Sky Arts - André Rieu fortnight

[Zucchini]

Actually, it illustrates what we're up against: the section of the public that appreciates Rieu and would prefer him to, say, a Willy Boskovsky.

God he was awful. A ghastly old man of zero charisma wearing a frock coat and pretending to be jolly and playing awful music in front of a sour faced audience. And getting away with it year after year

Let people enjoy Andre Rieu if they want and avoid making patronising remarks about being "up against" the section of the public that appreciates him. You shouldn't try to be an evangelist, should you?

[Flosshilde]

Isn't that the same as saying that people should be 'allowed' to enjoy, say, a mass-produced food full of artificial sweeteners & hydrogenated fats & artificial colouring, which will have negligable nutritional value & is also addictive, rather than be encouraged to eat good food?

[french frank]

Let people enjoy Andre Rieu if they want and avoid making patronising remarks about being "up against" the section of the public that appreciates him. You shouldn't try to be an evangelist, should you?

I didn't want to evangelise. I was just commenting on the, not altogether serious (I take it) suggestion that he might take over the NYD concert - thus encroaching upon a different audience's traditional experience and enjoyment, rather than staying in the vast stadia and arenas where he is genuinely appreciated.

[Mr Pee]

Isn't that the same as saying that people should be 'allowed' to enjoy, say, a mass-produced food full of artificial sweeteners & hydrogenated fats & artificial colouring, which will have negligable nutritional value & is also addictive, rather than be encouraged to eat good food?

By all means encourage, but at the end of the day, it is a matter of personal choice, and people should be allowed to eat what they want, and listen to the music they want.

[Thropplenoggin]

I find Rieu makes for an excellent emetic when required.

[Flosshilde]

By all means encourage, but at the end of the day, it is a matter of personal choice, and people should be allowed to eat what they want, and listen to the music they want.

Yes, but education & persuasion should be used to help them 'see the error of their ways'. Unfortunately the economic strength of the junk food (& junk music) purveyors rather overwhelms the miniscule budgets of the 'good food' (& good music) campaigners.

The post I was responding to seemed to suggest that there was nothing wrong in saccharine & glutinous music (or arrangements), & that one shouldn't criticise enjoyment of it. I think there is, & one should, just as one should about people's diets.

[aeolium]

The post I was responding to seemed to suggest that there was nothing wrong in saccharine & glutinous music (or arrangements), & that one shouldn't criticise enjoyment of it. I think there is, & one should, just as one should about people's diets.

I think it's quite wrong to suggest an equivalence between nutrition and taste in music. In the case of nutrition there is good scientific evidence as to the nutritional content of different foods, and to the effects of consuming certain foods. There is no such evidence in the case of music that it makes you physically, mentally or morally better or worse (except the effect of very loud music on hearing). It is purely a matter of taste. To criticise enjoyment of music you think saccharine or glutinous but others clearly don't is just puritanical.

[EdgeleyRob]

I wonder if he will ever feature on Radio 3

[Thropplenoggin]

I wonder if he will ever feature on Radio 3

If SMP et al have their way, he'll be chalked in for a Christmas Breakfast special. At least we'll spared the gurning...

[Flosshilde]

I think it's quite wrong to suggest an equivalence between nutrition and taste in music. In the case of nutrition there is good scientific evidence as to the nutritional content of different foods, and to the effects of consuming certain foods. There is no such evidence in the case of music that it makes you physically, mentally or morally better or worse (except the effect of very loud music on hearing). It is purely a matter of taste. To criticise enjoyment of music you think saccharine or glutinous but others clearly don't is just puritanical.

So there's no problem with R3 'dumbing down'? (not that I would suggest that R3's output is sacharine or glutinous - mostly)

[aeolium]

So there's no problem with R3 'dumbing down'? (not that I would suggest that R3's output is sacharine or glutinous - mostly)

I think that's a different issue, in that you're not criticising people for their personal taste but arguing that certain kinds of music - not including "crossover" - ought to be represented on R3 and others elsewhere.

[french frank]

I think that's a different issue, in that you're not criticising people for their personal taste but arguing that certain kinds of music - not including "crossover" - ought to be represented on R3 and others elsewhere.

Yes, exactly. Hence (again not wishing to take the suggestion too seriously), the horror, oh, the horror of Rieu invading the Musikverein for the Vienna NYD concert itself, with or without his personal orchestra. That would destroy choice for those whose tastes are other. His millions of enthusiastic fans can more comfortably be housed in O2 or Wembley.

[Suffolkcoastal]

I wonder if he will ever feature on Radio 3

I'm afraid he already has, when they did the 'charts' on a Tuesday.

[Pabmusic]

I think it's quite wrong to suggest an equivalence between nutrition and taste in music. In the case of nutrition there is good scientific evidence as to the nutritional content of different foods, and to the effects of consuming certain foods. There is no such evidence in the case of music that it makes you physically, mentally or morally better or worse (except the effect of very loud music on hearing). It is purely a matter of taste. To criticise enjoyment of music you think saccharine or glutinous but others clearly don't is just puritanical.

100% with you, Aeolium. It's one thing to criticise Andre Riieu and the 'plastic saccharine' music sound; quite another to suggest the music he's conducting shouldn't be listened to (or at least shouldn't be on Radio 3).

[Thropplenoggin]

100% with you, Aeolium. It's one thing to criticise Andre Riieu and the 'plastic saccharine' music sound; quite another to suggest the music he's conducting shouldn't be listened to (or at least shouldn't be on Radio 3).

I disagree entirely. What's so wrong with having one radio station that clings to a notion of High Art and Serious Music? Rieu fans have ample opportunities to listen to his muzak, via Classic FM, Sky Arts and elevators the world over. Must R3 be so inclusive as to include every classical-esque artist in the world? It would make more sense to have a digital channel for this - R3L (that L standing for 'lite' but it's tempting to say 'lobotomised'), or some such.

Rieu is a snake oil salesman, selling a cheap chintzy product that bastardises music, all for a whopping profit. He should be treated with contempt, not encouraged.

(Not that I feel strongly about it. )