Klarinet Archive - Posting 000052.txt from 1997/05

From: Roger Shilcock <roger.shilcock@-----.uk>
Subj: Re: Music, performance, and marching bands
Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 18:17:08 -0400

On Thu, 1 May 1997, Edwin V. Lacy wrote:

> Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 13:46:17 -0500 (CDT)
> From: "Edwin V. Lacy" <el2@-----.edu>
> To: klarinet@-----.us
> Subject: Re: Music, performance, and marching bands
>
> On Thu, 1 May 1997, Jonathan Gordy wrote:
>
> > Pardon, but doesn't the thing that makes modern music great is that
> > everyone buys it,
>
> "Everyone" doesn't buy it.
>
> > and if Elvis did inferior products he would have disappeared, and
>
> The commercial success of Elvis had nothing to do with musical content or
> quality. It had everything to do with marketing, promotion, mass culture,
> the redistribution of discretionary wealth, etc.
>
> > Which is more than I can say for some of our "standards" in
> > the classical world. We don't like them, yet because of their greater
> > "musical" value we play them, and notice who is disappearing...
>
> Who is the "we" you are referring to? You say you recognize that they
> have "greater musical value," and yet you don't like them. It seems to me
> that you are saying a lot more about yourself than about the music. They
> are disappearing? Where do you live? In most of the parts of the
> civilized Western world which I know about, if Bach for example has
> disappeared, his disappearance has gone largely unnoticed.
>
> > but I know that in the pop world there is only more money involved when
> > you product has superior quality in the marketplace.
>
> You are contradicting yourself. "Quality" from the standpoint of the
> "marketplace" and quality for the standpoint of musical considerations
> both exist, but they have relatively little to do with each other.
>
> > As musicians we should be finding ways to pull more than "antique" music
>
> Musical quality is not determined by its placement in history. Josquin
> des Pres was a great composer, and so was Claudio Monteverdi, and so were
> other composers who were separated from these by several centuries, such
> as Charles Ives and Igor Stravinsky, and others who are writing music
> today.
>
> Today, we can buy likenesses of Elvis or Jesus on velvet, in
> paint-by-numbers style. Does that diminish the value of the paintings of
> Michelangelo, or Rembrandt, or Picasso? I don't think so.
>
> > but when "movie" music, perhaps the most recognizable of our art music,
>
> You've got to be kidding. The only time movie music has had any
> relationship to art music was when some composers from the field of "art
> music" were employed to write film scores.
>
> > John Williams has done more to improve the status of the symphony with a
> > few movie scores in the last decade than all the Schubert and Brahms we
> > play.
>
> The status of the symphony? What symphony did John Williams write?
>
> > I detest the attitude of the musicans who grumble over the "Pops"
> > concerts they do. These concerts are the only bridge to our audience
> > that many orchestras provide.
>
> You obviously have not played many of these Pops concerts. If you had,
> you would know that the audience for them and the audience for orchestral
> music are nearly mutually exclusive. Do you imagine that the audience for
> Pops concerts are younger, more "with it" people who soon will be
> converted to the standard orchestral repertoire? Nothing could be farther
> from the truth. Demographically, the regular audience for pops concerts
> tends to be considerably older than that for the regular orchestral
> concerts. Most orchestras have come around to a more honest appraisal of
> the purposes of pops concerts. They do not serve effectively to increase
> the audience for symphonic music, but they do work effectively to make a
> profit for the orchestras. It would seem too obvious to have to state
> that potential listeners cannot be fooled into liking orchestral music by
> exposing them to the symphony orchestra trying to play pop, rock, or who
> knows what other styles.
>
> Further, if you had played a lot of pops concerts, you would know why
> many musicians have the attitude toward them that they do.
>
> This all calls to mind the philosophical stance of Liberace, who when he
> was criticized for playing "schlock" he used to respond with, "I was so
> upset I cried all the way to the bank." In other words, he tried to use
> his commercial success to try to validate the worth of what he was doing.
> What should be realized is that commercial success requires catering to
> the largest potential mass audience, which means the lowest common
> denominator, and which precludes the introduction of artistic quality as a
> primary motivating factor.
>
> Ed Lacy
> *****************************************************************
> Dr. Edwin Lacy University of Evansville
> Professor of Music 1800 Lincoln Avenue
> Evansville, IN 47722
> el2@-----.edu (812)479-2754
> *****************************************************************
>
>
>
Well said, Dr. Ed.!!
Roger Shilcock