Are questions on pop music legit. for University Challenge?

[makropulos]

Are they legit? Probably; but I still hate it when pop/rock comes up as the Music round on UC.

[Beef Oven!]

Are they legit? Probably; but I still hate it when pop/rock comes up as the Music round on UC.

I don’t know if they are legit, but they are certainly welcome by me. Because of this type of question, I’m averaging three correct answers per episode.

[Richard Barrett]

these are subjects based on some lasting body of mankind's knowledge. The said body may evolve, but is surely not based on ephemera as we would argue fashions in pop-music are

Science "evolves" at least as quickly as popular music, but actually non-popular music often evolves very rapidly too, as obviously do the visual arts, historical knowledge and so on. I think the idea that there's a hard and fast dividing line between a "lasting body of mankind's knowledge" on the one hand and "ephemera" on the other is mistaken, as is seeing popular music only in terms of fashion. People still listen to the music made by Bob Dylan, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones etc. half a century ago, not very long in the cosmic scheme of things but I don't think there's any sign of their sinking into oblivion now or in the future.

[ahinton]

I personally would say that individual and inventive use of language, fully-formed characterisation, ingenious plotting are pointers towards a distinction between "Literature" and "Fiction" - popular fiction and "literary fiction" can be one and the same thing, of course (Dickens? Shakespeare?). If you like, I can give a lengthy appraisal of Pratchett's work demonstrating that he is one of the finest wordsmiths and story-tellers in the English language, and pointing out the three-dimensional characterisation - a far finer writer than many of the established, "serious" novelists.

Please do!

[Richard Tarleton]

If a team quiz it's worth picking the members with care in order to provide for a wide range of subjects.

There's frequently a bird question, usually to do with genus or nomenclature. I was left reeling by one team suggesting that a yellowhammer was a member of the warbler tribe, the other that it was a type of thrush

[Ferretfancy]

History? But it begs the question: how do you define 'literature' as distinct from 'fiction'? Or what is meant by 'literary fiction' as distinct from 'popular fiction'?

Modern literary fiction, possibly from Virginia Woolf onwards, consists of recommended books by a small coterie of critics. It is easily recognised by the fact that by chapter three you begin to wonder why you are reading it.

I'm a bit grumpy this morning.

[ardcarp]

People still listen to the music made by Bob Dylan, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones etc. half a century ago, not very long in the cosmic scheme of things but I don't think there's any sign of their sinking into oblivion now or in the future.

Maybe such people/groups will be the history of late 20thC music, because 'art-music' of that era is known to a vanishingly small...and diminishing....elite.
There, Gongers, I've thrown you another bun.

[teamsaint]

History? But it begs the question: how do you define 'literature' as distinct from 'fiction'? Or what is meant by 'literary fiction' as distinct from 'popular fiction'?

If you can find it in Blackwells it is probably Literary Fiction,if you can find it in WHS , it is popular fiction,or a miracle.

[Richard Barrett]

Maybe such people/groups will be the history of late 20thC music, because 'art-music' of that era is known to a vanishingly small...and diminishing....elite.

Maybe in the English-speaking world the situation could at present be seen like that, yes. What is seen as ephemeral and what is seen as elitist can change through the course of time and in different places. It's clear (including from University Challenge from what you say; I haven't watched it in this century) that a knowledge of "classical" music is currently not part of the accepted intellectual equipment of supposedly educated people in the UK. Present trends in the education system seem calculated to exacerbate this situation. Before you make fun of MrGG's attitudes, you might consider that it's only through the efforts of people like him that there's still hope for at least some people coming through that system with a lively appreciation of what music in all its shapes and forms has to offer.

[Conchis]

I ask the question: at what point does 'popular art' become 'art'?

The Beatles and Dylan have been appreciated now for nearly as long as, say, the plays of Harold Pinter. I think they are legitimate subjects for questions - but I'd draw the line at soaps, the noxious Harry Potter franchise and virtually all pop music recorded in the last 37 years.

[french frank]

It's clear (including from University Challenge from what you say; I haven't watched it in this century) that a knowledge of "classical" music is currently not part of the accepted intellectual equipment of supposedly educated people in the UK.

Elegantly put.

I do wonder, though whether popular music, esp British, went through a golden age where quality music was being produced; so those who were 'of an age' then (now in their 50s?) continue in their admiration. Being a generation earlier I can't imagine why anyone would have more than a purely nostalgic reason to remember what was largely 'pop music' in their day: Buddy Holly and the Crickets? the Everly Brothers? Guy Mitchell? Tommy Steele? The Four Seasons? Adam Faith? And a host of Marty Wildes, Dickie Prides, Billy Furies … By the time I reached my early twenties I had no further interest in the new 'kids' stuff'; and no interest in what I had once listened to. The Bowies et al just passed me by.

[Bryn]

There's frequently a bird question, usually to do with genus or nomenclature. I was left reeling by one team suggesting that a yellowhammer was a member of the warbler tribe, the other that it was a type of thrush

With all due respect to the Monty Python team, "silly bunts".

[MrGongGong]

I ask the question: at what point does 'popular art' become 'art'?

The Beatles and Dylan have been appreciated now for nearly as long as, say, the plays of Harold Pinter. I think they are legitimate subjects for questions - but I'd draw the line at soaps, the noxious Harry Potter franchise and virtually all pop music recorded in the last 37 years.

WHY ?
These are all manifestations of culture and one would imagine suitable subjects for questions about culture
Desperately trying to cling on to the idea of 'popular' vs 'high' art is daft IMV for many reasons.

[Richard Barrett]

Elegantly put.

I do wonder, though whether popular music, esp British, went through a golden age where quality music was being produced; so those who were 'of an age' then (now in their 50s?) continue in their admiration. Being a generation earlier I can't imagine why anyone would have more than a purely nostalgic reason to remember what was largely 'pop music' in their day: Buddy Holly and the Crickets? the Everly Brothers? Guy Mitchell? Tommy Steele? The Four Seasons? Adam Faith? And a host of Marty Wildes, Dickie Prides, Billy Furies … By the time I reached my early twenties I had no further interest in the new 'kids' stuff'; and no interest in what I had once listened to. The Bowies et al just passed me by.

I think there are indeed many people who'd accord "classic" status to Buddy Holly or the Everly Brothers, not to mention Elvis Presley, although it's true that popular music underwent a massive upheaval in the early 1960s largely through a "new wave" of performing artists like the Beatles who also composed their own material. The Beatles were slightly before my time but I still listen to them now, along with pop music from most of the intervening years. My daughter, who's 14, is a much more committed Beatles fan than I am but has also convinced me that pop music in 2017 isn't the lost cause I might otherwise think it was, even if the gulf between the interesting music and the commercially successful music is mostly far wider than it was in the 1960s and 70s.

[french frank]

WHY ?
These are all manifestations of culture and one would imagine suitable subjects for questions about culture
Desperately trying to cling on to the idea of 'popular' vs 'high' art is daft IMV for many reasons.

Ignoring the word 'desperately' - which makes its own assumption - once you turn this into merely a question of 'culture', why no questions about 'music'? When all music is 'just music' the less 'popular' starts to disappear - as we see daily in BBC coverage.