Does Star Wars soundtrack count as classical music?

[North Star]

But I don't think Cinema has produced any great concert composers who have produced concert work that shows signs of being programmed up against LvB, Bach etc.

Exactly; which is the inverse of the examples of Prokofiev, Vaughan Williams, Shostakovich:  expert composers, first of all, who have written music for film.

What about Bernard Herrmann?

[Karl Henning]

What about Bernard Herrmann?

Good counter-example, certainly.

[mc ukrneal]

It is true for almost any art, manufacturing, events in our lives etc, etc and basically indicates that the main point i was making has in your mind been divorced from this side issue that you have latched onto. The main thrust of my argument was that by far most film music is filler, gloop, an extra. A small amout is considerably more. But not much of it. The genre has pulled in a few significant composers to produce work for the medium and of those few a subset of works have been programed along side their usual work and that of the mainstream classical composers.

But I don't think Cinema has produced any great concert composers who have produced concert work that shows signs of being programmed up against LvB, Bach etc. Williams is very popular, but his material gets played in the concert hall by orcherstas in themed programs of Film Music which seems to me to be pretty much a genre in its own right, not to be confused in Classical.

And to reaffirm: my view remains that even most good film music does not in any extended form survive divorce from that which it was designed to accompany.

Mike

Exactly; which is the inverse of the examples of Prokofiev, Vaughan Williams, Shostakovich:  expert composers, first of all, who have written music for film.

You both make it sound as if being a 'film composer' is a 'lesser' composer in some way and that being a traditional 'classical' composer is superior in some way. Do you believe this?

[Karl Henning]

You both make it sound as if being a 'film composer' is a 'lesser' composer in some way and that being a traditional 'classical' composer is superior in some way. Do you believe this?

As a class, no. Case by case, perhaps.

I've already mentioned that Williams technique is sub-par.

I've already mentioned, too, that film is not the composer's project in the way that a string quartet, or even a ballet, is.  I can speculate that this is why Williams has not mastered the art of composition, where he is certainly a master of furnishing sonic events suitable for accompanying film.

[relm1]

But I don't think Cinema has produced any great concert composers who have produced concert work that shows signs of being programmed up against LvB, Bach etc. 

Just last month, I saw the Star Wars suite performed in concert it was along with Beethoven Eroica (heroes being the theme). 

For some people, originality = innovation of musical techniques.  For others (myself included), originality = uniqueness of overall style.  Originality is overrated.  It is very easy to be original and much harder to be good.  This is of course just my opinion but there are very few original composers.  Most that we love are still distinctive.  I listened to Tubin's Symphony No. 2 and 5 (based on comments made in his thread here) and though it has zero originality, it is distinctively his and very rewarding and I'm glad to have heard it.  It was thoroughly engaging and well written and I would love to hear more from him.  I believe almost all composers we love fall into this category of not innovative, probably derivative, but individual.  People seem to mix "innovative" with "original" and it gives others the misleading impression that there's nothing of value in a piece of music unless it does something new from a technical point of view.

It's a mode of thought that plagues contemporary concert composers and contributes to the snobbery that film music (as epitomized by Williams) is worthless music.  What makes Williams's music distinctively his, apart from the superficial things that are easy to imitate like the flashy fanfares, evil dread chorus, and such, are a multitude of small idiosyncrasies that are very non-noticeable for the average listener and take a lot of listening to start to really notice them, like the special kind of jazz-infused harmony, the kind of intervals by which he constructs both his themes and much else that's going on, etc.   I wouldn't feel qualified to specify them all, but I'm convinced that Williams's unique "style" is just a combination of so many things that is very hard to really duplicate on a deeper than reasonably superficial level, but its uniqueness pales compared to a lot of composers with more overt, easily noticeable stylistic trademarks.

[Monsieur Croche]

What about Bernard Herrmann?

Great film composer whose early history shows a money-where-your-mouth is far deeper commitment to classical than many another film composer. Also wrote straight-up classical more than a little well, too. He was / is outstanding, and, imo, a pretty rare exception to the norm.

It took our teen-age hotdog young musician and composer from 'down under' forum member to cut straight to the heart of this Q, though....
'Unpopular Opinions' thread, ComposerOfAvantGarde's post
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,19564.msg950727.html#msg950727
[Thank you, CoAG.]

[mc ukrneal]

Just last month, I saw the Star Wars suite performed in concert it was along with Beethoven Eroica (heroes being the theme). 

For some people, originality = innovation of musical techniques.  For others (myself included), originality = uniqueness of overall style.  Originality is overrated.  It is very easy to be original and much harder to be good.  This is of course just my opinion but there are very few original composers.  Most that we love are still distinctive.  I listened to Tubin's Symphony No. 2 and 5 (based on comments made in his thread here) and though it has zero originality, it is distinctively his and very rewarding and I'm glad to have heard it.  It was thoroughly engaging and well written and I would love to hear more from him.  I believe almost all composers we love fall into this category of not innovative, probably derivative, but individual.  People seem to mix "innovative" with "original" and it gives others the misleading impression that there's nothing of value in a piece of music unless it does something new from a technical point of view.

It's a mode of thought that plagues contemporary concert composers and contributes to the snobbery that film music (as epitomized by Williams) is worthless music.  What makes Williams's music distinctively his, apart from the superficial things that are easy to imitate like the flashy fanfares, evil dread chorus, and such, are a multitude of small idiosyncrasies that are very non-noticeable for the average listener and take a lot of listening to start to really notice them, like the special kind of jazz-infused harmony, the kind of intervals by which he constructs both his themes and much else that's going on, etc.   I wouldn't feel qualified to specify them all, but I'm convinced that Williams's unique "style" is just a combination of so many things that is very hard to really duplicate on a deeper than reasonably superficial level, but its uniqueness pales compared to a lot of composers with more overt, easily noticeable stylistic trademarks.

I really connect with this idea. I could quibble about certain aspects, but all in all, is something that meshes with my thinking. I spent the last couple of days thinking about why some people keep going back to the composers he is supposed to have stolen from and using that as a reason to lessen his work. He makes the music his own - I would never mix up the Empire Strikes Back with Holst's Mars, for example. As you put it, the music is distinctive.

[mc ukrneal]

Great film composer whose early history shows a money-where-your-mouth is far deeper commitment to classical than many another film composer. Also wrote straight-up classical more than a little well, too. He was / is outstanding, and, imo, a pretty rare exception to the norm.

It took our teen-age hotdog young musician and composer from 'down under' forum member to cut straight to the heart of this Q, though....
'Unpopular Opinions' thread, ComposerOfAvantGarde's post
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,19564.msg950727.html#msg950727
[Thank you, CoAG.]

Except he's wrong in this case (or at least, partly). I have been to numerous stores (mostly in the past since most have closed), where soundtracks are in the classical section (often in a separate room with the word 'Classical' over the entrance to the door). In addition, John Williams discs (compilations for example, mostly with the Boston Pops) are always in the classical section. Another example is Erich Kunzel and the many discs he did with the Cincinnati Pops - never seen them anywhere but in classical.

[Florestan]

Originality is overrated.  It is very easy to be original and much harder to be good.  This is of course just my opinion but there are very few original composers.  Most that we love are still distinctive.  [...]  I believe almost all composers we love fall into this category of not innovative, probably derivative, but individual.  People seem to mix "innovative" with "original" and it gives others the misleading impression that there's nothing of value in a piece of music unless it does something new from a technical point of view.

+ 1

[knight66]

What about Bernard Herrmann?

That has been covered. How much music, pieces and time get concert coverage? Very few and very infrequently.

Mike

[knight66]

You both make it sound as if being a 'film composer' is a 'lesser' composer in some way and that being a traditional 'classical' composer is superior in some way. Do you believe this?

Yes.

Mike

[knight66]

Just last month, I saw the Star Wars suite performed in concert it was along with Beethoven Eroica (heroes being the theme)

It's a mode of thought that plagues contemporary concert composers and contributes to the snobbery that film music (as epitomized by Williams) is worthless music.  What makes Williams's music distinctively his, apart from the superficial things that are easy to imitate like the flashy fanfares, evil dread chorus, and such, are a multitude of small idiosyncrasies that are very non-noticeable for the average listener and take a lot of listening to start to really notice them, like the special kind of jazz-infused harmony, the kind of intervals by which he constructs both his themes and much else that's going on, etc.   I wouldn't feel qualified to specify them all, but I'm convinced that Williams's unique "style" is just a combination of so many things that is very hard to really duplicate on a deeper than reasonably superficial level, but its uniqueness pales compared to a lot of composers with more overt, easily noticeable stylistic trademarks.

Thanks re the info on the concert programming. I have never seen such pairing in the UK, though I don't scan all concert adverts across the country.

As to the rest of what I copied above; if you are going to quote me in order to suggest I am a snob; quote me accurately. I said lots of film music is sludge, some is very good, effectibve etc and some is exceptional. Williams is very skilled, but I would not pay to hear his music which is basically easy on the ear, catchy and ultimately soft centred. It is commercial. And before you start on the old chestnut of...so was Verdi, so was Puccint; then I will clarify. Williams is to a serious composer as Lloyd Webber is to Verdi. I think of Williams as equivilent to Lloyd Webber. They are/were all commercially aware, but..... Well, I don't need to finish the thought, you catch my drift.

I feel I have said what I meant to and will leave off now as we are engaged in a dialog of the deaf.

Mike

[Monsieur Croche]

Except he's wrong in this case (or at least, partly). I have been to numerous stores (mostly in the past since most have closed), where soundtracks are in the classical section (often in a separate room with the word 'Classical' over the entrance to the door). In addition, John Williams discs (compilations for example, mostly with the Boston Pops) are always in the classical section. Another example is Erich Kunzel and the many discs he did with the Cincinnati Pops - never seen them anywhere but in classical.

lol. Where do you live?

[mc ukrneal]

Yes.

Mike

Ah, well perhaps here is the root of the problem. I totally disagree. Will be interested to see Karl's response...

[Karl Henning]

Ah, well perhaps here is the root of the problem. I totally disagree. Will be interested to see Karl's response...

As a class, no. Case by case, perhaps.

I've already mentioned that Williams' technique is sub-par.

I've already mentioned, too, that film is not the composer's project in the way that a string quartet, or even a ballet, is.  I can speculate that this is why Williams has not mastered the art of composition, where he is certainly a master of furnishing sonic events suitable for accompanying film.

[Monsieur Croche]

Just last month, I saw the Star Wars suite performed in concert it was along with Beethoven Eroica (heroes being the theme).

Themed concerts like ''Heroes'' are already a clue there is a marketing force at work to bring more bums into the seats. Programming the Williams at the end of the program [at least that is the most likely running order, and 'how did he know that?] is another calculated strategy to pull new bums into the seats to cultivate a younger audience, or to make up for already failing numbers of bums in the seats in general.

Hey, those strategies work.

Whether the better known and 'major' symphonic organizations will permanently change their general subscription season programming, which BTW 'is not programmed like that,' -- but instead programs film scores and lighter fare on non-subscription single event nights, 'movie night,' or summer pops programs with the more generally known and popular classical fare -- is yet to be seen. It may happen, but it will not be because the general classical community has all of a sudden decided 'this is classical,' but instead because of its commercial power to draw in customers.

[mc ukrneal]

But should we then see composers who have weaknesses (if we accept your statements as fact, which I am not ready to do, but want to put that aside for the moment) as somehow lesser in their craft? And how far does it go? When does this weakness cause the composer to be 'lesser' for lack of a better word? 

[Karl Henning]

Themed concerts like ''Heroes'' are already a clue there is a marketing force at work to bring more bums into the seats. Programming the Williams at the end of the program [at least that is the most likely running order, and 'how did he know that?] is another calculated strategy to pull new bums into the seats to cultivate a younger audience, or to make up for already failing numbers of bums in the seats in general.

Hey, those strategies work.

Whether the better known and 'major' symphonic organizations will permanently change their general subscription season programming, which BTW 'is not programmed like that,' -- but instead programs film scores and lighter fare on non-subscription single event nights, 'movie night,' or summer pops programs with the more generally known and popular classical fare -- is yet to be seen. It may happen, but it will not be because the general classical community has all of a sudden decided 'this is classical,' but instead because of its commercial power to draw in customers.

John Williams enjoys a permanent home in Boston, with the Pops. I don't think we'll see a Star Wars medley programmed on a BSO subscription concert anytime soon.

[Karl Henning]

But should we then see composers who have weaknesses (if we accept your statements as fact, which I am not ready to do, but want to put that aside for the moment) as somehow lesser in their craft?

I've submitted an orchestral score to a call.  If my scoring is bad, they will reject my score in favor of a composer who knows how to write for the instruments.

[mc ukrneal]

I've submitted an orchestral score to a call.  If my scoring is bad, they will reject my score in favor of a composer who knows how to write for the instruments.

Not sure of the point.

And for the record, I'm not even talking about Williams now either, I'm being more general because it is an interesting topic to me. I say this as a lover of light music and operetta (for example), which are often looked down upon.