(1) Surely we have to wonder how Bing, Google, or any search engine decides who to list when queried for “the greatest musical composers.” On what grounds do Hildegard of Bingen (“one of the best-known composers of sacred monophony, as well as the most-recorded in modern history” according to Wikipedia) or Clara Schumann (whose work has in the last few decades started to be studied, performed, and recorded) not count?

(2) Yes, there is a gender aspect. Women were not allowed to be composers in some times and places. In others, they were strongly discouraged. And even where they were neither disallowed nor discouraged, their societal roles as women were expected to come first. This is what happened to Clara Schumann, for instance, severely limiting her output. Furthermore, female composers were often expected to limit themselves in the type of music they composed (abstaining from symphonies and operas, which are more likely to win a composer respect and renown). Again, this expectation effected both Clara Schumann’s output and her reputation.

(3) Staying on that point for a moment, should symphonic and operatic music be considered so much more prestigious than chamber music, piano sonatas, choir music, art songs, and so forth? Many of “the greatest musical composers” built their reputations on these musical forms. Mozart’s piano sonatas are some of his most popular work (e.g., the Sonata Facile or the Rondo Alla Turca), and he’s number three on Bing’s list. Almost all of Bach’s best known music was for choir or harpsichord, and he’s number two on the list. Beethoven’s only opera was considered a massive failure, and he’s number one on the list (though, to be fair, it is his symphonies that we listen to today). Frédéric Chopin (number six on the list) wrote primarily for solo piano. Ralph Vaughan Williams (number 44 on the list) built his career almost entirely on art songs. And Erik Satie—who barely makes the cut but still managed to get number 46 on the list—is primarily known for his solo piano work. So it seems like this criterion may be applied a bit unevenly.

(4) One more point about Clara Schumann, who was very much adored by my (male, if that matters) music history teacher (meaning that we received some very detailed coverage of her life and work). As her music has come to be studied more, an increasing number of scholars are coming to the conclusion that she was a better composer than her husband, Robert Schumann. Robert Schumann, meanwhile, is tenth in the Bing rankings of “the greatest musical composers” and 14th in Google’s rankings. So what should we think if and when this becomes a majority opinion among scholars? And what should we think of the fact that it took so long for her to be recognized as one “the greatest musical composers”?

Because the women’s classical music was hard to understand, so people didn’t buy it.

I think for the most part women didn’t have the opportunity to become composers due to the restrictions on women’s education and mobility in society at the time. It’s unfortunate because it makes you wonder what music there might have been had they been able study composition and make a life out of it. (During the common practice period, composing was a job; you took commissions and composed for wealthy patrons. Such a position wouldn’t have been open to women).

It’s for exactly the same reason there are no women Presidents.

Here are a few off the top of my head: Fanny Mendelssohn, Clara Schumann, Ethel Smyth, Janette Weir, Nadia Bolanger.

Because of The Patriarchy.

Ahem, hello…Britney Spears alert!

Because that was the way it was orchestrated…<giggity>

Behind every great man is a GREATER woman!!!

Women weren’t allowed nor accepted when they tried.