Categorisation of Music

[RichardB]

Before reading the book you recommend I would say that pop music originated from folk music.

Of course, all music actually originated from what could be called folk music.

You see how easy it is to get tied in knots when trying to define musical "genres". Nobody agrees about where the boundaries between them should be. Any system of definition is going to throw up very many exceptions and contradictions. My take on the situation is to ask why people think they need such boundaries at all, especially now that recorded music no longer needs to be packaged into physical objects. So I disagree that "what we need" is more rigorous definitions. What might be more desirable, in terms of opening minds and imaginations, is not to define musical "genres" in the first place. Can anyone think of a reason why they're needed?

[Serial_Apologist]

Of course, all music actually originated from what could be called folk music.

You see how easy it is to get tied in knots when trying to define musical "genres". Nobody agrees about where the boundaries between them should be. Any system of definition is going to throw up very many exceptions and contradictions. My take on the situation is to ask why people think they need such boundaries at all, especially now that recorded music no longer needs to be packaged into physical objects. So I disagree that "what we need" is more rigorous definitions. What might be more desirable, in terms of opening minds and imaginations, is not to define musical "genres" in the first place. Can anyone think of a reason why they're needed?

Well, for convenience? "Music" is too large a subject to be dealt with as just one category for educational purposes. Maybe historical eras are a better way of dividing music up, if we're just looking at Western music as a starting point - and in that examining how generics have become definitional.

[cloughie]

Of course, all music actually originated from what could be called folk music.

You see how easy it is to get tied in knots when trying to define musical "genres". Nobody agrees about where the boundaries between them should be. Any system of definition is going to throw up very many exceptions and contradictions. My take on the situation is to ask why people think they need such boundaries at all, especially now that recorded music no longer needs to be packaged into physical objects. So I disagree that "what we need" is more rigorous definitions. What might be more desirable, in terms of opening minds and imaginations, is not to define musical "genres" in the first place. Can anyone think of a reason why they're needed?

I suppose it came first but my first thought was that folk music and church music were the two main strands from which informal and formal music developed after it was decided that singing was allowed in sacred places.
I sometimes think that genres were only invented so that record shop owners and managers could decide where to locate them on their premises! …and if they don’t fit anywhere else sling them in that derisory section called ‘easy listening’.
But seriously these issues have been dragging on to become off-topic for Breakfast and maybe our hosts could separate them off under a separate heading - maybe The Genre Gap.

[RichardB]

I suppose it came first but my first thought was that folk music and church music were the two main strands from which informal and formal music developed

Music existed before churches did!

[cloughie]

Music existed before churches did!

I think I said that if you read on - I did say it was my first thought and actually pointed out that it only developed in churches after it was allowed their!
Folk music has existed as long as human vocal chords have been used if you would like me to be over-pedantic.

[RichardB]

Well, for convenience? "Music" is too large a subject to be dealt with as just one category for educational purposes.

Well, I don't teach music according to genres or historical periods - of course it's often necessary to refer to specific musics but I try to ensure that these are drawn from as many stylistic tendencies, historical periods and world cultures as possible. Surely the idea of "dividing music up" is actually a relatively recent one in historical terms, and I would like to think it will eventually become once more outmoded, following the way in which (for example) "dividing people up" according to strict definitions of attributes like gender and sexuality is beginning to dissolve.

[Bryn]

Well, I don't teach music according to genres or historical periods - of course it's often necessary to refer to specific musics but I try to ensure that these are drawn from as many stylistic tendencies, historical periods and world cultures as possible. Surely the idea of "dividing music up" is actually a relatively recent one in historical terms, and I would like to think it will eventually become once more outmoded, following the way in which (for example) "dividing people up" according to strict definitions of attributes like gender and sexuality is beginning to dissolve.

I think Louis Armstrong's division of music into two categories was fair enough.

[french frank]

I think Louis Armstrong's division of music into two categories was fair enough.

In theory, though I doubt there would be universal (or substantial) agreement as to which goes into which category

[cloughie]

I think Louis Armstrong's division of music into two categories was fair enough.

Which was?

[french frank]

Which was?

Good or Bad.

[RichardB]

In theory, though I doubt there would be universal (or substantial) agreement as to which goes into which category

But there doesn't need to be! (I always attribute that quotation to Ellington rather than Armstrong but maybe they both said it...)

Cloughie, sorry I misunderstood you. I certainly agree that "genres" as we know them were invented for the convenience of people making money out of musicians' work, rather than for those musicians or their listeners.

[french frank]

But there doesn't need to be!

I imagine I'm not fully understanding you

If you choose the two categories 'jazz' and 'classical' there would be 'substantial ' agreement as to which belonged to which of two categories based on pre-existing criteria. What are the generally agreed criteria for 'good music' and 'bad music'? And why should they be the only categories that matter, as the quote implies? Matter to whom? Matter for what purpose? Why have categories at all?

[Bryn]

I was thinking probably someone at about the [oops, we have a definite bug here - it doesn't like the pound sterling sign - or - has the messageboard been hacked already by the bbc? :)]

I was going to say "I was thinking probably someone at about the two hundred and twenty thousand pounds sterling mark per annum ..."

Well, they are a bit short on the £s.

[french frank]

Well, they are a bit short on the £s.

Blimey, Bryn. How did you rake up that post?

[Bryn]

Blimey, Bryn. How did you rake up that post?

I'm using Windose 10. Perhaps the lack of GBP (£) is a Mac thing, or maybe it's just your computer that has the problem. You are, I hope, currently using the UK keyboard layout?