At "The Organ in the New Millennium" conference held in April 1999 at Pacific Lutheran University, it was reported that, "The Pacific Northwest builders are in the process of creating a new organ type that will not merely incorporate, but will fuse the previous organ styles that feed into it, and thus will transcend all of them."1 The new Fritts organ at Pacific Lutheran University, which was featured prominently at the conference, is undoubtedly a noble example of flexibility, faithfulness to historical precedent, and innate beauty. That instrument and the work of other Northwest builders may indeed be heading toward the creation of a new type of organ, but this phenomenon isn't confined to the Pacific Northwest. An examination of the "new instruments" columns in pipe organ journals reveals that many organ-builders claim to be striving towards and reaching new stylistic territory with their recent work. Two noteworthy instruments whose attributes point to the coalescence of a new style of pipe organ are the Fisk-Rosales at Rice University and the Fisk at the Myerson Symphony Center. Large instruments such as these give builders artistic latitude to explore eclecticism and amalgamation of various elements. Smaller instruments display qualities that transcend established practices as well, beautifully exemplified by organs such as the Taylor & Boody at St. Thomas Church in New York City.
The post-modern trends of the late 20th century are being fused with the eclecticism that has dominated American organ-building for decades. These elements, combined with a desire to create instruments that serve the whole spectrum of organ literature, have motivated the creation of instruments of great flexibility. Remaining true to the organ's nature as an ensemble instrument, espousing proportion and balance, and emphasizing tonal color, organ-builders are reconciling opposing stylistic elements by blending them with one another. They are melding high-level craftsmanship founded on classical principles with tonal diversity and ingenuity, guided by an over-arching goal of musicality and beauty. These efforts have led to the creation of a new style of organ that I have dubbed the post-modern fusion style.
That the new style is a goal of many organ-builders today is proved by their own statements. Consider F. Christian Holtkamp's view of the matter: "While not being period or nationality specific, [the Holtkamp organ at the Peabody Institute] possesses a range of timbre and an internal balance that enables it to deal effectively with the full range of the literature. Because it is not eclectic, not a pastiche or collage of sounds drawn from unrelated sources, it is an artistically unified whole, an instrument of coherent integrity and sound."2 Dan Jaeckel espouses the idea as well. In commenting on the new Jaeckel organ at Trinity Lutheran Church in Duluth, Minnesota, Director of Music Greg Vick observed, "Although the concepts come from various styles, it is possible to blend them into one organ without the loss of integrity if the builder understands where the concepts overlap. Having designed and built highly stylized organs of various historic ideals, [Jaeckel] believes that the resulting amalgamation in this organ achieves integrity without compromise. Instead of being simply an 'eclectic' organ, this organ has the ability to play a great variety of music without compromising the stylist tonality, but, at the same time and because of its inherent integrity, can make wonderful music of other styles as well, even though the tonal design does not specifically take these into account."3 Despite such claims, however, the new style is in process. Few instruments built to date have reached the goal. The desire to build instruments which fuse disparate elements and the actual attempts to do so have not yet led to a mature aesthetic. Based on that, some would argue against the declaration of the arrival of a new style.
In an extensive article for The Tracker, Jonathan Ambrosino has commented that the end of the twentieth century finds the organ-building world in the United States highly pluralistic, defying definition: "The organ world has become as complex as modern life. Like our televisions, it has gained numerous channels in place of a former few. We have almost ceased to try to define our culture because it has grown beyond the tidy definitions we used to enjoy. Without any recognizable consensus on style, the organ of today is amorphous, difficult to codify."4 To his credit, Ambrosino does later add that "if we . . . look at where things seem to be headed, [ . . . ] the eclecticism that is currently driving us forward [may become] an identifiable style that may be in place by the year 2010."5
The organ-building world at present does indeed defy "tidy" definitions; however, it does not defy definition of any sort. Identification of a style according to a common set of principles evident in a spectrum of work is not only possible, but is also a productive way of making sense of the current situation. Furthermore, it is impossible to ignore a trend that is recognizable in the work of the most respected organbuilders in the United States. Pluralism is dominant; it is this very atmosphere of diversity that has allowed and promoted the birth of a new style, providing fertile soil for its development. The post-modern fusion style, still in its infancy, encompasses a variety of manifestations, but it is fair to say that the style has taken up residence in American organ-building.
Additional evidence that suggests the arrival of an identifiable new style is the export of American pipe organs. This exportation points toward the international recognition of the high quality workmanship of pipe organs produced in the United States. The ambassadors of the American organbuilding industry are firms that are building classically-inspired instruments which represent an amalgamation of styles. Shortly before his death in 1983, Charles Fisk had been in discussion with the leadership of St. Giles Cathedral of Edinburgh, Scotland about the possibility of his firm building a new organ there.6 Nearly twenty years later, Austin, Brombaugh, Fisk, Noack, and Taylor & Boody have installations and/or contracts in Asia. On the European front, John Brombaugh's two-manual instrument for Göteborg, Sweden, was a breakthrough. Equally significant are the two organs Fritz Noack is building for Reykjavik, Iceland.7 Still more compelling, though, is the selection of Fisk to build an instrument of 141 ranks for the Cathedral of Lausanne, Switzerland. Guy Bovet eloquently stated the significance of this organ in a report for La Tribune de L'Orgue: "By choosing Fisk as its builder, Lausanne will have an instrument which is different from anything which has been seen in Europe until now, and which will without a doubt define an epoch. As not long ago, grape vines which had been transplanted to the New World, and thereby escaped the disease which destroyed French viniculture, were then re-imported to reconstruct the noble viniculture ancestry, so the organ for Lausanne re-institutes for us a true tradition of organ building, which comes back 'home' enriched by the experience of a long journey of fruitful education."8 The best of American organ-builders are poised to become the world leaders in the 21st century, and it is these leaders whose work represents a new American style.
Six principles comprise the framework of the post-modern fusion style.
1. Emphasis on Historical Tonal Archetypes
The "historically-inspired" organ-building trend which reached its zenith in the 1980s, represented by instruments such as the French Classic Bedient at St. Mark's Episcopal in Grand Rapids, has received much attention and has been well-documented.9 Emulation of historic European organs based on painstaking study has provided a spectrum of facsimiles of the sounds heard in the instruments of Clicquot, Silbermann, Schnitger, and Cavaillé-Coll, among others. The use of ornate casework modeled on historic examples, including luxurious materials such as gold leaf and exotic species of hardwood (e.g. Honduras mahogany), can be construed as a post-modern reaction to the utilitarian arrangements of exposed pipework and lackluster facades of years past. Although it can be described as an unprecedented looking backward in American organ-building history, the "historically inspired" movement has nevertheless left a deep imprint on the organ-building milieu. It has motivated builders in their quest for artistic integrity, based in part on the realization that facsimiles of historical voices aren't necessarily successful in American acoustical environments.
2. Cultural Conditions Germane to the United States
Far from being a tradition-bound society on the whole, the atmosphere in the United States, home of democratic capitalism, gives free reign to creativity and free enterprise, especially if it proves viable in the marketplace. The concept of freedom of speech is extended to every corner of American life, and at its best this freedom unleashes experimentation and ingenuity. Embracing pastiche is part of our culture. The current trend toward worship which blends a variety of styles, reflected in recently published hymnals, is but one example. American organ-builders have followed suit, creating instruments that are "melting pots" for a variety of historical, technological, and home-grown characteristics. As Steve Dieck has said, "It is a fun game to mix and match different styles into one American style. Americans want everything."10
3. Pre-eminence of Musicality
The tonal personalities of the best organs built today are characterized by profundity and lyricism, coupled with a legibility of tone, to borrow a phrase from the late Charles Fisk. These organs speak with passionate, emotional voices and they speak clearly. They are delicately forthright, articulate yet powerful, and possess ensembles characterized by vitality and color. Harsh edginess and mushy unintelligibility are avoided. Here again we can thank the influence of historical models. European craftsmen of past centuries were building organs primarily to be musical, to fill a room with beautiful sounds, inspiring the composition of music for their instruments. Organ-builders have returned to this touchstone, realizing that the pursuit of authenticity or flexibility at the expense of tonal quality results in instruments that are idiosyncratic or uninteresting.
4. Repertoire-Driven Designs
Organs built today are subject to the crucible of being able to adequately, if not authentically, play the entire range of organ literature. Compromise is inherent in such a task; however, builders are discovering that pursuing the goal of versatility need not result in either pastiche or blandness. They are also learning where the boundaries of the "all-purpose" organ--a myth in the minds of some--need to be set. In a report on recitals heard on the Fritts organ at Pacific Lutheran University, Herbert Huestis commented, "This organ speaks to our own time with the same authority as the age of J.S. Bach. Historically-inspired organs can attain tremendous flexibility for the performance of the repertoire. The Fritts organ was not at all restrictive. It is capable of playing a very big slice of organ literature very well."11 Successful instruments are those which can render a significant portion of the literature musically rather than authentically. The best organbuilders display a circumspect artistic sense regarding service to organ literature, resisting the urge to sacrifice integrity to the whims of performers, even if the resident organist voices a desire to play the Grigny Tierce en taille and the Franck E major Choral with precisely the correct sounds. "Sometimes the specific commission the artist is working on will challenge the rules, and it is how well he can honor his convictions, but also meet the need of the commission, which will determine the creative prowess of the artist."12 Artistic maturity is crucial.
5. Pre-eminence of Artisan Builders
The leaders in American organbuilding today are small firms, led by highly-educated individuals who have found organ building a cause as much as a job.13 Generally founded by an individual with a vision and a passion for organbuilding, these shops emphasize craftsmanship and artistry. A social platform now undergirds quality organ building. It has evolved out of renewed interests in formal design, craftsmanship, education, and personal participation. These "artisan builders," spurred on by fervent convictions, preach their gospels through the organs they build. In their minds, pipe organs are works of art, not merely functional entities. A post-modern rejection of the utilitarian in favor of beauty and a shift away from mass production in favor of consummate workmanship by individuals is the modus operandi of the artisan builders. According to Lynn Dobson, "We must recognize the art in our profession in order to give purpose to the craft and science of organ-building. In all of life it is the human spirit which sparks the inquiring mind. The art of our work is what sends our minds and souls soaring when we experience the sight of a beautiful organ, or hear subtle sound, or even feel the vibrations of its power. It surely is our art which gives us the cause to master the technology."14
6. Fusion of Disparate Styles into a Blended Whole
The melding of disparate stylistic characteristics represents a return to balance and integrity, progress beyond a polyglot approach. Screaming mixtures, hyper-chiffy flues and other idiosyncratic qualities that draw attention to themselves have been cast aside in favor of a sophisticated eloquence, a matured eclecticism. Historical European voices are both emulated and manipulated, designed not only to be contiguous with their American neighbors, but also to dovetail with them. John-Paul Buzard has articulated the importance of process in creating an instrument that blends several styles: "A balanced eclecticism must be embraced. It is through the refiner's fire of a single artistic vision that such eclecticism can be cohesive and have integrity as the organ-builder's individual style."15 In order to produce instruments that are beautiful, functional, and unique, organ-builders must have the artistic capability to make wise stylistic decisions, or as Frank Lloyd Wright put it, "Style is a by-product of the process and comes of the man or the mind in the process." Success in the post-modern fusion style is achieved when history begets benchmark, syncretism gives way to synthesis, pastiche becomes poetry, and genuine artistic expression emerges.
The path that organ-building in the United States has taken has been a productive and instructive continuum. The growth and the growing pains experienced along this sometimes convoluted path (populated by the likes of E.M. Skinner, G. Donald Harrison, Hope-Jones, M.P. Möller, the Orgelbewegung, et. al.) has yielded answers about what isn't desirable as much as it has illuminated worthy goals. It has truly been, as Bovet observed, "a long journey of fruitful education." The most astute American organbuilders have heeded the lessons well. These organ-builders are maintaining their personal convictions, building upon the integrity of historic antecedents, and harnessing the energy of eclecticism in order to craft organs that have stylistic endurance. "A fine builder does not merely 'abide by the rules,' but injects such qualities as mystery, playfulness, majesty, or warmth. This character comes about in an ineffable rather than 'scientific' way, although it involves great care in choice of materials, the overall concept of the instrument, its winding, and voicing, and scaling of the pipes. The best instruments might be said to have a quality of flesh and blood, or to breathe, and have lives of their own."16 Such instruments will stand the test of time.
Steve Dieck, describing the Fisk organ recently built for St. James's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia, made a comment which succinctly summarizes the post-modern fusion style: "While rooted firmly in historical principles, the organ's tonal profile is fresh and innovative, a modern-day fusion of diverse elements, offering a singular and resolute musical statement."17 Historically grounded and inventive, serving the repertoire and delighting the ear, post-modern fusion organs offer an intricately woven tapestry of sound created by skilled artisans. Manifestations of one or more of the characteristics in my definition can certainly be found in the work of many an organ-builder; my six-pronged framework is intentionally broad. I do not consider an instrument to be representative of the post-modern fusion style, however, unless it contains all of the six elements to some degree.
Let's examine the Fritts organ at Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington for features of the post-modern fusion style. It is an instrument with strong North German roots as interpreted through the personal artistic convictions of Paul Fritts. David Dahl comments that the resulting sounds are "not so much 'historically specific' as they are credible within various musical contexts." I have already cited Herbert Huestis's comments regarding its flexibility in rendering a large array of literature. To offer performers more choices, Fritts has provided two pedal boards--flat and BDO--and an on/off control for the wind stabilizer. Also note these pertinent features: 250 square feet of hand-carved pipe shades on a case whose design is inspired by the 1658 Stellwagen organ of the Marienkirche in Stralsund, Germany. Regarding musicality, Huestis reports, "The listener was introduced to a kind of feminine nobility that few organs possess. Beyond power, this organ has profundity and lyricism."18 This instrument clearly fits the post-modern fusion profile. (For a more complete description of the instrument, refer to the June 1999 issue of The Diapason, p. 19).
Another fine example of the style is the Edythe Bates Old Grand Organ at Rice University, built by Fisk and Rosales. Its tonal personality is based primarily on French organs of the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries, which its designers felt would offer the greatest flexibility in performing a large selection of literature. The vertical towers of the organ's case were inspired by French Classical examples. Despite its traditional appearance, however, this case doesn't have a roof, a back, or sides, in an innovative effort to direct its powerful sounds towards the ceiling to achieve an appropriate effect in the recital hall. The organ has tracker action that is assisted by a servo-pneumatic machine on the lowest manual, developed by Stephen Kowalyshn of Fisk, that reduces resistance when full organ with couplers is engaged. Like the Fritts at Pacific Lutheran, the Fisk Rosales organ at Rice has an on/off control for its wind stabilizer. In addition, the performer may also select one of three methods for controlling the pistons: mode Americain--the usual way; mode Français I--toe studs function as ventils; or mode Français II--ventil pistons unaffected by combination action.
While honoring the artistic visions of both Fisk and Rosales, this organ combines tone colors from French, German, Spanish, and American organs with new sounds that move beyond the stylistic parameters of each firm. Jonathan Ambrosino has provided a detailed description of the instrument's tonal features in "A History of the Organ" on the Rice University web site (http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~organ/history.html). Not only has the combined expertise and experience of each firm been fully exploited, but together they have forged exciting new paths.19 Their achievements with this instrument pervasively traverse the territory of the post-modern fusion style, representing its superlative manifestation.
Eclecticism and the American Classic style are both important precursors of the post-modern fusion organ. One might in fact say that eclecticism has matured and developed to become a second-generation American Classic organ, albeit more sophisticated and eloquent. Again, builders are claiming to have accomplished that, for example, "While on paper the stoplist might seem to point toward yet another large American Classic organ, in practice this instrument is no mere echo of its predecessor or of any other instrument. The organ's tonal principles reflect a more eclectic nature, renewing rather than merely reviewing the tenets of that style."20 But let's be cautious with the term, "American Classic." It has been bandied about and used in both pejorative and positive sense to refer to various expressions of organbuilding, and upon occasion to organ performance.
For the purposes of my study, the term shall refer to the work of the Aeolian-Skinner firm under G. Donald Harrison, roughly over the years 1935-1955. It was Emerson Richards who actually coined the term in 1943: "I am endeavoring to give [this] the name of American Classic, although it is going to be awfully hard to dislodge the word Baroque. An expressive word for the new organ which is only quasi-Baroque in principle with some French, English and American practice makes a new word imperative but difficult to find."21 It is also important to be aware, however, that Richards had earlier clarified his understanding of the use of the word "classic" in a letter to William King Covell written in 1935: "When I speak of a 'forward step in the Renaissance of the classic organ in America' I am talking about the new birth of the classic organ in the U.S.A. I don't mean to imply that it ever existed here before, but that it is as much a creation of Art based upon classic lines as the work of Michelangelo or Raphael. [Their work] was nationalistically Italian not Greek, so in this case I think the thing will develop as nationalistically American."22
No doubt some readers have noticed by this point that I have avoided discussing issues of mechanism, resisting the temptation to jump into the electric-action vs. tracker action fray. I do so with intent. Although these issues will be touched upon in passing, my investigation deals primarily with tonal concerns. It is true that most of the instruments typifying the post-modern fusion style have tracker action. That is not to say, however, that an organ built with electric action could not be a post-modern fusion organ. Tracker and electric actions are becoming less and less tied to a particular tonal style and, therefore, I find the issue of action to be largely irrelevant to this discussion.
In order to shed more light on the roots and manifestations of the post-modern fusion style as I have defined it, I spoke with seven organ-builders about their work. I asked them to share with me how it relates to the American Classic style, how it compares and contrasts with the work of their peers, and where it fits in the organ-building scene in the United States. In the interest of presenting a balanced picture, I selected two distinct groups of builders, ostensibly identifying them with the terms "classic" and "romantic," although the picture is considerably more complex than those terms would imply. For my purposes, "classic" will indicate adherence to organ-building principles established in Europe during the 15th-19th centuries. This group includes Gene Bedient, John Brombaugh, Steve Dieck, Manuel Rosales, and George Taylor--the five lecturers at the 1998 University of Nebraska-Lincoln Conference on historically informed organ-building. "Romantic" indicates an emphasis on 19th-century French and English elements, expressive capacity and a symphonic or orchestral tonal profile. I spoke with Jack Bethards, president of the high-profile Schoenstein and Co., and John-Paul Buzard, who has been identified as a leader among electric-action builders.23 Buzard's unabashedly English cathedral style meshes with my definition of the term "romantic," while Bethards himself uses the term "American Romantic" to refer to his work.24
By including two "romantic" builders in my study, both known for electric-slider and electro-pneumatic actions, I hope to present a balanced picture. The fact remains, however, that tracker builders have led the historical style revival, a key component of the post-modern fusion style, and by and large they receive the lion's share of attention and respect. Comments such as "The electric-action people surely realize that among them there isn't a single name that is taken as seriously as the leading lights of the tracker world,"25 underline that fact. To dismiss or ignore the high quality work of electric-action builders because of such remarks or fashionable opinion is irresponsible. Their work merits serious consideration. Furthermore, at the risk of being accused of having an entirely convoluted view of organ-building, I will venture to say that each of the builders included in my articles is pursuing a common goal, albeit reaching that goal with vastly different methods. I am striving solely to identify areas of common ground, all of which I believe represent the post-modern fusion style, in order to encourage the development of a fresh, and perhaps more productive, perspective.
Consider well an admonishment from Stephen Bicknell: "Though there are countless areas in which the builder can strive to make the instrument better (more musical and artistic, more truly worthy of its role in worship or concert), it is ultimately the rest of us--listeners, players and purchasers--who need to be most alert to questions of good and bad. There is a task to be performed in trying to decide amongst ourselves what is truly excellent and worth encouraging, and what may be ignored. That task may not be easy, but the endless variety to be found in our instrument should make it enjoyable and informative. Gradually, by comparing instruments, analysing what we hear, and discussing our opinions, we can help mold the path of organ-building and thus of organ music and playing."26
The author wishes to thank Brian K. Davis for advice and consultation in the development of this article.
