I found the following newspaper clipping from a 1977 article in the Los Angeles Times titled “The Voice of Musgrave.” It is a brief overview of Thea Musgrave’s career as a composer and her contemporary works at that time. What caught my attention first, though, was how the article began:
It isn’t until the next paragraph that we actually read a quote from Musgrave herself. I thought it was telling that the article begins with the opinion of Musgrave’s father and that the third paragraph states that “today she composes, is married, has no children, isn’t starving.” Finally, after this we begin to hear about Musgrave’s fourth opera, “Mary, Queen of Scots,” which was new at the time of this article. After the mention of her new opera, we get this sentence: “Not coincidentally, her husband, the violist-conductor Peter Mark, is the head of Virginia Opera.”
At this point, we have more sentences dedicated to Musgrave’s father, an update on her marital status, and an explanation of her husband’s work, than sentences discussion her work as a composer. Doesn’t this make the title “The Voice of Musgrave” misleading?
Fortunately, the rest of the article focuses exclusively on Musgrave and her musical work. She discusses her life as a female composer and states the following:
This caught my attention because in class last week we discussed whether it is helpful or harmful to specify that a composer is female. Does saying “female composer” rather than just “composer” make women in the field outsiders? Or would ignoring the fact that they are women devalue their struggle for equality and visibility in a male-dominated field?
After reading this question from Musgrave, the opening of this article seemed even more trite than before. While the author begins by drawing attention to Musgrave’s personal life, her father’s opinions, and her husband’s status as a musician, Musgrave is concerned with the state of her profession and its future. She brings up serious questions that we face today as well: does classical music have a sustainable future?
Musgrave has and continues to contribute to modern music in a way that ensures the continuation of classical music composition. I especially enjoy her piece Narcissus, for flute or clarinet, which utilizes a digital delay system. It was composed in 1986–87 and was commissioned by the National Endowment for the Arts. Here is a recording:
This piece caught my attention as a clarinetist, but of course Musgrave has written a host of various works over an impressively long career, all to be found here on her website: https://www.theamusgrave.com/works
I think to continue to move forward, to promote classical music, and to encourage inclusivity and diversity in the field, we need to continue to have discussions as my classmates and I had in class last week. Education is key to developing our field for the better, and learning about a composer such as Thea Musgrave and her true impact on the field is a great place to start. We cannot simply rely on newspaper interviews and other biased sources; we need to ask important questions and do some of the digging ourselves.
