# Has classical music died and gone to heaven, along with the novel?



## cuchuflete

Among readers, the death of the novel is often the source of jokes about premature announcements.  I have been reading and hearing that classical music publishing--as in recorded performances, not sheet music--is dying.

This doesn't surprise me but does make me sad.  I've been listening to this music, with its huge variety of styles, since I was an infant.  I've been a performer of it.  I simply cannot imagine life without it.

Apparently I'm in a small and ever-shrinking minority.  Honestly, I just don't understand the massive change in the buying public's tastes over the past couple of decades.  Way back when, my friends and I bought the latest popular music, as well as a good assortment of folk, jazz, and classical.

Now I leave the popular sounds to my sons' generation, and when I'm in a music store, I head for the Jazz, classical, and "International" sections.  Many stores no longer offer classical music, as it seems their customers don't choose to buy much of it.

Last night I heard an interview with the head of Sony's music division dance around the possibility that his firm was about to exit the classical market entirely.


So...here's a question for you.  If, as seems to be the case, far fewer people are buying classical music than was the case in, say, 1970 or 1980, what has changed in our societies to cause this?  The quality of the compositions has not deteriorated, and the musicianship of the performers is superb.  So we, the market, have chosen to put our coins elsewhere, or just leave them in our pockets.  Why?


----------



## la reine victoria

Classical music is alive and well in the UK, thank goodness.  If anything I would say that during the last few years it has undergone a revival and is attracting people who would hitherto have ignored it.  Luciano Pavarotti, Jose Carreras, Andrea Boccelli and a new group 'Il Divo' are extremely popular and selling well.  Must mention James Galway the flautist who is also very popular.  We have quite a few radio stations which broadcast only classical music, the most popular of which is Classic FM.  Try to find this on Google - I believe you can listen via your PC.  Don't be downhearted - Sony are probably moving more towards young people and their 'pop' music.


----------



## GenJen54

Obviously, I cannot speak for what is happening in other countries, but at least in the US, part of this problem is the _disintegration_* of arts programs in many of our country's public schools. Teachers and children are so focused on passing (stupid) standardized tests, they have little room for teaching things other than the core subjects of "readin', writin' and 'rithmetic."

Long gone are the days when students were required to take some sort of art or "music appreciation" class. Now, students are lucky if they get one or two field trips - _per year _- to a local performing arts center to see an orchestra play. Even though cirriculums are created to accompany these arts "programs," they are rarely followed.

For some young people, this one performance - where students are taught the different functions of orchestra "sections" (string, wind, percussion, brass) - is the ONLY exposure they have to classical music.

Even performing arts centers like the one in which I work are feeling the brunt. Ticket sales to philharmonic events (pops and classical) are showing a steady decline as patrons age and grow unable to attend. Younger generations are simply not filling the void - for a variety of reasons.

*Note:*  I have another thought or two, but am being summoned out the door.  Will finish upon my return later this evening. *Edit 2*: Much of what other comments I was going to make have already been made.


----------



## jacinta

Don´t let any classical musicians read this, but I do believe that it is certainly not enforced or supported in any educational forum.  I think children are growing up not even familiar with the basics; Bach, Beethoven and Brahms.  I know and enjoy classical music because my parents listened to it.  I still have my Sunday morning classical hour, when I have control of the stereo and listen to my favorites.

Unless classical music is used to sell Ipods, I don´t think it has a chance in this attention-deficit world.

Please prove me wrong.

PS:  Don´t even get me going on classic novels


----------



## siljam

Well, I trust there will always some fanatic records collector, like me.


----------



## nycphotography

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> So...here's a question for you. If, as seems to be the case, far fewer people are buying classical music than was the case in, say, 1970 or 1980, what has changed in our societies to cause this? The quality of the compositions has not deteriorated, and the musicianship of the performers is superb. So we, the market, have chosen to put our coins elsewhere, or just leave them in our pockets. Why?


 
Why?  MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY.

Seriously.

MARKETING MARKETING MARKETING.
By media companies which need to sell MORE marketing, which has to be paid for by selling products which need more marketing which needs attention to be effective and its all one big ratcheting tool clicking ever tighter increasing the pressure to be profitable which increases the pressure to sell MORE of whatever it is which we can lay our hands on to sell.

So, of course, nobody wants to sell classical music.  You can't support 248 city tours with it.  You can't sell T-Shirts with it.  And you damn sure can't use the faces to start a fashion label.

So the media machine will overlook it as not worth the effort to harvest.

Have you ever seen a soybean field after the combine is done?  My ex wife used to go pick up BUSHELS of soybeans left behind by the machines (to make soybean sprouts).

Well, that is how the modern global economy works.

And in the world of the , it's going to be steadily worse I'm afraid.

Movies, Literature, Newspapers, Music, Art... you name it... it's all going to the same way.   The more we can get of it cheaper and mass marketable, the better.

sigh.


----------



## I.C.

I'll say one thing: I love J.S.Bach, but his music doesn't match the rhythm of my life, while “Blinded by the lights” by Mike Skinner does. (No, I don’t do drugs and I chose this example for contrast).

But I don't think classical music has died.


----------



## Muglass

Well, I guess I grew up in a generation where my parents (primarily my mother) exposed me to classical music.  So, even though I grew up in the era of pop music, and rock of the 60's, 70's and 80's I developed a sense of an appreciation for classical music.

But NYC is right...marketing, marketing, marketing (translated $$$$$$$) is the driving force, and classical music is supported by older and older patrons.

By the way, I also love J.S. Bach, especially his Brandenburg Concerto #3 in F.  Funky tune, actually, and "Johnny" was a pretty rhythmic kinda o dude for 16th century Germany.

But, schools don't even support orchestras or classical music much, either,as GenJen54 said.  (sigh)

One can only hold out hope.


----------



## Kelly B

There are pockets of hope... our elementary school has a very fine string instruction program -- there are maybe 40 kids out of 200 (mine included) who have _played _short pieces from Bach and Tchaikovsky. There's a band, too, over and above that. That's really not so bad. A few of the more talented neighbors are playing in the junior version of the city orchestra. The adult version, the Orchestra itself, is feeling the pinch of reduced donations and attendance, but they're hanging in there.


----------



## Alundra

Hi, Cuchuflete 

I like classical music very much... and the good books, of course... but I don't think like you this is dying... it is true that the sales are less than other kind of music... but I think still there are many people that they like it... and they show it to their children..

I like the opera specially (more than jazz  ), and I like that my kids listen it( I don't know how many times they have listened "la flauta mágica" by Mozart... ) I hope they know to value(valorarla) it...someday.

Don't worry, I think the classical music (the fine) can't disappear... I hope ... the same as the good novels... they always will remain while there are people that they like it.


Sorry my english...

Alundra.


----------



## zebedee

As most people have pointed out, it's all down to education. I consider myself very lucky to have had the exposure I had to all kinds of music in my formative years. Why do I enjoy curling up with a good novel? Because my parents opened my mind to the joy of reading at a very early age. 

There's a TV campaign in Spain at the moment to promote reading for children. The message is: "Si tú lees, ellos leerán" ("If you read, they'll read".) Is it working? I don't know.

Marketing trends are sadly all about cultivating the exterior rather than the interior, because that's where the money is. Most children want to become models and footballers rather than novelists and musicians, which offers a very bleak panorama for the cultural future of society.


----------



## LV4-26

I'll try to say a couple of things of the subject but I feel it's going to be hard to get them through in English.

When people are asked why they'd rather listen to pop music rather than classical music, why they don't read or read little, they often answer : _because it isn't for me_, meaning I'm not worthy of it.
At the same time, there's something of an urge to become educated meaning to read or have certain "correct" cultural tastes in our societies. If you want to be somebody you should listen to classical music and read poetry and literary novels and so on...
So you have one part of the population that has those "correct" cultural standards (some of them feeling like being part of an elite). Another part says "that isn't for me" but with that sort of bitter feeling that they really should try to become interested in classical music or something but feel themselves unable to appreciate it. Why do they feel this way? Because it's sort of compulsory as I said before : the answer is in the "you *have *to".

I find there's an essential misunderstanding here. Culture in general and classical music in particular is something that is at our disposal, that we can have if we want it. To explain myself better I'd have to refer a passage in the Gospel. The general attitude tends to be that man was made for culture (hence the idea that it's compulsory) while I think (and assume _you _think) it's just the opposite : culture was made for man.
[the accurate reference is from Mark 2:27 The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath]

In his book _Comme un roman_, Daniel Pennac wrote what he calls _The imprescriptible rights of the readers. _They're as follows [I've tried to translate that but it's sometimes difficult so I'll explain between brackets)

1. The right *not *to read
2. The right of skipping pages
3. The right of not finishing a book
4. The right of reading again
5. The right of reading anything [i.e. even books generally considered as "cheap" or mediocre]
6. The right to bovarysm
7. The right of reading anywhere
8. The right of _grapiller_ [i.e. reading a little bit here and a little bit there]
9. The right of reading aloud.
10. The right of not saying anything [i.e. not to feel compelled to comment, I guess].

In this book, he tries to explains why people and especially youngsters read less and less. Among the answers he finds is the idea that it's felt like an obligation. (I'm summing up).

I felt that this quote could explain my above ideas better than myself.

EDIT : forgot something important. I listen to all kinds of music. As a matter of fact, I tend to consider music as a whole, i.e. I don't know that there are several kinds of music. Music is one, all musics are made more or less with the same tools and the same material and more or less the same purpose (though I know the latter is debatable especially if you consider it from the commercial point of view).


----------



## Alundra

Hi, LV4-26,

Well, you are right in part....

To read is very important, my children not *to have to* read to feel themself part from an elite like you say..), I want that they to have culture, and that is one of the best ways... (I think that to play in the PS2 not is the best way, and they play too.....) 
You know? The most of people that they read... they spell very well (it is a fact)... and for me, it is very important that they write correctly.
Furthemore I'm a compulsive reader... my children always see to me reading or sitting in front of the PC.  (They never see to me cleaning my house..  )

And the music... yes, I like all kind of music too... and I listen all kind of music... but, I think you have to distinguish between music like W.A.Mozart, L.V.Beethoven, Vivaldi, Bach... and other kinds or styles of music.. like Evanescense, David Bisbal o Estopa... of course the instruments are the same...but they don't sound the same...

Do you think they are the same music??? Do you think something will not die if classical music disappear? I think yes. 
Do you think is the same "The beatles" (or Aznavour or J. Iglesias) that "Estopa" or any actual French group (sorry my ignorance) All of they make music... but they aren't the same for me...


I want my children have the opportunity to listen all the music... not only that better is traded.


Alundra.


----------



## GenJen54

As much as education, parenting, like in other areas of life, has much to do with this. Parents are responsible for the content of their children's lives. Television, in particular, is grossly detrimental to the formation of a young mind. 

To further Pennac's list of reading, I suppose one could extend the analogy of the rights parents have to raise their children - by either exposing them to classical music and the bountiful pleasure of a good book, or not. 

TV is used as the ubiquitous babysitter. Children raised used to having such mental clutter in their minds are adverse to understanding - and appreciating - the moments spent in adventurous splendor, both in literature and music. Alundra brought up a wonderful point - that being, to teach by example. Children patterning after their parents, seeing them read and listening to classical music only helps them appreciate these things as well.

My mother insisted I not only NOT watch TV, she made me listen to all types of music. At one time, "pop" and its cousin "rock" music on the radio was absolutely _verbotten_ to me. This was the age of 8-tracks, so we did not have the numerous outlets for bringing pop music into our home as are available today.

Now that I am adult, I can only think of how poor my life would be if I hadn't been exposed to the things I was "made" to listen to as a child. Mom took care of musical theatre, opera and classical appreciation. Dad filled in the void with jazz and "pop standards" of the 1940s (Sinatra, King Cole, Armstrong, Etta James, Sarah Vaughn, etc.) As the mood strikes, I still listen to all of these great genres today.


----------



## LV4-26

Just to mention that the statement I quoted "this isn't for me/us" appeared in the results of an inquiry that was made in France. This may not be true for all countries.

What I wanted to emphasize most was that there was some sort of "tense" attitude towards culture among those people because it's seen as some sort of obstacle when it should be a "relaxed" attitude. They should be told something like : "here is the music, here are the books, you can enjoy them if you like, but don't feel guilty of inferior if you don't want to. They're here to improve your quality of life, not to be a barrier to your achievement".



			
				Alundra said:
			
		

> Do you think they are the same music??? Do you think something will not die if classical music disappear? I think yes.


 Do you think it's really got to that point? (that classical music will disappear). Yes, I agree something would die then. Agreed, I'm not prepared to see centuries of music vanish just like that.
But I also think something would die if nobody would ever listen to the Beatles any more. (just an example you mentionned - did the word get round that I'm a genuine beatlemaniac? ).


			
				GenJen54 said:
			
		

> Now that I am adult, I can only think of how poor my life would be if I hadn't been exposed to the things I was "made" to listen to as a child


 The following is also an answer to some scattered remarks by Alundra.

I'm not sure early exposure is all that decisive as far as culture is concerned. I was bathed in classical music in my childhood because my mother was a piano teacher. I liked what she played at home but that was all. She gave concerts and I remember falling asleep at them.  I really don't think I was a classical music lover then. I was taught to play the piano but I didn't like practising. I only liked playing anything, inventing, and I never listened to any classical records. Then, at 20 or so, I started to play and sing rock and roll and lost all interest (provided I'd had any before) in classical music. I turned back to it much later. And all my favorite pieces in classical music I've discovered since then, not in my childhood, not when I was supposed to. I just became really interested in classics when nothing and nobody urged me to do so.
While I admit the importance of the early years in many fields, I'm not a determinist. I do believe we change every day, we learn every day, everything we hear and see and read makes us a new individual. (permanently "reborn" which is better than GWB who was only reborn once).

Ermm...am I still in the frame of the topic?


----------



## Outsider

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> So...here's a question for you.  If, as seems to be the case, far fewer people are buying classical music than was the case in, say, 1970 or 1980, what has changed in our societies to cause this?  The quality of the compositions has not deteriorated, and the musicianship of the performers is superb.  So we, the market, have chosen to put our coins elsewhere, or just leave them in our pockets.  Why?


Pop music.

The second half of the 20th century brought us various forms of pop music. Record labels have perfected the production of pop music to the point where they can make it very cheaply, and sell it with great profit. Pop singers don't even seem to need talent to succeed anymore; just a pretty face and a so-so voice.


----------



## Alundra

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> Yes, I agree something would die then. Agreed, I'm not prepared to see centuries of music vanish just like that.
> But I also think something would die if nobody would ever listen to the Beatles any more.


 
Me too.   

I think all kind of music must to survive. 

And I never would compel to my children, I listen many kinds of music, and if they are with me, they listen it too. As you say, nobody must to compel you... but if you have more music where you can to choose, I think it will be better... If my children know more music, they might to choose better than if they don't know but pop music, or rock, etc.....and that is because I show them all kind of music... and later, they listen that they want...  

Alundra.

PD. My brother also played the guitar... during many years... and it was awful to be so much hours listening him to rehearse... jejeej... I still remember the songs resounding in my brain...


----------



## LV4-26

Alundra said:
			
		

> but if you have more music where you can to choose, I think it will be better... If my children know more music, they might to choose better than if they don't know but pop music, or rock, etc.....and that is because I show them all kind of music... and later, they listen that they want...


Yes, I totally agree with that.


----------



## Amityville

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> 6. The right to bovarysm


Your own interpretation, though it may be highly individual or 'wrong' ? 

I think it may be so that it depends on exposure in childhood, as you say, at least the choice is there if you choose to take it up but with music particularly there seem to be more barriers. I had both classical music and classical literature vagiely present at home in my childhood - but it was only the literature that struck a chord (pun just came out but not bad ?). My kids have only been exposed to the literature (one is a passionate convert and one isn't really)..I haven't written off' classical music but it has fallen by the wayside - the sort I had to listen to wasn't to my taste, eclectic let's say (it was a bit like living with Alundra's brother) and I never really searched to find what was, so have ended up a bit of a philistine musically. Popular music and songs with words are more accessible for anyone with a busy life or Attention Deficit Disorder and not all classical music is what you need after a hard day at the office -soulless technical virtuosity or the opposite, plain trite. Just a case of searching through the archives for the right one but I agree, la reine, Classic FM is good for that, nothing too obtrusive and it saves time. Classical Music 'Lite'. !
As well as being something of an obligation, there is that the fact of it being part of the prestige bundle, one of the accoutrements of success along with the BMW and the wine cellar, can be a complete turn-off at a formative age as it smells of hypocrisy. Music's also more of a social thing and part of youth culture than literature is, at a time when you're developing your tastes and peer-pressure's strong. Classical music has to be able to speak to you through all that baggage. With words it's easier to claim your 'rights' for me anyway but despite all that there is nothing better than classical music to accompany reading classical literature - 3-minute ditties with words don't go with the flow. Beethoven=Aeschylus. Nothing like it.


----------



## LV4-26

Amityville said:
			
		

> Pennac/bibi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. The right to bovarysm
> 
> 
> 
> Your own interpretation, though it may be highly individual or 'wrong' ?
Click to expand...

  To be perfectly honest, I didn't know exactly what to do with that one. In French, it goes
_6. Le droit au bovarysme (maladie *t*extuellement transmissible) _
I forgot to translate the bit between brackets : "*t*extually transmitted disease". (provided that pun also works in English).
I guess it refers to the fact of breaking away from reality by living in an imaginary and romanesque universe.
Here's a definition of bovarysme :
Of course Pennac's idea of it must be far less negative than that and surely retains only the last part of this definition. Not necessarily harmful, after all, as long as you can still switch freely from one to the other. I mean, when I'm reading, I'm really in the world of the book I'm reading. I'm really living it.


			
				Amityville said:
			
		

> there is nothing better than classical music to accompany reading classical literature - 3-minute ditties with words don't go with the flow. Beethoven=Aeschylus. Nothing like it.


 I couldn't. I mean do both at the same time. A girl friend of mine once told me that women were different to men in that they were able to do several things at the same time.
Seriously, if I was reading I wouldn't *really* be listening to music.

EDIT : More on Comme un roman (Reads like a Novel) here
Search for the 5th paragraph entitled "_reading  your rights_" and you'll get a native (i.e. better) translation of the_ reader's imprescriptible rights _together with a brief comment on the book.


----------



## Aupick

Take any major film put out these days, Hollywood blockbuster or arthouse film, and there will be some form of 'classical' music in it. There'll be pop songs, too, and other genres that make up a nice sound track, but the music that accompanies the film's key events, that acts as a vehicle for the film's emotional development, is nearly always 'classical' in style. This music may or may not be 'of good quality', but most film producers wouldn't dream of making a film without the kind of music that we call classical. (I can think of an exception that proves the rule: the music in _Ladyhawke_ (1985) is entirely done on a synthesizer -- and it sounds awful!)


Some people might be offended by me calling cinema music 'classical' music, maintaining there's too much of a difference in quality or scope, that 'classical' music is not background music, that it deserves to be listened to in its own right, and they might have a point. Personally I disagree. I can't listen to Puccini's Madame Butterfly anymore without thinking of Rivendell because of the music created for The Lord of the Rings -- they're strikingly similar and surely the one provided inspiration for the other. And then every now and then a well-known piece of classical music _is_ used in its original form and people catch on and buy it and listen to it, just as everyone started buying volumes of W.H. Auden after _Four Weddings and a Funeral_ came out. (Hmm -- is poetry dead too? Another thread I guess.) Some people even bought Herodotus after watching _the English Patient_.


What all this proves to me is that classical music is both accessible and popular. People _do_ like it and they _do_ listen to it, even if they don't always know it. You could even say that it plays an essential part in our culture -- although perhaps not in the place that it should be. If classical music has such an ailing reputation and is threatened by the decisions of the music industry bosses, the reasons must lie elsewhere: it probably has more to do with economics (as others have pointed out) than taste or attention span.


I’m generally an optimist when it comes to people and what they’re capable of. I disagree with theories that people don’t have the attention span that they used to, that things like classical music are too complicated or extended for modern youth. I disagree whenever it’s claimed that people don’t have the patience or the time for in-depth news, documentaries, a good 19th century novel or classical music. It’s the politicians and the media companies who benefit from dumbing down and sound bites and all the rest of it. People are capable of a lot more than anyone realises, given the chance.


I’m not convinced the problem lies with education either. I had music lessons in school that introduced us to the classics, but young people tend to define their tastes _in reaction to_ what they learn in school, not in accordance with it, especially when it comes to those things that are presented as things you 'should like', as ‘good for you’, as ‘medicine’. 


Having classical music around the home is probably more important. It plants seeds that can sprout in adulthood even if it’s rejected during childhood. I always disliked my dad’s classical music growing up, but if I like it now it probably has more to do with him that I would like to admit (although we have different tastes).


But there _is_ a problem with the format of classical music that makes it a difficult sell. With pop music you have groups that put out songs that are organised into albums. However you buy a song it always sounds exactly the same. You know what you’re getting. With classical music you have composers, but then you have pieces of music with odd names, ‘Sonata number 33 in A flat major (opus 114)’, in a dozen different versions, the quality of which depends on the musicians, the conductor, the recording, and the date. It’s not so easy to go out and buy that piece that was in such and such a film or TV ad. And it’s not so easy to package. The music itself is accessible, but I often find buying it a bit of a headache. (It’s similar to the difficulty French wine has marketing itself outside France, but I guess that’s a topic for another thread.) The marketing of classical music is changing, the economics of it is in flux, but I really don’t think classical music will die out. People like it too much, and not just the elite.


----------



## Agnès E.

An overwhelming presence on main radios, TV channels and/or so-called cultural magazines is not the sole attribute of success.
Something not in the forefront of current fashion is not necessary dead or in the process of disappearing.
Many people don't rely on trendy medias to dictate them what they have to like or dislike.
Heureusement !


----------



## LV4-26

> People are capable of a lot more than anyone realises, given the chance.


I like that idea. However I don't totally agree with it. Or rather, I agree with it as long as it doesn't mean removing all the responsibility from us and putting it on others : producers, medias and so on....(even though I'm sure they play an important role in the process).
Yes, we are capable of it. But that doesn't mean we will necessarily exert (? not sure that's the correct verb) this capability. That doesn't mean we will necessarily overcome this overwhelming "laziness" of ours which makes us stick to our cultural comfort and habits.


----------



## JazzByChas

One thing I do know, as Aupick GenJen, LV, and others have stated in here is that, what you are exposed to as a child tends to stay with you when you are an adult.

I agree that many of us who grew up with "pop" music liked pop music (and I also like/liked the Beatles), and like Jean-(LV) Michel, I have been exposed to a lot of music over my 51 years, and would really consider all music part of one big body of music. I rather think that all music is inspired and draws from other music. Although most younger people's exposure to classical may now be as background to films, at least it is still there.

I will also admit, that most of what I like about music is its arrangement. One song can be arranged in several ways, and will sound different every time. I have heard "Switched On Bach", and "Disco to the Classics." As silly as some of these things are, they do get people to listen to an idea originated by someone a long time ago. I guess the best I can do is draw upon my experience, and say that my mother exposed me to Broadway Plays and Classical Music, and dad exposed me to Jazz and Rhythm and Blues. I, of course, grew up in the 60's and 70's (and some of the 80's), and was exposed to all sorts of popular music. I guess the point is, that as I have grown older, all the music I have been exposed to, now means much more to me in the context of having let it "simmer" in my spirt over these years. I appreciate *all* music much more, including the "classics." And when I hear a very original and creative arrangement of something, especially jazz from "The Great American Songbook" I have to elicit a joyous smile, when I realize a very talented soul created something that has literally appealed to generations.

The same goes for reading. A good novel and I will become one until I have finished reading it. I find myself not being able to "put the book down" until it is either very late at night or the book is finished. I imagine this came from my mother exposing me to reading at a very young age. There are certainly times when I find that I wish I could throw the TV out the window, and just read a good book. However, I do find that there are some good movies on TV, some of them based upon "classical" literature. I do like these, "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen being one of them.

So, I suppose I could say that nothing ever really goes out of style, it just gets recycled in a newer way for the audience of today. "King Kong" is just about to be out in its 3rd or 4th incarnation, and will expose kids of today to a movie that originally debuted in the 1930's. And yes, I also like a movie channel here in America called "Turner Classic Movies" where you are exposed to the vast repertoire of movies that have been made since the early days of American movie making in Hollywood (California).

What is that saying, which I think was written by Solomon in the book of Ecclesiastes, "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is *nothing* *new* *under* the *sun*." (Ecclesiastes 1:9)

And any great work of art, be it music, or literature, will by its own merits, last forever, one way or another...


----------



## jimreilly

The notion of "classical music" as a body of elite, historic work being refreshed and extended by contemporary composition is relatively modern. Such music, codified or not, has generally been a minority pursuit. The very notion of "popular" music means that popular music is more popular than other types of music. It's a little odd that this actually needs to be said! 

For some people the gap between "classical" and "popular" has not always been as great as it seems to be for many people today. My Italian grandfather, for example, saw Italian opera as popular music, and it indeed was popular in his immigrant community in New Jersey at that time. There was nothing snobby attached to his high regard for Caruso, for example, who was actually a kind of cultural hero for many working-class Italians. My first exposure to opera was though his wife (he had died), my grandmother. Born in Italy and an immigrant here when very young, she never learned to read or write either Italian or English (she went to work at age eight instead of going to school). She could, however, identify tunes from Italian opera, and listened to the Met broadcasts regularly, unless German opera was being broadcast (French opera was OK). 

As a classical musician myself, I have always been uncomfortable with the  associations of classical music with social class and lots of money, and I certainly haven't made very much money myself. Many classical musicians have struggled with the politics of these issues, all the while trying to earn a living. Some good music has even come of these struggles.....

One thing we can all do if we care about music (any kind!) is to support music education in our public schools. We need to be sure music education is supported in our school budgets and that all kids have opportunities to see, hold, and play instruments, and to sing. Taking kids to the symphony once a year won't do it, it's got to be hands on. If most kids turn out to be more interested in "popular" music (as either audience or performers) that is, after all, the way it is by definition.


----------



## Agnès E.

Bonjour Jim ! 



> One thing we can all do if we care about music (any kind!) is to support music education in our public schools. We need to be sure music education is supported in our school budgets and that all kids have opportunities to see, hold, and play instruments, and to sing. Taking kids to the symphony once a year won't do it, it's got to be hands on. If most kids turn out to be more interested in "popular" music (as either audience or performers) that is, after all, the way it is by definition.


It seems that French elementary school agrees on this point. 
I remember my daughters having studied (yes! at their level, naturally) at school the Carnival of Animals (Le Carnaval des animaux) by Camille Saint-Saëns and Peter and the Wolf by Sergei Prokofiev... at the age of 3-4! 
Now, they are still getting music course at elementary school, but from a more general overview.
They still love classical music, but also jazz and any kind of melodious music. We don't limit them to one single sort, but let them choose what they like. And their taste is surprisingly consistent: they are attracted by well-made music, whatever its style, ancient or contemporary. Probably because their "ears" have been "educated" rather early in their lives, thus they don't feel threatened by a so-called "difficult" music and they can be content with just appreciating any kind of music.


----------



## Fernando

I can not conceive a world (humans-unhabitated) when people dislike 9th Beethoven Simphony.

Anyway, the problem with Classical music (but I can say the same about picture) is that current authors are unplugged from popular taste.

While people in 19th Italy could sing in the street Puccini's themes, I do not know none who knows by heart a single note of Cristóbal Halffter (the best known "classical" Spanish composer).

Without new compositions I think that people will move further and further from "classical" music, unless you consider film "classical" music or experimental music (Michael Nyman, as an example) as classical music (I do, for the record).


----------



## valerie

I'm not a specialist, but I think basically, classical music is NOT profitable. 

Only public funding (I mean state and city budgets) are able to support the cost of having a permanent orchestra. Classical music stars are probably making a living from disc recording, but in the total I guess they are quite few. To make a living, a musician has basically to be a music teacher (mainly funded by the state in public schools), or member of an orchestra (funded by public budgets also). Apart from amateur groups, chorals etc.

I do not think the disc industry is so crucial to the music financials as to say that Sony will make classical music die if they do not record it anymore.


----------



## Fernando

I partly disagree. In US most orchestras are private-funded. Bayreuth festival is profitable and classical music is more encouraged in private than in public schools.


----------



## Alundra

valerie said:
			
		

> I'm not a specialist, but I think basically, classical music is NOT profitable.
> 
> Only public funding (I mean state and city budgets) are able to support the cost of having a permanent orchestra. Classical music stars are probably making a living from disc recording, but in the total I guess they are quite few. To make a living, a musician has basically to be a music teacher (mainly funded by the state in public schools), or member of an orchestra (funded by public budgets also). Apart from amateur groups, chorals etc.
> 
> I do not think the disc industry is so crucial to the music financials as to say that Sony will make classical music die if they do not record it anymore.


 
I wonder what the public funding must to spend your money in (in cultural issues I mean)

How do you think the cultural acts must to be? Or do you think mustn't to have cultural acts??  


I prefer my money (my taxes) to be spent in cultural issues (even permanent orchestra or the teacher's salary) before other things.

In the city where I live, there are not many music teachers in public schools, only basic notions or to play the flute... they (the good teachers) are privates the most. I wish it had had a public school here where to take classes of music without pay o lot of money... only the taxes...(I know it's a lot of money too  but I pay it alike)

Alundra.


----------



## Maria Juanita

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> At the same time, there's something of an urge to become educated meaning to read or have certain "correct" cultural tastes in our societies. If you want to be somebody you should listen to classical music and read poetry and literary novels and so on...
> So you have one part of the population that has those "correct" cultural standards (some of them feeling like being part of an elite).




yes. That's true. But it's also true that somehow, classical music doesn't adjust to our times as some other styles do. (it doesn't matter if they are technically good or bad...-subject for another discussion-). Art -true art- is not meant for the masses, though sometimes we can find situations where the two things converge. (Now I remember, we've talking about Jhon Lennon this week cuz of the 25th anniversary of his tragic death).

And I do think Danniel Pennac is a wonderful writer too.



			
				Alundra said:
			
		

> Personally, I prefer my money (my taxes) to be spent in cultural issues (even permanent orchestra or the teacher's salary) before other things.



Well, according to the definition of a "cultural act", I'd rather spend my money on cultural acts such as feeding poor p-pl or trying to find a cure for cancer. 

(Sorry, I didn't mean to be sarcastic nor wanting to be Bono)

Saludillos...

Maria Juanita


----------



## LV4-26

Does classical music not adjust to our times or is it just the way it's presented and "packaged" that takes us away from it?

- In a "pop" concert, you can do what you like, applaud, shout, even dance when you like.

- In a classical concert you aren't even supposed to applaud in between the various movements lest your might be frowned upon by your neighbours of they might think you're a "hick".
Also, you'd better not tell you've been bored or you've been sleeping during a Mozart symphony.
(here, I may be outrageously generalizing. Well, it's true at least in France quite often).

Isn't that what makes the former more "popular"?

How about allowing children to bring their gameboy (with the sound off, of course) at classical concerts? I'm sure it wouldn't stop them from hearing and retaining something of the music. Ok, that may sound a little extreme but I'm confident I'm not offending anybody. (hopefully)

As has already been mentionned, classical music *was* popular once. I think we should regain some sort of familiarity with it. It is *not* sacred. Not that I think that you guys here have a religious attitude towards it. I just think this renewed familiarity should be favoured one way or another for everybody.

Again, "pop music" and classical music may be different (I said they weren't) but I swear I do experience exactly the same kind of joy and jubilation at both...sometimes (ie when it's *good* pop music)
I also remember having a similar kind of emotion listening (actually it's a bit more than just listening) to hard rock pieces and Hierophony IV by Taïra (Japanese contemporary composer).


----------



## Maria Juanita

LV4-26 said:
			
		

> Does classical music not adjust to our times or is it just the way it's presented and "packaged" that takes us away from it?
> (...)
> Isn't that what makes the former more "popular"?



I'm not going back to the same old and cliché discussion about how medias are _evil_ and how they sell us a thing that's empty. Medias are like restaurants: they sell what people want to eat and if some people prefers strawberry flavored sodas to strawberry juice from actual fruits, there always will be someone who sells it. And this is more related to our stupidity.

Here is when we talk about "elites", or snob people who think they're better because they have a _real_ knowledge of what culture is, just because they hate reggaeton and love Chopin. (Well I do hate reggaeton, but that's not the point... )

I think artistic and musical expressions can be used in a time different to when they were created with different purposes and they lead u to find those beautiful creations and even to re-create 'em with other purposes (no wonder I've watch Kubrick's Clockwork Orange -Naranja Mecánica, I don't remember the original name whatsoever.

Saludillos...


----------



## valerie

Alundra said:
			
		

> I wonder what the public funding must to spend your money in (in cultural issues I mean)
> How do you think the cultural acts must to be? Or do you think mustn't to have cultural acts??
> 
> I prefer my money (my taxes) to be spent in cultural issues (even permanent orchestra or the teacher's salary) before other things.



Alundra, you've not read me carefully, I have described a fact, not said it should not be like that. What I mean is that the economy of classical music is based on public funding, and therefore it does not mean much if Sony decides to stop recording classical music.

However, I agree that this feeling of me (I'll try later to get data instead of feelings) is based on what I know in Europe, and I have no idea of how the situation is in the USA. With regards to the teachers, in Spain, the public school may not provide a lot of music education, but please, private education is really reserved to a minority, and is not relevant statistically


----------



## Fernando

LVA and Maria Juanita: We are not attacking pop music (well, I do attack reggaeton. but that's not the pint ). The point is whether or not classical music is dying or not and whtether it should or not and (if so) why.

My answers:

- Partially yes. It is not dying but it knew better times.
- No, it should not.

- Why? I agree with you. One reason is the snobness of many classical fans and (overall) composers.


----------



## Alundra

Maria Juanita said:
			
		

> Well, according to the definition of a "cultural act", I'd rather spend my money on cultural acts such as feeding poor p-pl or trying to find a cure for cancer.


 
Me too, of course, but it isn't a cultural act for me, it is other kind of taxes... 

Maria Juanita, lo que quise decir es que antes de gastar el dinero de mis impuestos en cosas más tontas (alimentar a los pobres o encontrar la cura para el cáncer lo considero bastante más importante...) prefiero gastarme el dinero en cultura...

Valerie, forgive if I misunderstood you.


Alundra.


----------



## valerie

I've done some (quick) research on the economics of classical music, basically *in France*. It appears that:

- Most professional classical music structures are permanent institutions (around 50) and "professional independant structures" (around 200)
- there are around *7000 professional musicians in classical music*, and 28% (2000) are employed by permanent institutions. The other ones do work punctually, employed by the "professional independant structures".
- the permanent institutions are *public funded*
- the "professional independant structures" are more autonomous in terms of management, but receive between *40 and 70 % of public funding*. Complementary *private funding is significant*, and *disc sales is not*.
- The state contributes also to the musicians living through a special unemployement regime (for artists in general), to compensate the intermittent employment.

So I think Sony can close its classical music department without any remorse, if this structure is similar in other countries, which I think quite probable.


----------



## valerie

I've found an interesting interview of Andrew Litton, director of the Dallas Symphony Orchestra in 2003.

He mentions the difference in financing between the US orchestras and the European ones. But more interesting, he notes that nowadays institutions, operas, orchestras and solists do not need majors and labels to produce their discs, they can and do produce them on their own. He also comments that distribution will be done increasingly through the internet, making the traditional distribution channels (probably the main bottleneck for classical music) useless.

http://www.abeilleinfo.com/dossiers...er=litton&rg=1&tit_dos=Andrew Litton à Dallas (in French)

I found others comments pointing to these propectives, as well as to the creation of new labels, focused on niches and apparently financially viable.

THERE IS STILL HOPE!!!


----------



## Maria Juanita

Two last things I would like to add (as a bonus... I do know where it does come from but I just love contests so I will let  u gays guess who's the author of these quotes)

*If classical music is the state of the art,
then the arts are in a sad state.*

*Modern music is a sick puppy.*

and Fernando, I understood that by bringing up the subject of pop music, the question about how we can reach to the conclussion that classical music might be dead. 

I also find Valerie's researches very interesting. It could lead to another discussion on music bussiness, but that won't be that interested in 'em...


----------



## LV4-26

Maria Juanita said:
			
		

> Originally Posted by *LV4-26*
> Quote Does classical music not adjust to our times or is it just the way it's presented and "packaged" that takes us away from it?
> (...)
> Isn't that what makes the former more "popular"?
> 
> I'm not going back to the same old and cliché discussion about how medias are _evil_


 I guess there's some misinterpretation here. If you've read my post #23 carefully as I take it you have, you must have understood that I agreed with you on that point.

I supposed I didn't express myself well in this instance. Certainly the word "_packaged"_ was misleading. When I said "_the way it _[classical music]_ is presented_" I didn't whish anyone to read "_by medias_", but rather "_presented (as some kind of religion) by some of its goodwilling but ultimately harmful devoted worshippers"._


----------

