July 14, 2005
Survey: Critics differ by gender on top composers
If you're a female classical music critic, you're much more likely to consider Antonin Dvorak a favorite historical composer than if you're a man.
That's one of the interesting bits of information from a study published in May by the now-defunct National Arts Journalism Program at Columbia University. This study, called The Classical Music Critic, is a survey of 181 critics at newspapers and specialized publications across the country. (You can download a copy here.)
The female critics also listed Prokofiev, Shostakovich and Verdi among their top 10, names that weren't found in the men's list. This is one of those factoids that's fascinating because it could mean almost anything, and therefore is worth discussing.
Here's the men's top 10 of historical composers, in descending order: Mozart, Beethoven, Bach, Schubert, Ravel, Brahms, Stravinsky, Mahler, Debussy and Haydn.
The women's top 10, in descending order: Mozart, Bach, Brahms, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Prokofiev, Dvorak, Shostakovich, Verdi and Ravel.
I'm a little more inclined towards the women's list, if truth be told. Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Shostakovich and Verdi would certainly make my list, but the other five would be tougher to select. Maybe that would be the best way to do it: Choose a permanent Council of Five, and the other five can switch out in United Nations rotating-seat fashion.
The critics also ranked their top contemporary composers; the list of the top 10, among critics who said they knew the work of these writers enough to be able to rate them. In descending order, from top to bottom: John Adams, Arvo Pärt, Einojuhani Rautavaara, Osvaldo Golijov, Sofia Gubaidulina, Henri Dutilleux, Krzysztof Penderecki, Kaija Saariaho, William Bolcom and Steve Reich.
I'm glad to see Rautavaara's name on this list, because the Finnish composer's music is really worth hearing (the Cantus Arcticus, for example, also known as Concerto for Birds and Orchestra), and his star appears to be on the rise with audiences worldwide.
There's much more in this report worth examining, because it touches on so many issues critical to the health of classical music, and if you've got some time and interest, it's worth a read-through.
It also is probably the last publication of the 11-year-old National Arts Journalism Program, which went out of existence July 1 for lack of funding, unless I missed the news of some last-minute reprieve. I'll make the requisite lamentations, because no matter how much criticism the media deserves, the craft of journalism is absolutely indispensable, as national events such as the jailing of Judy Miller have shown.
In the arts, it's every bit as important, because journalists keep the cultural conversation going, and in so doing keep us in touch with our common heritage. No matter how established an artist is, and no matter for how long, all artworks need renourishment and reconsideration at every possible juncture.
And now an avenue for elevating this conversation to a place of national prominence is closed, and there's nothing good to say about that.
