Composers of Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei played a critical role in the compositional sphere of the 1930s, both by organizing performances of new music and introducing novel aspects in their own work. The society was founded by eleven composers, four musicians, and one critic on April 28, 1930 in Tokyo.56 Its founding was inspired by the desire to promote new music and
56 The founders were (in alphabetical order): composers Hashimoto Kunihiko, Ike Yuzuru (池譲, 1902–1990), Ishii Gorō (石井五郎, 1909–1990), Itō Noboru, Kiyose Yasuji, Komatsu Heigorō, Komatsu Kiyoshi, Matsudaira Yoritsune, Mitsukuri Shūkichi, Sugawara Meirō, and Yamamoto Naotada; critic Shioiri Kamesuke (塩入亀輔, 1900–
1938); pianists Kondō Hakujirō (近藤栢次郎, 1900–1932) and Oida Kōkichi (笈田光吉, 1902–1964); cellist and conductor Saitō Hideo (斉藤秀雄, 1902–1974); and cellist Suzuki
support anyone with the same goal. This interest in the new is indicated in the society’s name, as shinkō was associated with avant-garde in the 1930s (Akiyama 1979, 42). Originally, indeed, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was what could even be called an avant-garde group.57 Mitsukuri poured his enthusiasm into gathering the sixteen founding members—with active cooperation from Komatsu Heigorō, the brother of Komatsu Kōsuke and Kiyoshi58—to form a society of composers interested in modern musical idioms that were not largely present in the Japan of the time. The idea was rebellious; Matsudaira (1969a, 30) later described the society as a radical “antithesis” of the predominant German-style composition. That Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was as an antithesis is argued by Matsushita (1999, 1) and Akiyama (2003, 271) as well: both of them see the founding of the group as a sign of opposition to established composers, their societies, and the academic style that they represented.59
It soon became clear, however, that instead of remaining a small and cohesive avant-garde group, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei would take a different path. It attracted new members only some days after its founding, and eventually grew to be one of the biggest composer societies in Japan, as the Japanese branch of the International Society for Contemporary Music (hereafter, ISCM). This resulted in versatile and diverse approaches, a tendency that became even more apparent at later stages. Matsudaira, who had originally thought of Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei as a radical antithesis, later recalled the early steps of the society in more bitter terms, and criticized the “unfocused” nature that eventually turned the originally small association into a more public society (in Akiyama 2003, 287–288).
Considering the context of the foundation of the society—with modern expression as the main motivation—Japanese-style composition was possibly only one style represented by the founding composers. However, it was a significant one: Komiya (1976, 99) and Akiyama (1979, 12), among others, have taken notice of the founding composers’ ambitions to incorporate Japanese elements into Western art music composition. It is no less remarkable that many of the founding composers represented the frontline of
Fumio (鈴木二三雄, 1900–1945). The division into composers and performers was, however, originally not that strict; although listed as musicians here, Oida, Saitō, and Suzuki composed some works at the early stages of their careers. And vice versa:
practically all composers were also musicians or conductors. See list of those involved with the society in Someya et al. (1999, 360–378).
57 As defined by Souriau, avant-garde seeks to “break with tradition, convention, and permanent schools” (see Tarasti 2012, 32).
58 Three of the Komatsu brothers were involved in the music world of Japan. Komatsu Kōsuke was the oldest and one of the “established” composers, whereas his younger brothers Heigorō and Kiyoshi were among the founding members of Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei.
59 Most likely because the search for new styles largely equaled the search for styles other than German composition, Akiyama and Matsushita associate the society with the aim of opposing established composers like Yamada, Komatsu Kōsuke, and Nakayama Shinpei.
However, Yamada, for example, shared the interest in modern music and joined the organization as early as in 1932. Rather than opposing academic composers, the society opposed their compositional styles.
Japanese-style composition of the time;60 furthermore, as Komiya (1976, 99) notes, most prewar discussion on Japanese-style composition took place during the lifetime of the society. Some (e.g. Herd 2004, 44–45) even suggest that Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was originally founded on the idea of following a certain compositional principle to synthesize Western and Japanese expression. However, no such principle is listed in the documents of the society, and furthermore, the lack of a consistent, shared approach becomes clear when examining the writings and musical works of the composers (see Chapters 4 and 5, and Someya et al. 1999). While centered around the idea of promoting new music, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was not a homogenous society in terms of compositional techniques or ideals. Other societies and groups, such as the avant-gardist School of New Music (Shin ongakuha), were also founded by composers of the society. Above all, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was a group in which the members shared one common goal, but did not necessarily share their personal goals as composers.
Aside from Mitsukuri and Shioiri, all founders worked as professional musicians or conductors (Komiya 1976, 97). This is an important observation in that it was reflected in the actions and the course that the society would take.
To promote contemporary music, the group started organizing concerts and open rehearsals (see Someya et al. 1999, 9). Many small-scale works heard in these gatherings were performed by the composers of the society, but they also worked in cooperation with ensembles such as New Symphony Orchestra (Shin kōkyō gakudan), National Symphony Orchestra (Kokumin kōkyō gakudan), Suzuki Quartet, and Crystal Quartet (Komiya 1976, 97).61
One of the achievements of Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was, indeed, the promotion of new music in both performances and radio broadcasts. The first such event was an open trial performance of contemporary Japanese music—
works by members of the society—in June 1930. While the concert caught the attention of the Japanese media (see Someya et al. 1999, 20), it was eventually attended by only a few listeners (Kiyose 1963a, 14). However, after having been praised by some critics (ibid.), works by the composers were performed on JOAK—the national radio station in Tokyo. The program of only 30 minutes contained works by eleven composers. From 1933, the society began organizing concerts more regularly. During its decade of activity, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei organized 29 performances of contemporary Japanese music—including open rehearsals and other smaller performances—as well as
60 For example, in the debates on Japanese-style composition, works and approaches by Kiyose, Mitsukuri, and Sugawara were addressed directly (see Akiyama 2003, 534–535);
furthermore, they were commissioned works for both kokuminshikyoku and the celebrations of 1940.
61 All these ensembles had a connection with composers of the society. The National Symphony Orchestra was directed by Komatsu Heigorō, and Saitō Hideo was employed in the orchestra. The Suzuki Quartet was formed by Suzuki Fumio and his brothers—
including Suzuki Shin’ichi (鈴木鎮一, 1898–1998), the inventor of the Suzuki teaching method.
a concert of contemporary German works.62 In addition to this, works by members of the society were performed in nine of the regular gatherings of the society.
Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei also had its works performed on the radio three times. Although these broadcasts received attention in the media, the newspaper Asahi Shinbun (Anonymous 1933, 5) revealed the circumstances enabling these broadcasts: the national radio stations had royalty issues with Western copyright holders, which made the broadcasting of Japanese works more convenient than Western recordings. Thus, the broadcasts were not necessarily a sign of rising interest in contemporary Japanese music. What they did contribute to, however, was the recognition of Japanese composers in general (Komiya 1976, 98). In addition to performances, the society organized various gatherings and discussion events, and hosted foreign composers visiting Japan, like Alexandre Tansman in March 1933. Apart from these actions, literary contributions by the two non-musicians were notable in gaining attention to the group, as well: Shioiri was the chief editor of the music journal Ongaku sekai (Music World), which published many of the founding composers’ works as scores, and in 1933, Mitsukuri was among the founders of the journal Ongaku hyōron (Music Critique), which hosted a regular page for the society.
In these actions, there are also signs of a rebellion against the music world of the time. All composers of Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei were relatively young at the founding of the society, the youngest being Matsudaira (23) and the oldest Mitsukuri (33). For young, unestablished composers, the only way to have their works performed was to organize concerts themselves. From this point of view, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was also a group offering opportunities to present works and ideas that were possibly not accepted by established composers and institutions.63 At the same time, this explains why those writing music in more “academic” and generally accepted styles—
including Hashimoto, Mitsukuri, and Yamamoto—were also interested in founding the society. Aside from Hashimoto and Ike, none of the founding composers had studied at the Tokyo Academy of Music, although many—for example, Kiyose, Mitsukuri, and Yamamoto—had studied composition in Europe, or in Japan from established composers.64
62 The number of performances given, as five during the years 1930–1935 and 13 during the years 1936–1940 by Komiya (1976, 97) and Galliano (2002, 82), apparently refers to the number of major concerts, excluding trial performances and other smaller events.
The number 29, as well as other information here, is based on the lists in Someya et al.
(1999, 304–318).
63 To some extent, this has not changed in Japan of today, either. As noted by composer Yokoyama Mioko (横山未央子, b.1989), contemporary Japanese music culture is hierarchic and puts an emphasis on respecting older composers rather than giving opportunities to younger ones (Yokoyama 2016).
64 Many studies claim that Hashimoto was the only founding composer trained at the Tokyo Academy of Music (e.g. Komiya 1976, 97; Galliano 2002, 82). Ike had also, however, studied violin at the same school—although he completed his studies in Germany (Someya et al. 1999, 361).
The year 1934 marked the beginning of gradual changes for music in the Japan of the time. Censorship was enforced in general (Yamazumi 1976), and leftist movements—including the Japanese Proletarian Music League—came under oppression. Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei was potentially under suspicion as well, as the word shinkō was associated with proletarian movements, parallel to European avant-garde groups (Akiyama 1979, 15).65 Because of this, the society changed its name to the Modern Composer Federation of Japan (Kindai Nippon sakkyokuka renmei) in 1934, and again to the Japanese Federation for Contemporary Composers (Nippon gendai sakkyokuka renmei) in 1935. At this stage, virtually all Japanese composers interested in modern styles joined the society (Akiyama 1979, 14). The number of members reached its peak in 1939 with 116 people (Someya et al. 1999, 403). In 1935, Moroi was accepted as a board member of the society, and it was thanks to Moroi’s and Mitsukuri’s efforts, and possibly even more importantly to Tcherepnin’s efforts, that the Japanese Federation for Contemporary Composers became the Japanese branch of the ISCM in 1935 (Akiyama 1979, 18; Hosokawa and Katayama 2008, 648).
This also introduced the society to the international scene. Some works by Japanese composers were performed in Europe already during the first half of the 1930s (Katayama 2007, 57), but the number grew notably with the foundation of the Japanese Federation for Contemporary Composers. It was possibly the most international music society in the Japan of the 1930s: the Federation took part in the World Music Conferences of the ISCM in 1937 and 1938, and in 1937 works by composers of the society were performed in Karlsruhe in a concert entitled “An Evening of Music from the Far East” (see Someya et al. 1999, 280). In the latter half of the 1930s, Tcherepnin had numerous works by the composers performed in Europe (Katayama 2007, 58), and there were concerts and radio broadcasts of music by the composers in several European countries (see Someya et al. 1999).66
Despite these promising developments, however, the Japanese Federation for Contemporary Composers saw its end due to political developments. The society was disbanded on November 20, 1940 by order of the government. The order encompassed all associations, including political parties. They were to form a new entity in the New Order (Shintaisei)67 promoted by Prime Minister Konoe Fumimaro (近衛文麿)—the brother of the conductor and composer Konoe Hidemaro (近衛秀麿, 1898–1973). At the time of disbandment, 66 members belonged to the society (Someya et al. 1999, 404). The umbrella
65 Possibly because of this, Katayama (2007, 56) even suggests that Hashimoto’s and Itō’s radical works were a type of discreet artistic opposition toward the establishment.
66 At these later stages, the versatility of the group became notable. For example, Fukai Shirō, who joined Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei in 1934, was among the founders of the composer group Promethe, which strongly opposed Japanese-style composition (see Akiyama 1979, 21).
67 New Order was the term used for the social order that emphasized national homogeneity. It featured the idea that all activities of a certain field would be gathered under one umbrella organization.
society Alliance to Promote the New Order in the Musical World (Gakudan shintaisei sokushin dōmei) was founded to encompass all musical activities. It was replaced in 1941 by the Association for Japanese Music Culture (Nihon ongaku bunka kyōkai), which operated until the end of the war.
The current Japanese branch of the ISCM, the Japan Society for Contemporary Music, as it is called in English (JSCM; Nihon gendai ongaku kyōkai), was re-established in 1946.68 Of Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei, Mitsukuri and Kiyose were among its founders; Mitsukuri also assumed the position of its first chair. Possibly seeking to avoid the dispersion that eventually characterized Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei, however, those composers that were now acknowledged as the forefront of Japanese-style composition founded their own society, the Society for New Wave Composition (Shin sakkyokuha kyōkai), in 1946. The group is famous because the young Takemitsu Tōru (武満徹, 1930–1996) was its member. In general, the postwar years marked the beginning of a new period in Japanese composition. Many composers of Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei found themselves in a situation where they were now opposed as “established composers.” Kishibe (1969, 14), for example, regarded it as a positive phenomenon that the influence of prewar composers was eventually to be small in the newly-established JSCM.
One reason for this might have to do with the postwar generation’s opposition to wartime nationalism. Japanese elements were treated with caution after the war because of their potentially nationalist connotations (Akiyama 1979, 46).69 For example, Hashimoto, a versatile modernist and a composer of popular songs as well, practically lost his status as a leading composer after the war because of some of his nationalist works. One composer to follow an opposite course was Matsudaira, who had stopped presenting his works during the war, and who did not take part in the nationalist trends. He became an appreciated figure in the postwar period among young composers as well.70
During its ten years of activity, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei offers an interesting view of the Japanese compositional scene, as a group that sought to develop Western-style composition and, in some cases, accomplish this by adopting elements from traditional Japanese music. According to Komiya (1976, 99), the society succeeded in three causes above all: in 1) promoting instrumental music, 2) becoming closer to foreign music and adopting new influences from it, and 3) bringing the profession of composer into wider knowledge, and having it recognized in society. Akiyama (1979, 11), however,
68 JSCM became the Japanese branch of ISCM in 1949.
69 The same eventually happened, however, to the postwar generation with the rise of radical student movements in the late 1960s. For example, Sakamoto Ryūichi (坂本龍一, b. 1952), known for his film scores, later reminisced how he organized a demonstration against Takemitsu for representing the “far right” because of his works for Japanese instruments (Sakamoto 2009, 84).
70 However, Matsudaira’s prewar music has not attracted as much attention as his works of the postwar period.
points out that the influences on compositional style in the 1930s were still solely one-sided; that is, Japanese composers were ultimately not free of the idea of following the “advanced West.” Even so, Shinkō sakkyokuka renmei represented a musical internationalism exceptional in the Japan of the 1930s.
These trends might have eventually become as successful as the approaches by postwar Japanese composers, had the war not interrupted their development.
3 Analyzing Japanese elements in musical works
Concepts such as “Japanese elements” and “Japanese-style composition” have been mentioned already several times. In a wider, international context,
“Japanese” is interchangeable with “national:” either as musical characteristics associable with a specific “nationality,” or as a perceived, fundamental quality characterizing the music overall. But how can one assess if a musical work contains national elements, and on what basis does a work become “national” or, more specifically, “Japanese”? These are questions that I address in this chapter. Chapters 3.1 and 3.2 introduce viewpoints to assessing the “national” in Western art music on a general level, and Chapter 3.3 discusses some issues related specifically to the concept of “Japanese.” In Chapter 3.4, I propose an approach for identifying Japanese elements in musical works.