The Classic FM-isation of R3 is almost complete

[DavidP]

I suppose I just mean: as opposed to the less-discriminate 'immersion' approach R3 seem reportedly to be planning ("Film music month" or whatever).

I’m with you in being generally against these ‘immersion’ events. After all, if you don’t like said composer or the particular area of the repertoire highlighted then you are shut out of R3 for the week or month.

[Zucchini]

I suppose I just mean: as opposed to the less-discriminate 'immersion' approach R3 seem reportedly to be planning ("Film music month" or whatever).

Are you certain that they're planning a 30 day 'immersion' approach? If 'immersion' means inescapable, it is so obviously wrong that the odds are very much against.

As far as I can see this thread is based on no more than the fact that BBC Music Magazine is including an article about film music composers in its next issue. And that the OP doesn't want to have to share his radio station with plebs.

[amateur51]

Are you certain that they're planning a 30 day 'immersion' approach? If 'immersion' means inescapable, it is so obviously wrong that the odds are very much against.

As far as I can see this thread is based on no more than the fact that BBC Music Magazine is including an article about film music composers in its next issue. And that the OP doesn't want to having to share his radio station with plebs.

Au contraire Zukes, you're most welcome

[Thropplenoggin]

Are you certain that they're planning a 30 day 'immersion' approach? If 'immersion' means inescapable, it is so obviously wrong that the odds are very much against.

As far as I can see this thread is based on no more than the fact that BBC Music Magazine is including an article about film music composers in its next issue. And that the OP doesn't want to having to share his radio station with plebs.

Pray tell which part of this you struggle to understand:

As Radio 3 gears up to celebrate music of the silver screen

Based on the previous 'immersion' months, weeks, etc. I listed, many from this year, it would seem that another 'immersion' gimmick is forthcoming. I have no problem with film music per se, apart from the fact it is over-used in modern films (Inception, for example) compared to the far more subtle use of it in that oft-deemed 'golden age' of cinema from the late 60s and 70s, when large swathes of the film had silence so that a) dialogue could be heard, and b) the music carried more impact. However, I don't believe R3 is the place to hear such music for any length of time other than as a one-off documentary. Agree with others regarding the integral nature of the images for this music.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Ferrney

I’m thinking of his essay, “Who Cares if You Listen”

But, David, that's like referring to your first post on this Thread as "Only Nasty People Don't Like Film Music" - it's a title imposed on the article he wrote (which he called "The Composer as Specialist") by the Editor of Hi-Fidelity, who gave it the new title because it sounded "sexier". Babbitt's article is "contemptuous" of those critics and performers whose slovenly comments on Music they haven't understood mislead the general public (or "the layman" as Babbitt calls them), pointing out that no popular Scientific journals wrote about contemporary scientific ideas in the same way that popular Music journalism discussed contemporary ideas in Music.

The science editor ... contents himself with straightforward reporting. ... books and articles not intended for popular consumption are not reviewed [and] ... are left to professional journals. The Music Critic admits no comparable differentiation. He may feel, with some justice* that Music which presents itself in the market place of the Concert Hall automatically offers itself to public approval or disapproval.

... it's this "market place" that Babbitt feels is inappropriate for serious promulgation of new Music, which context leads to a very different understanding of the "public and social aspects of Musical composition" in the quotation you include.

Babbitt spent a good deal of his time (in public lectures, record notes, articles) introducing the Music of the Twentieth Century that he most loved (Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Bartok, Varese) to this "layman" in terms that make his insights clear without patronizing or undervaluing that layman's intellect. Of all composers, none have cared more that people listen, nor done more to empower them to listen carefully.

(* - emphasis mine: Babbitt even sympathizes with the Music Critic's dilemma.)

[DavidP]

But, David, that's like referring to your first post on this Thread as "Only Nasty People Don't Like Film Music" - it's a title imposed on the article he wrote (which he called "The Composer as Specialist") by the Editor of Hi-Fidelity, who gave it the new title because it sounded "sexier". Babbitt's article is "contemptuous" of those critics and performers whose slovenly comments on Music they haven't understood mislead the general public (or "the layman" as Babbitt calls them), pointing out that no popular Scientific journals wrote about contemporary scientific ideas in the same way that popular Music journalism discussed contemporary ideas in Music.

The science editor ... contents himself with straightforward reporting. ... books and articles not intended for popular consumption are not reviewed [and] ... are left to professional journals. The Music Critic admits no comparable differentiation. He may feel, with some justice* that Music which presents itself in the market place of the Concert Hall automatically offers itself to public approval or disapproval.

... it's this "market place" that Babbitt feels is inappropriate for serious promulgation of new Music, which context leads to a very different understanding of the "public and social aspects of Musical composition" in the quotation you include.

Babbitt spent a good deal of his time (in public lectures, record notes, articles) introducing the Music of the Twentieth Century that he most loved (Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Bartok, Varese) to this "layman" in terms that make his insights clear without patronizing or undervaluing that layman's intellect. Of all composers, none have cared more that people listen, nor done more to empower them to listen carefully.

(* - emphasis mine: Babbitt even sympathizes with the Music Critic's dilemma.)

Ferney

You've just given me an excellent title for a new thread there!

I wasn't making anything of the heading imposed on MB. I'm more concerned with his hostility to the commerical world which is in a line of comments from Wagner through to many "modernist" composers. I think much of the hostility to film music derives from this attitude.

As for Babbit he's not exactly embracing of the general public is he? You give the game away when you mention the composers he sought to promote. Schoenberg, for instance, was perhaps one of the most self-consciously elitist composers there ever was (Didn't his pupil Eisler say he was "composing for the bottom drawer for posterity"?) and, 'Transfigured Night' apart, isn't exactly embraced by most music lovers even today.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

But Schönberg wrote film Music!

And "hostility to the commercial world" doesn't equate to "contempt for the public", does it?

And is Perotin, or Dunstable, or Simpson, or Rubbra "embraced by most Music lovers even today"? Is popularity a criterion of excellence? And does creating work that isn't so cuddled demonstrate "contempt" for the general public? Aren't there more examples of composers patronizing the public by writing Music that those composers think that public will like? And which "general public" of "Music Lovers" are we talking about, anyway?

And, for that matter, which "Film Music"? We had this discussion 18 months ago when John Williams was Composer of the Week; my own position was stated then:

... the best film scores transcend ... mere "background" effect: in a documentary devoted to Herrmann (who did write some very good concert pieces as well as his CotW-worthy film scores) the car scene from Psycho was shown without Music. This was a very dull 10 minutes. Then again with those strings - the hairs shivered down my spine!

Similarly with Scott of the Antarctic: the Music - unobtrusively, surreptitiously - created the tone of the film, giving those "stiff-upper-lip" performances a genuine depth of courage.

That sort of film Music is worthy of general praise and discussion.

... but ...

I don't like Williams' scores, but even giving him as much benefit of the doubt as I possibly can, too much of his music seems to me to be very "one-size fits all": the ET theme ... could be swapped with the Music that accompanies Superman flying with Lois Lane; the dinosaurs in Jurrasic Park interchangeable with the Jaws theme. Fine for general purpose, and for the contexts they serve, but I can't take them away from those contexts.

Do you think that, by criticizing Williams' work in this way, I am therefore showing "contempt" for the "general public" of "most Music lovers"?

[DavidP]

But Schönberg wrote film Music!

And "hostility to the commercial world" doesn't equate to "contempt for the public", does it?

And is Perotin, or Dunstable, or Simpson, or Rubbra "embraced by most Music lovers even today"? Is popularity a criterion of excellence? And does creating work that isn't so cuddled demonstrate "contempt" for the general public? Aren't there more examples of composers patronizing the public by writing Music that those composers think that public will like? And which "general public" of "Music Lovers" are we talking about, anyway?

And, for that matter, which "Film Music"? We had this discussion 18 months ago when John Williams was Composer of the Week; my own position was stated then:





... but ...



Do you think that, by criticizing Williams' work in this way, I am therefore showing "contempt" for the "general public" of "most Music lovers"?

I made no comment about you at all. Nor am I criticising Schoenberg, whom I admire. Perhaps you need to calm down.

By the way Schoenberg TRIED to be a film composer but wasn't able to adapt his style to what was acceptable in Hollywood at that time (No criticism intended - his genius lay elsewhere). He wrote no film scores.

Why is there such intolerance toward film music on this forum? I'm at a total loss to understand it. But, then, maybe it has something to do with the ridiculous paranoia on here toward anything perceived to be a nod towards CFM?

[Serial_Apologist]

By the way Schoenberg TRIED to be a film composer but wasn't able to adapt his style to what was acceptable in Hollywood at that time (No criticism intended - his genius lay elsewhere). He wrote no film scores.

What Schoenberg composed in 1930, in his "Music for a Film Score", was his idea of what film music could be. One learns from Cage that Hollywood composers flocked to his classes in the hope of learning how he obtained his "effects", and were left somewhat disconsolate when discovering that his teachings consisted in the rudiments from the German classical/romantic tradition. Eisler's criticism of Schoenberg concerned the latter's politics, rather than his techniques, to which Eisler returned continually from the late 1930s onwards, and it is revealing to see similar arguments to those of Zhadanov in the 1940s Stalinist USSR effectively regurgitated in your point of view.

[DavidP]

What Schoenberg composed in 1930, in his "Music for a Film Score", was his idea of what film music could be. One learns from Cage that Hollywood composers flocked to his classes in the hope of learning how he obtained his "effects", and were left somewhat disconsolate when discovering that his teachings consisted in the rudiments from the German classical/romantic tradition. Eisler's criticism of Schoenberg concerned the latter's politics, rather than his techniques, to which Eisler returned continually from the late 1930s onwards, and it is revealing to see similar arguments to those of Zhadanov in the 1940s Stalinist USSR effectively regurgitated in your point of view.

Praise indeed!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I made no comment about you at all.

I made no comment suggesting that you did. I was trying to ascertain where you drew your dividing line between criticism of work that was popular with some audiences and "contempt" for that audience for liking it - your comments about "hostility to the commercial world" didn't make this clear.

Nor am I criticising Schoenberg, whom I admire.

Glad to hear it.

Perhaps you need to calm down.

What evidence do you have for such a suggestion? What relevance does it have to the discussion?

By the way Schoenberg TRIED to be a film composer but wasn't able to adapt his style to what was acceptable in Hollywood at that time (No criticism intended - his genius lay elsewhere).

Correct; I should have concentrated on the subject of Hollywood film scores.

He wrote no film scores.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhNDsTGgQss

Why is there such intolerance toward film music on this forum? I'm at a total loss to understand it. But, then, maybe it has something to do with the ridiculous paranoia on here toward anything perceived to be a nod towards CFM?

Your total loss to understand things is perhaps something to which you will need to become accustomed.

[teamsaint]

I think, at a very simple level, people (on this forum) might be sceptical or hostile (rightly or wrongly) to the promotion of film music on R3, because they might see it as part of a process which is very clearly well underway to take R3 in certain directions, of which they disapprove.

I have a lot of sympathy with that, even though there is no doubt a mountain of film music that is well worth hearing, some of which could do with rediscovering I suspect. Some of this music might well be an "improvement" on the fare currently on offer between 6.30 AM and Mid day. But that isn't the point, since there is a lot of music which might do that job even better.

[Thropplenoggin]

I think, at a very simple level, people (on this forum) might be sceptical or hostile (rightly or wrongly) to the promotion of film music on R3, because they might see it as part of a process which is very clearly well underway to take R3 in certain directions, of which they disapprove.

I have a lot of sympathy with that, even though there is no doubt a mountain of film music that is well worth hearing, some of which could do with rediscovering I suspect. Some of this music might well be an "improvement" on the fare currently on offer between 6.30 AM and Mid day. But that isn't the point, since there is a lot of music which might do that job even better.

Far too reasonable a response. Stop him, someone! Stop HIM!

[Bax-of-Delights]

I do hope R3 will feature Elisabeth Lutyens - the "Horror Queen" - among its forthcoming film music season. Here's a little taster to be going on with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRjqZGiulhw

The sharp-eyed will spot Charles Hawtry (shurely shome mishtake - ed)

[Serial_Apologist]

I do hope R3 will feature Elisabeth Lutyens - the "Horror Queen" - among its forthcoming film music season. Here's a little taster to be going on with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRjqZGiulhw

The sharp-eyed will spot Charles Hawtry (shurely shome mishtake - ed)

In the radio portrait "If You're a Composer, then Bloody Well Compose", Anthony Payne recalled her telling him about composing for a film which had the following stage direction to be set to music: "Tart's legs - 2.5 seconds", and Liz asking him, "What on earth am I supposed to do with that?!"