COTW - Film muzac

[Herrmannesque]

Well, let me quote from the report of Lord (Chris) Smith's independent committee, submitted to the BBC Trust in 2010:

"For Radio 3, our main concern is that the service should retain its “quality” positioning and its distinctiveness from Classic FM. If Radio 3 were to broaden its appeal (for example, through more accessible programming - supported by promotional campaigns), this could have a detrimental impact on Classic FM’s audience – though listeners might equally be drawn from other BBC services, such as Radio 2 and Radio 4. In order to ensure the retention of Radio 3’s distinctiveness, there may be scope to tighten the service’s remit ..."

[The bold is mine.]Following this report to the Trust, the Trust agreed that Radio 3 should ignore this concern and do the exact opposite: seek to broaden its appeal with more accessible programming. RadioCentre (the commercial radio trade group) particularly mentioned the introduction of film music as a populist device designed to imitate CFM's output - but a CotW on JW's film music is just the tip of a very large iceberg - and that's what makes people angry (those who are, that is).

Actually, there is a bit of JW's harp concerto on YouTube and it is much more in the style of 20/21st c. 'classical music'. The film music is comfy and populist. So why didn't they do a CotW of JW's concert music?

And we should listen to Lord Smith, because ....... ?

I wondered when Classic FM was going to come into it. Who said R3 should become like Classic FM?

Let me repeat (because you never seem to ever address this question or try to understand where I'm coming from): Film music is part of the Classical tradition and R3 will continue to include it whether you like it or not. And wherever it does I have every confidence it is strong enough to introduce it with its customary integrity and distinctiveness.

[Herrmannesque]

I was going to continue with the previous post but felt I had to stop since I was feeling so angry. I still feel that. But more than that I feel rather sad. Sad that there are so many narrow-minded people who seem to almost perversely and willfully ignore what one tries to say.

For a couple of years I used to follow the old R3 message boards with great enthusiasm. I took part in many discussions and, yes, had some spats and arguments along the way. But I always felt we were all basically on the same side. After this discussion I no longer feel that. Frankly, I'm done beating my head against a brick wall - life is too short for this.

I shall still listen to Radio 3 since it gives me so much pleasure and I think it's a vital part of this nation's culture - long may it continue!

[doversoul1]

Herrmannesque

Let me repeat (because you never seem to ever address this question or try to understand where I'm coming from): Film music is part of the Classical tradition

Flosshilde #174

How do you define 'classical' music?

If you are still here, instead of repeating yourself, how about responding to this post? We may get somewhere if you do. As Flosshilde asks, it is your definition we would like to hear.

Also, it would be good if you would quote a few posts from this thread in which someone is actually insisting that film music should not be played on Radio3.

[french frank]

And we should listen to Lord Smith, because ....... ?

As an ex-Culture Secretary he was appointed to chair an independent committee to look at the BBC's cultural obligations regarding radio? Though, if you don't like the conclusions, you are free to ignore them.

I wondered when Classic FM was going to come into it. Who said R3 should become like Classic FM?

The point is not how closely R3 does or does not resemble CFM, but whether in having the same remit of introducing a broad audience to accessible classical music it gives sufficient choice to listeners. Never mind appealing to CFM, R2 or R4 listeners, think of it in terms of catering for the distinctive requirements a R3 audience.

Let me repeat (because you never seem to ever address this question or try to understand where I'm coming from): Film music is part of the Classical tradition

I understand very well that it your opinion. To me film music is, in general (though I hesitate to generalise and attract criticism for it), a form of contemporary orchestral music. It has kept the musical aims of the past, rather than following the trends of the art music of the century, to suit the age, function and tastes of the millions who go to these films. But it has not, to my ear, a sound that resembles contemporary classical music.

and R3 will continue to include it whether you like it or not.

Game, set and match to you then. And no need to be angry - it's just a discussion. What we say here doesn't matter to anyone.

And wherever it does I have every confidence it is strong enough to introduce it with its customary integrity and distinctiveness.

As it does with so many of its new features designed to attract the listeners from other stations.

[Podfather]

Basically there is not enough of JW's concert works and concertos recorded. There is no recording of his Symphony or the Harp concerto The film scores are by far his most important contributions to celebrate his 80th birthday

[William McCrum]

Tragic attitude from the original poster, and the tragedy is largely his own, in that he's not exposed himself to a whole genre of serious orchestral works.

There is no composer of the 20th Century, no major composer, who hasn't dabbled with film music. Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Walton, Vaughan-Williams, Bliss, Copland, ... the list is endless, and all of them enjoyed and praised the medium as a vehicle for the SERIOUS composer. Many splendid composers like Miklos Rozsa, Bernard Herrmann, Erich Wolfgang Korngold etc. had double lives writing for both cinema and concert-hall. To cite The 'Warsaw Concerto' is ridiculous, since it was an on-scene diegetic concerto to be played by a concert-pianist on-scene in the film, and is not therefore film-music.

A true film score uses leitmotif, variation, chordal progressions in and out of resolution as the drama requires, orchestrational skill and dama to provide pacing and underline vision, and is a work from start to finish. The great composers wrote scores that stand alone and are often stunning, sophisticated and arresting. Try to listen to Prometheus/Tadlow's new 2CD of Miklos Rozsa's incredibly well researched (much period material) score for 'Quo Vadis?' (1951 film), and the same composer's 'The Red House' again recently re-recorded by the RSNO and on a 2CD set from the Intrada label.

Scores like that have all the staying power of operas, and all the skills of 5 centuries of composition accumulated .... and no plagiarism, let me make clear!

Why should pseuds make such sweeping and unfounded assumptions about that kind of music? If they're good enough for Vaughan-Williams to praise and steep himself in, what possible criteria could you be using except those of your own limitations. There are musicians and there are snobs, and guess which of the two are ruining concert music for the future?

[french frank]

I think it was more about the composer than the genre. As the previous poster said: "Basically there is not enough of JW's concert works and concertos recorded."

The question was posed as to why 'film music' was considered to be a genre on its own, when 'opera music' and 'ballet music' are part and parcel of the classical umbrella.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

There is no composer of the 20th Century, no major composer, who hasn't dabbled with film music.

Webern? Lutoslawski? Messiaen? Tippett? Bartok?