Login   Sign Up 
 


Site Search.


New Members
  masavage (21/7)
  bbhrupp (21/7)
  Milo1865 (17/7)
  supertrex (17/7)
  Rood (16/7)

   » Full C:T Members List


Other Resources
News Archive






Search Forums:
This 31 message thread spans 3 pages:  < <   1  [2]  3  > >  
  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Ben Mueller-Heaslip at 23:56 on 06 June 2008
 

Regarding specific points:

Misuc, two things

1) I think you're right about this issue

2) I think you could've made a lot better sense of your views if you'd addressed this a bit less egotistically.

What I'm objecting to is not your "being right". As I've stated, I would've likely agreed with your distaste for Pete's views. But I never really heard them - because of your noise. What I object to is your certainty that if you yell loud enough nothing else matters.

There's more than the two ears and the one thing in-between involved in this. You don't seem the sort to make simplistic judgements. There are a few sentences in your last that you ought to cut - out of self-respect if not respect for others. I suspect you're aware of the difference between an idea, a challenge, and a slur.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Pete12b at 00:56 on 07 June 2008
 

How dare you accuse me of quasi-racist propoganda. Cite one phrase or sentence that proves this. I asked 3 questions. If you are so amazingly intelligent why can't you answer them: here they are again

Is political correctness stifling our creativity?

This is what they call a basic closed question. The vast array of answers you can choose from are:

a. Yes
b. No

The second question requires a longer answer:

What do you think?
Here you cite evidence as to why it is YES or why it is NO

The final question is:
Who REALLY thinks we are a cultural melting pot?!?
Here I am asking whether composers are embracing the music from cultures around them or is music steering clear of it and focussing on tradition (ACADEMIC tradition). I don't listen to everything and have not heard many fusions celebrating this point.

At no point in this post do you see a Right wing approach, an ideology, a racist remark, or anything that points to me demonstrative of "dangerous nasty backward ignorant vulgar stupidity"

"Go around the countryside recording old land-labourerís ditties? (That might once have been a genuine cultural service, but could not nowadays give you, even if you were very lucky, more than one or two Polish songs amid a mass of mp3s.)"

What on EARTH is your point? Are you implying something about the Polish?! And Land labourers ditties - that is EXACTLY what Cecil Sharp did - and dances, and folk tunes without whom we would have lost alot of our National music and Dance.

My questions were simple. France has a national harmonic language, Germany has a national harmonic language, so has Spain, Italy, Russia. England had one too. Has it been developed so it maintains its National identity - much as Messiaen maintained fingerprints of France, as Schnittke maintains fingerprints of Russia, Albeniz did in Spain. I don't know - which is why I asked whether we'd lost our identity.

Lastly being intelligent gives you no right to assume or be offensive. It gives you no right to believe you are better than someone else. Disagreeing is fine, but being patronising and accusing them of things like racism is a dangerous game. Your point about understanding simple phrases - thats fine. I used simple phrases in a defamation case 2 years ago - and I won. Do you REALLY know me that well?


  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Nicolas Tzortzis at 01:38 on 07 June 2008
 

A composer whose creativity is "obstructed" by political correctness is probably a composer with little to say in the first place.The good composer writes what he feels he has to say,without thinking about how his music is going to be greeted by the public (or anyone else,for that matter).

as far as the "melting pot" goes:Information and influences have been travelling around the world ever since the beggining of time,so there's nothing new happening today.In a way,yes,we are as a melting pot today as they were 200 or 300 years ago.The problem with today's situation is that it being done mainly for commercial reasons,in order to be able to sell music easier to a greater number of people,Like pop music.
We could look for political reasons behind all this,but I prefer to go with the commercial of the issue,since today's "melting pot" always seems to result in an easy-listening kind of thing,where one takes the most obvious elements of different kinds of music,puts them all together in a blub-like grey thing that has no real musical proposition.
I think that a composer has to look for inspiration in everything,no matter where it comes from.he should also be looking for quality,and not necesseraly try to put a flag on his score.
And why should a British composer try to relate to Tippett and not to Ferneyhough?they are both very British composers,but with a completely different approach.Why should "British" music be one thing?
Nonetheless,I do believe that a French composer will always sound like a French composer,a German composer like a German,an Italian like an Italian etc.Because national and musical indentity is to be found not in a superficial level (how it sounds,for instance),but in something a lot deeper. That would probably be a number of principals,aesthetics,and not a specific musical object.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Ben Mueller-Heaslip at 17:38 on 07 June 2008
 

This is what they call a basic closed question. The vast array of answers you can choose from are:

a. Yes
b. No


Hi Pete:

I really do think your statement has been misinterpreted a bit. I don't think anyone has the right suggest that what you've written here is racist. But I do think the reason why people are getting up on their soapboxes to yell at you has to do with the nature of the question you're proposing and it's underlying assumptions:

It sounds as though you, like many composers, are responding to the awareness that your cultural identity - and, particularly, the value of composition as a vital and influential artistic force - has been watered-down and degraded. I think most people involved in composition consider this a truism .

In your original posting and the points you made yesterday on political correctness (i.e. nursery rhymes, shanties, suppression of history) you suggest that there's a direct connection between these trends in the educational system and the inability of composition to present a cohesive language that would help re-establish its cultural value and identity.

Where I think many people, including myself, disagree with you is in this: these things are simply not related in the way you suggest.

I'm sure, from what I've read, that the situation in England is similar to what's happening here in Canada. There certainly are pressures from government granting bodies that likely do direct money away from some potentially more artistically valuable projects to (yeah, usually wishy washy and dull) culturally-inclusive ones --- that's nothing new. You'd have a hard time pinning down a point in time when the government really got arts funding right and didn't direct loads of money to pap of one sort or another.

By your earlier posts about institutional changes I think you're referring to this aspect of the issue. If I'm mistaken in this, I don't understand how: if, rather than the institutional P.C. problem, you're talking about the larger social trend to P.C. I'd have to say that begs the 'so what?' question: you're saying that society doesn't support good artistic work? Well - when has it ever? But I don't think that's the point you were making.

So I find putting so much weight into the 'political correctness' angle to be a bit of a cop out - the real problem is that composers, performers, and ensembles have done a really crappy job of responding to the way society's changed, and naturally this has reduced their voice to near insignificance.

That's our problem as people who are involved with and care about this sort of music... And it requires real courage and innovation to go about fixing it. Transferring the blame to other people, other cultures, and benignly-stupid institutions is a cheap and easy way to make a huff without having to do the difficult work of addressing a real problem.


  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Misuc at 19:27 on 07 June 2008
 

You have still not answered our points, Pete.

Let me answer yours.

"....Is political correctness stifling our creativity?...."

No

".....What do you think?....."

I think that there is not a composer in the world who writes music according to an agenda of political correctness or the reverse. Or if there is I don't see how there could be a good or even honest one. Surely to the limits of our ability, understanding or technique we all try to be true to our musical ideas. That is where we get our enjoyment. To be sure musical ideas always come from other musical ideas that other people have had. That is what is meant by calling music a part of human culture. Whether we are aware of it or not, this will mean picking out from music we have heard since babyhood in our locality - and in so far as this is any different from what other babies have experienced this will be a local or national musical style.

".....The final question is: Who REALLY thinks we are a cultural melting pot?!?....."
"....Here I am asking whether composers are embracing the music from cultures around them or is music steering clear of it and focussing on tradition (ACADEMIC tradition). I don't listen to everything and have not heard many fusions celebrating this point...."

I can't, of course, speak for anyone else here, but I personally am steeped in the European Classical tradition. Anything I hear i tend to try and assimilate into this tradition. I don't think this is any sort of obligation, but it is what i tend to do. The main strength of this tradition, and the one which I think has become indispensible to me is the aim to make anything that happens at one time in a composition responsible for and responsive to the timescale of the whole piece
(i.e. tonality - not the dead tonality of the composers who call themselves 'tonal' but the attempts at a dynamic, 'dialectical' tonality of some of those who don't necessarily do so) (I'm sorry if this sounds too abstract - I assure you i am not trying to be 'clever' and that this is the absolute opposite of an 'ego-trip'. I was asked what I think, and I can only tell you in words like this.) On the other hand I dislike the concert hall tradition and I 'go mad' about other traditions. And when you're enthusiastic about something you try and imitate it, don't you? Try to make it 'your own'. That is what I find myself doing with all kinds of music from all times and places. I suppose there are lots of us doing something like that.

"......Go around the countryside recording old land-labourerís ditties? (That might once have been a genuine cultural service, but could not nowadays give you, even if you were very lucky, more than one or two Polish songs amid a mass of mp3s.)"

"........What on EARTH is your point? Are you implying something about the Polish?! And Land labourers ditties - that is EXACTLY what Cecil Sharp did - and dances, and folk tunes without whom we would have lost alot of our National music and Dance......"

My point is that what was progressive and useful in Cecil Sharpe's times is sadly impossible now. We don't have a peasantry. Folk music- local traditions - everything that did make up a national culture was the work of peasants. That is why there are still national musics in Eastern Europe, and Ireland and to some extent still in Italy,France and Spain etc. - and certainly in India and Africa. But in England the aristocracy and the rising capitalist class were throwing peasants off the land to make way for more profitable sheep all of 500 years ago! By the 19th century Britain had become the most consistent market economy of the time (in Napoleon's phrase: "A nation of shopkeepers") and this both weakened local traditions and strengthened international cultural links. By 1900 a way of life had already almost come to an end. (Read Thomas Hardy). Cecil Sharp was already collecting survivals like museum items.

Admittedly it has taken the latest wave of capitalist globalisation to finally overwhelm local cultures and/or turn them into tourist Disneyland attractions ('World Music'). Real national/local traditions are being destroyed by the minute.

"...Lastly being intelligent gives you no right to assume or be offensive. It gives you no right to believe you are better than someone else. Disagreeing is fine, but being patronising and accusing them of things like racism is a dangerous game...."

Nowhere have I claimed to be 'intelligent'. Actually I am not particularly intelligent, but I am interested in the subject. Nor do I claim to be better than anyone else. On the contrary. But racism is racism, and I will oppose it whenever I see it. If I have done this before the perpetrator was fully aware that racism is what he was guilty of, then so much the better. Let's nip it in the bud.

There have been moves to make incitement to race hatred a criminal offence. There have been all kinds of policies aimed at encouraging children and others to be aware of the terrible divisiveness of racial discrimination, bullying and the like. Please remember that it is not so very long ago since British imperialism destroyed Indian manufacture and massacred whole populations, raided Africa for slaves etc. only a few years since we saw signs like "No Dogs or irish" and "No Coloureds". There are still pubs with notices saying: "No travellers". Gipsy camps have been burnt down recently here in England where there is supposed to be a statutory obligation to provide them with secure sites. The efforts at stopping this sort of thing have often missed the point, or brought up the wrong issues or concentrated on words rather than realities. it is not always easy to get these things right.

Hence the controversy over 'political correctness' and the like.

But to use the mistakes of some well-meaning people to spread lies promulgated, invented and/or blown up by the BNP about what alleged 'PC' local education authorities are up to is playing the racists' game. It is this which is the 'dangerous game'.

To warn people against this racism is not being patronising. it is our duty as citizens.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Ben Mueller-Heaslip at 20:38 on 07 June 2008
 

...the rising capitalist class were throwing peasants off the land to make way for more profitable sheep all of 500 years ago!

This phrase is just amazing. I can read it again and again and each time my awe increases - and I love how it ends with an exclamation point! I might have to make this quote my 'email signature' from now on.

Misuc - I really admire your convictions and your direct manner in addressing this issue. But I do think you're, as always, much more polarizing and absolute than you are effective.

Pete, that last line in your last post about "defamation cases" seems like a threat of some sort. What's that about? Sure, Misuc might be way out of line in calling you a racist but personally, I wish you'd just answer a couple of his points than resort to that sort of nonsense. Misuc's very hard-headed and doesn't listen all that well, but other people on this forum are less so and would rather hear what you have to say...

...but that "defamation case" thing really threw me: that's nothing but a passive-aggressive, petty, dishonest, fall back position of a hyper-sensative, childish prat who's been called out and knows he's wrong.

What? You're not wrong? Misuc is wrong about you? Well try answering a couple of his points (or mine) rather than falling to the level of empty threats. Sure, Misuc comes off as a complete ass in a lot of his posts, but you've really topped him.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Misuc at 22:34 on 07 June 2008
 

{An aside - away from the main discussion]

Not being very intelligent, I am not sure if Ben was being sarcastic or not.

Anyway, here is a quote from an article about the excavation of a deserted village in Yorkshire, England. It shows how peasant/folk culture was already being destroyed 500 years ago. This is part of the explanation for the lack of a distinctive English national musical language as compared with other countries mentioned

".....So why was this village at the bottom of a valley deserted? Famine? Flooding? No. The reason was sheep. As Sir Thomas More wrote in Utopia, "Your sheep which are usually so tame and so cheaply fed, begin now, according to report, to be so greedy and wild that they devour human beings themselves and devastate and depopulate fields, houses, and towns."

Not that sheep were really eating humans, but you can see More's point. By the 15th century, sheep farming had become far more profitable than arable farming, so the lord of the manor turned more of his land into pasture land, leaving less for the farming of crops. This in turn led to less work and less food for the villagers of Wharram Percy, so that they were forced to leave the village to find work and food elsewhere. In the end, documentary evidence shows that there were just four homes left occupied when the landowner, Baron Hilton, evicted the few remaining villagers around 1517. Archaeologists think that the last inhabitant of Wharram Percy was either a vagrant or an inhabitant who refused to move out, who was killed when a dilapidated house collapsed on him whilst he slept........."

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Ben Mueller-Heaslip at 00:14 on 08 June 2008
 

Not being very intelligent, I am not sure if Ben was being sarcastic or not.

Whenever anyone other then a shepherd is talking about sheep there's a 29 out of 30 chance that they're being sarcastic.

Thanks for the info about Yorkshire sheep. Here we have a similar problem with muskrats in rural Quebec.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Misuc at 10:25 on 08 June 2008
 

So Ben is trying to tell us that 16th century Yorkshire sheep have nothing to do with Nationalism in music today. I see. Very funny

But when people were forced off the land and into shanty-towns, factories, mines or exile their former way of life was lost; their land, or hopes for land went, their work tools no longer belonged to them, nor their methods of working them, their relation to the seasons etc. their manner of social interaction, their clothes, dialects, customs,folklore etc. - their whole culture.

The culture that replaced those local traditions was much more productive, more international and less under their/our control. Hence a certain nostalgia for 'the way we were'.

The demands of the market have forced people off the land over the centuries, and are still doing so. In China now, for example, peasant cultures are being smashed daily as millions are forced off the land.

Ben can't see that any of this is relevant to the question of nationalism in music today.

But leaving aside the gross lost arts of memorisation, improvisation etc. ( in some countries, right up to modern times, old ballad singers would remember/make up eight hour epics performed to whole village feasts. These used microtonal modal systems that will not come back) - as i said, leaving that aside, what is the music that has inspired the great classical nationalist composers rn from Russia, Eastern Europe, Spain, Latin America etc.? It is the music of these now lost cultures.

The destruction of these people and their way of life does certainly affect the issue we have been speaking about. I find it revealing that this process of privatisation was pioneered as long ago as it was and that it was primarily England that took the lead.

This is significant because it is England which more than most countries has lost both its folk heritage and any sense of a common shared culture (way of dressing, talking, making music whatever) free from that imposed by international big business. what is disturbing is that this is happening just as people from other often more active participatory cultures are entering the country as cheap labour, political refugees etc.

It is this trauma which is causing 'National heritage vs Political Correctness' to become an issue. There are no easy answers. Those who find it a problem do really have to start looking back into the causes. Sarcastic off-the-cuff remarks will not do.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Ben Mueller-Heaslip at 15:12 on 08 June 2008
 

It is this trauma

i.e. sheep.

which is causing 'National heritage vs Political Correctness' to become an issue. There are no easy answers. Those who find it a problem do really have to start looking back into the causes. Sarcastic off-the-cuff remarks will not do.

No, Misuc, there are no easy answers. But blaming sheep and centuries-dead landlords is, frankly, an easy answer. It's not reasonable to pretend that sheep are any more relevant to this issue than nursery rhymes are to the state of composition.

You criticized Pete for being backwards-looking. I agree with you in that looking for identity in a past distant enough to be tenuously-relevant at best is not productive: Pete hints at a positive nostalgia (looking for a positive identity in history) while you seem to be pushing for a negative nostalgia (ignoring present problems in favour of historical ones). These are both false positions, although yours is much more benign that the other because it's so profoundly ineffectual.

Aren't there some more recent - and perhaps even ongoing! - social changes that might have a stronger impact on why ideas of "National Heritage" are presenting themselves as poor surrogates for real identity? Or are we still feeling the thunderous impact of 16th-century sheep?

You're quite right: things have changed violently in the past and that has an impact. But to inflate it so much diminishes the importance of changes that are happening now and which artists have the responsibility to wrestle with. Your hammering out these historical connections more than they rationally merit places composers in the position of passive victims: I don't accept that.

Maybe we can do a survey:

SURVEY

Please rate the following items from 1-10 according to your perception of their impact on compositional practice:

1) The exponential proliferation of recorded music?
2) Reluctance of composers to assimilate changes in technology?
3) Changes in public perception of classical music and its composers?
4) The changes to the official nursery rhymes?
5) The death of the orchestra as an artistically-valid medium for composition?
6) The emergence (or lack thereof) of new small-ensemble forms?
7) Sheep in 16th century Yorkshire?
8) The dislocation of the composer/performer relationship?
9) Changes in audience expectations and tastes?
10) Experimental modes of presentation vs. maintaining the concert hall tradition?
11) Representation of creative music in the media?
12) Muskrats in rural Quebec?
13) The collapse of real debate on issues relevant to the survival and growth of this art form?


This is just a short, very incomplete list. It's intended to point of the difference between hot and cold air.

But I do think many of these points are worth discussing and would like to see if anyone else has points to add. A couple of the items are manifestly silly and appear to be irrelevant jokes shoved in between a number of important points... that's because that's exactly what they are.

By the way, you English do have a distinct national identity, culture, and music. I think it's difficult to perceive that from within it, which is why people with base interests seem to have luck drumming up support for their nonsense.



  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Misuc at 16:58 on 08 June 2008
 

Some people on this list were worried by what they thought of as a problem: the alleged d.ecline of a "national heritage" under the supposed threat from "political correctness". They were worried that is was stifling our creativity. What i and others have been doing is

a] to show that this problem need not be a real one.

b] that the ideology behind expressing real problems in such words is the conscious propaganda work of rightwing extremists, and that non-racists should be warned of this

c] a rough sort of explanation of the context in which such prejudice arises i.e why there are sensible people who can get taken in by this sort of talk.

We do not make our own past history. Whether you wish to recognise it or not you are formed by this history - you too, Ben. Does this mean that we are "passive victims"? I never said or implied that. People can free themselves from prejudice. That's why I spend so much time and effort arguing about all these things. James Joyce said: "History is a nightmare from which we are trying to escape".

It is not a question of blaming anybody or anything, and it is wrong to suggest that anybody was doing this. But, for those who feel there is a problem here, it is a question of recognising what the 'problem' actually is and doing something about it. I don't really feel there is a problem

Of course there are real problems. All the serious ones you list, Ben, are the direct effects of the way modern capitalism and the market economy works. But even if everyone on this list agreed with us on this point, that would neither change the system nor would it excuse us from taking advantage of the benefits which this same system offers or of bypassing it or of ignoring it in our own work. There are many personal solutions. Nothing is excluded

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Ben Mueller-Heaslip at 19:28 on 08 June 2008
 

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, Julian. I really do agree with the three points you've just posted about your rationale.

I find the first of your points the most telling: the real problem here is the substitution of a falsely-constructed premise as a substitute for rational and constructive debate - particularly when the substitute is, as it appears to be, a wolf in sheep's clothing.

I do, however think it's possible to do these valuable convictions and arguments a disservice by throwing in volumes of loosly-related information. Your moral and logical points stand up more than well enough to not need this sort of support... and worse, the best of what you have to say gets lost in the tangent. Also, it shifts the focus of the debate away from what's essentially important to trivia.

We do not make our own past history. Whether you wish to recognise it or not you are formed by this history - you too, Ben. Does this mean that we are "passive victims"? I never said or implied that. People can free themselves from prejudice. That's why I spend so much time and effort arguing about all these things. James Joyce said: "History is a nightmare from which we are trying to escape".

It's a question of degree, isn't it?

Being unaware of the historical forces that have made the world what it negates the possibility of one's actions having any real impact. On the other end of the spectrum, giving these forces more weight than necessary makes one a fleck of cork on the historical current, with no potential to influence its course.

You accuse me of the former, incorrectly. I'd like to think I'm as wrong in my view of you as the latter? I find so many people who reference the "capitalist system' viewing it as a monolithic force rather than the product of generations of small personal and collective actions and choices. The difference is that one view sees the world in a state of flux and constant change, with our every act altering its state in at least a small way.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Pete12b at 20:14 on 08 June 2008
 

Thank you Ben and Julian for raising some excellent points and along the way introducing me to peasants, sheep and muskrats - the points you made about big business, national musical identity, the choice whether to follow or not be concerned with it show fantastic insight into my original question. Many thanks, I have enjoyed the heated debate which was my original intention - just to get us all thrashing out some beliefs and views.

The comments when reading back do show that an all round knowledge is needed in order to understand and fully appreciate music - politics, culture, history and religion.

My students are divided - some thing total enjoyment and understanding can be achieved through analytical skills and viewing compositions as abstracts - others appreciate the importance of context within the regimes, social issues and functionality.

I am a little disappointed that more people didn't join in, and I am wracking my brain to think of a new fiery or deep topic! Why do boys have less rhythmic ability than girls - yet boys far outnumber girls as composers? Please think of something deliciously controversial or deep to get more debating. This time I will, if it is okay, let my students join in more.

Many thanks again Ben and Julian for your time, patience and sometimes focussed agression.

Pete

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  Ben Mueller-Heaslip at 20:59 on 08 June 2008
 

hmm... I'm not convinced, Pete.

I suspect your 'students', were they real and had they witnessed this display of your opinions, would be diminishing in number in direct proportion with the level of respect they have for you. Not that I think it's an issue. Nice try, though.

Is this a fairly objective translation of your last post? I think it's reasonably good:

"Yes, the opinion I expressed did have a racist foundation - I thought other bigots on this forum would join in and support me. But as they haven't I'm going to say that I don't really hold those views and was just saying them to be provocative - it's funny that you guys took it seriously. But I don't mind presenting myself as a bigot because racism is, after all, a bit funny and not a really serious issue.

Hey! Let's see if we can push someone else's buttons about some issue we don't care enough about to understand! Being smug is where it's at: it works for me and it can work for you too!"

Well: the joke might be on me, but I'm not the joke.

  Re: National heritage vs Political Correctness  scott_good at 03:55 on 09 June 2008
 


1) The exponential proliferation of recorded music?

I think it will be ages before it is clearly understood what the impact of mechanical reproduction will have on the human mind. I believe it is profound, but I'm not sure exactly why and how. But, read Walter Benjamin's paper on the subject.

2) Reluctance of composers to assimilate changes in technology?

Well, there have been so many ways in which technology has interacted with music making for hundreds/thousands of years on many levels.

Although you may disagree, I believe my trombone is an example of excellent technology. In todays world of micro chips, for me, it still does the trick. So do violins and pianos and...

Also, I do not believe all music needs to be amplified and recorded.

so, not an issue for me. lower than the sheep.

3) Changes in public perception of classical music and its composers?

Huge. But this is very complex - it's not just about classical music but of the very idea of what music is and means. Also, this refers back to point 1 and 2.

4) The changes to the official nursery rhymes?

Actually, I'm a bit suspicious of mother goose...

5) The death of the orchestra as an artistically-valid medium for composition?

I don't agree with this statement. It's the death word that bothers me so - too final.

But, another complex subject. But on a pure artistic scale, I see nothing inherently wrong about composing for an orchestra (if someone is going to play it...), as long as the expectations are based in the reality of the mediums capacity.

But, i do think orchestras have problems on many levels.

6) The emergence (or lack thereof) of new small-ensemble forms?

One of the positive things going on for sure. Interesting issue - important, but not on a big level like #1 or #3.

7) Sheep in 16th century Yorkshire?

ha ha. i liked that story -thought it spoke well to our time also.

8) The dislocation of the composer/performer relationship?

this is mostly personal (depends on who you are talking to). but yes, quite present in the orchestral world.

i think this is a big issue.

9) Changes in audience expectations and tastes?

core issue. so many factors. refers much to #1.

10) Experimental modes of presentation vs. maintaining the concert hall tradition?

to me not a huge issue. concert halls work for what they are meant to do - let people hear and play music in good acoustics - there is lots of room for creative presentations outside of concert halls, and they are being explored.

but, certainly worth discussing and sharing ideas.

11) Representation of creative music in the media?

big issue, but, what is there to say?

except more people should turn off the tv and go out and see live music/art.

12) Muskrats in rural Quebec?

?

13) The collapse of real debate on issues relevant to the survival and growth of this art form?

well...keep going please.

This 31 message thread spans 3 pages:  < <   1  [2]  3  > >