wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

In Mozart’s day, his place at the banquet table was between the valet and the cook – because while Mozart may have been a composer of singular genius, he was also essentially a servant, part of the household staff of the Archbishop of Salzburg. Author Tim Blanning, in his book The Triumph of Music, compares the status of the great composers of the past with someone like Bono today; the U2 singer has reportedly been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in the past, and access to and influence with many of the most powerful leaders on the planet. The idea is that musicians were once hired hands whose craft was on a par with the people who made the drapes or designed the dining room, and have now become celebrated people with more influence than most European courts of Mozart’s day could ever have dreamed of.

It certainly is an intriguing idea… but I wonder if it isn’t a bit of apples and oranges. A truer comparison might be Mozart in the 1790s with the classical composers of today, who most certainly are not media superstars and wealthy power-brokers. Most composers – the occasional Philip Glass or John Adams aside – cannot make a living just as a composer; they need to be hired hands too. But since we’re running thin on royal courts these days, it’s the universities that have become the places where composers often make their living.

And let’s not forget that even at the height of the Baroque and Classical periods, when composed music was usually only heard in courts, mansions, and churches, there was still a popular music sung by the common folk. It was largely anonymous, regional, and amateur. Some Frenchman (or woman) wrote “Ah Vous Dirai-Je Maman” in the early 18th century, but we don’t know who; and while this person would be fabulously wealthy today from royalties (this is the melody we use for “Twinkle Twinkle Little Star,” “Baa Baa Black Sheep,” and learning the alphabet – and that’s just in the English-speaking world), he almost certainly made nothing from his little tune. That is where the real dramatic difference lies. The idea that a pop musician could be famous (and maybe not even need to use his or her full name), global, and incredibly wealthy, is the most striking change in music that I can think of. But whether that’s a “triumph of music” I’m not so sure. After all, Britney Spears (did I really need to use her last name there?) may be a global phenomenon, and her every misstep is noted by hundreds of millions of newspaper readers and TV viewers, but how many can name even one of the people who writes her songs? Don’t get me wrong, Max Martin and Rami Yacoub (who wrote, among others, “Oops I Did It Again”) are doing quite well for themselves. I just wonder if it’d be more accurate to call this a triumph of marketing.

Has the place of composers, songwriters, and singers changed in our society over the last few centuries? For better or for worse?