"Classical Music" and other names for it

[MrGongGong]

Someone sent me this

https://medium.com/cuepoint/classical-music-needs-a-new-name-2e07b084f4a3#.chf7vcrxj

some interesting thoughts IMV

[Dave2002]

Someone sent me this

https://medium.com/cuepoint/classical-music-needs-a-new-name-2e07b084f4a3#.chf7vcrxj

some interesting thoughts IMV

Definitely worth reading.

What then?

[Bryn]

Someone sent me this

https://medium.com/cuepoint/classical-music-needs-a-new-name-2e07b084f4a3#.chf7vcrxj

some interesting thoughts IMV

Trouble is, for me, AMM improvisations fall within the broad category of 'classical music', and "composed music" implies notation.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Trouble is, for me, AMM improvisations fall within the broad category of 'classical music', and "composed music" implies notation.

"Composed in real time"?

The other failing (for me) of the writer's preferred expression is summed up in his penultimate paragraph - and in his attempts to ignore this problem he really fudges the issue. It's an important issue, I think, and it's great that he's put it in the public domain - but I don't think he's produced a solution that I would be prepared to use.

[ahinton]

Someone sent me this

https://medium.com/cuepoint/classical-music-needs-a-new-name-2e07b084f4a3#.chf7vcrxj

some interesting thoughts IMV

Interesting thoughts indeed but I'm not sure that what I think most if not all of us would agree is a misleading term with a long-term image problem has actually been solved by coining "Composed Music" to replace it.

"Classical Music" is what should be understood (if at all) as having been produced from somewhere in the first half of the 18th century until the death of Haydn or thereabouts but, as we know, it's been misppropriated by some to cover far more than that, to the extent that it might be seen as embracing Frescobaldi and Ferneyhough, Buxtehude and Bussotti, Dowland and Dillon, Carver and Carter which, of course, is the height of absurdity.

"Art Music" has been put forward as a substitue on occasion and, whilst I believe it to be a better one, it still falls far short of fulfilling the need for a viable and credible descriptor and can risk carrying with it a possible whiff of snobbery. "Composed Music" needs surely to be recognisable and recognised as such by the listener, but where does that leave, for example, an improvised fugue (particularly as the listener might not necessarily know when listening that it is improvised)?

As "Composed Music" and "Notated Music" are not and cannot realistically be treated as synonymous, let alone identical, neither of these terms will really do either. Moreover, who's to say to what extent music of any kind is "notated" anyway? In Bach's day, continuo parts were notated in shorthand and the "fakebook" approach hardly ended there. A casual glance at Schönberg scores shows that what were at one time fastidiously detailed notational procedures gave way to something more flexible. Sorabji's scores for the most part are very thin on performance directions in the hope that performers studying them would work some of that out for themselves. It is the sheer vastness of variations of approach here that are the reasons why neither "Composed Music" and "Notated Music" will fit the bill as terms to replace "Classical Music". But what should be used instead? Frankly, I am not sure.

An interesting subject, this, though and thank you for raising it and posting the link.

[ahinton]

"Composed in real time"?

The other failing (for me) of the writer's preferred expression is summed up in his penultimate paragraph - and in his attempts to ignore this problem he really fudges the issue. It's an important issue, I think, and it's great that he's put it in the public domain - but I don't think he's produced a solution that I would be prepared to use.

Indeed; another area in which the argument over the implication of notation falls down is that the act of composition and that of notating what's been/being composed are also not synonymous, let alone identical; ignoring that means that that there's scant recognition of the fact that the arrival of idas and some of the working out of those ideas and the problem solving processes and the rest are by no means exculsively dependent upon notating, even when the final score is indeed fully notated.

[Richard Barrett]

Trouble is, for me, AMM improvisations fall within the broad category of 'classical music', and "composed music" implies notation.

One big mistake this author makes IMO is that "composed music" implies notation. The definition as "works by a singular mind, fixed and promulgated in written form" excludes AMM but also shuts out electronic music composed directly on tape or computer, or, with its "singular mind", any music that involves collaboration in its creation (most operas for example, where the composition of the music is crucially shaped by the composition of the text)...

Then you have "[f]ormal pieces that allow for substantial improvisation or randomness can still fit in the Composed Music as long as it’s clearly of the composer’s design. If you must, you can call those hybrids Semi-Composed Music", and the fudging begins in earnest, together with the implication that "composing" according to this author's definition somehow elevates a music above those that are "semi-" or "non-composed".

It all seems to be based on the desirability of composers being rock stars. Personally I wouldn't wish to be a rock star. Yesterday evening I watched the 2015 documentary film about Amy Winehouse and contemplated what a blessing it is to go around unknown and unrecognised 99% of the time.

I don't like the term "classical music" and I don't use it, and I don't particularly feel the need to replace it with something else.

[ahinton]

One big mistake this author makes IMO is that "composed music" implies notation. The definition as "works by a singular mind, fixed and promulgated in written form" excludes AMM but also shuts out electronic music composed directly on tape or computer, or, with its "singular mind", any music that involves collaboration in its creation (most operas for example, where the composition of the music is crucially shaped by the composition of the text)...

Then you have "[f]ormal pieces that allow for substantial improvisation or randomness can still fit in the Composed Music as long as it’s clearly of the composer’s design. If you must, you can call those hybrids Semi-Composed Music", and the fudging begins in earnest, together with the implication that "composing" according to this author's definition somehow elevates a music above those that are "semi-" or "non-composed".

It all seems to be based on the desirability of composers being rock stars. Personally I wouldn't wish to be a rock star. Yesterday evening I watched the 2015 documentary film about Amy Winehouse and contemplated what a blessing it is to go around unknown and unrecognised 99% of the time.

I don't like the term "classical music" and I don't use it, and I don't particularly feel the need to replace it with something else.

Agreed in all particulars - except that 99% must surely be a gross exaggeration?(!). It's a confused and inadequate piece of writing and clearly we agree on the notational aspect of where it falls down (I've already written about that above). The author, aware of the inappropriateness of the term "Classical Music", seems to perceive some necessity for him to find a suitable alternative and he appears to have written as he has without first realising that there almost certainly isn't one.

[french frank]

it's been misppropriated by some to cover far more than that, to the extent that it might be seen as embracing Frescobaldi and Ferneyhough, Buxtehude and Bussotti, Dowland and Dillon, Carver and Carter which, of course, is the height of absurdity.

I can't see that there's anything 'absurd' about it: it's the way language moves on. Nor does it seem at all strange to me that 'classical music' has two separate/overlapping definitions: also not linguistically unusual.

But what does he mean by:

My concept of Composed Music is limited to music that begins with musical notation, conventional or otherwise

?

We have Miloš Karadaglić quoted as saying today that the Beatles are 'as important' as Bach and should be included in the classical repertoire (guess who's just recorded an album of Beatles songs). So that would be non conventional, would it - or does getting someone else to write the music down and arrange it for you still count as 'Composed'?

More of a complication seems to me that 'classical music' has been used, retrospectively, to refer to a sequence of differing styles down the ages; this becomes uneasy when the lines between the notional 'classical music' and varying new styles of contemporary music become gradually blurred. Can 'classical' continue to be used for that continuing sequence? Or has it in some recognisable way become 'too different'? Or is that just a contemporary perception, which each succeeding generation would have recognised? The elephant in the room now seems to be the predominance of commercial popular music.

PS I missed some of the later posts here.

[jean]

We who cherish profound, challenging, complex music...

the author writes.

That means the music that isn't going to be included under our new term isn't any of those things.

We may well believe that, but we mustn't say so.

[ahinton]

I can't see that there's anything 'absurd' about it

But then you write

More of a complication seems to me that 'classical music' has been used, retrospectively, to refer to a sequence of differing styles down the ages; this becomes uneasy when the lines between the notional 'classical music' and varying new styles of contemporary music become gradually blurred. Can 'classical' continue to be used for that continuing sequence? Or has it in some recognisable way become 'too different'? Or is that just a contemporary perception, which each succeeding generation would have recognised?

The point that I was seeking to make when referring to "absurdity" was that the notion of trying to maintain a single generally accepted and acceptable portmanteau term for a range of musical creativity that embraces "Frescobaldi and Ferneyhough, Buxtehude and Bussotti, Dowland and Dillon, Carver and Carter" seems to me to be on a Haydn to plenty o' nuttin'. I think that the only possible conclusion can be that, whilst the term "Classical Music" is hopelessly inadequate, misleading and possibly also divisive, the search for a suitable alternative would be fruitless.

[Serial_Apologist]

"Art music" is criticised as elitist, but there's nothing necessarily exclusionary about elitism.

[Richard Barrett]

We have Miloš Karadaglić quoted as saying today that the Beatles are 'as important' as Bach and should be included in the classical repertoire (guess who's just recorded an album of Beatles songs). So that would be non conventional, would it

No, "non-conventional notation" surely means something like Cardew or Bussotti.

I agree with your implication that usage, rather than individual preferences, is the driver of linguistic change. I can't think of any example of an individual commentator coming up with a new and supposedly watertight formulation which replaces the one in general use. As I said I don't like to use the word "classical" (or "modern" for that matter, to refer to another discussion that's recently taken place here), but I'm not going to waste my time suggesting that everyone should follow my example!

[Serial_Apologist]

I can't see that there's anything 'absurd' about it: it's the way language moves on.

But can anyone on here remember when "classical music" was not used to refer to musics from Perotain to Birtwistle?

[Richard Barrett]

"Art music" is criticised as elitist, but there's nothing necessarily exclusionary about elitism.

Right. It's the idea that "art" is somehow exclusive that's the problem here. I just don't think it is. I never felt it excluded me, for example. There seems to be much liberal hand-wringing about it these days, but remember that back in the day Soft Machine performed at the Proms, Ravi Shankar at Woodstock, Stockhausen at Expo 1970 etc. etc. and the word "crossover" hadn't been invented!