Joseph Schillinger, the forgotten Guru
Joseph Schillinger was a Russian-born composer and teacher, active in New York in the 1930s. Today his name is all but forgotten and his books are not widely read. The unprecedented migration of European knowledge and culture that swept from East to West during the first decades of the 20th Century included figures such as Prokofiev and Rachmaninov, great composers who were the product of the renowned Russian system of music education. Schillinger came from this background, dedicated to creating truly professional musicians, having been a student of the St Petersburg Imperial Conservatory of Music. Unlike his more famous contemporaries, Schillinger was a natural teacher and communicated his musical knowledge in the form of a precise written theory, using mathematical expressions to describe art, architecture, design and (most insistently, and with most detail and success) music.1
In New York, Schillinger flourished, becoming famous as the advisor to many of America’s leading popular musicians and concert music composers. These number, inter alia, George Gershwin, Benny Goodman, Glen Miller, Nathan Laval, Oscar Levant, Tommy Dorsey and Henry Cowell. Gershwin spent four years studying with Schillinger. During this period, he composed Porgy and Bess and consulted Schillinger on matters concerning the opera, particularly its orchestration. In the field of electronic music, Schillinger collaborated with Leon Theremin, the inventor of an early electronic musical instrument, the Theremin, which had a huge impact on commercial music, most famously in the 1960’s song Good Vibrations by the Beach Boys.
His postal tuition courses were so successful he was able to rent a twelve-room apartment on Fifth Avenue. Schillinger accredited a small group of students as qualified teachers of the System and after his death, one of them, Lawrence Berk, founded a music school in Boston to continue the dissemination of the System. Schillinger House opened in 1945 and later became the Berklee College of Music where the System survived in the curriculum until the 1960's.
On the other hand, Schillinger was not his own best friend, becoming notorious for his arrogant style, ridiculing well-known critics and establishment figures. His flamboyant manner is evident in his published writings and one can only wonder at some of his extreme assertions.2
‘These procedures were performed crudely by even well reputed composers. For example L. Van Beethoven…’3
Later, in The Theory of Melody4, Beethoven is taken to task once again over the flawed construction of the opening melody of his Pathetique Sonata.
In relating these eccentricities, it is easy to make Schillinger sound like a trickster and to obscure the true value of his work - but it would be a terrible mistake to consider Schillinger merely as a crank. After all, his pupils in the USA included some of the most distinguished Jazz musicians of the century who would not have sustained any interest in his highly numerical techniques unless they were of immediate practical use. It is my experience that Schillinger's work brings great benefits to any student of music, at whatever level, from the beginner to the working professional. Following Schillinger's sudden death in 1943, three voluminous tomes5 were published based on Schillinger's own notes: certainly the most extensive treatise ever written on the theory of composition but difficult for the uninitiated. The Schillinger estate resisted6 efforts by others to interpret and explain his theory and consequently by the 1960's it was generally ignored and forgotten.
The thesis underlying Schillinger’s research into the properties and behaviour of music can be summarised as follows: music is a form of movement. Any physical action or process has its equivalent form of expression in music. Both movement and music are understandable with our existing knowledge of science.
The idea that music was a form of movement bound-up with science and philosophy dates back thousands of years, starting, perhaps, with Pythagoras, (circa 569-500 BC) and stretching forward in time through the work of Plato, Boethius and Zarlino, to mention only a very few. In fact, the depth of mathematics and science required for Schillinger’s research, was, and is, basic.
By the end of the eighteenth century, the problems of calculating and predicting the movement of objects, for all for all practical purposes, were conquered. Schillinger’s great contribution was intuitively recognising how to apply everyday mathematics to the making of music. Most importantly, he expressed the belief that certain mathematically derived patterns were universal, and (as we know today) common to both music and the very structure of our nervous system.7
"My system does not circumscribe the composer's freedom, but merely points out the methodological way to arrive at a decision. Any decision, which results in a harmonic relation, is fully acceptable. We are opposed only to vagueness and haphazard speculation."9
Music theory had become mired in tradition and in the 19th century attraction towards the cult of the inspired genius. Music education based on the observance of stylistic habits would quickly create pedagogical dogma. For example, the tendency of the leading note of a scale to ascend, or the dominant seventh chord to resolve are not universal laws but features of historical trends only true in certain cases and not in others. By revealing the underlying principles of the organisation of sound through scientific analysis, Schillinger hoped to free the composer from the shackles of tradition.
Many of the concepts contained in the System have already penetrated modern compositional practice10. Schillinger's techniques are tools for the imagination. By themselves, they do not compose music but merely assist the composer to realise his or her vision through facilitating the planning and execution of large musical structures. The numerous techniques described by Schillinger in the field of rhythm offer a unique and attractive approach to the composer and to some extent compensate for an imbalance in composition literature, largely dominated by considerations of pitch.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes
1 For a more extensive biography of Schillinger the reader should refer to an excellent article by Warren Brodsky published in American Music Spring 2003.
2 Brodsky. W. American Music Spring 2003
3 SSMC page 21.
4 SSMC page 250.
5 The Schillinger System of Musical Composition, in two volumes and The Mathematical Basis of The Arts.
6 From my own conversation with Earle Browne
7 Deutsch D, The Psychology of Music, Academic Press 1999.
8 SSMC page 1063 and 1064.
9 SSMC Page 1356
10 For example, Elliot Carter's numerical chord charts (Schiff, 1985 pg 324) or Allen Forte's work on pitch class sets (New Haven, 1973).
Rights reserved
Site designed, built and hosted by oxfordmusic.net
The Schillinger School of Music is grateful for the support of Rosalie Coopman.
In New York, Schillinger flourished, becoming famous as the advisor to many of America’s leading popular musicians and concert music composers. These number, inter alia, George Gershwin, Benny Goodman, Glen Miller, Nathan Laval, Oscar Levant, Tommy Dorsey and Henry Cowell. Gershwin spent four years studying with Schillinger. During this period, he composed Porgy and Bess and consulted Schillinger on matters concerning the opera, particularly its orchestration. In the field of electronic music, Schillinger collaborated with Leon Theremin, the inventor of an early electronic musical instrument, the Theremin, which had a huge impact on commercial music, most famously in the 1960’s song Good Vibrations by the Beach Boys.
His postal tuition courses were so successful he was able to rent a twelve-room apartment on Fifth Avenue. Schillinger accredited a small group of students as qualified teachers of the System and after his death, one of them, Lawrence Berk, founded a music school in Boston to continue the dissemination of the System. Schillinger House opened in 1945 and later became the Berklee College of Music where the System survived in the curriculum until the 1960's.
Decline
The reasons for the decline in awareness of Schillinger's work are complicated. During his life, he had been heavily criticised by the concert music establishment as a promoter of mechanised creativity. Schillinger’s work was very radical, clearing away mystery and elitism and speaking directly to musicians involved in popular music, which fed largely on jazz energy. As such, its outlook was in conflict with an avant-garde who looked to Europe, and to certain ascendant figures, such as, Schaeffer and Stockhausen, for a philosophical and intellectual lead. In addition, Schillinger’s celebrity status must have made him more suspect in the eyes of his critics and caused his ideas to be treated with greater scepticism than they deserved.On the other hand, Schillinger was not his own best friend, becoming notorious for his arrogant style, ridiculing well-known critics and establishment figures. His flamboyant manner is evident in his published writings and one can only wonder at some of his extreme assertions.2
‘These procedures were performed crudely by even well reputed composers. For example L. Van Beethoven…’3
Later, in The Theory of Melody4, Beethoven is taken to task once again over the flawed construction of the opening melody of his Pathetique Sonata.
In relating these eccentricities, it is easy to make Schillinger sound like a trickster and to obscure the true value of his work - but it would be a terrible mistake to consider Schillinger merely as a crank. After all, his pupils in the USA included some of the most distinguished Jazz musicians of the century who would not have sustained any interest in his highly numerical techniques unless they were of immediate practical use. It is my experience that Schillinger's work brings great benefits to any student of music, at whatever level, from the beginner to the working professional. Following Schillinger's sudden death in 1943, three voluminous tomes5 were published based on Schillinger's own notes: certainly the most extensive treatise ever written on the theory of composition but difficult for the uninitiated. The Schillinger estate resisted6 efforts by others to interpret and explain his theory and consequently by the 1960's it was generally ignored and forgotten.
Science
Schillinger lived in times of great change: technology had revolutionised both war and peace, acceptance of religious authority was in decline, and class struggle had changed the balance of global power. Schillinger was in harmony with the spirit of the times in believing that science would ultimately provide the answer to all questions and that all human endeavours could be better understood and improved through the application of rational thought. Music was no exception, if its various components and their behaviour could be described scientifically, then methods could be devised for its synthesis.The thesis underlying Schillinger’s research into the properties and behaviour of music can be summarised as follows: music is a form of movement. Any physical action or process has its equivalent form of expression in music. Both movement and music are understandable with our existing knowledge of science.
The idea that music was a form of movement bound-up with science and philosophy dates back thousands of years, starting, perhaps, with Pythagoras, (circa 569-500 BC) and stretching forward in time through the work of Plato, Boethius and Zarlino, to mention only a very few. In fact, the depth of mathematics and science required for Schillinger’s research, was, and is, basic.
By the end of the eighteenth century, the problems of calculating and predicting the movement of objects, for all for all practical purposes, were conquered. Schillinger’s great contribution was intuitively recognising how to apply everyday mathematics to the making of music. Most importantly, he expressed the belief that certain mathematically derived patterns were universal, and (as we know today) common to both music and the very structure of our nervous system.7
Beyond style
Although Schillinger’s work is forward looking, couched in an apparently modern form, it also clarifies traditional music theory by debunking misconceptions from the past. He was clear that his methods allowed any style of composition to be undertaken more effectively.8"My system does not circumscribe the composer's freedom, but merely points out the methodological way to arrive at a decision. Any decision, which results in a harmonic relation, is fully acceptable. We are opposed only to vagueness and haphazard speculation."9
Music theory had become mired in tradition and in the 19th century attraction towards the cult of the inspired genius. Music education based on the observance of stylistic habits would quickly create pedagogical dogma. For example, the tendency of the leading note of a scale to ascend, or the dominant seventh chord to resolve are not universal laws but features of historical trends only true in certain cases and not in others. By revealing the underlying principles of the organisation of sound through scientific analysis, Schillinger hoped to free the composer from the shackles of tradition.
Many of the concepts contained in the System have already penetrated modern compositional practice10. Schillinger's techniques are tools for the imagination. By themselves, they do not compose music but merely assist the composer to realise his or her vision through facilitating the planning and execution of large musical structures. The numerous techniques described by Schillinger in the field of rhythm offer a unique and attractive approach to the composer and to some extent compensate for an imbalance in composition literature, largely dominated by considerations of pitch.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes
1 For a more extensive biography of Schillinger the reader should refer to an excellent article by Warren Brodsky published in American Music Spring 2003.
2 Brodsky. W. American Music Spring 2003
3 SSMC page 21.
4 SSMC page 250.
5 The Schillinger System of Musical Composition, in two volumes and The Mathematical Basis of The Arts.
6 From my own conversation with Earle Browne
7 Deutsch D, The Psychology of Music, Academic Press 1999.
8 SSMC page 1063 and 1064.
9 SSMC Page 1356
10 For example, Elliot Carter's numerical chord charts (Schiff, 1985 pg 324) or Allen Forte's work on pitch class sets (New Haven, 1973).
Rights reserved
Site designed, built and hosted by oxfordmusic.net
The Schillinger School of Music is grateful for the support of Rosalie Coopman.