Does Star Wars soundtrack count as classical music?

[Mirror Image]

Well, I can say that at least prequels suck. Except Williams's music and few actors. I still don't think that by awknowledging Williams's genius it takes anything away from Wagner, who is the ultimate master for me.

Williams' genius? Are you kidding me? Okay, MI...calm down, take a deep breath.....okay.....I did not read this.

[mc ukrneal]

So I take you're an admirer of John Williams?

If you go back a few pages, you will see that unlike some here, I have no problem putting Williams in the same breath with Vaughan Williams, Stravinsky and many other well known composers. This has given some of you fits, I know. So, yes I do enjoy his music.

But I was trying to put that like/dislike to the side and see if there were in fact any moments of true plagerism, and not just similarities in style/sound. I think this can be objective (either he did it or not), so need not end in angry discourse. The subjective part of it would be how far one has to go to be considered a plagrist. I provided an example of another (even more hated composer) to illustrate what I meant. I am interested to see if there are such instances with Williams.

[MishaK]

But I was trying to put that like/dislike to the side and see if there were in fact any moments of true plagerism, and not just similarities in style/sound.

You mean plagiarism.

Perhaps not outright plagiarism, but unthinkable without the original. E.g.

Main theme of Indiana Jones = Strauss' Don Juan opening, simplified

Main theme from Jaws = Mussorgsky's Night on Bald Mountain opening, drastically simplified

etc. etc.

Really, Williams' music is good solid workmanship, but original it is not at all. It is very derivative and a century behind its time. Without the models from Strauss, Wagner, Debussy, Stravinsky and others to look at, Williams wouldn't know what to put on the page. It suits the purpose well, but he's far from even being one of the more original film music writers like Rota, Morricone or Mancini.

[karlhenning]

Really, Williams' music is good solid workmanship, but original it is not at all.

And for that reason, to 'equate' him with Stravinsky, Vaughan Williams, & al. is IMO terribly naïve.

[Scarpia]

And for that reason, to 'equate' him with Stravinsky, Vaughan Williams, & al. is IMO terribly naïve.

Quite so.  I don't have any trouble classifying Williams as boring, unimaginative, derivative, unoriginal classical music.  (A definition of classical music which requires it to be 'genius' is unworkable.)   But to equate John Williams with Stravinsky or Vaughan Williams strikes me as utterly absurd.

[mc ukrneal]

You mean plagiarism.

Perhaps not outright plagiarism, but unthinkable without the original. E.g.

Main theme of Indiana Jones = Strauss' Don Juan opening, simplified

Main theme from Jaws = Mussorgsky's Night on Bald Mountain opening, drastically simplified

etc. etc.

Really, Williams' music is good solid workmanship, but original it is not at all. It is very derivative and a centiry behind its time. Without the models from Strauss, Wagner, Debussy, Stravinsky and others to look at, Williams wouldn't know what to put on the page. It suits the purpose well, but he's far from even being one of the more original film music writers like Rota, Morricone or Mancini.

On the plagiarism (thanks for the spelling fix) - so he didn't steal outright. Great and minor composers alike have borrowed something from others and made them their own as I feel Williams has done. Anyway, I appreciate the examples. I am not familiar with Don Juan, and not sure if I have that or not, but will try to eventually compare that. I know Night on Bald Mountain well, but the comparison to Jaws never occurred to me, so I will have to listen to that again as well.

The rest is your opinion - one I do not share. The reason I do not is that the music has original and attractive melodies (even if there are similarities in style to other composers) and he has a style all his own that I find engages. But let's not go down that argument road - thanks again for the examples. 

[Brahmsian]

Main theme from Jaws = Mussorgsky's Night on Bald Mountain opening, drastically simplified

Also heavily borrowed from Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring, "The Augurs of Spring"

[mc ukrneal]

Also heavily borrowed from Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring, "The Augurs of Spring"

I'm sorry. Do you mean he used this in Jaws? If so, are you referring to the main theme?

[Brahmsian]

I'm sorry. Do you mean he used this in Jaws? If so, are you referring to the main theme?

Yes, you can hear it in the climax of the main theme.  Or at least, I can.

[MishaK]

Yes, you can hear it in the climax of the main theme.  Or at least, I can.

Insofar as Stravinsky may have gotten the idea from Mussorgsky to beging with, same thing. 

[Mirror Image]

So, yes I do enjoy his music.

This was all I needed to know. As far as the part where you lump John Williams in with composers like Stravinsky, I'm going to have to disagree and just walk away from the conversation.

[Philoctetes]

Quite so.  I don't have any trouble classifying Williams as boring, unimaginative, derivative, unoriginal classical music.  (A definition of classical music which requires it to be 'genius' is unworkable.)   But to equate John Williams with Stravinsky or Vaughan Williams strikes me as utterly absurd.

Not so absurd.

[lescamil]

Here is my take on the issue: any music composed for the purposes of serving as the score for a film (or any other sort of commercial music), and only for this purpose, is not considered classical music. It doesn't matter what the style is, but it is the purpose. If the composer (or someone else, such as an arranger) orchestrates and edits the work into a performable suite, then it is now classical music (because it is intended for concert performance). You cannot perform untouched scores in a concert hall, so therefore it is not classical music. The idea of a work intended to be for concert performance in a formal setting serves as my personal qualification for a work to be called "classical music" (and yes, I realize that the term "classical music" is flawed, so I also call it "concert music").

[Florestan]

The idea of a work intended to be for concert performance in a formal setting serves as my personal qualification for a work to be called "classical music"

This criterion disqualifies as "classical music" anything written prior to the advent of the formal setting of the concert hall --- Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert included. 

[mahler10th]

Williams' genius? Are you kidding me? Okay, MI...calm down, take a deep breath.....okay.....I did not read this.

I didn't read it either.  However, I would rather listen to 10 fabulously scored soundtracks by John Williams than...Jazz.   
Williams et al are doing what Verdi, Puccini et al did.  Writing for the common entertainment media of the day, applying music to stories.  I don't think Williams is a 'genius', but he's just as talented as many of the best known names of this musical tradition.
(Sorry about mentioning Jazz again MI... )

[jochanaan]

Here is my take on the issue: any music composed for the purposes of serving as the score for a film (or any other sort of commercial music), and only for this purpose, is not considered classical music. It doesn't matter what the style is, but it is the purpose. If the composer (or someone else, such as an arranger) orchestrates and edits the work into a performable suite, then it is now classical music (because it is intended for concert performance). You cannot perform untouched scores in a concert hall, so therefore it is not classical music. The idea of a work intended to be for concert performance in a formal setting serves as my personal qualification for a work to be called "classical music" (and yes, I realize that the term "classical music" is flawed, so I also call it "concert music").

This criterion disqualifies as "classical music" anything written prior to the advent of the formal setting of the concert hall --- Bach, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert included. 

That's the difficulty with this and most other "classification" discussions.  Not many of us who voted "yes" are seriously equating Mr. Williams' compositional mastery with that of Bach, Wagner, Stravinsky or the other commonly accepted Great Masters.  The concerns I and a few others have raised are with the entire classification system.  However useful these labels may be to academics or marketing executives, they become somewhat ridiculous when applied to real music, Williams' or any other.

For the record, I count the Star Wars soundtrack as good, enjoyable music.  I for one would find the movies much less enjoyable without the music.  And Mr. Williams is by no means without subtlety.  The Schindler's List score is a fine example of subtle underpinning that seldom draws serious attention to itself but deepens the already profound experience.  But as I've said, I've actually played suites from the Star Wars and Harry Potter soundtracks, so maybe I'm positively prejudiced.

[karlhenning]

For the record, I count the Star Wars soundtrack as good, enjoyable music.  I for one would find the movies much less enjoyable without the music.

With that, I have no particular quarrel.

Though some day I should watch a Star Wars movie with the sound off, and a Havergal Brian symphony playing as an alternative soundtrack . . . .

[jochanaan]

With that, I have no particular quarrel.

Though some day I should watch a Star Wars movie with the sound off, and a Havergal Brian symphony playing as an alternative soundtrack . . . .

They're about the same length, aren't they? 

[Guido]

I'm sure I have heard Williams mention the difference before - He said his film scores are different from his concert works because in the latter he has formal or structural concerns, whereas the former just use the harmonic and melodic language of classical to provide whatever background music is currently needed without any thought for larger scale structure.

[Mirror Image]

I didn't read it either.  However, I would rather listen to 10 fabulously scored soundtracks by John Williams than...Jazz.   
Williams et al are doing what Verdi, Puccini et al did.  Writing for the common entertainment media of the day, applying music to stories.  I don't think Williams is a 'genius', but he's just as talented as many of the best known names of this musical tradition.
(Sorry about mentioning Jazz again MI... )

It's quite alright, John. It doesn't matter to me that you don't like jazz. It's an acquired taste just like Varese or Brahms. It's all a matter of what you're exposed to and what you connect with.