Our Classical Century Episode 3

[Barbirollians]

An enjoyable programme but far too much to cram in - unfortunate for Suzy Klein to be put up against Joan Bakewell who is simply different class.

Though wasting time on prog rock was annoying.

[LMcD]

An enjoyable programme but far too much to cram in - unfortunate for Suzy Klein to be put up against Joan Bakewell who is simply different class.

Though wasting time on prog rock was annoying.

Some folk - myself included - would say 'unfortunate that Suzy Klein featured at all'.
Joan Bakewell remains a class act in my book.

[MrGongGong]

Though wasting time on prog rock was annoying.

Surely "wasting time on prog rock" is essential ?

I had a look at the music list
which is the "prog" ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00041tg

[french frank]

Surely "wasting time on prog rock" is essential ?

I was going to suggest that. Absolutely essential for any self-respecting classical music programme, along with pop, jazz, folk/roots, musical theatre. It's what makes a classical music programme what it is, more or less anywhere these days. Puzzling that classical music isn't included in rock, jazz, folk/roots/pop programmes but a lot of their fans aren't keen on classical and it wouldn't do to spoil their enjoyment.

[MrGongGong]

I was going to suggest that. Absolutely essential for any self-respecting classical music programme, along with pop, jazz, folk/roots, musical theatre. It's what makes a classical music programme what it is, more or less anywhere these days. Puzzling that classical music isn't included in rock, jazz, folk/roots/pop programmes but a lot of their fans aren't keen on classical and it wouldn't do to spoil their enjoyment.

BINGO

But WHERE is the "prog"?

genre nonsense again I see (YES , they do exist ..... how about some Schubert ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzF-...&frags=pl%2Cwn)

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Some folk - myself included - would say 'unfortunate that Suzy Klein featured at all'.

Don't be silly. The BBC is never wrong.

[Serial_Apologist]

Surely "wasting time on prog rock" is essential ?

I had a look at the music list
which is the "prog" ?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00041tg

Life on Pa's

[MrGongGong]

Life on Pa's

Hummm that's not "prog" though even though Rick plays piano on it.

[french frank]

genre nonsense again I see

Do you know, there are people who spend their entire careers studying the functions of the human mind and conclude that one of the most basic cognitive processes is in placing things in categories - recognisng what makes things similar and what makes them different. This is not a spare time hobby - it's a faculty that humans have developed because they have found it useful.

[Serial_Apologist]

Do you know, there are people who spend their entire careers studying the functions of the human mind and conclude that one of the most basic cognitive processes is in placing things in categories - recognisng what makes things similar and what makes them different. This is not a spare time hobby - it's a faculty that humans have developed because they have found it useful.

Classification:

1) Ruling class - grand bourgeoisie

2) Middle class - petit bourgeoisie

3) Working class - proletariat.

[MrGongGong]

Do you know, there are people who spend their entire careers studying the functions of the human mind and conclude that one of the most basic cognitive processes is in placing things in categories - recognisng what makes things similar and what makes them different. This is not a spare time hobby - it's a faculty that humans have developed because they have found it useful.

I do , and many of them are flexible enough to use a variety of different taxonomies for the same sets to avoid the kind of nonsense that we so often find when some folks talk about music.

(i'm quite keen on the Elementary organology classification of instruments as opposed to the traditional Sachs–Hornbostel system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musica...ary_organology)



Don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that genres don't exist or aren't useful BUT that they are much less rigid than folks would like to imagine.

How did you like the choir ?

[french frank]

I do , and many of them are flexible enough to use a variety of different taxonomies for the same sets to avoid the kind of nonsense that we so often find when some folks talk about music.

I think this is a misunderstanding. One of the uses of classification is that it can predict a personal reaction (such as liking and disliking). It's a short cut. Just as you gravitate towards music that interests you (and slag off a certain work that shall remain nameless), so others find, for example, that classical music or jazz or world - just to stick to the broadest kind of categories - are what they generally find enjoyable/interesting; while other kinds are what experience proves don't hold much interest.

Everyone's 'consumption' of music is limited by one factor or another - the most obvious being time. No one has time enough to listen to every piece of every kind of music so we all - even you - must make our selections based on various criteria. For most people, the most straightforward is to select the kind of music they are fairly sure they will enjoy - contemporary pop, classic rock, jazz - or something which people have mentally categorised as 'classical music'. They aren't forced to eschew every other kind of music - but they are likely to avoid music which experience tells them they don't usually like.

Of course, there will be some ornery characters who deliberately choose what they don't think they will like, just in case they do - but even that is a criterion for selection.

[MrGongGong]

I think this is a misunderstanding. One of the uses of classification is that it can predict a personal reaction (such as liking and disliking). It's a short cut. Just as you gravitate towards music that interests you (and slag off a certain work that shall remain nameless), so others find, for example, that classical music or jazz or world - just to stick to the broadest kind of categories - are what they generally find enjoyable/interesting; while other kinds are what experience proves don't hold much interest.

Everyone's 'consumption' of music is limited by one factor or another - the most obvious being time. No one has time enough to listen to every piece of every kind of music so we all - even you - must make our selections based on various criteria. For most people, the most straightforward is to select the kind of music they are fairly sure they will enjoy - contemporary pop, classic rock, jazz - or something which people have mentally categorised as 'classical music'. They aren't forced to eschew every other kind of music - but they are likely to avoid music which experience tells them they don't usually like.

Of course, there will be some ornery characters who deliberately choose what they don't think they will like, just in case they do - but even that is a criterion for selection.

All i'm saying (based on experience) is that the usual categorisations that are often used aren't (aaaargh I hate the phrase but can't think of a better one ?) really "fit for purpose". I might "slag off" a particular work BUT I did hear it first and conducted by Charles Groves who, they tell me, was good at it.
The genre categories that are often used are (as RB said elsewhere) mostly to do with selling things and often have little to do with music as a sonic art.

Did you like the choir ?

Still not sure where the "prog" is ?

[french frank]

All i'm saying (based on experience) is that the usual categorisations that are often used aren't (aaaargh I hate the phrase but can't think of a better one ?) really "fit for purpose".

Which brings it back to what I was saying. What is the "purpose", other than to point people in the direction of what, based on their tastes and character (curious/incurious, preferring the familiar/unfamiliar) they are likely to enjoy? For me, 'classical music' does not refer to forms of modern/contemporary music. It's already been composed, in its entirety. All of it. Works that I don't know aren't necessarily 'unfamiliar' when I hear them for the first time, and I don't expect them to be because in date and style they fit into a pattern or category which might be called a genre, or a sub-genre And it is not incumbent upon anyone to pursue any form of 'modern' music if they wish to focus on the music of past centuries. As far as I can see, the only people who might object to that are those engaged in producing/creating 'modern' music ('C'mon, give us a break, will ya.') The marketing aspect is a result of people having established tastes, not a cause.

Did you like the choir

I didn't hear any choir. Can't watch television, don't listen to R3. Can't help on the "prog" question.

[MrGongGong]

I didn't hear any choir. Can't watch television, don't listen to R3. Can't help on the "prog" question.

It's not "prog" honest guv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzF-...&frags=pl%2Cwn