Is the Absolute Symphony dead?

I've been thinking about this a lot lately, partly because when I listen to symphonies post-Mahler, they seem to lack a certain justification or grounds for their existence.  I know that many composers consider the symphony to be the pinnacle of instrumental (and sometimes even choral/vocal) music and definitely have the goal of writing one themselves.  I personally am flabbergasted by the task of writing a symphony - should I start with a classical symphony like Prokofiev did and evolve the form in some new direction?  But when I listen to many symphonies even by composers who are already dead, they fail to enter my mind as music deserving of the title of "Symphony".  For example, many American symphonies written post-Mahler seem to me to be overblown and overly cinematic seeming, with too much emphasis on brass and do not seem to fit into the category of "Symphony" in my mind.  Perhaps the Programmatic Symphony has some future, since the program of the symphony might lend the music the purpose and impetus it needs for its existence.  Otherwise, why write a symphony only for the sake of writing a symphony?  It seems like a pointless exercise.  Although I don't think that the form/genre is completely exhausted - for example, why was the minuet/trio chosen as the sole dance movement to be inserted into the middle of symphonies?  Maybe, like Prokofiev we should try writing a gavotte/musette instead?  Or perhaps an Allemande, Courante, Bourrée or Gigue?  Imagine if, as a finale to the symphony, one fashioned a scherzo out of a gigue rather than a minuet?  Or maybe, the Symphony should be developed harmonically, becoming more polytonal, like Stravinsky intended?  (Or should *I*, as a Polish composer, try to insert Polish folk dances such as the Polonaise or Mazurka into the symphony?)

The Programmatic Symphony on the other hand seems like it might have infinite variety and utility.  I think Beethoven's 6th Symphony shows that programmatic music in symphonic form can stand on its own (since some consider programmatic music 2nd rate and the program as a sort of crutch which *real* composers don't need).

What is your opinion?  And do you plan on ever writing a symphony and if so - what kind?

Frankly, and I know I'm in the minority here, but most long-form musical works are simply vanity projects in an era where rich people no longer pay you to compose them.

I do not know that I have ever listened to any symphony in its entirety, in a single sitting, no matter how good it is. Honestly, most pieces of music longer than 5 minutes really have no business being that long, and starts to either descend into an unnecessary amount of variations and repetition, or may as well be multiple pieces.

Elvis had over 20 #1 hits and I don't think any of them were longer than 3 minutes. This was in the '50s and '60s, when we are told people had longer attention spans. I feel there is an important thing to learn there.

Most people here don't seem to be film composers or TV, but rather aspiring concert composers (at least from what I've noticed) and thus they don't really realize just how much story can be told in 1-2 minutes. In most cases, that is  plenty long enough to say what you want to musically, in one coherent idea.

So in short: I don't have any plans of writing a symphony. Right now, I'm putting the finishing touches on an album of adventure orchestral music for TV. The company requires at least 10 tracks, but if I'm being honest, I do feel like I said what needed to be in 8.

8 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Frankly, and I know I'm in the minority here, but most long-form musical works are simply vanity projects in an era where rich people no longer pay you to compose them.

An astute comment if ever! Agreed, and I suppose it's an exercise and something to aim for among beginner to intermediate experience composers (if you'll pardon those descriptions, please). I also agree with about 5 minutes being a reasonable time for a concert piece. Perhaps there are cases when a piece may go on for longer but they should be the exception. Maybe a concertante movement since there are soloists still around. 

I half-heartedly tried a single movement Sinfonietta (which I thought was ok but failed with inadequate rendering), then a Symphony which was unsatisfactory so I kept just the middle movement as a lone piece. I've no intention of writing another unless it's for fun - light music, e.g. Don Gillis' Symphony 5 1/2.

Like many musical forms if you include dances of the same era, they're now outdated, relics from the days of the Sunday concert being "higher-brow" entertainment. Minuets, Sarabands, Bourees...enjoyed by the elite and the effete.  This doesn't mean that these forms or the associated music shouldn't be the basis of composition, as long as the composer is aware of their provenance. 

.

On 3/26/2024 at 2:33 AM, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Frankly, and I know I'm in the minority here, but most long-form musical works are simply vanity projects in an era where rich people no longer pay you to compose them.

I do not know that I have ever listened to any symphony in its entirety, in a single sitting, no matter how good it is.

Your second statement is somewhat shocking to me, but it fully explains why you believe the first statement is true.

I only ever listen to a symphony in its entirety, and I enjoy that kind of long-form music.  And that's also why I write long-form music - I'm not just copying older forms for the hell of it; I'm writing the kind of piece I would want to sit down and listen to.  Of course, I'm not an "aspring composer"; I'm just a hobbyist, a dilettante.