Musical Patronage

Musical patronage is an interested topic of discussion. Most people would presumably now think that musicians no longer work under a system of patronage, and haven't done since composer's started to write for the concert hall in the baroque era. I'd have to disagree; I think patronage has come full circle with the advent of film/TV and video games. Many composers nowadays write almost exclusively for these mediums, and are employed by private companies to do so.

Any system of patronage, whether writing for a royal court or for a film production company, provides a secure and regular income for the musician, on the agreement that they write certain types of music to certain deadlines. They may have some limited freedom within that framework, but the employer, having their own artistic vision for the final event or product, may demand adjustments or complete rewrites to be made. On the flip-side to this argument, working under a form of patronage gives the composer direction and a sense of purpose, and the framework they are limited to, like a musical form, may actually help give shape to their ideas and increase the volume and quality of the artist's output.

A composer not working for a patron finds they are able to be more daring and experimental with their creations. This pushes musical innovation forward and doesn't allow it to stagnate. In the early days, when the church had complete control and most music was sacred, said music barely changed over hundreds of years. The problem with new and experimental music is that it often finds a great deal of resistance at its inception, and requires a great deal of early adopters to change the general perception of this new music. This can be a difficult thing to do, and when composers need to earn a wage, and they aren't working under a patron, they may find that they compose many works that follow a guarantee'd winning formula, in order to sell concert tickets and CD's. With that being said, I think artists who write music that appeals to the public are ambassadors for art music and can drive more people, and therefore money, into the scene.

I do however think an element of state funding is absolutely essential, as it allows innovative composers and musicians to push forward creatively, without worrying too much about pleasing patrons or punters. I read a couple of articles on The Guardian website, which made some excellent points regarding state funding, and its role especially during times of economic downturn. They said:


Spending on arts is hugely good value for the Government. The monetary amounts required is relatively small, and the investment "levers in" funds from other sources, such as fundraising, sponsorship and box office sales.

Withdrawing or limiting state funding would restrict funds from elsewhere. Boards of trustees and artistic directors would be more conservative and less risk-taking. This would result in less interesting performances, and thus smaller audiences.

The arts are vital in bad times. Music and the other arts brings the nation together, and is needed in bad times more than ever, offering comfort and solace. It shouldn't be looked at as a mere 'luxury' that can be done without.

Thousands of art organisations could collapse in America due to minimal state spending. The result of failure to invest money from the public purse into the arts is being evidenced in America. Continued support from the government is required if we aren't to follow suit in this country.


The points raised in the articles mirrored my own thoughts on the subject. The arts and culture are important for the nation as a whole, and shouldn't be seen as an area where the state can save a few pounds from a budget that isn't very big (relatively) to begin with. State funding is needed if music is to continue to evolve, and composers able to innovate.

For a recent exercise I watched a DVD performance by the Freiburger Barockorchester, a German period instrument ensemble. I decided to find out on their website how they are funded, and found it is from a multitude of sources. The Society of the Friends and Patrons of the FBO e.V has supported the orchestra's work for over 20 years. Its role is to organise concerts for the orchestra, either with or without third-party involvement. They raise money through concerts, DVD and CD sales, public donations, and a membership scheme, where for an annual fee the subscriber receives regular newsletters, and access to exclusive behind-the-scenes events. As the society is a charity, both the subscriptions and donations are tax-deductible.