Paul Mathews, Peabody professor of music theory and Homewood professor of rock music, talks about his days as a Peabody Prep student and reconciling his two loves, classical and popular music.
News-Letter: Was your family musical? Paul Mathews: No, not particularly. My father worked here at the Domino Sugar Plant and my mom stayed home.
N-L: So how did you fall into music? PM: My mom had a part time job at a music distributor, so I was in contact with a lot of music businesses. Through that, she sort of set me up with piano lessons. From there, I took it up in school and stayed with it.
N-L: Were you originally interested in classical, or was it just something separate? PM: Mostly I was a drummer in a rock band. Then I sort of had an epiphany my last year of high school when I heard music of Igor Stravinsky and decided that was where it really was, so moved towards that.
N-L: You originally studied at Peabody Prep. Did you have any idea that's where you would wind up later in life? PM: No idea. I had no desire to go there until graduate school.
N-L: Was there an individual in your life who piqued your interest into what would become a career path? PM: I had a much older brother and he kind of steered my musical tastes towards acts like, say, Led Zeppelin or Steely Dan.
N-L: Had you not chosen music, what path might you have taken? PM: Perhaps writing. I used to write fiction in college. I really like Pixar, so the idea of writing screenplays or animated features would interest me.
N-L: You recently published a book, Orchestrations. PM: Right. It's an anthology. I'm currently working another one that I'm covering. It's about Pierrot Lumaire, a seminal 1912 new music pianist.
N-L: In Orchestrations you discuss several theories behind orchestration. In your own works, how have these theories manifested? PM: As a composer, I've been mostly writing chamber music and an opera, so I wouldn't say terribly much. It's just my teaching. I was actually hired by Peabody to teach orchestration. So the constant teaching and constant studying of it is what generated the materials that I used in the book.
N-L: Which do you consider yourself first: a composer or professor? PM: I am a professor who composes incidentally.
N-L: What is the most challenging aspect of your work in either field? PM: I would say the work I do when I'm actually working is fine. It's when you have to take it to other people. Publishers are just so hard to work with. Or when you're composing and you have to take it to the performers. Taking my vision to other people is a difficult aspect of what I do.
N-L: How have you dealt with that? PM: I tend to work with people with whom I already have a relationship with. I like to people with people who I already know, already know what the situation is going to be. It's when you feel with people you don't know, you run into difficulties in communication.
N-L: What composer would you say your work most mirrors? PM: I would like the answer to be Anton Webern. Whether or not that is true is for others to decide.
N-L: Is there a reason why you have enjoyed teaching Beethoven string quartets over the years? PM: I don't think there is any other literature that so maps out the composer's whole career. You can just tell from any one of his quartets where he is and how it's going to play out in his symphonies and in his piano sonatas. It's just a fascinating portrait of the composer.
N-L: What advice do you have for aspiring composers and/or musicians? PM: Study, study, study. I really think the intellectual side of music pursuits is too often downplayed and you can learn a lot by studying scores in an atmosphere where you can share your insights with other students, guided by a professor. It is integral to creating new music as a composer and as a musician.
N-L: What new acts in the classical or popular spheres today do you find the most promising?PM: Among performers, the Alarm Will Sound, which is based in New York. We actually have one of the members, Courtney Orlando, who works at Peabody. She's amazing. She's a violinist and teaches ear training. They're very promising, in part because of their ability to crossover. They're constantly striving to do new things, and not just to broaden the audience, which sounds kind of cheap, but to just challenge themselves and take themselves to places beyond any musical ensemble. In the pop sphere, I'm very encouraged by Rilo Kiley, Arctic Monkeys and Spoon. It's not just the way they perform, not just the way they write songs, but the way they present themselves and the way they mirror what's going on in society at any given time. N-L: What values do you look at differently when considering popular music?PM: I'm not always thinking about development of musical ideas and harmony or the guitar playing. I'm sort of taking this gestalt whole of the entire package. How they present themselves, the way they perform songs, the differences in how they perform live and in way they record. N-L: Where would you classify Beethoven? PM: Beethoven is an unusual case; in that, psychologically, he was kind of a loner and then there was the impediment of his hearing, which made him shun social situations. He really tried to avoid being around people because he couldn't hear them. I really admire composers, who in their late years are still doing new and innovative things. In this category, I would put Webern, Stravinsky and even Pierre Boulez. I think for them it gets more interesting as they write more.
N-L: What types of new innovations? PM: It's hard to say. When you're a rock and roll act, you're in a pretty tight box. We think of them as being wild and crazy, but the style that accompanies being a rock act is very limiting. It's hard to chip away at that and still be considered a rock act. Sometimes that involves instrumentation, which was certainly the case in the '60s and '70s where we saw new instruments added to rock. But, more often, it involves new ways of presenting the music in the way it is sung or the way it's recorded.
N-L: How do you see the individualization of music morphing the music industry? PM: I think it's good. I remember when I was in college, reading Future Shock, by Alvin Toffler, and one of the points he made was that instead of being this homogenous future where everyone wore gray suits and did the same thing, technology would make choices so varied that everyone could do what they want, and I think that has really played out in my lifetime, in music. We're getting increasingly sort of niche acts that have very small audiences, but can make a living doing it.
