Young Samuel Coleridge-Taylor
(Oxford American)
(Oxford American)
is profiled at AfriClassical.com, which
features a comprehensive Works List and a
Bibliography by Dr. Dominique- René de Lerma,
The following excerpt is taken from a web feature on Samuel Coleridge-Taylor which is a lengthy examination not limited to music. We believe the reader will find it informative, but we do not necessarily share all of the views of the authors, including the suggestion that his advocacy of Black American music may have been "...a little patronizing."
Oxford, Mississippi
March 6, 2015
Though The Heavens Fall, Part 2
By
John Jeremiah Sullivan & Joel Finsel
|
March 6, 2015
Part 2: The Higher Musical Calling
Most people have heard of Samuel Taylor
Coleridge, canonical English poet and laudanum addict. Far fewer know
the life and work of Samuel Coleridge-Taylor. Coleridge-Taylor was a
black composer, London-born, his mother a white English woman, his
father a doctor from Sierra Leone. The father, frustrated by his
inability as a black man to rise higher than a subordinate position in
an English hospital, left the family when Samuel was young, went to
Africa and never returned. Samuel was raised by his mother. His English
schoolmates called him Coalie, according to profiles that ran years
later in the London press. They would “taunt” the “keenly sensitive”
boy, who “suffered extremely” from the abuse. They once set his hair on
fire “to see whether it would burn.”
He
had a violin that he carried around “as a girl carries her doll.” One
night he was out walking around with it, stopping now and then to play
marbles on the sidewalk, and he passed by a well-to-do house. There was a
fire in the parlor, a glow in the window, and he could hear music. One
of the people inside saw him staring and noticed what he was carrying.
They called him inside. At first he was shy, but when two of the men in
the group began to play a violin duet, he pulled out his instrument and
leapt in, so effortlessly that “all present marveled.” The man who owned
the house, Joseph Beckwith, took him on as a student and taught him for
more than a decade.
He emerged as a violin prodigy, whose performances—on that instrument
and on the pianoforte, in churches and at curated “smoking sessions” in
aristocratic houses—drew admiring notice in the English press,
sometimes including mention of his having proved “a young gentleman of
colour,” other times not, or unaware of it. He performed multiple works
by Edvard Grieg, a Romantic composer who’d turned to the folk songs of
his Norwegian ancestry for fresh melodic ideas.
Coleridge-Taylor’s own compositions start showing up around 1892.
Church songs, at first. “Break Forth Into Joy” and “Oh! Ye That Love the
Lord.” Christmas anthems, composed for hire. Derivative but
“well-written,” said the Guardian. Then came a soprano solo
piece, “Zara’s Earrings,” subtitled perhaps with quiet irony, “A Moorish
Ballad.” Next he set one of Byron’s poems to music, and finally,
succumbing to the weight of his name, he set Coleridge’s “Kubla Khan,”
claiming later that it had been only when the poet’s grandson Ernest
Hartley Coleridge had read it to him over tea one afternoon that it
“sang its way into his brain.”
As the century waned, Coleridge-Taylor waxed. The composer Edward
Elgar voiced admiration and opened doors for him. Somebody called him
the African Mahler. His Hiawatha’s Wedding Feast sold hundreds
of thousands of copies and was staged as a ballet. He and his wife, a
pianist named Jessie Walmisley (a white woman from a notable family
who’d fought the couple’s marriage to the bitterest end), had a son
together and named him Hiawatha.
Black newspapers in America paid a lot of attention to
Coleridge-Taylor between 1897, when he first rose to international
notice, and his premature death in 1912. He died of pneumonia (he’d
smoked incessantly). He collapsed in an English train station. The Indianapolis Freeman said that he may have enjoyed “more distinction than any known to any other member of the race.” Many viewed him as a kind of miraculous bodying forth of the famous
“Dvořák Statement” on black music, which had been uttered precisely as
Coleridge-Taylor made his debut. Antonín Dvořák is of course the
celebrated Czech composer. He lived in America for a while in the 1890s
and during that time took on students. One of his charges was a Southern
boy, white (we assume) but enamored of the black songs he remembered
from childhood. The boy taught a few of these “real negro melodies” to
Dvořák, who went wild for them. Dvořák started having his students go to
minstrel shows and take notes. He told a newspaper interviewer that “in
the Negro melodies of America I discover all that is needed for a great
and noble school of music.”
This sentence—this Statement—resonated powerfully in the bosom of
black America, a community seeking forms to express its freedom. Serious
people were starting to say that the “old negro songs,” which had both
entertained and sustained them through generations, might also be art,
that perhaps “the Afro-American,” as the Chicago Broad Ax put it several years later, “is destined to become the true artist.”
The importance of Coleridge-Taylor—whose music can still give
pleasure a century-plus on—isn’t just that he was half-African in his
DNA, but that he thought of his music as spiritually black. He wasn’t,
in other words, just following Dvořák in the sense of, Here I am, the black composer you predicted would come,
but instead following the method of Dvořák, who himself had based many
of his pieces on old Bohemian folk songs, and of Edvard Grieg, the
favorite composer of his youth. Coleridge-Taylor saw that he had rare
access to a similarly deep well of melodic material in his own heritage.
Often he even sounded like Dvořák, in interviews, saying things on his
American tours such as, “I intend to do all in my power to call
attention to this splendid treasure of melody which you have.”
That was nice, but also a little patronizing. As had been Dvořák’s original Statement, for that matter. You have all that you need here to make great music!
Really? You sure we don’t just have, you know, great music? Black
journalists and critics picked up on this problem. A fascinatingly
tortured, admiring, competitive, frustrated response to Coleridge-Taylor
made by the black theater critic Sylvester Russell ran in the Indianapolis Freeman
in 1905. Coleridge-Taylor had spoken (to another publication) in favor
of ragtime but lamented that in Europe “the only idea of ‘rag time’ is
that associated with a ‘coon song’ and that is unfortunate, for one
thing is certain, and that is the coon songs in this country are ‘bad.’”
Well, maybe. Russell, the black critic, sort of liked some coon
songs. After all, “[Bert] Williams and the late [George] Walker”—a black
vaudeville duo, blacks who performed in blackface, famous for their hit
“Bon Bon Buddy. The Chocolate Drop.”—were known to have “delighted
kings and queens and touched the hearts of all with their ‘peculiar
minor’ cadence.” 1
Russell’s defense of coon songs in the face of Coleridge-Taylor’s
dismissal is on one level a you-don’t-get-it defense of a pop form, a
reaction we might recognize and sympathize with as post-moderns, but
it’s also something subtler, and more worth noticing, a very quiet
subversion of something Coleridge-Taylor is trying to get away with
chronologically, or temporally. The composer had said, Here is the
modern, here is now, this art music, these “compositions.” You have your
“songs,” which are the past, and they’re wonderful, etc., but they
aren’t what we can call “serious” music. Perhaps with effort and
training, we can make serious music out of them. Or rather, I
can. You’ll go on having your “songs.” And it’s excellent the little
move Critic Russell makes. He takes out just a few tiny words, but the
gulf he opens is vast. Coleridge-Taylor had told the interviewer, “In
fact your coon songs are not real negro songs at all; they are concert
hall caricatures.” Russell says: “Yes, coon songs are real negro songs;
they are concert hall caricatures.” In other words, we go to the concert
hall, too. This culture lives, it’s not waiting to be song-collected.
It talks to itself as well as up and out, has a cheek to put its tongue
in.
Russell also says—he can’t resist, and who’d begrudge him, here was
this well-bred English guy (Coleridge-Taylor gave concerts at Eton)
telling American blacks what their artistic inheritance meant—he says,
“Listen again.” You think you know, but maybe you’ve never heard the
real thing. What you call our “low” music isn’t always low. “[W]hat does
Mr. Taylor know about the genuine jubilee songs?” Russell asks. “Has he
ever heard the original class meeting-room tunes of the Christian
daughters of slavery? If he has not we have wisely led him into the
higher musical calling of a heavenly trance.”
Russell was being hard on Coleridge-Taylor, who loved and made a
profound study of black Southern music (as well as native African
styles). In the 1890s SCT even wrote a piece—“A Negro Love-Song,” later
re-titled, “African Love Song”—that musicologists consider a candidate
for “first blues song.” Granted, there are about ten candidates, and the
problem is unsolvable, but the “Love-Song” does have a recognizably
bluesy sound and structure, especially in spots, and it uses quite
emphatically the flatted third and seventh (“blue notes,” we call them).
It was popular too: the Times of London called the appearance of African Suite,
the larger opus to which the “Love-Song” belonged, “the unique event in
music in the last generation,” and described the “Love-Song” itself as
“a revelation of melodic charm and strange, changing harmony.” Yes,
Coleridge-Taylor was borrowing from black American songs he’d heard,
here and in England. He was taking those anonymous tunes (for as
Chicago’s Broad Ax had it, “America’s Afro-American songwriters
are unknown”), and he was making “compositions” out of them. But he was
really listening.
Comment by email:
Comment by email:
Thanks, Bill. Always great to witness authors newly discovering Samuel Coleridge-Taylor! Charles [Charles Kaufmann]
1 comment:
Thanks for this mention of "Though the Heavens Fall," AfriClassical (differences of opinion included). From our point of view, the interest lay less in the question of whether or not SCT was actually being patronizing--we'd need to have been there when he made the remarks, after all, to know for sure--than in the fact that the African-American critic Sylvester Russell believed that SCT was being patronizing. That's what we wanted to bring to light, that this attitude had developed among early black music journalists, who'd grown tired of hearing that their own music (African American folk and popular music ca. 1890–1910) could be used as the material for 'serious music' but couldn't be serious music. And it's true that such a hierarchy of genres or forms was implied in many of SCT's remarks. All good wishes, John Sullivan and Joel Finsel
Post a Comment