The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Serial_Apologist]

I think that's harsh Should Radio 3 be reserved for that percentage of the UK population for whom Perotin, the Ring, a Mass by Byrd or a symphony by Honegger have any meaning (in fact not for those for whom only the word 'symphony' has any vagueish musical resonance at all)? What percentage would you estimate it to be? Are they any more misinformed than someone who makes no distinction between pop, garage, thrash metal, grunge, grime, acid house, techno, trance, prog rock &c? From a linguistic point of view, if 'classical music' is commonly used as an umbrella term (comprehending Perotin, Byrd, Haydn, Schubert, Wagner, Debussy, Honegger, Stockhausen) that has become its 'meaning'; and it only confuses those who do appreciate the vast differences - and care.

It may be pearls before swine but what use are pearls to swine? Language - or meanings - is use.

Surely whether a certain kind of music with characteristics in common and part of a lineage which covers all of the abovementioned composers can be grouped together can define a generic name, in the same way the term "a home" can be used to describe a multitude of domicile types with few common characteristics ranging from castles to igloos? We don't say "you can't call a cave a home because a home has at least to include windows or doors"; so what is wrong with using a classical way for describing a body of music? In using the term "classical" one would be distinguishing one particular type of music from others based on or primarily derived from non-western musical cultures, (possibly excepting "Indian classical music", many or most of whose practitioners and devotees accept or use this term). But it does presuppose definitional agreement on authoritative consent: jazz and blues fall into the non-western-originated types since howevermuch their evolution has absorbed "classical" forms and features they would never have existed were it not for pre-existent pre-Eurocolonial African musical cultures. And - to anticipate the argument "neither would what I describe as 'classical music genres' I would delineate the latter as having a starting point, perhaps the 12th century, whereas we have no way of knowing how far back non-European music cultures go.

[Serial_Apologist]

My experience too with the 30-40s in the family. They live very much in their present, in the bubbles of their immediate acquaintance. The past and the beyonds are other countries which they feel no pressing need to explore. Everything they want is close, familiar and on tap.

Listening to Poulenc's Les Biches just now, a work which had me in stitches at the age of 15, I was saddened for the first time at the thought that the satirical references and parodyings the composer roped together to create his piece of "modern music" for 1920 would probably go right over the heads of most young listeners of today, who, lacking knowledge of music history or feeling for period context would assume the whole piece to be in one consistent idiom to be taken at face value.

[french frank]

Dare I say, that the term we'd use in other contexts for this sort of simplification of realities is "misinformation"? To communicate that a Pérotin clausula sits in the same basket as Wagner's Ring, or that a Byrd Mass is essentially from the same genre as a Honegger Symphony, is profoundly wrong - in a word, those polite ladies and gentlemen are telling (and selling) porkies to their "intended audience".

I think that's harsh Should Radio 3 be reserved for that percentage of the UK population for whom Perotin, the Ring, a Mass by Byrd or a symphony by Honegger have any meaning (in fact not for those for whom only the word 'symphony' has any vagueish musical resonance at all)? What percentage would you estimate it to be? Are they any more misinformed than someone who makes no distinction between pop, garage, thrash metal, grunge, grime, acid house, techno, trance, prog rock &c? From a linguistic point of view, if 'classical music' is commonly used as an umbrella term (comprehending Perotin, Byrd, Haydn, Schubert, Wagner, Debussy, Honegger, Stockhausen) that has become its 'meaning'; and it only confuses those who do appreciate the vast differences - and care.

It may be pearls before swine but what use are pearls to swine? Language - or meanings - is use.

[vinteuil]

... I suppose the categories I wd consider would be "music for grown ups and those aspiring to be grown ups" as opposed to "music for kiddiewinkies, sulky teenagers, and those happy to go thro' their lives as kidults".

But that wd be terminally 'triggering'....


.

[Master Jacques]

True enough. But if communication is the goal, context and the specific audience have to be taken into account. So R3's polite presenters will be aware that their intended audience has its limitations and will have an understanding of the term 'classical music'; as would my brother, infinitely more musical and knowledgeable about the repertoire than me, and a ClassicFM listener.

Dare I say, that the term we'd use in other contexts for this sort of simplification of realities is "misinformation"? To communicate that a Pérotin clausula sits in the same basket as Wagner's Ring, or that a Byrd Mass is essentially from the same genre as a Honegger Symphony, is profoundly wrong - in a word, those polite ladies and gentlemen are telling (and selling) porkies to their "intended audience".

[french frank]

Generic taxonomy has always created problems; and when this catch-all "classical music" (so lovingly spooned-out by Radio 3's polite presenters) takes hold, it obscures the huge number of different types and conditions of music which it so uselessly embraces.

True enough. But if communication is the goal, context and the specific audience have to be taken into account. So R3's polite presenters will be aware that their intended audience has its limitations and will have an understanding of the term 'classical music'; as would my brother, infinitely more musical and knowledgeable about the repertoire than me, and a ClassicFM listener.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Funny you should mention Henry Moore. One of my own Christmas rituals (completed this morning) is to visit the magnificent Moore sculpture in our local park, just to touch it while looking out over the vista of London and the river. I hope that younger generations don't forget him entirely.

One reason he won’t be forgotten is that, aside from his great talent, he believed in public art often gifting works to the public realm at knockdown prizes. So his work can be found everywhere.

I’m off now to a concert where another of his works lies in the garden…
Any ideas anyone ?
Clue - it overlooks the medieval equivalent of a boxing ring …

[LMcD]

Counterpoint used to be a balanced quiz programme, with contestants who had a good, broad knowledge of music in the round. Winning meant that you had to know your Bax from your Bach. .

The last time I tuned in, only one of the 2nd-round topics on offer related to classical music and one of the others required an exhaustive knowledge of Madonna's recording career.

[Master Jacques]

My stepchildren, all in their thirties, all the beneficiaries of a 'good education' in terms of schools and universities - seem to have none of that: happy to be unaware of, eg Henry Moore, Monteverdi, der Blauer Reiter, MR James, whatever...

Funny you should mention Henry Moore. One of my own Christmas rituals (completed this morning) is to visit the magnificent Moore sculpture in our local park, just to touch it while looking out over the vista of London and the river. I hope that younger generations don't forget him entirely.

[french frank]

My stepchildren, all in their thirties, all the beneficiaries of a 'good education' in terms of schools and universities - seem to have none of that : happy to be unaware of, eg Henry Moore, Monteverdi, der Blauer Reiter, MR James, whatever...

My experience too with the 30-40s in the family. They live very much in their present, in the bubbles of their immediate acquaintance. The past and the beyonds are other countries which they feel no pressing need to explore. Everything they want is close, familiar and on tap.

[vinteuil]

What's gone missing, though, is the aspiration to have at least some sort of general cultural map to hand, so as not to embarrass oneself ... socially...

Interesting. I was an undergraduate in the early 70s - colleagues from then whom I keep up with (regardless of what they were reading then) did indeed have that 'aspiration ... to a cultural map' - we wd have been embarrassed not to have had at least an inkling of what was meant, what was 'going on' in a larger cultural world than our vocations required. My stepchildren, all in their thirties, all the beneficiaries of a 'good education' in terms of schools and universities - seem to have none of that : happy to be unaware of, eg Henry Moore, Monteverdi, der Blauer Reiter, MR James, whatever...

[Master Jacques]

If the prime purpose of language is to communicate with other people, it becomes necessary - for that reason alone - to modify one's own language. 'Classical' has come a long way from when it referred to the cultures of Ancient Greece and Rome; and "the classics" refered to literature from that age; then it referred to the 18th-c, 'homage' to that early aesthetic; then as an umbrella term for the various styles of the modern age, before and after the 18th c. Now, just orchestral music in general. The problem is that when these terms evolve in meaning so far, do we need new terms to clarify the obsolete ones?

Generic taxonomy has always created problems; and when this catch-all "classical music" (so lovingly spooned-out by Radio 3's polite presenters) takes hold, it obscures the huge number of different types and conditions of music which it so uselessly embraces.

[french frank]

"classical" (a term which, as you may know, I personally avoid like the plague)

If the prime purpose of language is to communicate with other people, it becomes necessary - for that reason alone - to modify one's own language. 'Classical' has come a long way from when it referred to the cultures of Ancient Greece and Rome; and "the classics" refered to literature from that age; then it referred to the 18th-c, 'homage' to that early aesthetic; then as an umbrella term for the various styles of the modern age, before and after the 18th c. Now, just orchestral music in general. The problem is that when these terms evolve in meaning so far, do we need new terms to clarify the obsolete ones?

[Master Jacques]

Reminds me of a conversation I had just before Christmas at a dinner party. I was telling the lady next to me about my interest in and love of music and she said, "my husband likes ALL types of music....not classical though....."

Watching the old National Theatre film of Three Sisters last night, was to be reminded strongly that plus ça change. Most people are no less but no more ignorant of the arts than was formerly the case. What's gone missing, though, is the aspiration to have at least some sort of general cultural map to hand, so as not to embarrass oneself (or indeed, one's husband) socially.

Chekhov's Natasha now rules, not just one decaying family, but the whole social world.

[hmvman]

Indeed, I was speaking to a younger (i.e. younger than me, but by no means in the first flush of youth) person yesterday about her Dansette and vinyl records. She said she had a collection of "classics" and then was at pains to emphasise that these were not classical...

Reminds me of a conversation I had just before Christmas at a dinner party. I was telling the lady next to me about my interest in and love of music and she said, "my husband likes ALL types of music....not classical though....."