jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (07/22/84)
Really, Rich, are you on speed or what? :-) Seems to me you're giving mr.
Giles a harder time than he deserves.
"Classical" has two meanings in music.
1. Referring to the period of western music from about 1750 to about 1830
(approximately from Bach's death to Beethoven's death). The foremost
composers of this time were Haydn, mozart, and Beethoven. Schubert,
although he lived in this time, was born a generation after Beethoven
and seems to have more affinity musically with composers active after
1830 (the so-called Romantics, hmmm?)
2. Referring to any music that has remained popular after several
generations, or more appropriately, after one or more cultural shifts
(i.e, WWI, the beginning of the Renaissance, etc.). Stockhausen
and Beatles are indeed too recent, but I don't see why East African
music can't be classical.
"Classical" also refers to any music written in this tradition, even
if it hasn't yet (or never will) become truly classic.
In western culture, "classical" usually refers to western music only.
That's not because of cultural bigotry, but simply a convenience of
expression which is clear in context.
I think everyone recognizes terms like "classical" and "popular" are
inexact at best. I don't think any purpose is served by jumping all over
someone verbally and accusing him of pigeonholing if he uses one.
As for starting arguments, it's true what Rich says about the source of the
argument, but it isn't an argument until somebody argues, and that
points the finger back at him, right? :-) How's that for hair-splitting?
never loath to continue an argument,
Jeff Winslow