Light Music

[smittims]

In my view, 'My Music' (a spin-off of Edward J Mason and Tony Shryane's 'My Word') was much superior to 'Face the Music'. I didn't like to spoil the fun of those who were reminiscing about that show on another thread, but it seemed to me to be terribly tired and creaky.

A favourite moment I recall from 'My Music' was when Steve Race said 'now in this round all the questions relate to Peter and the Wolf. I want each of you to identify the character you hear represented . And off they went: 'Oh well, that's Peter; erm.. I think that's Grandfather, that's the duck, 'etc.

'Now Frank, for yours'. After a long pause he said in his inimitable manner : ' I wonder if you people realise I haven't the faintest idea what you're on about.'

[french frank]

The more I hear of 'Light Music' the less (quantitatively), I feel, should be on Radio 3. That is, not excluded but not an essential part of its remit in order to cater for 'the light music enthusiast'.

[vinteuil]

The more I hear of 'Light Music' the less (quantitatively), I feel, should be on Radio 3. That is, not excluded but not an essential part of its remit in order to cater for 'the light music enthusiast'.

... yes, a fortnightly or monthly slot of possibly half an hour / an hour, to represent a niche interest - like 'The Organist Entertains', or 'folk music', or 'British music'

[french frank]

... yes, a weekly or monthly slot of possibly half an hour / an hour, to represent a niche interest - like 'The Organist Entertains', or 'folk music', or 'British music'

Wise words, vinty

To be clear, I've always felt that no genre of music (Broadway, GAS, pop, rock, hiphop, triphop, grime, garage, (acid) house, disco, techno ad infinitum ad nauseam) should be excluded from Radio 3. But only a restricted number of genres should be fundamental to Radio 3's remit: namely 'classical' (premedieval onwards), jazz and world music (the latter, possibly, to be defined). Any kind of music not included in that fundamental remit could/should be subjected to the critical lens of Radio 3 scrutiny in dedicated programmes - not, though, provided for the delight of existing fans of such genres.

How many brain cells does it take to work out that the premise 'Radio 3 should feature music that isn't primarily covered by any of the other BBC radio stations' is an unsustainable nonsense?

[Serial_Apologist]

Wise words, vinty

To be clear, I've always felt that no genre of music (Broadway, GAS, pop, rock, hiphop, triphop, grime, garage, (acid) house, disco, techno ad infinitum ad nauseam) should be excluded from Radio 3. But only a restricted number of genres should be fundamental to Radio 3's remit: namely 'classical' (premedieval onwards), jazz and world music (the latter, possibly, to be defined). Any kind of music not included in that fundamental remit could/should be subjected to the critical lens of Radio 3 scrutiny in dedicated programmes - not, though, provided for the delight of existing fans of such genres.

How many brain cells does it take to work out that the premise 'Radio 3 should feature music that isn't primarily covered by any of the other BBC radio stations' is an unsustainable nonsense?

Exactly. Actually, while we're at it, a definition of World Music (or at any rate an attempt at one) could be the basis for an interesting discussion on the forum, although admittedly I would feel unqualified to lead it off with the adequacy it deserves - particularly as I rarely post on the board designated for its enthusiasts.

[smittims]

I've often thought the term 'World Music 'is a euphemism to avoid talking about race, which seems to be a taboo subject for some. I feel like saying ' well, Gloucestershire is in the 'World' just as much as Mali, so why don't you play some Herbert Howells and Ivor Gurney? '.

[LMcD]

I've often thought the term 'World Music 'is a euphemism to avoid talking about race, which seems to be a taboo subject for some. I feel like saying ' well, Gloucestershire is in the 'World' just as much as Mali, so why don't you play some Herbert Howells and Ivor Gurney? '.

Presumably people who listen to World Music are thought to be broader-minded and more adventurous than those who limit themselves to Country Music.

[Dance Band Spiv]

Presumably people who listen to World Music are thought to be broader-minded and more adventurous than those who limit themselves to Country Music.

I recall a remark by Jimmy Webb, when his song 'The Highwayman' won a Grammy for Country Song of the Year, being pleased but surprised because he didn't know which country they were talking about!

[french frank]

Presumably people who listen to World Music are thought to be broader-minded and more adventurous than those who limit themselves to Country Music.

It's just a convenient label - one might just as well query the labels classical, pop and jazz (there may be people who think of Acker Bilk playing Stranger on the Shore as jazz). It requires an entire thesis to examine how and why these labels are decided and what they mean. If the group who coined the label "World Music" wanted a fluid term which covered everything that they wanted it to cover, and excluded western classical and light orchestral music (including In Gloucestershire, a favourite of mine) that's what it means. It coincided with a growing interest in the music of popular artists from Africa, Asia and South America and a wish to promote it in the West.

[smittims]

Quite so. I've often thought these 'labels' for genres of music were invented by the retail trade to direct customers to what they'd prefer. Many LP sleeves have a small legend 'file under classical' or other category.

[french frank]

Quite so. I've often thought these 'labels' for genres of music were invented by the retail trade to direct customers to what they'd prefer. Many LP sleeves have a small legend 'file under classical' or other category.

And why not? There are people who want to sell things and people who want to buy things. Obviously, people who are selling want to it to be easy for customers to find their product. And vice versa. Definitions attempt, often very unsuccessfully, to establish boundaries. If you define 'light music' I shall know I'm not interested in it. But if I chance to hear Dick's Maggot, I enjoy it - while not thinking it dates from the 17th(?) century just because it's called a maggot.

[smittims]

I think it's because musical categories are imposed on the music afterwards that the boundaries between them are so hard to define. I wonder what category Astor Piazzolla comes in,though. Radio 3 seem very keen on him these days, though it's the most vacuous music I've ever heard. The thought of anyone actually liking it leaves me baffled.

[Master Jacques]

I think it's because musical categories are imposed on the music afterwards that the boundaries between them are so hard to define. I wonder what category Astor Piazzolla comes in,though. Radio 3 seem very keen on him these days, though it's the most vacuous music I've ever heard. The thought of anyone actually liking it leaves me baffled.

None of these taxonomies ('genres') mean anything. They cannot be defined, because genres don't exist in a good composer's - or good listener's - mind. They are there, as many people have said on this thread, to help arrange the stuff on the (real or virtual) commercial shelves. And the labels shift over time: Stranger on the Shore is labelled 'classical' for the millennial generation, as it features acoustic instruments like violins backing a solo clarinet. Most people take 'classical' as a description of orchestration, not content.

As for this 'classical' thing ... any alleged 'genre' which is forced to spatchcock everything from a Bach solo cello suite to Götterdämmerung is a non-starter, which tells us nothing about the music while providing lethal misinformation.

"Light Music" is of course equally fatuous: anyone patronising such a multi-faceted, miniature gem such as Binge's Elizabethan Serenade by trying to argue it is in some way less "serious" art than a Bruckner symphony is missing the point. It is merely shorter.

(On Piazzolla, we need to judge him on his tango-opera María de Buenos Aires, a poetically complex - and musically beautiful - piece of Brechtian epic theatre, rather than the two or three standards endlessly recycyled by the lazy and cynical producers of Essential Classics).

[gradus]

Some years ago I recall that R3 had a Light Music weekend or some such, possibly a little too much of a good thing but taking up the suggestion above a fortnightly programme would be most welcome as would the return of Edward Seckerson's musical theatre programme, a well-informed source of neglected but first rate vocal music eg Rogers and Hammerstein's Allegro.

[Ein Heldenleben]

None of these taxonomies ('genres') mean anything. They cannot be defined, because genres don't exist in a good composer's - or good listener's - mind. They are there, as many people have said on this thread, to help arrange the stuff on the (real or virtual) commercial shelves. And the labels shift over time: Stranger on the Shore is labelled 'classical' for the millennial generation, as it features acoustic instruments like violins backing a solo clarinet. Most people take 'classical' as a description of orchestration, not content.

As for this 'classical' thing ... any alleged 'genre' which is forced to spatchcock everything from a Bach solo cello suite to Götterdämmerung is a non-starter, which tells us nothing about the music while providing lethal misinformation.

"Light Music" is of course equally fatuous: anyone patronising such a multi-faceted, miniature gem such as Binge's Elizabethan Serenade by trying to argue it is in some way less "serious" art than a Bruckner symphony is missing the point. It is merely shorter.

(On Piazzolla, we need to judge him on his tango-opera María de Buenos Aires, a poetically complex - and musically beautiful - piece of Brechtian epic theatre, rather than the two or three standards endlessly recycyled by the lazy and cynical producers of Essential Classics).

I guess to quote the disgraced Brains Trust philosopher CEM Joad “It all depends what you mean by ‘serious’ “ Binge’s serenade is massively less complex , harmonically adventurous , tonally ambitious than the great Bruckner Symphionies . It doesn’t explore the possibilities of contemporary or indeed future music as AB did. It contains no large scale tonal structures nor develops or explores the potentialities of the music in the way that “serious “ symphonic art does. To be honest even his tune isn’t as good as some of Bruckner’s. It’s a nice enough piece but comparing it to Bruckner is a waste of time and tells us little about either . It’s like comparing Banksy to Michelangelo.
On your more general point the distinction between both genres is arbitrary l the Blue Danibe is both light music and a classical masterpiece.