Conference Agenda

Rather than viewing otherness through the lens of well discussed and highly problematized 19th-century philosophical viewpoints, this session explores how otherness can be used as a means of resistance with and against established collectivities. Musical borrowing exists not only within the historical context of domination and power, what Root describes as “cannibal power”, but also as a means of establishing otherness that both resists and aligns with cultural norms, standards, and authorities. Born writes: “To examine musical borrowing and appropriation is necessarily to consider the relations between culture, power, ethnicity and class; and these relations are always further entangled in the dynamics of gender and sexuality.” Through Price’s “Whiteness”, Shostakovich’s “Jewishness” and Cooper’s “Royalty” we see how otherness is used as resistance within and without social and cultural movements, leading to new collectivities through unique methodologies idiomatic to each individual.

Whether it’s through affinity, descent or dissent (Shelemay), each community finds a form of hybridity and liminality, often referred to as the Thirdspace (Bhabha). This session endeavors to explore the various avenues through which this liminality manifests, all centered within the concept of otherness and its signification. Shelemey asserts: “Dissent may not always be formulated in opposition to a dominant majority. However, dissent communities generally emerge through acts of resistance against an existing collectivity.”

Signification becomes a means for resisting these collectivities. Gates defines the distinct differences between white codified “Signification” and Black cultural “Signifyin’” as “dependent on their [confrontations with] identity.” Price’s Signifyin’ on Tchaikovsky’s Violin Concerto attempts to break into the canon while Shostakovich’s signification of the past resists the oppressive present. By contrast, an ethnographic exploration of Cooper’s “Royalty” reveals insider-outsider dynamics that signify a unique identity rooted in the past and the present.

We begin with Price as a model for investigating the complexities of Signifyin’ as a woman of color before transitioning to Shostakovich’s signification of Jewish philosophy as resistance. Finally, we arrive at the problems associated with signification as a method for individuals in positions of power to assert social status, asking the question: should the privileged signify?

Due to efforts to diversify the western canon, Florence Price’s first violin concerto has gained traction as of late. Performances clearly reveal the influence of Tchaikovsky's violin concerto, evidenced by the many embedded quotations, particularly noticeable in the cadenza and coda. Yet scarcely any research has been done on Price's treatment of Tchaikovsky's material, perhaps due to the relatively late re-discovery of Price's work in 2009. Thus, this paper, through Price's Tchaikovsky quotes, will explore the relationship and influence between these two works, proposing three different but intertwining approaches: folksong adaptation, artistic lineage, and signification/signifyin’. Shared interest in folk song adaptations are already apparent in Tchaikovsky's arrangement of Fifty Russian Folksongs and Price's Five Folksongs in Counterpoint for String Quartet, sounding an engagement with a personal heritage that elevates cultural familiarity. Price's Violin Concerto is an intentional (and quite literal) bid into a canon defined by white, male composers, positioning Price, alongside Tchaikovsky, and within direct reach of an artistic lineage. In a letter written to Serge Koussevitsy, Price implores: “To begin with I have two handicaps - those of sex and race.” Within the context of Price’s life during this period, unpacking the timeline between the Wanamaker Prize and this infamous letter makes clear the immense difficulties that she faced as a woman of color. The role of 'Signifyin’’' in Price's concerto illustrates a type of quotation or sampling found within various forms of Black cultural expression, first associated with Price and Tchaikovsky by Alexandra Kori Hill (2015). Drawing on Henry Louis Gates Jr.’s groundbreaking work, I consider the impact of white “signification” and Black “Signifyin’”, exploring the various implications that derive from each through Walser’s application to jazz performance (1993). Price reveals an embodiment of Black “Signifyin” through gestures, reference, and by making use of the audience association of Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto. Examining these works in tandem enable us to derive new insights from both works.

In June 1960, Shostakovich found himself in Leningrad, where he suffered an emotional breakdown, brought on by his imminent initiation as a Communist Party member. During this period, the composer was faced with moral questions and feelings of existential dread. Faced with tremendous difficulty throughout his life, Shostakovich would often look to philosophy for moral and existential relief. Esti Sheinberg argues that Jewish existential irony became one of his primary mechanisms for expression in a politically oppressive environment. Perhaps, this irony is where we find the realization of Shostakovich’s unique, idiomatic humor. While Shostakovich himself is not Jewish, he was surrounded by Russian-Jews throughout his life, such as Solomon Mikhoels, who undoubtedly influenced his personal philosophy and world view. By blending irony, satire, parody and the grotesque, Shostakovich infuses his music with an enduring thread of humor, humor that finds its foundation not within the hopelessness of nihilism but rather within the existential and moral inquiries of the Jewish ethos.

While this concept has been discussed as manifested in his instrumental music, there has yet to be literature addressing this type of irony within his vocal works. By looking closely at Shostakovich’s song cycle from 1960, Satires: Pictures of the Past, I illuminate the nuances and complexity of Jewish existential irony and its musical manifestations. Because of the complexity of ironic structure and form, musical elements of irony are primarily based on individual interpretation. Through my examination, three primary elements emerge: incongruities, ambiguity, and exaggeration–in which incongruous metric implications, ambiguous harmonic functions, and exaggerated musical clichés nuance and challenge established compositional norms.

Through the lens of these frameworks, Satires reveals Shostakovich’s signification of Rachmaninoff as a means of criticizing communist cultural destruction. By referring to Russian imperialism, Shostakovich directly criticizes anti-cosmopolitanism, as the era implies certain values and aesthetics that explore the nature of the human condition. Signification of the past becomes a resistance to the repressive present and, utilizing Jewishness as a means of resistance, he others himself in order to resist against an oppressive collectivity.

“Dixon's ‘Saint Lawrence Suite’ is the first new ‘Water Music’ especially written for a river since Handel's famous Water Music premiered in July, 1717 to amuse King George I as he floated on a barge down the Thames. We hope all guests and "River Rats" are equally amused listening to the ‘Saint Lawrence Suite’, though Pine Island will remain stationary.” Bolstered by Phil Cooper’s program notes, for three days in late August, Pine Island became a miniature Esterházy on the St. Lawrence River. Every summer, members of the Boston-area early-music ensemble Cambridge Concentus traveled to the island, near Clayton, NY, where, by invitation of the Island's owner, Cooper, they stayed and rehearsed for an outdoor concert for the residents of the Thousand Islands region. As part of each festival, Cooper, a Boston resident and patron of the ensemble, commissioned composer Graham Dixon, to write a new work in the Baroque style for the area's summer inhabitants. Socio-musical readings of Dixon’s commissions detail how musical, textual, and textural new-old elements in these works preserve the subtle (and not so subtle) relationship between performer and patron.

Supported by interviews, as well as images, scores, and recordings, I interrogate the inner workings of Cooper’s “Royalty”, revealing insider-outsider dynamics that signify identity building, rooted in the otherness of the past and the present. Such a dynamic reveals a modern-day monarchical patronage cultivated by the early music movement. Historical performance practices inform and inspire patrons, providing insider knowledge of long-gone composers’ and patrons’ intentions–such as those of Handel and George I or Haydn and the Esterházy Princes. Cooper’s patronage runs between humanistic (centered on good taste and knowledge) and conventional (where repertoire signifies associations with the upper class). His patronage is achieved through three intertwined dynamics: genuineness of intentions, quality of content, and sense of community. His endeavors signify to the “River Rats” insider knowledge, cultivating an otherness worthy of his “royal” status. As a result, Cooper's patronage begs larger questions such as how social hierarchies are engrained (and evident) in historically informed practices and how we problematize such signifying practices in the 21st-century.