Serious Music - Definition

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Richard Barrett
    Guest
    • Jan 2016
    • 6259

    #16
    Originally posted by doversoul1 View Post
    a non serious classical piece: any Vivaldi’s violin concerto
    Personally I take Vivaldi's music very seriously indeed and I could bore you all to sleep by explaining why. As I say, it's in the ear of the listener, not stamped into the music. So I agree fully with MrGG that "seriousness" isn't worth taking seriously as a term for describing music.

    Comment

    • doversoul1
      Ex Member
      • Dec 2010
      • 7132

      #17
      Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post
      Personally I take Vivaldi's music very seriously indeed and I could bore you all to sleep by explaining why. As I say, it's in the ear of the listener, not stamped into the music. So I agree fully with MrGG that "seriousness" isn't worth taking seriously as a term for describing music.
      I should have added or/and

      And I agree with you and Mr GG that talking about serious music is not worth taking seriously unless the seriousness to be discussed is precisely defined.

      Comment

      • french frank
        Administrator/Moderator
        • Feb 2007
        • 30253

        #18
        Originally posted by oddoneout View Post
        Reminds me of a discussion(which got a bit heated)I heard decades ago about an idea someone put forward to classify music(of a certain kind, this was R3 after all!) as 1st class and 2nd class, and within those categories, 1st or 2nd rate.
        I think that was a debate started on the BBC messageboard by Mr Sydney Grew, late of this parish, was not it?

        Originally posted by oddoneout View Post
        I tend to agree with the view that 'serious music' is used as an alternative to 'classical music' in some cases - and not always in a positive way. There can be overtones of superiority and judgement-making in its usage.
        Well, let's face it, audiences for classical music are often accused of/censured for being 'po-faced', 'serious' and looking as if they're not enjoying themselves, as if music should make you smile, clap your hands, snap your fingers, get up and dance …
        It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

        Comment

        • MrGongGong
          Full Member
          • Nov 2010
          • 18357

          #19
          Originally posted by french frank View Post
          In that case, replace the word 'definition' with the word 'observation' in my original post and the rest stands. Your 'observation' is an opinion, a statement of 'what you think'. It suggests that either you don't think that music can be serious or that you think all music is serious by virtue of being music.
          I think that music can be serious
          I think that cheese can be serious
          I don't think that what I think has any bearing on what others think
          I don't think that what I think is what others should think
          I think that those who use the word "serious" to talk about music are often talking bollocks and trying to justify their own sense of superiority
          I think that music can be "as serious as your life"
          I think that many people take themselves too "seriously" when their time would be better spent taking music "seriously" (which doesn't mean that music is "serious")
          and
          I don't really give a toss about whether others agree or not

          Comment

          • doversoul1
            Ex Member
            • Dec 2010
            • 7132

            #20
            What’s an antonym / antonyms of serious when used with music?

            Comment

            • Padraig
              Full Member
              • Feb 2013
              • 4231

              #21
              To change the focus - I'm thinking along lines of the concept of 'Voice', where an artist, in this case a composer, tries to find the way in which he wishes to express herself, given the times in which they exist. When one speaks in that voice, which must be true to oneself, one is being serious. Alternatively, they can degrade their talent by successfully writing stuff in which they don't believe but will succeed in some arena.

              Comment

              • french frank
                Administrator/Moderator
                • Feb 2007
                • 30253

                #22
                Originally posted by doversoul1 View Post
                What’s an antonym / antonyms of serious when used with music?
                As Richard said, in Germany there's 'entertainment music'.
                It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

                Comment

                • Richard Barrett
                  Guest
                  • Jan 2016
                  • 6259

                  #23
                  Originally posted by Padraig View Post
                  where an artist, in this case a composer, tries to find the way in which he wishes to express herself, given the times in which they exist. When one speaks in that voice, which must be true to oneself, one is being serious. Alternatively, they can degrade their talent by successfully writing stuff in which they don't believe but will succeed in some arena.
                  It doesn't really work like that.

                  Comment

                  • doversoul1
                    Ex Member
                    • Dec 2010
                    • 7132

                    #24
                    Originally posted by Padraig View Post
                    Alternatively, they can degrade their talent by successfully writing stuff in which they don't believe but will succeed in some arena.
                    Some people say that was what Handel did when he moved on to writing oratorios for his London audience.

                    ff
                    As Richard said, in Germany there's 'entertainment music'.
                    That isn’t a linguistic antonym, is it? Or is it?
                    Last edited by doversoul1; 02-09-16, 22:33.

                    Comment

                    • NatBalance
                      Full Member
                      • Oct 2015
                      • 257

                      #25
                      Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
                      It's bollocks
                      'serious music' is simply a name that some people like to use to try and demonstrate that what they like is somehow more significant than what others like.
                      Good grief, I reckon I might actually agree with you Gongers. Am I alright? (Feels brow for temperature)

                      Thank you Visualnickmos for your confidence that I am not making an idiot of myself. Let's see if I can keep it up.

                      Originally posted by french frank View Post
                      I don't particularly defend the term which seems to have no very useful meaning, though I personally would think of it as being any piece of music/work which 'people' find interesting, which engages their full attention, which they would happily listen to attentively as a primary activity, and would still be inclined to do so however many times they'd heard it. It's not a kind of music or genre. It won't be 'here today, gone tomorrow' music and it doesn't have a specific audience. Is that useful? I suspect not.
                      Well, I don't think any piece could withstand an endless amount of hearings but I think you meant a reasonable amount and for it to still keep its charm over the decades. Where does comedy music fit? I think The Streak by Ray Stevens would fit that description for me. The Monster Mash by Bobby Picket with that opening line "I was working in the lab late one night, when my eyes beheld an erie sight" and the way he sings/says it is brilliant every time. A seriously good piece.

                      Originally posted by Daniel View Post
                      Although I love Rach's 2nd symphony, I don't think of it as great symphony, it's somewhat lumpen and it doesn't seem to 'do' very much (apart from be lovely, though its loveliness may be more important to me than many examples of great music). There aren't any real surprises, no aerating of the form, no subtle prisms in harmony/metre etc, so I understand why it might not be included in a prog about the symphony. But I don't think it's because it has a surfeit of 'nice tunes', as both Mahler and Bruckner for example are full of them, yet both would surely fall into anybody's definition of 'serious' music.
                      These are the kind of analysis of pieces I find very difficult to understand. I don't know what "it doesn't seem to 'do' very much" means. I am a fan of minimalist music and a big fan of Steve Reich's Music for 18 Musicians and I think it's safe to say that Racher's symphony 'does a lot more' than that. For me, that kind of analysis does not really get to the heart of the matter. I agree they are avenues to explore when trying to analyse a piece of music, but if the piece is not original, there is no aerating of the form and so on, I don't see that they can be sited as reasons to affect the piece's value. There's more to it than that.

                      I wonder if a programme about The Piano Concerto would include Rachmaninov's 2nd in that category

                      I remember a fairly local concert including Racher's 2nd symphony having to be given an extra night because so many people wanted to go. The point about it is that those melodies are not just nice melodies, they are over poweringly 'nice'. They tug hard (not gently) at the heart strings (for many listeners anyway), the music in effect makes love to you, it teases you with little snippets till you are dieing to hear the full melody given some force … and you are eventually satisfied in the end …. yes I know, just like Tchaikovsky and Wagner did before him …. but that does not take away from the entrancingly powerfull way in which Rachmaninov does it. It's a bit like Chopin and the nocturne. We all know he did not invent the nocturne. You could also say the same about Elvis and Dusty Springfield. They basically sang blues and gospel music. Nothing new there.

                      Interesting that you add in brackets "apart from be lovely, though its loveliness may be more important to me than many examples of great music". That is the key to deciding a piece of music's 'greatness' I think. Analysing why certain pieces of music's loveliness (or other emotional attribute) can sometimes be so powerfull? If we could discover that, then such qualities as originality, subtle prisms in harmony/metre would then be put into their proper perspective as really a small part of the equation.

                      Crumbs, that was a seriously long post.
                      Last edited by NatBalance; 03-09-16, 05:59.

                      Comment

                      • MrGongGong
                        Full Member
                        • Nov 2010
                        • 18357

                        #26
                        Originally posted by NatBalance View Post
                        Good grief, I reckon I might actually agree with you Gongers. Am I alright? (Feels brow for temperature)
                        You are fine

                        (recapitulation?)

                        "Serious" music is performed by teenagers in bands.

                        Comment

                        • Pianorak
                          Full Member
                          • Nov 2010
                          • 3127

                          #27
                          Originally posted by doversoul1 View Post
                          What’s an antonym / antonyms of serious when used with music?
                          Easy Listening?
                          My life, each morning when I dress, is four and twenty hours less. (J Richardson)

                          Comment

                          • french frank
                            Administrator/Moderator
                            • Feb 2007
                            • 30253

                            #28
                            Originally posted by NatBalance View Post
                            Well, I don't think any piece could withstand an endless amount of hearings but I think you meant a reasonable amount and for it to still keep its charm over the decades.
                            I think music has to have more than "charm". Not 'endless' (as in playing a new record over and over again on the day you buy it), but life-long and reasonably regularly.

                            Originally posted by NatBalance View Post
                            Where does comedy music fit? I think The Streak by Ray Stevens would fit that description for me. The Monster Mash by Bobby Picket with that opening line "I was working in the lab late one night, when my eyes beheld an erie sight" and the way he sings/says it is brilliant every time. A seriously good piece.
                            These may well be 'seriously good' pieces. The problem with including 'songs' is that people end up only talking about the words, not the music. Does it have a 'serious message'? So on what basis do you assess work that doesn't have words? How can it also be 'seriously good'.

                            I'm afraid I've conceded enough to Gongers' flip one-liners: i.e. I don't think describing music as 'serious' is particularly useful. But it can in given contexts have meaning, moreso than people writing off 'classical music' as music for old people or 'elitist snobs'.

                            Complex is a word that's sometimes used as an alternative (not a synonym) - perhaps 'sustained complexity'.
                            Last edited by french frank; 03-09-16, 08:29. Reason: Unable to spell 'and'
                            It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

                            Comment

                            • greenilex
                              Full Member
                              • Nov 2010
                              • 1626

                              #29
                              Couple of ideas: is the word "frivolous" of any use?

                              And what about concerts in China, say, where the audience talks and does its makeup throughout? My mother would have forty fits, she thinks that if something is worth listening to it deserves one's full attention...

                              Comment

                              • CallMePaul
                                Full Member
                                • Jan 2014
                                • 789

                                #30
                                Originally posted by greenilex View Post
                                And what about concerts in China, say, where the audience talks and does its makeup throughout?
                                There was a time when this was common in Europe too!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X