Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 09, 2010, 04:41:56 PM
Contemporary "classical music" isn't a significant cultural factor, and that's so obvious it isn't even debatable at this point.  In that sense, it is as dead as a the dinosaurs, even if, like dinosaurs, it remains of interest to a few academics and nerds who will grow out of it.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 10, 2010, 02:20:04 PM
Contemporary "classical music" isn't a significant cultural factor

Prove it. I count three logical fallacies in your post and no evidence.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 10, 2010, 06:12:19 PM
Contemporary "classical music" isn't a significant cultural factor

Prove it. I count three logical fallacies in your post and no evidence.

Name a single composer of contemporary "classical" music that has meaningfully impacted the common public conception of music.  The average member of the public is far more likely to be familiar with death and black metal than with any composer of contemporary "classical."  There's a reason that modern "classical" music is often labeled "academic" music: it isn't written for the public, it is written by conservatory graduates for the consumption of other conservatory graduates, with neither the expectation nor the desire to reach any audience beyond the professional in-group.  As a force for shaping human culture, it is fucking DEAD.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 10, 2010, 07:55:07 PM
Name a single composer of contemporary "classical" music that has meaningfully impacted the common public conception of music.

Cage.

</argument>

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 10, 2010, 08:37:11 PM
Name a single composer of contemporary "classical" music that has meaningfully impacted the common public conception of music.

Cage.

</argument>

Cage impacted the public consciousness in the 50s and 60s and has been dead for the better part of 20 years.  There's nothing "contemporary" about him.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 10, 2010, 10:39:57 PM


Name a single composer of contemporary "classical" music that has meaningfully impacted the common public conception of music.

The burden of proof is with he who asserts.

  The average member of the public is far more likely to be familiar with death and black metal than with any composer of contemporary "classical."

Prove it.

[...] modern "classical" music is often labeled "academic" music:

Prove it.

it isn't written for the public, it is written by conservatory graduates for the consumption of other conservatory graduates, with neither the expectation nor the desire to reach any audience beyond the professional in-group.

Prove it.

As a force for shaping human culture, it is fucking DEAD.

A fuck. I'm scared. Please comfort me by proving it.

Are you interested in having a discussion? Then let's begin by you using something besides forceful rhetoric and logical fallacies to back your claims.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 10, 2010, 11:25:19 PM
Generally speaking, anything written after World War II is classified as "contemporary" by classical standards.

You would be hard-pressed to find a more influential post-WWII composer than Cage.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 12:13:48 AM
Generally speaking, anything written after World War II is classified as "contemporary" by classical standards.

Yes, but by the standards of the rest of the universe, something that occurred 50 years ago is not "contemporary."  If someone says, "Classical music is dead as major cultural force in 2010," and your best response is, "Well, John Cage," then you haven't even remotely rebutted the argument.

Quote
You would be hard-pressed to find a more influential post-WWII composer than Cage.

And you would be equally hard-pressed to find anyone outside the academic music clubhouse who has been meaningfully influenced by John Cage.  For good or for ill, the classical modernism of 1910 to the 1940s had real cultural legs and influence outside the academic world.  The minimalists and their successors never even made the pretense of composing for real audiences, as with the rest of the "high" art world, they followed postmodern theorists down the rabbit hole and threw away any hope of actually impacting the culture outside of their own little circles of initiates.


Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 12:32:33 AM
What's that?  Cage?  Absolute twat.  Listen to music, instead.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 12:51:07 AM
And you would be equally hard-pressed to find anyone outside the academic music clubhouse who has been meaningfully influenced by John Cage.

Worthless argument, for you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone outside of academic art music who's been seriously influenced by the music of Bach, Mozart and Beethoven – for classical music has always been the music of a small elite, claiming otherwise is delusional. Not to mention that the influence of Cage and Stockhausen on contemporary pop and rock music has been quite profound, if you're going to judge the relevance of art by its ability to shape contemporary culture, then the aforementioned artists are certainly more important than classical modernism has ever been.

As for your the rest of your post, it's hard to argue with such ignorant and blatantly wrong preconceptions – all that needs to be said is that minimalism has long crept its way into pop culture through the works of Glass, Pärt and Nyman.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 12:58:12 AM
Worthless argument, for you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone outside of academic art music who's been seriously influenced by the music [of] Bach.. and Beethoven.

My only encounter with "academic art music" was attempting GCSE music, and the "famous composers" we studied were Schumann and Britten.  It is long after having achieved a dubious A in that course that the joy and intrigue of the three Bs has been made known to me (thank you, DLA), and that my own music has begun to be influenced by the Baroque and the Romantic in any manner more intrinsic than melodically/harmonically (Yngwie Malmsteen just doesn't cut it).

Quote
Not to mention that the influence of Cage and Stockhausen on contemporary pop and rock music has been quite profound indeed, if you're going to judge the relevance of art by its ability to shape contemporary culture, then the aforementioned artists are certainly more prominent in their influence than classical modernism has ever been.

The majority of modern "pop and rock" musicians, when asked if they know who Cage is, will say "who, Nicholas?  He was good in Wicker Man.  I heard they made another version with Gandalf in it".

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 01:05:37 AM
Quote
Not to mention that the influence of Cage and Stockhausen on contemporary pop and rock music has been quite profound indeed, if you're going to judge the relevance of art by its ability to shape contemporary culture, then the aforementioned artists are certainly more prominent in their influence than classical modernism has ever been.

The majority of modern "pop and rock" musicians, when asked if they know who Cage is, will say "who, Nicholas?  He was good in Wicker Man.  I heard they made another version with Gandalf in it".

Indirect influence through the likes of Zappa and Pink Floyd is still influence.

Worthless argument, for you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone outside of academic art music who's been seriously influenced by the music [of] Bach.. and Beethoven.

My only encounter with "academic art music" was attempting GCSE music, and the "famous composers" we studied were Schumann and Britten.  It is long after having achieved a dubious A in that course that the joy and intrigue of the three Bs has been made known to me (thank you, DLA), and that my own music has begun to be influenced by the Baroque and the Romantic in any manner more intrinsic than melodically/harmonically (Yngwie Malmsteen just doesn't cut it).

Exceptions like you and me prove the rule.

A final edit: Why the hate for Cage, by the way? Trolled by 4'33"?

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 01:52:39 AM
A final edit: Why the hate for Cage, by the way?

Cage was criticized for focusing in sound rather than in music. Cage didn't want to make sounds something psychological, evocative or harmonic, just sounds. see

Ok, the concept is logically flawed. Sounds really needed Cage to happen?

I hate when these artists try to justify their concepts with bad philosophy and fail in execution as consequence.

I'll keep with the good ol' Beethoven instead:

"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy, it is the wine of a new procreation, and I am Bacchus who presses out this glorious wine for men and makes them drunk with the spirit.'"

Edit: Also, hearing Cage talking about his music or hearing others talking about Cage's music is far more interesting than actually hearing Cage's music, that's not good.

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 04:14:38 AM
The burden of proof is with he who asserts.

Prove that.

Although, seriously, what kind of proof are you looking for? How does one prove unequivocally what is and what is not a cultural force?
Do you want numbers?

Contemporary classical: dead or just stinky?
April 11, 2010, 04:17:12 AM
Indirect influence through the likes of Zappa and Pink Floyd is still influence.

Yes, but the fact that Cage influences Floyd, Floyd influences Band X and then I hear Band X doesn't mean I'm hearing any Cage influence. What quintessentially Cagian influences can you trace from Pink Floyd to bands recording and performing today?