|
Baa?21244 Posts
*Please note that this is not a “post your favorite classical piece” thread.
First, I would like you to read this article titled “Weaponizing Mozart.”
http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/24/weoponizing-mozart/
As the article points out, this situation seems disconcertingly similar to A Clockwork Orange.
I think many would agree that classical music gives off an aura of alien-ness, of remote aloofness, and is not something that the general public would readily embrace. And, as seen from “Weaponizing Mozart,” this remoteness of classical music ranges from general ignorance to downright hostility – classical music isn’t art, it isn’t entertainment, it’s an annoyance, something that can keep unruly youths from, indeed, graffiti-ing walls!
Though removed from the forefront of popular culture, classical music still has a vibrant and robust community. It is perhaps perplexing, then, to see classical music circle appealing, even pandering to the general public.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/classical/article7048605.ece
Is contemporary relevancy what classical music circles should be striving for? In addition to the article, there are countless examples of classical institutions engaging in uncharacteristic activities. For those of you who’ve seen Shutter Island, I would like to note that quite few pieces on the soundtrack were performed by none other than the Vienna Philharmonic – yes, what is without a doubt one of the elite orchestras in the world has “reduced” itself to playing film scores!
There is a paradox here – on one hand, we have classical music laboring to be more “accessible,” more “relevant” to the scene, while still maintaining this image of an elitist circle that borders on the ritualistic. The most familiar of this, no doubt, would be the no-applause between movements “rule.” An article on this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2010/mar/08/classical-music-applause-rule-obama
It is ritual and ceremony like this that have, in the mind of the general public, firmly fixed classical music as something that is aloof, impractical, and even artificial. In every concert, one would find both aficionados and socialites who treat the music as nothing but background to a social gathering. I found the Stuff White People Like entry “Appearing to enjoy classical music” quite amusing ( http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/09/01/108-appearing-to-enjoy-classical-music/ ) because it seems to illustrate precisely those kind of people.
And it would seem that the industry is struggling to either reconcile these two paths or elitism vs. populism, or whether if there was a way to reconcile the two. I am often interested in season programming of major orchestras, because it shows a divide within the industry. In every season, without fail, you will find a work that either is, or is equivalent to, Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony in terms of mass appeal and accessibility. You also find works by modernist composers that non-enthusiasts, and even some enthusiasts, have never heard of. Chances are, it is an atonal composer. Atonality, born out of Schoenberg’s serialism in the early 20th century, is certainly something very alien to most listeners (a famous example of something that’s “atonal” is John Cage’s 4’33”, which is exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds worth of silence from the orchestra. Atonality has grown to encompass so much that even no notes can be seen as atonal. An aside, some Cage works were also featured in the Shutter Island soundtrack. Listen for something that sounds very “minimalist.”). A large part of it is an intellectual exercise, and the majority of the time, it makes no effort to appeal nor pander to an uninformed/disinterested audience.
Without a doubt, classical music aficionados form a fringe portion of the population that remains nonetheless significant. And bordering these aficionados are those with a passing interest, and bordering them would be the public who can perhaps name the Turkish March or the Ode to Joy. Would the industry be “selling out,” so to speak, by courting these casual listeners? Should the NY Philharmonic’s next season be forty week’s worth of Beethoven symphonies, and then the next year, start incorporating orchestral arrangements of pop music, or should it program things that no one has ever heard of to maintain “artistic integrity?” Indeed, while I doubt that a night of Beethoven and Mozart will pack the house like Jay-Z or even Justin Bieber, many still scoff that programming Beethoven and Mozart is a gross injustice. It’s safe to say Kanye West won’t be starring in The Magic Flute for a while, but will it be safe to say that, twenty years from now, the Vienna Philharmonic would still be playing Beethoven, Brahms, and Bruckner, or would they, in between recording sessions, provide a live orchestral backing to Apologize? How should the classical music industry remain culturally relevant without compromising what it is that they were created to do?
---
I’d like to note that this post came out simultaneously more chaotic and more coherent than I had intended. I don’t even know what I’m really going for anymore.
|
personally, I hate it when my hometown classical music station sells out. But then again, I go to Oberlin Conservatory, so I'm not representative of many people at all
|
I'm a college student, who grew up in urban areas with high crime rate, and I'm a closeted classical music aficionado. The reason is I never had any education about music, never played an instrument, and never knew anybody my age that liked classical music. Another important reason is that I grew up listening to pop and rap music, and I was never aware of classical music outside of "Amadeus" and Beethoven's Fifth.
Personally, I like it to remain as elitist as it is because I don't particularly like the discussions that are going on the internet about the music itself. Youtube is a classical example, where some people love to write about "I think this interpretation is completely wrong, so and so's interpretation is far superior." They are not elitists, they are just stupid people who think they know everything when they clearly are imbeciles. When I think about elitism, I think about musicians and writers who actually give a damn about they are interpreting. It allows me to keep my thoughts about what I am feeling when I listen to this highly subjective and emotional form of music.
The only idea I like is teaching young kids more about classical music in schools. Kids would be exposed to a very complicated form of music, and hopefully they'll learn to appreciate it a lot more so that they have an open mind about not just music but other aspects of life as well.
|
Speaking of Shutter Island, I was amused that there was a scene discussing a piece by Mahler... when of course the piece was not by Mahler at all and sounded nothing like a piece by Mahler.
Edit -- apparently, I was completely wrong. x_x As usual, people on the internet like me have no idea what they are talking about.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
There is orchestra in every single movie and every single TV show. It's ubiquitous as background music. Even if it's not the classical pieces that are being played, the new compositions can be arrangements of pop music but usually it is not. Classical music isn't that far removed from contemporary culture. It just doesn't stand out in the foreground as the highlight of the show. I would be inclined to believe that those that show disgust for classical music just because it occupies the foreground of their attention have no self-awareness. They just don't have any flashy pictures to accompany the orchestra.
I am also inclined to think that those that hang onto their air of high society above the rest of us are merely living on past glory. While Beethoven, Liszt, Mozart, or Chopin are excellent and appealing experiences, I would love nothing more to discover new star compositions in the modern era. It would be such a new and exciting experience for lovers of classical music, and for such a composer to garner wide critical acclaim, how much more exciting would it be able to share that love with more and more people!
But for that to happen, I think that classical music needs both more attention and more money, and to do that they need to shed of the elitist attitude. Reaching out and servicing the common people is where the money is at today not in serving the snobby nobility of Europe that characterized the 19th century.
|
"(a famous example of something that’s “atonal” is John Cage’s 4’33”, which is exactly 4 minutes and 33 seconds worth of silence from the orchestra."
sounds fantastic
|
I love playing classical music
Mozart is so good
I hate how classical music has been turned into something ridiculous though. Muzak is an abomination and the bastardization of amazing compositions in commercials is truly a shame.
|
I think that you are putting too much effort into this. Everyone likes / dislikes different music. People that think they are some how Intelecually superior to those who do not listen to the music are fools. I think that most classical listeners need to get their heads out of ther ass.
|
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say. Any argument that classical musicians and composers are "lowering" themselves in playing for film scores is without much basis. Composers have been writing work for other works for a while now, particularly a lot since the French Impressionist period, and one could say that program music in the form of opera and ballet were the forerunners of soundtrack music, and both opera, ballet, and many others have been a part of Western music for forever.
Classical music has also always had a close distance with local popular music with both sides influencing one another. It has only been a very recent development where Western Classical, or more appropriately the professional musical intelligentsia, has become rather distant from the people. I can't find the interview with Steve Reich where he expands upon this right now, but it really isn't hard to find examples of the people's music giving a distinct influence upon compositions (particularly Russian composers, the jazz influence upon some of Ravel's latter compositions and Nikolai Kapustin, etc.), and composers having influence upon the people (you can hear Steve Reich's influence quite a bit in Tortoise's music for example).
I dunno. I don't even know what you're trying to say with all this.
|
I’d like to note that this post came out simultaneously more chaotic and more coherent than I had intended. I don’t even know what I’m really going for anymore.
yea it shows lol
I thought the first article was pretty funny though
I would have loved to have been "punished" at detention by being "forced" to listen to classic music lol
|
i got into classical music as a kid because of piano and bugs bunny (the old school ones that always had classical music playing). but who still listens to this anymore? lol
|
Though I won't go so far as to say that classical music is dead, I will argue that its true fans are so far alienated from the rest of the populace that it no longer even matters. I think there are genuinely few people who appreciate classical in it's raw form nowadays and the rest, like you posted, simply appear to like it. It's like classic rock to most people, it serves as a foundation and is appreciated primarily as a relic of the past.
Additionally, I think the accessibility of musical instruments, computers, synthesizers and other digital media has basically gotten rid of the traditional classical style. Anybody with an ounce of talent can make a cool beat and those who are genuinely good at music often opt for obscure, ambient, electronic music rather than venturing into older, classical-style music.
What I love about classical music is its expressiveness, technical mastery, and fluidity. I'll pick (and have) a Rachmaninov program over a Jay-Z concert any day of the week. Less and less people are able to appreciate classical music in this sense. I think that it will inevitably become more of a history subject rather than a category of music that people enjoy. It will be like looking at a picture of Newton in a physics textbook. Sad. 
|
Baa?21244 Posts
On March 11 2010 08:40 koreasilver wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say. Any argument that classical musicians and composers are "lowering" themselves in playing for film scores is without much basis. Composers have been writing work for other works for a while now, particularly a lot since the French Impressionist period, and one could say that program music in the form of opera and ballet were the forerunners of soundtrack music, and both opera, ballet, and many others have been a part of Western music for forever.
Classical music has also always had a close distance with local popular music with both sides influencing one another. It has only been a very recent development where Western Classical, or more appropriately the professional musical intelligentsia, has become rather distant from the people. I can't find the interview with Steve Reich where he expands upon this right now, but it really isn't hard to find examples of the people's music giving a distinct influence upon compositions (particularly Russian composers, the jazz influence upon some of Ravel's latter compositions and Nikolai Kapustin, etc.), and composers having influence upon the people (you can hear Steve Reich's influence quite a bit in Tortoise's music for example).
I dunno. I don't even know what you're trying to say with all this.
Where do we draw the line? Classical orchestras have traditionally performed art music, and adhered to its standards, but art music is finding itself distanced from the general public. Should orchestras work to appeal to the masses or to plow on as they have before? "People's music" is not the same as popular music, and the idea that Beethoven and Mozart were the "pop music" of their day is simply not true.
|
On March 11 2010 08:42 Poly325 wrote:
i got into classical music as a kid because of piano and bugs bunny (the old school ones that always had classical music playing). but who still listens to this anymore? lol
MANY MANY MANY PEOPLE AND TONS OF CLASSICAL MUSICIANS AND THE COMPOSERS THAT ARE STILL EXTREMELY RELEVANT TO NOT ONLY CLASSICAL MUSIC BUT ALSO THE MUSIC OF THE GENERAL POPULATION EVERYWHERE.
What the fuck.
|
On March 11 2010 08:40 koreasilver wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say. Any argument that classical musicians and composers are "lowering" themselves in playing for film scores is without much basis. Composers have been writing work for other works for a while now, particularly a lot since the French Impressionist period, and one could say that program music in the form of opera and ballet were the forerunners of soundtrack music, and both opera, ballet, and many others have been a part of Western music for forever.
Classical music has also always had a close distance with local popular music with both sides influencing one another. It has only been a very recent development where Western Classical, or more appropriately the professional musical intelligentsia, has become rather distant from the people. I can't find the interview with Steve Reich where he expands upon this right now, but it really isn't hard to find examples of the people's music giving a distinct influence upon compositions (particularly Russian composers, the jazz influence upon some of Ravel's latter compositions and Nikolai Kapustin, etc.), and composers having influence upon the people (you can hear Steve Reich's influence quite a bit in Tortoise's music for example).
I dunno. I don't even know what you're trying to say with all this.
tortoise are pimps, should i check out steve reich?
|
On March 11 2010 08:29 triangle wrote:
Speaking of Shutter Island, I was amused that there was a scene discussing a piece by Mahler... when of course the piece was not by Mahler at all and sounded nothing like a piece by Mahler.
uh, it is by mahler..
and it also sounds like mahler..
|
On March 11 2010 08:42 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2010 08:40 koreasilver wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say. Any argument that classical musicians and composers are "lowering" themselves in playing for film scores is without much basis. Composers have been writing work for other works for a while now, particularly a lot since the French Impressionist period, and one could say that program music in the form of opera and ballet were the forerunners of soundtrack music, and both opera, ballet, and many others have been a part of Western music for forever.
Classical music has also always had a close distance with local popular music with both sides influencing one another. It has only been a very recent development where Western Classical, or more appropriately the professional musical intelligentsia, has become rather distant from the people. I can't find the interview with Steve Reich where he expands upon this right now, but it really isn't hard to find examples of the people's music giving a distinct influence upon compositions (particularly Russian composers, the jazz influence upon some of Ravel's latter compositions and Nikolai Kapustin, etc.), and composers having influence upon the people (you can hear Steve Reich's influence quite a bit in Tortoise's music for example).
I dunno. I don't even know what you're trying to say with all this. Where do we draw the line? Classical orchestras have traditionally performed art music, and adhered to its standards, but art music is finding itself distanced from the general public. Should orchestras work to appeal to the masses or to plow on as they have before? "People's music" is not the same as popular music, and the idea that Beethoven and Mozart were the "pop music" of their day is simply not true.
I'm with koreasilver on this. I don't see how playing for a movie score is degrading in anyway. Seems almost like a step up from where it used to be. Classical composers and orchestras were basically the king's bitches..
|
On March 11 2010 08:42 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2010 08:40 koreasilver wrote:
I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say. Any argument that classical musicians and composers are "lowering" themselves in playing for film scores is without much basis. Composers have been writing work for other works for a while now, particularly a lot since the French Impressionist period, and one could say that program music in the form of opera and ballet were the forerunners of soundtrack music, and both opera, ballet, and many others have been a part of Western music for forever.
Classical music has also always had a close distance with local popular music with both sides influencing one another. It has only been a very recent development where Western Classical, or more appropriately the professional musical intelligentsia, has become rather distant from the people. I can't find the interview with Steve Reich where he expands upon this right now, but it really isn't hard to find examples of the people's music giving a distinct influence upon compositions (particularly Russian composers, the jazz influence upon some of Ravel's latter compositions and Nikolai Kapustin, etc.), and composers having influence upon the people (you can hear Steve Reich's influence quite a bit in Tortoise's music for example).
I dunno. I don't even know what you're trying to say with all this. Where do we draw the line? Classical orchestras have traditionally performed art music, and adhered to its standards, but art music is finding itself distanced from the general public. Should orchestras work to appeal to the masses or to plow on as they have before? "People's music" is not the same as popular music, and the idea that Beethoven and Mozart were the "pop music" of their day is simply not true.
Art music is definitely not finding itself distanced from the general public. Firstly, we should put a line between people that actually listen to music as more than just a simple arbitrary pleasure, but as an intellectual work. You can't expect everyone to like music the way that aficionados do, and obviously these people that just hear music aren't going to have a deep interest in music. If we take away these people, then it's pretty clear that "art music" is still extremely vibrant. It's just that composers that have been trained classically aren't the only ones that are taking music seriously with fully intended deepness anymore.
Pop music is a part of the "people's music", and trying to completely decry pop music is just trite rhetoric from an elitist. And Mozart was pretty much a "pop star" at his time. Mozart was not disconnected to the population, and at those times the better classical musicians and composers were very well known and quite popular, and this still continues albeit to a lesser level.
Steve Reich —From an Interview with Jakob Buhre
All musicians in the past, starting with the middle ages were interested in popular music. (...) Béla Bartók's music is made entirely of sources from Hungarian folk music. And Igor Stravinsky, although he lied about it, used all kinds of Russian sources for his early ballets. Kurt Weill's great masterpiece Dreigroschenoper is using the cabaret-style of the Weimar Republic and that's why it is such a masterpiece. Only artificial division between popular an classical music happened unfortunately through the blindness of Arnold Schoenberg and his followers to create an artificial wall, which never existed before him. In my generation we tore the wall down and now we are back to the normal situation, for example if Brian Eno or David Bowie come to me, and if popular musicians remix my music like The Orb or DJ Spooky it is a good thing. This is a natural normal regular historical way.
|
Baa?21244 Posts
On March 11 2010 08:52 Xenocide_Knight wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2010 08:29 triangle wrote:
Speaking of Shutter Island, I was amused that there was a scene discussing a piece by Mahler... when of course the piece was not by Mahler at all and sounded nothing like a piece by Mahler. uh, it is by mahler.. and it also sounds like mahler..
It's Mahler's only chamber piece, and was composed when he was young. Not really characteristic Mahler...
On March 11 2010 08:56 Xenocide_Knight wrote:
I'm with koreasilver on this. I don't see how playing for a movie score is degrading in anyway. Seems almost like a step up from where it used to be. Classical composers and orchestras were basically the king's bitches..
I don't personally denounce or support it, but there are quite a few people who are appalled by the very notion. It is this sentiment, and the opposing sentiment that you and koreasilver pose, that I am interested in. Should classical musicians continue to do this to draw in more people, even if it means alienating their earlier "supporters?"
|
It's not about what they should do or what they should not do.
Orchestras are businesses that sell products in order to make a profit. If customers stop attending their concerts then orchestras will try to change their repertoire. If that doesn't work then they will close. As far as I can tell many long standing orchestras are doing well. There's no reason to believe that they will die out soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
