Klarinet Archive - Posting 000696.txt from 2002/07

From: Jeremy A Schiffer <schiffer@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] Clarinet History & "Popular" vs. "Classical"
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 12:08:35 -0400

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Bear Woodson wrote:

> However as a Terminal Music Theory GEEK, I
> get really tired of fans of "Popular" Music, who try
> to tell me, "they are my favorite group, but they are
> not really 'Popular' Music". Knock off the sophistry!

...

> Therefore, to recap: if your favorite Group on
> the radio is NOT writing Operas, Symphonies, Con-
> certos, Sonatas and Fugues, then they are what we
> call "Popular" Music because they do NOT stress
> Music Education in their music. While the com-
> posers of those Operas, Symphonies, Concertos,
> Sonatas and Fugues, are what we would call com-
> posers of "Art", "Serious" or "Classical" Music.

I really don't want to get into too much of an argument over this, but I
really feel that your dichotomy of "Art" or "Popular" music is way too
simplistic.

Even within the "Western Art Music" (or classical) tradition, there has
been "popular" music, and more "scholarly" music. In fin de siecle Vienna,
those who specialized in waltz music for public dancing (E.G. Strauss)
were the "popular" music of the day, while the more "serious" composers
wrote for the concert stage. There is the famous story (which I'm about to
butcher) of Strauss's daughter asking Brahms for an autograph... (at the
time, it was supposedly customary for composers to write a few bars from
their best known work and then sign it) and Brahms wrote the opening bars
from "Blue Danube" and signed it "not, alas, by Johannes Brahms."

The point is, even within each genre, there is more "serious" music and
more "popular" music. To draw a line in the sand based on form and
harmony is shortsighted and fallacious. Would you consider Steve Reich or
John Cage "popular" because they don't use enough chords or write
traditional symphonies, or stress "Music Education," whatever that is?
What about the Bang on a Can group (and their amazing clarinetist Evan
Ziporyn)?

As for music on the radio, if you hear it on a station owned by Clear
Channel (which owns roughly 60% of the commercial radio market), then you
can definitely consider it pop, because it has been written and produced
specifically for the radio audience of 12-25 year olds. But most music
being made today isn't written for the radio market, and will never be
heard by a mass audience. There is electronic music for the rave scene,
some of which is as complicated structurally as anything the 20th century
has seen. There is also a strong folk-alt-rock scene, which gets virtually
no airplay, except on college radio stations. But one of my favorite
artists, Mason Jennings, a singer-songwriter from Minneapolis, can bring
an entire audience to tears with his ballads; I've seen it happen numerous
times. Why is his music any less valid just because it's not in symphonic
form?

Similarly, much of the music of the early-90's (such as Nirvana) was
written as a scathing critique on "pop" music. Does the fact that it
became widely disseminated and listened to make it "popular" despite the
fact that it turned the "popular" conventions of its day around 180
degrees?

Upon simple analysis, your dichotomy appears to be lacking in substance.
It is disappointing to see people who know so much about one aspect of
music know so little about others. Perhaps you should leave theory behind
for a while and head down to PDQ records (yes, I lived in Tucson for my
first 18 years) to broaden your horizons.

"Pop" music is that which is _written_ to appeal to a mass audience,
often sacrificing originality and creativity in the process. Music which
is written for the sake of artistry, but then finds mass appeal
(accidentally or otherwise), is not generally considered "pop" music. Of
course, there's a lot in between that doesn't fit either category, but
that doesn't affect the validity of my argument, while it contradicts
yours.

> Then I can get back to
> my series of Clarinet Works for Professor Joze
> Kotar.

Is Jerry Kirkbride still at the U of A? Or is Kotar a composition
professor?

> Bear Woodson
> Composer in Tucson, Arizona, USA

-jeremy

----------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy A. Schiffer
AcIS Security Administrator
Columbia University
212-854-2903
AcIS Nextel *75

Please direct all computer security related queries to
security@-----.

---------------------------------------------------------------------