FEW figures throughout history have managed to have the musical impact of Arnold Schoenberg. Unlike older giants, like Beethoven, Schoenberg, despite having a huge admiration, still suffers the ire of conservative ears and being the “sole” reason for disliking modern music (ignoring that Schoenberg has not been modern for decades).

Born in Vienna in 1874, Schoenberg’s music grew and developed amid the cultural growth and energy of turn of the century Vienna and he was mostly self-taught.

His early works show the influence of Gustav Mahler and Richard Strauss, a rich romanticism and tempestuous music full of energy and drama.

However, this ultimately was not enough. Schoenberg’s second string quartet is arguably the work which “destroyed” tonality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFOWcHark14

Following this work, he entered a period called either his “atonal” or “expressionist” period. What this meant was that characteristics common in tonality (ie hierarchy of pitch, tonal relationships) were abandoned for a completely free musical language.

Two standout works of this period for me – Funf Orchesterstucke and Pierrot Lunaire – show the richness this freedom brings, however a common feature of both is a collection of small movements, instead of the grandiose larger single movement works like his Kammersymphonie. This was because when exploring a new world without the framework of tonality, the ability to construct larger forms was increasingly difficult – especially, to retain a sense of continuation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bqlt1EOlwg

After years of exploration and theorising, we eventually come to a period/style referred to as serialism. This, like the atonal works, freed a composer from traditional habits of tonality, but unlike atonality, there was a unifying centre which could steer and cement the work. This was called the tone-row.

The tone-row placed notes from the chromatic scale into an order (of the composer’s choosing) and relationships of those notes referred to that original skeleton. Early experiments focused on just playing variations of the row, to create new melodies or vertical harmonies, however as the experiments matured this became increasingly elaborate.

Schoenberg’s piano concerto and A Survivor from Warsaw are both particularly powerful examples of the potential of this method that Schoenberg had developed. For many “traditional” classical music ears, Schoenberg’s music can be a rough step away from the familiar, and to this day, Schoenberg is seen as the sole individual responsible for “modern music not having a tune.” Though in the case of unadventurous ears this is pretty harmless, because he was Jewish and writing “degenerate music” he was an easy target for the Nazis in the cultural purges.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFXkc9AGoeU

Schoenberg’s life is not only defined by his unique music and talents, but also the incredible impact he had as a teacher, with pupils including Alban Berg, Anton Webern, Hanns Eisler, John Cage, Robert Gerhard, Nikos Skalkottas and Dave Brubeck, to name just a few. All of whom have managed to place their own particular music onto the world.

Conservative audiences and artist management have meant that performances of Schoenberg’s work are limited and despite his incredible impact and influence, Schoenberg still stands as a bogeyman.

Perhaps, having fallen — as of January 1 2022 — into the public domain, which means royalties are no longer payable on performing his work, greater interest might be the chance to re-engage with this incredible composer and see how his music could be relevant to us all.

Schoenberg is incredibly distant from what is often considered “classical music,” and much like whisky, the first try is rarely fun, however the richness is eventually enjoyed when you stick with it.

Now, Schoenberg’s place in history is thoroughly confirmed – and realistically, even if I fail to convince readers of his value, it is still assured.

I also will not try to argue that Schoenberg was some “misunderstood proletarian hero,” his pupil Eisler often talked bluntly about his distaste for his teacher’s conservative politics. But Eisler did also famously say — a socialist society needs to re-evaluate the works of Schoenberg. What he meant was that the very essence of Schoenberg’s genius cannot be ignored.

However, I fear the conservative ears of programmers and orchestral managers will keep Schoenberg a rare dish. This being said, as has been a common trend of my discussions for the Morning Star, we should be fighting for the full richness of what music has to offer, not just what is deemed “accessible” or “suitable” – and I sincerely hope those reading will give this mis-stereotyped genius a chance.