Pop and classical
I've lurked in the shadows for the good part of a year now. I've gained valuable insight through this forum, but my pool of knowledge has been too shallow to float any meaningful contribution. My belief is that, generally, there is more to be gained through listening than speaking for the sake of speaking, but the recent posts about "daft programming," having revived (albeit briefly) a topic which has been discussed before, piqued my curiosity.
Exceptions are noted, but why, on a personal basis, do most of you prefer classical to pop? This seems like an awful, almost irreverent question, but please, humor me. Classical is structurally more complex, but on an emotional level, modern music has the same potential, no? Previous comments on the purity of instrumental music interested me and in this regard, I do favor cm over pop. One entirely valid criticism of modern music is the uninspired lyrics in many recordings.
Interest in a wide variety of music is, in my opinion, less a dilution of focus than a healthy openness and flexibility. Favoring one brand of music is bordering oppressiveness. Study of (or exposure to) world music and exploration beyond the boundaries of the western tradition would endow a deeper understanding of music in relation to society. I'd like to solicit opinions on middle eastern music in comparison to European.
I have friends who speak of cm as "noise" or incomprehensible and others who refuse to acknowledge metal or grunge as music. I enjoy and "relate to" (for lack of a better term) world, modern and classical, so while I respect their private views, I wish I personally knew someone who appreciates Music, with a captial 'm.' There's joy in listening to works which have transcended time, but there is also something to be said for living in the times and watching (or rather, listening to) history as it develops. What disturbs me is that some people play and turn on cm without actually hearing it. These people seem to like cm as background music, an accompaniment to other tasks at hand. I realize that for the majority, it is simply a matter of genuine preference (as is with those who are intensely involved), an argument could be made for the psychological comfort of a fixation on the past, of choosing music that is widely-accepted and already renowned.
I disagree with the all-encompassing condemnation of compilations. While they are unsatisfying and even irritating to those who have been immersed in cm, they can be helpful for "beginners" who are yet unfamiliar with the "terrain." They can serve as springboards--listening to selections may help inexperienced audiences identify which styles and composers they enjoy most. However unimpressive, they're a start.
Tentative observation: there seems to be a trend toward simplification in music as well as art (ie classicist realism and detail to Rothko and Mondrian--although, yes, postmodern art is more eclectic than anything else). Psycho-social-political explanations?
I'll cease my ranting now...
"When I get a little money, I buy books and if any is left I buy food and clothes."
--Erasmus
Exceptions are noted, but why, on a personal basis, do most of you prefer classical to pop? This seems like an awful, almost irreverent question, but please, humor me. Classical is structurally more complex, but on an emotional level, modern music has the same potential, no? Previous comments on the purity of instrumental music interested me and in this regard, I do favor cm over pop. One entirely valid criticism of modern music is the uninspired lyrics in many recordings.
Interest in a wide variety of music is, in my opinion, less a dilution of focus than a healthy openness and flexibility. Favoring one brand of music is bordering oppressiveness. Study of (or exposure to) world music and exploration beyond the boundaries of the western tradition would endow a deeper understanding of music in relation to society. I'd like to solicit opinions on middle eastern music in comparison to European.
I have friends who speak of cm as "noise" or incomprehensible and others who refuse to acknowledge metal or grunge as music. I enjoy and "relate to" (for lack of a better term) world, modern and classical, so while I respect their private views, I wish I personally knew someone who appreciates Music, with a captial 'm.' There's joy in listening to works which have transcended time, but there is also something to be said for living in the times and watching (or rather, listening to) history as it develops. What disturbs me is that some people play and turn on cm without actually hearing it. These people seem to like cm as background music, an accompaniment to other tasks at hand. I realize that for the majority, it is simply a matter of genuine preference (as is with those who are intensely involved), an argument could be made for the psychological comfort of a fixation on the past, of choosing music that is widely-accepted and already renowned.
I disagree with the all-encompassing condemnation of compilations. While they are unsatisfying and even irritating to those who have been immersed in cm, they can be helpful for "beginners" who are yet unfamiliar with the "terrain." They can serve as springboards--listening to selections may help inexperienced audiences identify which styles and composers they enjoy most. However unimpressive, they're a start.
Tentative observation: there seems to be a trend toward simplification in music as well as art (ie classicist realism and detail to Rothko and Mondrian--although, yes, postmodern art is more eclectic than anything else). Psycho-social-political explanations?
I'll cease my ranting now...
"When I get a little money, I buy books and if any is left I buy food and clothes."
--Erasmus
Must be the beard.
Comment