lipman@decwrl.UUCP (02/25/84)
From: delphi::malik (Karl Malik ZK1-1/D42 ) Subj; use of the term 'Viennese' instead of 'classical' Someone recently submitted an article suggesting that since many of composers of the 'classic period' were Viennese (and since his/her music appreciation textbook used it), we might benifit from using the term 'Viennese' instead of 'Classical'. "This suggests, does it not, a trend towards the use of `Viennese'? So let's stop calling it `classical' and call it Viennese instead, and stop confusing each other." In what sense does the terminology of one author consitute a 'trend'? And even if it could be demonstrated that large numbers of scholars were using the term (which they aren't), that is hardly a reason to accept it uncritically. Vienna has produced many famous composers. In addition to the 'classic' period, Johann Strauss (the 'waltz king') is strongly identified with Viennese music. And then to make the matter worse, Schonberg, Berg and Webern are often referred to as the '2nd Viennese school'. There are, of course, many others. Musical terminology is ambiguous enough. Substituting a term which is already dripping with connotations, for one which is generally accepted would seem to confuse things even more than they already are. I find that using the phrase 'music of the Classic period' to refer to that specific period of musical history and 'Classical music' as the generic term, to be quite understandable to most people. ,Karl ...decvax!decwrl!rhea!star!malik