Customer Discussions > Classical Music forum

In the year 2125


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 51-75 of 182 posts in this discussion
Posted on May 9, 2012 5:20:43 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on May 15, 2012 12:49:39 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 5:29:37 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 9, 2012 5:46:50 PM PDT
Yi-Peng says:
Will there be a distinction between the pop song composers (Arlen, Ellington, Bacharach), Broadway score composers (Rodgers, Sondheim, Bart,, Lloyd Webber, Menken.) and film score composers (Herrmann, Steiner, Zimmer) so that they can be told apart from the classical composers such as Shostakovich, Glass, Gorecki, Carter or Reich?

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 5:38:11 PM PDT
KenOC says:
Yeah, that's more or less my question...

Posted on May 9, 2012 5:55:15 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 9, 2012 6:00:06 PM PDT
Good point about when the PT vs SQ is ascendant, March. Shosty's PT2 is intense and emotional, Schnittke's PT (an arrangement of his String Trio) is haunted (by ghostly Viennese dancers, it seems) and bittersweet. Those are the two 20th c. PT's I know best. Are there others you recommend?

Posted on May 9, 2012 6:00:57 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on May 15, 2012 12:49:33 PM PDT]

Posted on May 9, 2012 6:11:46 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 9, 2012 8:51:15 PM PDT
Larkenfield says:
I would invision the music of the future as more of a natural synthesis of many styles, freely available for musicians to absorb from internet or other sources, with fewer boundaries between CM and other genres. 'Magnetar' posted by Ken was one example. It was like a concerto for cello, but it was an electric not traditional cello, and yet the same virtuostic abilities of the traditional cello were still necessary. Sometimes the cello sound had the added effect of distortion that is used by guitars in rock bands. But i would still describe this work as being CM, because that seems to be the audience it was written for, and yet I sense that someone who listens more to Rock might still be able to appreciate it.

Music 100 years from now might require such a blending of elements to interest the young and survive. I would imagine these possibilites with excitement and not horror. Who was it - Charles Ives or Emerson or Thoreau? - who envisioned every man and woman writing their own symphony? Even if the music isn't good, it'll belong to those who wrote it, and some great new works may also be forthcoming, with the standard classics still being available in one form or another. - Lark

Posted on May 9, 2012 6:15:04 PM PDT
Oh, yes. The Ravel PT. Of course. Thanks for the reminder. I wonder why Dichterliebe holds the contrary view... I mean, what does he hear that we don't?

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 6:15:59 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 22, 2012 9:03:57 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 6:18:18 PM PDT
KenOC says:
Lark, I hope you're right. Magnetar did occur to me. Maybe one reason it made the audience happy at the premiere was that the now-graying concertgoers has been brought up on Led Zeppelin, and they had no problems with the heavy metal influences!

If composers write what audiences want, including new and exciting stuff, we'll be OK. If they care only for their own "artistic vision," we probably won't. We've seen plenty of that already.

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 6:20:49 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 9, 2012 6:23:10 PM PDT
KenOC says:
"So, John Williams has these criteria and obstacles to overcome if his work is to be considered as "high art:" most of it was composed for movies, so compromise was involved."

So what does that say for the "movies" of the last century or so, the operas? Talk about compromise! This argment doesn't make a lot of sense (or any in fact) to me.

And written for "profit"? How terrible. But I can think of a few other composers who were keenly sensitive to profit...where shall I start?

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 6:20:58 PM PDT
Mahlerian says:
"As such, jazz is unconnected with the Western Classical Tradition unless it is "appropriated" into the form, as Gershwin did. "

A lot of influence has gone the other way, though. Ellington and others were influenced by classical composers, especially the Impressionists, whom they felt spoke thier own language.

The best pieces of "Jazz-influenced" Classical music, in my opinion, are Stravinsky's Ebony Concerto and Babbitt's All Set (one of the few pieces by him I like).

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 6:29:37 PM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 22, 2012 9:03:58 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 6:45:43 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 9, 2012 7:16:43 PM PDT
KenOC says:
"...since much of opera is intended purely to entertain..."

Well, I guess that disqualifies it as "fine art," for sure. ;-) Frankly, I think that "fine art" is a figment of your imagination, and evidently only you know what it is.

Music is what it is, and it doesn't change one iota from the time it is written. Whether we (or you) call it "fine art" or not is irrelevant. And in fact, I admire music that is "entertaining," since that is a most difficult objective to achieve. Beats the alternative, no?

BTW just listened to "Whole Lotta Love" by the LZ. 43 years ago! High art? Not? Will this be considered CM in a hundred years?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQmmM_qwG4k&ob=av2n

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 7:25:18 PM PDT
K. Beazley says:
millions,

"...jazz, a form of ethnic music...used for entertaining and dancing (utilitarian functions)."

Well then, if "utilitarian functions" like dancing disqualify works from being considered as "high art", there goes most of Chopin's piano works, as well as Brahms' "Hungarian Dances", & Dvorak's "Slavonic Dances" & his final piano trio, not to mention most Baroque music, which was written to dance tempos like Gigue, Courante, Allemanda, etc.

As for Jazz having no capability of achieving "high art" status, because it is "a form of ethnic music created in America with roots in Africa", well this just smacks so much of racial prejudice! What of the piano rags of Scott Joplin, not to mention his opera, "Treemonisha"? Joplin saw himself as a serious composer rooted in the Western Classical Tradition, yet his music was a clear forerunner of Jazz. Duke Ellington was classically trained, & wrote many serious concert works. Is it just because he was black that you don't give him the respect you'd give someone like Gershwin, who showed that Jazz had just as much potential as an art form as what you call "high art"?

You're the one who claims that we need to "...apply criteria which give some semblance of objectivity", yet you're lacking that very objectivity you see as necessary.

Kim.

Posted on May 9, 2012 8:22:23 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 9, 2012 8:26:12 PM PDT
"We should get busy with THAT, I say, and give over the idle speculations by people who don't even know, much less enjoy, what they're speculating about. We're alive now. We should maybe be listening to now."

Actually, ANON, YOU SHOULD GET BUSY WITH THAT. In the Decades Game ongoing, nominators routinely assisted other players with links to recordings or info assuming they wouldn't know the music. You made six nominations and did nothing of the sort.

Moreover, as the game has played out, folks have sought out unfamiliar works before voting against them. Lots have posted comments thanking the thread as a mechanism for learning something new.

So, before you chastize an interested group for not doing its homework, commit and assign it rather than using your assumed cynicism to skip making any such effort in the first place.

In reply to an earlier post on May 9, 2012 8:41:43 PM PDT
barbW says:
Posted on May 8, 2012 11:58:04 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 8, 2012 11:58:29 AM PDT
Mahlerian says:
"If Lloyd-Webber is ever regarded as a good composer in this forum, I might have to leave. :)"

If one composes or has had to memorize ALW songs for a performance, I suspect they wouldn't make such a statement.

In reply to an earlier post on May 10, 2012 6:20:30 AM PDT
[Deleted by Amazon on May 22, 2012 9:04:00 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on May 10, 2012 8:46:12 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 10, 2012 8:54:47 AM PDT
millions

Would you care to describe the superiority of your "method"? I would use many of the same words, but I've given up on that long ago.

Why don't you just stick to the topic, and stop being so much like what you don't like?

I mean, ya know, we individuals can read between the lines for ourselves, make our own choices, and let the Help buttons say the unsayable.

Posted on May 10, 2012 10:13:50 AM PDT
Ken, here and elsewhere, you've spoken about Williams under the guises of erasing some distinction between "high art and low art." But I'm getting the sense that there's a bias it can only be obliterated from below. Magnetar is a case in point, after you conjectured it got a pass in LA based on an aging audience's familiarity with heavy metal. (Btw, Steven Tyler for Burger King, yuk!)

On the flip side, though, you seem sceptical when the erasure tries to flow in the other direction, from high to low -- for example, comments about Michael Daugherty's Superman or another recalled, maybe re the same's Tombeau de Liberace, about him accepting a commission from Absolut vodka as a sort of indictment.

I could be wrong in this perception -- can you elaborate? To me, the endeavor to "merge" high & low is equally valid in either direction. Do you feel the same or just anti-establishment? ;-) Thanks!!

In reply to an earlier post on May 10, 2012 10:25:00 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 10, 2012 10:30:11 AM PDT
KenOC says:
MZ, I can't recall any comments I made about Daugherty one way or the other, though I did refer once to his "Red Cape Tango" which struck me as a really good title. I have quite a bit of his music but it doesn't appeal much to me (now anyway). So I guess I'm not sure what you mean. Did I criticize him for accepting a commission from Absolut? If so, it was a weak moment! I mean, it's a quality brand, right?

Personally, I don't feel any "merger" is necessary except in our own minds. Music is what it is; it neither starts nor ends as "high art' or "low art." Of course it may be "good" or "bad," but even those judgments are often overruled by time!

This probably doesn't answer your question though, since I'm not sure I understand it. But for the record, I hate crossover concerts! If it's a classical concert, I don't want to hear Barry Manilow. If it's a rock concert, I don't want to hear Mozart. If it's a Barry Manilow concert, I don't go at all.

Posted on May 10, 2012 10:55:45 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 10, 2012 11:27:05 AM PDT
Henry Kaspar says:
I somehow sense most trust their personal taste will be confirmed by the wisdom of the folks living 113 years on from now ... ;-)

How do we know?

Posted on May 10, 2012 11:22:20 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 10, 2012 11:23:12 AM PDT
Not only do I see a trend toward smaller ensembles, but I see a trend toward shorter works, for the benefit of impatient or ADD listeners. This would appear to be a merging of pop and classical aesthetics.

Who cares any more about extended thematic or melodic development, of the kind that works into a listener's head without resorting to critical analysis? Morton Feldman is an obvious exception, and there must be others. I would hate to see this aspect of CM go away.

Posted on May 10, 2012 11:28:05 AM PDT
The better question, I think, is who among today's living or recently deceased composers will people still listen to 100 years down the road. Rautavarra? Adams? Anyone else from the minimalist school? I've read the greatest composing "school" today is in Finland. Don't know if it's true. The greatest birthplace of new performers is China; I would expect at least one great composer from China or Asia in the next century. I am fairly sure people will still listen to Mahler and Shostakovich in 100 years but I'm not so sure about Arnold Schoenberg or the Second Viennese School. I think they may become what the Damstardt School became -- a lot of crafty but mostly forgettable composers and compositions.

Posted on May 10, 2012 11:33:26 AM PDT
Schoenberg's been dead for 60 years. His earliest works are over a hundred years old. He is still listened to, though not as much as Lady Gaga or Shostakovich. He is one of the least forgettable figures in music history.

Posted on May 10, 2012 11:36:22 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 10, 2012 11:41:42 AM PDT
Henry Kaspar says:
@ Larry VanDeSande

So my hunch is people will indeed still listen to Shostakovich, but also to Ligeti and Stockhausen. Glass, Riley, etc. - less sure. Mahler - yes, but less so than today. And the likes of Vaughn Williams and Edward Elgar will be (rightly) forgotten.

But then, this is how I feel about these composers today.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Classical Music forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Classical Music forum
Participants:  30
Total posts:  182
Initial post:  May 8, 2012
Latest post:  May 17, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions