Great Composers, Lousy Reviews

[Homo Aestheticus]

"Really, this is a lament for a lost era. The great lousy reviews arose because critics and audiences truly cared about music and its future. Critics were sometimes reactionary, boneheaded, and cockamamie, but music mattered to them. If we no longer enjoy the uproars and the withering screeds of yesteryear, it's mainly because people no longer care passionately enough about what they hear in the concert hall to want to murder somebody over it"

http://www.slate.com/id/2210339/pagenum/all/

*****

Will anyone here argue that the above is not true ?  I believe Mr. Swafford has hit the nail on the head.

[Bulldog]

"Really, this is a lament for a lost era. The great lousy reviews arose because critics and audiences truly cared about music and its future. Critics were sometimes reactionary, boneheaded, and cockamamie, but music mattered to them. If we no longer enjoy the uproars and the withering screeds of yesteryear, it's mainly because people no longer care passionately enough about what they hear in the concert hall to want to murder somebody over it"

http://www.slate.com/id/2210339/pagenum/all/

*****

Will anyone here argue that the above is not true ?  I believe Mr. Swafford has hit the nail on the head.

I don't think it's true.  Those "lousy" reviews were full of ridiculous and histrionic comments.  Fact is that passion can well exist without over-the-top criticisms.  Don't you feel any passion?

[Homo Aestheticus]

Don't you feel any passion?

Excuse me ?  I am someone who invents the net name: 'The Unrepentant Pelleastrian'   

Isn't that an indication of great passion and love ?

0:)

[ChamberNut]

Excuse me ?  I am someone who invents the net name: 'The Unrepentant Pelleastrian'   

Isn't that an indication of great passion ?

0:)

Yes, some might even say - obsession?

[Homo Aestheticus]

Yes, some might even say - obsession?

Nothing wrong with obession.

Infinitely better that it be an aesthetic product rather than involvement with alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc..

[ChamberNut]

Better that it be an aesthetic product rather than involvement with alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc..

I agree with you there.

[The Six]

It's great reading the composers of the past getting blasted, but it wouldn't work today. New music barely has a voice as it is without having critics tear it apart.

[greg]

Infinitely better that it be an aesthetic product rather than involvement with alcohol, drugs, gambling, etc..

High five!

[Josquin des Prez]

Nice article, and it expresses something i've been considering for a long time now.

[Bulldog]

Excuse me ?  I am someone who invents the net name: 'The Unrepentant Pelleastrian'   

Isn't that an indication of great passion and love ?

0:)

No, it's just three words from a man who wants attention.

But let's say you do have much passion about music.  So do I and likely most other members of the board.  So where's this reduced passion that Mr. Swafford dwells on?  It hasn't declined - it's simply not expressed in overwrought terms by windbags.

[Homo Aestheticus]

No, it's just three words from a man who wants attention.

No, it's the expression of fanatical love.   

It hasn't declined - it's simply not expressed in overwrought terms by windbags.

But you missed the larger point... ACD explains it very well here:

The main reason classical music is no longer on the menu of cultural literacy is that somehow it lost the critical mass of a critical community that listens / talks / writes about music as though it matters and where there are frequent debates, multiple judgments and competing ideas to keep things energized. How can you build artistic consensus that keeps renewing itself if you lack critical voices? Without that consensus, it's difficult to argue that classical music deserves a place at the table

The generally debased, PC-contaminated, ultra-"civilized" crowd which today constitutes much of the mainstream classical music critical fraternity relishes nothing so much as engaging in discussion of classical music in ways more appropriate to genteel luncheon and dinner parties where it's considered the height of gauche to argue in any manner that might upset the digestion of those seated at table. Arguing in that "civilized," genteel way makes members of this critical crowd feel they've been winning, intellectually probing, stimulating, and "with it," when all they've managed to be is glib; nattering on about nothing of real substance or pertinence while at the same time keeping hands clean, hair un-mussed, and digestion undisturbed — theirs and their readers'.

Well, I've a bit of news for this critically "civilized" bunch: Your brother mainstream classical music critics of prior eras would have none of such "civilized," genteel pap, even in proper and oh-so-civilized Victorian England. When they discussed or wrote on matters musical they were not in the least afraid of dirtying hands, mussing hair, and disturbing digestion. They carried on their dialogues red in tooth and claw if need be as in those culturally more concerned eras we had in the mainstream media that healthy and vital mass of informed classical music critical ferment ... at the heart of which was a critical fraternity made up of courageous and erudite classical music critics who felt that anything in music or music related worth arguing about was worth getting bloodied for.

http://www.soundsandfury.com/soundsandfury/2005/07/a_lack_of_criti.html

****

[Bulldog]

No, it's the expression of fanatical love.   

Hey, it's just a title you gave to yourself; that's not passion.

As for my missing the larger point, I reject your larger point (not that I feel it has anything large associated with it).  You use ACD as a prime reference, a man whose extremist views likely go over very well with you.  Do you ever move in a moderate manner?  I ask because you always seem to be at one end of the spectrum or the other.  In this respect, you remind me of my brother - everything is at the extreme.

[Homo Aestheticus]

Hey, it's just a title you gave to yourself; that's not passion.

Hmm, let's see:

I spend more time with it than any other opera (along with  Falstaff and  Das Rheingold)

I've attended every performance at the Metropolitan Opera since 1995.   

My bookshelf has more books, monographs, analyses, articles and reviews on it than any other work dating all the way back to 1904.

I've always got my eye on the following: http://www.operabase.com/oplist.cgi?id=none&lang=en&is=pelleas+et+melisande&by=&loc=&stype=abs&sd=4&sm=2&sy=2009&etype=abs&ed=&em=&ey=

I dream of conducting it.

And so on... 

Just a title, Don ?

0:)

[Bulldog]

Hmm, let's see:

I spend more time with it than any other opera (along with  Falstaff and  Das Rheingold)

I've attended every performance at the Metropolitan Opera since 1995.   

My bookshelf has more books, monographs, analyses, articles and reviews on it than any other work dating all the way back to 1904.

I've always got my eye on the following: http://www.operabase.com/oplist.cgi?id=none&lang=en&is=pelleas+et+melisande&by=&loc=&stype=abs&sd=4&sm=2&sy=2009&etype=abs&ed=&em=&ey=

I dream of conducting it.

I've had dreams where I'm Bach playing one of his keyboard works.  By the way, you might want at some point to acquire a second bookshelf.

[Homo Aestheticus]

By the way, you might want at some point to acquire a second bookshelf.

I might stop by  Crate and Barrel  tomorrow evening.

[Sergeant Rock]

Will anyone here argue that the above is not true ?

I will. I'll just mention Norman Lebrecht, David Hurwitz and Donald Rosenberg (who was fired because of his passionate condemnation of Welser-Möst). Nothing "polite" about those critics. And they aren't the only ones. And further: all you have to do is read any of the numerous classical music blogs or participate in classical music forums (including this one) to realize there is just as much passion for music as there has ever been...and just as lousy criticism (see any post by J des Prez    )

Sarge

[karlhenning]

I will. I'll just mention Norman Lebrecht, David Hurwitz and Donald Rosenberg (who was fired because of his passionate condemnation of Welser-Möst). Nothing "polite" about those critics. And they aren't the only ones. And further: all you have to do is read any of the numerous classical music blogs or participate in classical music forums (including this one) to realize there is just as much passion for music as there has ever been...and just as lousy criticism (see any post by J des Prez    )

Right;  the mere fact of passion for music (witness the OP) means exactly nothing in terms of generating quality of criticism.  Passionate condemnation fails to earn its place at the table, period.

(Nothing "polite" about a cloth-head claiming that Carter and Wuorinen "have no business" as composers, either, BTW.)

[knight66]

Eric, No more P&M posts here. You have you thread, that was provided to restrict the rash across the board, do use it and leave the reas to the board P&M free.

Knight

[drogulus]

I don't think it's true.  Those "lousy" reviews were full of ridiculous and histrionic comments.  Fact is that passion can well exist without over-the-top criticisms.  Don't you feel any passion?

     I do, and I go over the top because of it.

     Besides, these splenetic comments often contain wonderful observations. The best was not by a critic, though, but by a fellow composer. Brahms referred to Bruckner's "gigantic snake symphonies" or "boa constrictors".* Wonderful!

     _{* I wish someone would find this for me in German}