http://www.slate.com/id/2066612/landing/1
I enjoy many of Slate's columns because they managed to be both insightful and witty at the same time, and generally, the Music Box column, covering all forms of music, is no exception. It only comes out every few weeks, but the various authors often put an interesting spin on a conventional music topic.
One fairly recent entry I enjoyed was an article about "The Lexicon of Musical Invective" and what effects it might have on how we perceive music. The famous book was discussed in relation to the mythos of the brilliant but misunderstood composer and the shortsighted critics of his time who simply lacked the faculties to comprehend his genius.
Of course, no one wants to be that guy who trashes a composition that goes on to become highly respected, but at the same time, as educators, we have to be able to look at new pieces and have the confidence to make independent judgments. The repertory is a huge part of the curriculum, and promoting lousy music for fear of looking bad in the future, or simply ignoring the issue of new music and playing only what others have already approved is a disservice to students.
This larger concept of the dynamic between composer, audience, and critical establishment is hugely important in music, and something I have a lot of interest in, but this isn't the time or place for a detailed examination of these ideas.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's amazing to look back historically on how many currently respected works were thought of as unrefined noise at their premiere. I often question what current repertoire (in all genres) will be reflectively viewed as innovative and influential for future musicians and composers.
ReplyDeleteHi Matt,
ReplyDeleteYour comments are always very insightful. Your above post sounds similar to what we've been discussing in the graduate conducting seminar. It is difficult to say what music is worth programing and what music isn't. The time we have available to work with our students is limited and preparing music that has little to offer them in their development is a waste. At the same time, I do like Dr. Ciepluch's philosophy - "Every piece is worth at least one quality performance." However, your statement is correct for the public school setting. Every piece may be worth a performance but it doesn't have to be done by our school ensembles. I would want to actually see a composition, though, before judging it, as opposed to simply reading the words of a critic.
-Damon