Richard's mention of the Piano Sonata (which I adore) reminds me of what I've always thought was the most interesting 'thing' about Carter: the extraordinary transformation he forced on himself in 1951 in writing the first quartet (in the desert, funded by a Guggenheim). Those 'on the cusp' works, the piano and 'cello sonatas in particular, are so much more than 'American neoclassical' in style - the weird energy they can barely contain seems to embody a voice desperate to escape the confines of that style. And then he *forces* himself to 'grow up' with that 1st quartet (overlong, but quite remarkable - especially rhythmically, and containing the most compelling examples of metric modulation he ever produced, IMO); and the rest is history. I can't think of any other instances of a composer so willfully imposing upon himself a mature style, overnight as it were.

Errr - are you sure that's unusual for an artist? I can think of a fair few composers, past and present, with independent wealth.

Just thinking of contemporary composers - Nono, Scelsi, Cardew, Benjamin, Ades instantly spring to mind. Indeed most composers seem to come from some sort of middle or higher class background, and have some degree of financial security - of the exceptions that come to mind, all come from the UK - Birtwistle, Maxwell Davies, Ferneyhough, Dillon, Turnage (I'm sure there are a few others from elsewhere, just not sure of the details). A comprehensive international study of composers' financial circumstances prior to setting out upon a career could be extremely informative. Composition is a very forbidding world for those who don't have something else to fall back on, financially; the weighting in terms of class of those who are successful should be every bit as much of a cause for concern as weightings in terms of gender or race.

Independent wealth ? Cardew ? Stroll on, Ian !

Such a study would be informative, sure; but what to do with that information? How much energy is already spent promoting composers' careers based on demographic factors? I think it is noble and progressive to regard class as a real factor in the music world, but there should always be a word of caution uttered to the effect that such 'parameters' are often drawn upon by policy makers when deciding whom to promote and whom not to promote. It's one additional step from the difficult and risky attitude of solely focussing on the quality of the music. Anyway, I'm sorry I brought it up in this thread.

Has anyone undertaken a closer study of Carter's music here? Are you familiar with the book by David Schiff, entitled simply The Music of Elliott Carter?
http://www.amazon.com/Music-Elliott-Carter-David-Schiff/dp/0903873060

It's a good resource as long as you don't read the prose too closely. Schiff is more enthusiastic about Carter's music than one might think possible. Nevertheless, the analyses and figures are very helpful when they do appear, plus there are some nifty charts in the back of the volume. One of these, a list of twelve-note, all-interval chords obeying certain conditions, was a bit jumbled in earlier editions -- don't know if that has been corrected. At any rate, Schiff mentions a few gems that deserve closer study, such as the Canon for 4 (which also stems from the '80's).

In this context, also worth mentioning "Elliott Carter's Harmony Book" which is fascinatingly useless to anyone but Elliott Carter. It's a compilation of his systematic interval and chord charts that he wrote up in train stations and dentist offices or whenever he was away from his desk. Talk about a convoluted system, though!

Nor with Nono. Returning to Carter, though, the fact of having that independent wealth was probably a major factor in giving him the freedom to take his time over developing his idiom, so that his first mature works were not written until he was in his late 30s, and generally to be able to choose for himself what to do, rather than being bound by financial necessity. That doesn't make it good or bad, of course; just that the factors bearing upon composers without this freedom should be borne in mind when surveying the nature of their compositional career.

But even to do the usual stuff that most composers have to in their 20s - continuing education at a post-graduate level, being able to be around the right places and mingle with the right people on a regular basis, having access to certain artistic circles in general (being the right 'type'), spending the time developing one's work and idiom with very few financial rewards at the outset, are all things that are frequently unavailable to those from poorer backgrounds, who desperately need to make enough money just to live. Of course some manage, but they've generally had to put a hugely greater effort in to be able to achieve what others can take for granted.

No, that's fine. Such a survey could be used to derive more detailed information about the effect of financial circumstances upon the possibilities available for composers, and maybe might act as an incentive to see what new measures could be put in place to alleviate the problems? I know what you mean about excessive attention upon careers rather than music (though that often takes the form of glamorising the backgrounds of the more privileged, or in the case of Carter, endless stuff about how he hobnobbed with the great and good when younger (there was loads about that in the 'Get Carter' festival programmes and publicity)); it's far too easy to make simplistic links between background and music, though I can't help but feel that the fact that Birtwistle and Maxwell Davies came from markedly different backgrounds to most British composers that preceded them, and the fact that their work constituted a radical shift within that culture, are not unrelated. But this should probably be taken to another thread if we want to discuss it further.

I've skimmed my copy of Schiff, but not read it that closely. I got the feeling that it is a little over-indebted to the composer's own perspective on things, rather than standing back a bit from that, but that could be said about countless other writings on new music (including some of my own). I haven't read Carter's writings - what are they like?

Does sound rather interesting - must take a look!