malik@delphi.DEC (Karl Malik ZK01-1/F22 1-1440) (08/16/84)
Subj; a real musical elitist In reading the recent articles on 'why [contemporary] classical music isn't popular', I keep thinking about the composer, Milton Babbitt. He not only accepts the unpopularity of [his brand of] contemporary music, but seems to revel in it. I present the following excerpts from his article 'Who Cares if You Listen?' for your amusement/indignation/enlightenment. The views expressed are his, NOT MINE. No point in flaming - he isn't on the net. - Karl * * * "Like all communication, music presupposes a suitably equipped receptor. I am aware that 'tradition' has it that the lay listener, by virtue of some undefined, transcendental faculty, always is able to arrive at a musical judgement absolute in its wisdom if not always permanent in its validity. I regret my inability to accord this declaration of faith the respect due its advanced age." "Deviation from this tradition is bound to dismiss the contemporary music of which I have been talking into 'isolation'. Nor do I see how or why the situation should be otherwise. Why should the layman be other than bored and puzzled by what he is unable to understand, music or anything else? It is only the translation of this boredom and puzzlement into resentment and denunciation that seems to me indefensible. After all, the public does have its own music, its ubiquitous music; music to eat by, to read by, to dance by, and to be impressed by. Why refuse to recognize the possibility that contemporary music has reached a stage long since attained by other forms of activity? The time has passed when the normally educated man without special preparation could understand the most advanced work in, for example, mathematics, philosophy, and physics. Advanced music, to the extent that it reflects the knowledge and originality of the informed composer, scarcely can be expected to appear more intelligible than these arts and sciences to the person whose musical education usually has been even less extensive than his background in other fields. But to this, a double standard is invoked, with the words "music is music", implying that "music is JUST music". Why not, then, equate the activities of the radio repairman with those of the theoretical physicist, on the basis of the dictum that "physics is physics"? "It has often been remarked that only in politics and the 'arts' does the layman regard himself as an expert, with the right to have his opinion heard. In the realm of politics he knows that this right, in the form of a vote, is guaranteed by fiat. Comparably, in the realm of public music, the concertgoer is secure in the knowledge that the amenities of concert going protect his firmly stated 'I didn't like it' from further scrutiny. Imagine, if you can, a layman chancing upon a lecture on 'Pointwise Periodic Homeo- morphisms.' At the conclusion, he announces: 'I didn't like it.' Social conventions being what they are in such circles, someone might dare inquire 'why not?' Under duress, our layman discloses precise reasons for his failure to enjoy himself; he found the hall chilly, the lecturer's voice unpleasant, and he was suffering the digestive aftermath of a poor dinner. His interlocutor understand- ably disqualifies these reasons as irrelevant to the content and value of the lecture, and the developement of mathematics is left undisturbed. If the concertgoer is at all versed in the ways of musicianship, he will also offer reasons for his 'I didn't like it' - in the form of assertions that the work in question is 'inexpressive, undramatic, lacking in poetry, etc.', tapping that store of vacuous equivalents hallowed by time for: 'I don't like it, and cannot or will not state why.'" "...Or those well-meaning souls who exhort the public 'just to LISTEN to more contemporary music,' apparently on the theory that familiarity breeds passive acceptance. Or those, often the same well- meaning souls, who remind the composer of his 'obligation to the public', while the public's obligation to the composer is fulfilled, manifestly, by mere physical presence in the concert hall or before a loudspeaker or - more authoritatively - by committing to memory the numbers of phonograph records and amplifier models. Or the intricate social world within this musical world, where the salon becomes bazaar, and music itself becomes an ingredient of verbal canapes for cocktail conversation." "I say all this not to present a picture of a virtuous music in a sinful world, but to point up the problems of a special music in an alien and inapposite world. And so, I dare suggest that the composer would do himself and his music an immediate and eventual service by total, resolute, and voluntary withdrawal from this public world to one of private perform- ance and electronic media, with its very real possibility of complete elimination of the public and social aspects of musical composition. By so doing, the separation between the domains would be defined beyond any possibility of confusion of categories, and the composer would be free to pursue a private life of professional achievement, as opposed to a public life of unprofessional compromise and exhibitionism."
greg@olivej.UUCP (Greg Paley) (08/20/84)
How one reacts to Babbit's assertions will depend, among other things, on whether he views music as an art or a science. If music is viewed purely as a science, then the argument that it has, in line with mathematics, physics, etc. evolved to an advanced state where the layman is out of line in thinking he should be able to grasp it is plausible. If it is viewed as an art with communication of an idea as a goal, this doesn't make sense. What I find offensive is the idea that, with regard to contemporary music, the only valid alternatives are to like it and praise it or else be silent and presume that if you didn't like it, it can only be because you're too ignorant. It's rather like the pope declaring himself infallible. This is actually just a variant of the same snobbishness and elitism that have caused people to avoid "classical" music in general. There are enough people who will succumb to this kind of intimidation and will ignore their own perceptions and feelings if they don't agree with what they've been told they're supposed to perceive and feel. These are the types you see sleeping at the symphony or opera but will turn their noses up at anyone who criticizes it as being boring. They've long accepted the fact that great music bores them and have gone on to assume that therefore any music that bores them must be great. - Greg Paley