rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (08/04/84)
> Michael's statement was in a long tradition of those who said music written > in the classical tradition was dead. Those earlier people probably didn't > even bother to consider the "popular" music of the time. And as it turned out, > it didn't matter - they were shown to be fools without its help. As present > day doomsayers will most likely be. We weren't judging the rightness or wrongness of Michael's statement, but rather YOUR assumption that a statement about the "death of classical music" meant "the death of ALL music". A major difference between earlier doomsayers and present day doomsayers is that the former were *predicting* a demise based on their opinion that there was nowhere else to go musically (they were proven wrong). Today, the doomsayers are WITNESSING a demise and stagnation, not predicting it. What prevented the earlier prophecies from being fulfilled was the introduction of new blood and new thought. Part of today's problem is that the current stagnation and restrictiveness has led the "new blood" down other paths, not within the "serious music" fold. Perhaps, if that "fold" were to open up and accept some really new innovations and forget about labelling for the purpose of exclusion.... NAAAH! (Why do you think Laurie Anderson is considered a "pop" musician? Not that it should matter what she's called...) >>> nomenclature is a problem. please have more sympathy for people who try to >>> use all these terms, classical, popular, serious, etc.? And not be so >>> willing to take offense at the way they are used? >> I take *great* offense when any of them are used, since their only purpose >> seems to be delineate "classes" of music (and their associated worths in the >> minds of people who'd rather have labels make the decisions as to what they >> like instead of doing it themselves). > Well, YOU used "serious" and "20th century" and "conservatorially composed" > referring to music. "Serious" and "conservatorially composed" were used in place of the misnomer "classical", and you'll note that "serious" was almost always in quotes (as it should be). Both terms were used to describe music and musical communities as seen by labellers. "20th century" is a time period, not a label, and it was used in reference to remarks by other people regarding "20th century" music. >>> Notice that Rich did not mention any of the new ideas that I asked Michael >>> to enumerate. Oh well, perhaps Michael will. Or maybe there aren't any :-) >> What's funny is that Jeff didn't bother to mention any new ideas either. > First off, no one *asked* me to mention any, whereas I did ask for some. > Second, I *did* mention minimalism anyway (in my original followup). Third, > *you* still haven't mentioned any (and, believe me, I'd rather read anything > you could post on this than to be called a "white supremacist" based on the > music I like. Talk about nonsense!). First off, that's a rather lame excuse; if you can't name any yourself don't ask others to do so. Second: Minimalism? You mean like the sounds of Glass who was scorned by the "serious" (note the quotes) community for years? Don't take credit for what isn't truly your own! If you'd like to see a list that includes ragtime, jazz, harmolodics, and styles that don't have names or labels (except as denoted by pigeonholers, inaccurately)... And third, you weren't called a white supremacist; the question was asked whether you were one, and not "based on the music you like", but based on your being "proud" of a "classicocentric mentality". It is reasonable to ask if other "X-ocentric mentalities" (e.g., caucasiocentric) were among other things you might be proud of. (I doubt it's true of Jeff, but the mindsets *are* the same.) > This got mixed up with the other argument about "classical" vs. "popular", on > which I agree with someone who said, "this could get exceedingly stupid." I > generously leave half the credit for that particular stupidity to Rich > (while, of course, greedily taking the rest for myself). Take it all. You deserve it. You worked hard for it. :-) (I thought this discussion had died...) -- "Now, Benson, I'm going to have to turn you into a dog for a while." "Ohhhh, thank you, Master!!" Rich Rosen pyuxn!rlr