     
|
Forsyth's
orchestra is the orchestra of before the First World War. There have been
numerous developments in instrumental technique on an individual basis since
then; one need not remind the reader of the tremendous growth in the
percussion family since that time. But much, or most, of what Forsyth says
holds today. Since 1914 two major factors have contributed to keeping the
orchestra in (I think) a lamentably steady state—up until then the orchestra
evolved and added to its numbers as various new instruments gained in
players' technique enough to be worthy of it—and those are: (1) the First
World War itself, which decimated the ranks of orchestral players
dramatically (one need only compare the Stravinsky of Le Sacre to
that of L'Histoire du Soldat to see what that war did to the
instrumental ensemble), and (2) the unions. When the American Federation of
Musicians decided on the basic complement of winds, brass and strings in the
orchestra, that decision effectively eliminated the slow inclusion of
instruments like the saxophone into the ranks (no smart orchestrator will
use too many instrumentalists that require time-and-a-half pay) or that of
any of the electric instruments that now possess a formidable technical
culture. Forsyth fully expected these accretions (after all, the previous
history of the orchestra had always been in that direction: for proof of
Forsyth's feelings on the subject see his late addendum on the saxophone on
p. 490), and I am sure he would have been disappointed in the ossification
of this wonderful ensemble into the historical monument it now is becoming.
Gunther Schuller's famous remarks on the rigidity of the average orchestral
musician's attitude today could very well find cause in the vague sense many
of these musicians may have that their ensemble may be fading into the
past, and themselves with it. Thus it is in a way sad to remark that little
need be added to Forsyth's great work in order to make it usable today.
|
next