
Classical Enemy #1

Classical music, our beloved, beleaguered art form, has plenty of negative forces to contend with in America. Let's see, there's its aging and declining audience, its struggling, strife-plagued orchestras, its tiny and decreasing share of recorded music sales, its diminishing presence on the airwaves, and its general position as a genre that's seen better days, is coasting on past glories and works by dead people, and basically isn't part of the overall cultural conversation. Still and all, I remain enthusiastic about its current artistic state, and optimistic that after a probably rather nasty shaking out, classical music will find an stable and sustainable, if never again dominant, place at the American arts table.
But things have got to change before that happens. What things? It depends whom you ask. Some will say to get classical music back in the schools. Others (along with some of the same people) will push for more funding, whether private or public. Outreach and marketing could certainly be improved, new venues and concert formats can be explored, and new repertoires investigated. Whether any or all of these could actually do the trick, they're at least serious responses to a serious problem.
Or, you can try to change the things that bug Philadelphia Inquirer music critic Peter Dobrin, as stated the end of his otherwise thoughtful analytical musing about how orchestras got into their current mess. What does the present spate of orchestral strikes, lock-outs and all-around bad news say to Mr. Dobrin? This:
Great things happen when a broad spectrum works toward a common interest, but we've become a nation of small-minded individualists. This sort of relevance may be cold comfort, but for once, the nation can look to the symphony orchestra as the perfect emblem of our time.
Ahah! It's not orchestras that have gone off-course. It's our small-minded individualist nation. I guess Mr. Dobrin is blind to the counterexamples to his bitter assessment of his fellow Americans that I see every day. Was the outpouring of help and concern for victims of last year's local natural disasters that of a "nation of small-minded individualists?" How about, for that matter, the typical New England Public Radio fund drive? Besides, I wonder how Mr. Dobrin expects his readers to react to his dire conclusion. Perhaps, if I may enage in a little snark, he expects them to say "thank you, sir, for pointing out our national shortcomings. I now plan to atone by subscribing to an institution which I had previously ignored, and by becoming a big generous fan of an art form for which I hadn't up until now shown any interest."
Or less snarkily, some percentage of the tiny minority of Philadelphia classical fans who are his readers will give him an "amen!" And the vast majority of Philadelphians who don't read him will go on with the rest of their lives, unmoved and unchanged by Dobrin's stern assessment of them. In other words, he would have changed no minds, fixed no problems, and not made a bit of difference.
But put enough Peter Dobrins together, give them enough airtime and column space, let them defend their artform this way to their heart's content, and they may actually make a difference. They'll take a bad situation, and make it worse. They'll reinforce every negative, usually untrue stereotype about classical music and its supporters: disdainful, out-of-touch, entitled, snobbish. They'll point their fingers at everyone but themselves and their fellow true believers. They'll blame "them" (meaning, in part, us). But will they ever look in a mirror?
So, my own perhaps enlightening, perhaps unhelpful advice: Be on the lookout for Classical Enemy #1. His crime? Kidnapping classical music, isolating it from the outside world, threatening to hold it hostage until the world complies with his preposterous demands, then eventually loving it to death — the fate which may indeed befall classical music if he and his co-conspirators get their way.
(Photo: James Cagney as Tom Powers in the 1931 William Wellman film The Public Enemy )













Comments
interesting ideas. and I used
interesting ideas.
and I used to think that classical enemy #1 was the solo violin, which has serious intonation problems when played fast, even by the best of players.
but that's not the main issue.
I think there is some sort of bias that classical professionals (conductors, writers) have that causes some of them to miss what is needed to grow the classical "audience".
I got to think about this a little more.
anonumass
Isn't that the way it
Isn't that the way it frequently is, that those on the inside, and most invested in the way things are, are among the least able to see how things look, or could look, from the outside?
yes part 5
so K-Rho and anyone else:
another guess by me and perhaps at this point I'm overdoing it, but here's my personal subjective idea of what to fill an evening with in concert.
I'd say start with an aim of say 80 to 90 minutes of music, too long?
But certainly 10 or so pieces.
mix fast and slower.
Adagio by Barber
Swan by Saint Saens
Thais Meditation by Massenet
Candide overture by Bernstein
William Tell by Rossini
transcendent 3rd movement of Petrushka by Stravinsky
3rd mov. 4th symphony by Brahms
3rd mov. 6th symphony by Tchaikovsky
(yes, one great movement from several symphonies, think outside the box)
Blue Danube by Strauss jr
Ride of Valkries by Wagner
Rhapsody on theme of Paganini by Rachmaninov
Rhapsody in Blue by Gershwin
Unanswered Question by Ives
Roman Carnival overture by Berlioz (other that's better?)
Hoedown from Rodeo by Copland
Slalom by Pann (I didn't like that skiing piece, said that old time concert goer)
Enigma Variations by Elgar
what's that fiery overture by William Walton?
Bolero by Ravel
1st mov. 7th symphony by Shostakovich
quite a few symphonic poems by Tchaikovsky
symphonic poem(s) by Liszt
Hebrides overture by Mendelsohn
one movement piece by mozart?
Finlandia by Sibelius
Warsaw Concerto by Addinsell
Sabre Dance by Khachaturian
Night on Bald Mountain by Mussorgsky
Moldua by Smetana
your mood may vary, but there's many more I'm sure.
be well, anonumass
yes part 4
so what concert?
if the aim is to grow the audience, then the menu can't be based on the "bias" of the professionals deciding on the menu. I'm guessing it should be the greatest one movement pieces that classical has to offer, even if the pros may not think much about many of them because they've heard them perhaps 5 to 10 times more than casual concert goers.
But I'd say the aim is to blow their minds at least a few times during any one concert. And I would guess that a growing audience would have a large backlog of "great" pieces which they've never heard in concert.
as an aside, i think it was in the early years of K-rho's reign here that he opened a concert with Tchaikovsky's Romeo and Juliet which totally blew me away, perhaps the most transcendent 15 minutes in concert for me ever. Not so great was the rest of the evening, decent enough but lesser.
yes part 3
so anyway, this brings me around to what Alex Ross (I think) calls classical music:
genius music.
So if indeed this is genius music, then somehow and some way a classical concert should reflect that. In other words, the Springfield Symphony should have monthly concerts called Absolute Genius Music or Freakin Genius Music, a year long series starting in the autumn of 2013 if I may be bold enough to say.
I hope K-Rho is listening in ( yes, I know he has bosses and there are "politics" and dare we mention tradition involved).
Then, and it's a big then, of course it becomes fairly important to live up to the boast. And as I seem to be repeating, the symphony and concerto perhaps don't always cut it, maybe with the exception of you know who's 5th.
yes part 2
a back story to this: at the start of this week I began playing through the 7 Tchaikovsky symphonies, and I was detecting the "fact" that in the usual 4 movements there were some certainly "great" ones but also some weaker ones. Like say in the 6th, which yes, I'm sure there's some value to understanding what the composer is doing through the 4 related movements (maybe even more in the 4th symphony and Manfred), and this comes through more on repeated listenings, but the 2nd movement is quite weak compared to lots of his other stuff.
So as I'm thinking of how a symphony works well for radio and perhaps even better on CD in repeated listenings, along comes your blog on enemy #1.
yes
so here's my look from the outside.
I may be wrong, or this could be just my subjective view and not so factual.
my guess is classical enemies #1 and #2 are the symphony and the concerto. Now I'm saying this only for concerts and not for radio. Your blog mentioned "new venues and concert formats". I think the multiple movement pieces are usually good for radio, but it's in concert that the problems begin.
Here's where the "bias" I mentioned comes into play. It's the most invested music professionals that of course can understand the genius of many symphonies, but then perhaps don't see that there are weaker movements in most "great" symphonies that bog down the concert experience. Not to mention that the audience then has to sit on its hands for three movements in a ridiculous supression of response.