People obsessed by categories: "Soundtracks are not classical music!!!"

[San Antone]

I don't think anyone is arguing that John Williams is not a good composer.  His film scores are masterpieces of the genre.  And that genre is film music. The value of his music is not derived from the genre within in which his music is classified; and conversely the value of his music is not enhanced by attempting to re-classify his music as "classical". 

In fact, to the extent someone makes a strenuous argument that film music should be considered classical music, there is a whiff of insecurity about the intrinsic worth of film music and this person appears to need to enhance the value of film music by association with classical music.

[San Antone]

I will go further.  To think that any music that "sounds like" a certain kind of classical music is also classical music, is evidence that the person making that claim does not really understand what a classical composer does.

"Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" is a popular children's song the melody of which was derived from a Mozart piano sonata.  However, what makes Mozart's sonata "classical music" is not the tune and harmony, i.e. the sound of the music, it is what he does with those simple materials in order to create a complex long form structure and the development the melody and harmonies undergo in Mozart's hands.

Classical composition is primarily the craft of manipulating motivic cells, harmonic movement, and other musical materials, and the development of long form structures.

The materials themselves, which can also be used to create a pop song, are not what makes classical music classical. A classical music composer expands the possibilities of these materials beyond the surface qualities of the melody and harmonies - and in the process creates larger structures beyond what is found in film scores, pop songs, or any other kind of music which may sound something like classical music.

[Iota]

Just type in the words castaneda hoax...

Castaneda was never an especially powerful writer or thinker. His dialogue is repetitive, his landscapes are filled with generic, indistinguishable entities, and his insights are vague to the point of a blur. His genius consisted in a talent for seduction, which became a mania for manipulation and finally exploitation. His first books were brilliant because of the tension of his set-up as a tightrope between ordinary and non-ordinary reality. His permanent exile to the world of the non-ordinary meant the loss of suspension and the surrender to madness, however.
The last phase of his life saw Castaneda living in Los Angeles surrounded by Armani-clad "witches" who called Castaneda "the nagual". He had literally bewitched himself. Marketing extortionate workshops for a shamanic cult called Tensegrity, which simultaneously operated as a personal sex ring, he had become a cliché of the guru-as-tyrant — alternately fucking and abusing his acolytes for their own spiritual progress. "We think don Juan is lost in Infinity, in the second Attention," he sometimes said. Following his 1998 death, four of his inner circle disappeared with him: believed to have killed themselves, their bodies have never been found.
Today Castaneda is dismissed as a hoaxer, a fraud, a sexual predator, a cult leader and maybe a psychopath. His books continue to sell, but his academic credibility is zero, and his style of mysticism has gone out of fashion. The questions he faced haven't vanished, however, and the answers which he gave supply a warning.

Source : https://thecritic.co.uk/castaneda-the-sorcerer/
and many more.

Oh dear, well that makes three literary hoaxes I've been caught up in at the latest count, Castaneda, Laurens van der Post (darling of Prince Charles as he was, and Margaret Thatcher) and Greg Mortenson (Three Cups of Tea, etc). All very skilled at drawing one in to what seemed fascinating/inspiring stories, only to disappoint when revelations emerged.

[Florestan]

"Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" is a popular children's song the melody of which was derived from a Mozart piano sonata.

Actually, it's the other way around: Mozart used the (French) popular tune as a theme for his piano variations KV 265.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ah!_vous_dirai-je,_maman

[San Antone]

Actually, it's the other way around: Mozart used the (French) popular tune as a theme for his piano variations KV 265.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ah!_vous_dirai-je,_maman

Thanks for correcting me - but the point remains. 

[Florestan]

Thanks for correcting me - but the point remains. 

Sure, and I agree, although the whole discussion is a huge waste of time. 

[pjme]

Sure, and I agree, although the whole discussion is a huge waste of time

So let's stop to contribute....

[Florestan]

So let's stop to contribute....

[DavidW]

The materials themselves, which can also be used to create a pop song, are not what makes classical music classical.

In fact Michael Jackson quoted Beethoven's 9th in one of his songs.  And none of his music is remotely classical.

[pjme]

So let's stop to contribute.... 

[Karl Henning]

Wow, that's quite the thought experiment!

E.T., the Estonian Tintinabulist....
ArvoD2....
Jurrasic Pärt....

ROTFLMAO

[Karl Henning]

Just type in the words castaneda hoax...

Castaneda was never an especially powerful writer or thinker. His dialogue is repetitive, his landscapes are filled with generic, indistinguishable entities, and his insights are vague to the point of a blur. His genius consisted in a talent for seduction, which became a mania for manipulation and finally exploitation. His first books were brilliant because of the tension of his set-up as a tightrope between ordinary and non-ordinary reality. His permanent exile to the world of the non-ordinary meant the loss of suspension and the surrender to madness, however.
The last phase of his life saw Castaneda living in Los Angeles surrounded by Armani-clad "witches" who called Castaneda "the nagual". He had literally bewitched himself. Marketing extortionate workshops for a shamanic cult called Tensegrity, which simultaneously operated as a personal sex ring, he had become a cliché of the guru-as-tyrant — alternately fucking and abusing his acolytes for their own spiritual progress. "We think don Juan is lost in Infinity, in the second Attention," he sometimes said. Following his 1998 death, four of his inner circle disappeared with him: believed to have killed themselves, their bodies have never been found.
Today Castaneda is dismissed as a hoaxer, a fraud, a sexual predator, a cult leader and maybe a psychopath. His books continue to sell, but his academic credibility is zero, and his style of mysticism has gone out of fashion. The questions he faced haven't vanished, however, and the answers which he gave supply a warning.

Source : https://thecritic.co.uk/castaneda-the-sorcerer/
and many more.

Thanks for this, although there's an element of one cannot unsee what one has seen here

[Luke]

ROTFLMAO

Pärt would have done a great job on Indiana Drones, too...

[T. D.]

Ah right, I read those books in my early 20s and hadn't thought about them much since, and it's only today with your post I find out they weren't (predominantly) autobiographical, as I'd thought. I assume the fictional Yaqui shaman's teachings were based on some kind of reality though (?) .. seems a spot of googling is called for ..

I read those [Castaneda] books in college circa 1976, aged just under 20, and they were obviously embellished to a very high degree if not fictional.

Joyce Carol Oates commendably outed Castaneda as a fraud way back in '74.

https://www.thesunmagazine.org/issues/264/correspondence

Joyce Carol Oates had Castaneda pegged as a fraud twenty-three years ago, in the September 1974 issue of Psychology Today. An experienced novelist herself, she recognized at once the fictional quality of Castaneda's work, and was amazed that anybody took him seriously as an anthropologist. Alas, she overestimated the sophistication of the American reading public, not to mention Castaneda's dissertation committee at UCLA.

[W.A. Mozart]

Tellingly, Nyman's score for The Piano, which you seem to dislike/disapprove

I didn't write that I dislike/disapprove the music that Nyman wrote for the film.

Furthermore I was not speaking about the score, but about the diegetic music, i.e. the music played by the pianist inside the film.

When it comes to the score, you can use contemporary classical music even if it's a film set in the 18th Century (I'd avoid to use/write rap music, however).

On the other hand, when it comes to the diegetic music, you should use music that actually existed at the time, or at least compose music written in the same style of the music of that time.

The piece I posted above might still pass as music of the 19th Century, but this other piece absolutely not. It's completely out of place.

"My Father's Favourite" of Sense and Sensibility infact is diegetic music: there is a character who plays the piece in the film. When the main characters leave the room where the music is played, it continues as a score.
While the diegetic music is for the piano solo, the score is for orchestra + piano, reminescent of a piano concerto.

In few words, when it comes to the appreciation of the music in itself, you can appreciate the music of Nyman as well as the one of Patrick Doyle.
However, Doyle did a better job in respect to the setting (it's realistic fiction). The operation of Nyman is antistorical, because the contemporary-style classical music didn't exist in the 19th Century.


Various users here are saying that it's a bad thing to compose Classical music today, but:

1) For me is not a bad thing: it's a valid style, and art is not prescriptive. If today you write a good piece in Classical style, I'll consider you a good composer.

2) In the specific case of Patrick Doyle, there is also the fact that his operation was historically correct. I value accuracy in films and his piece is nice to listen to even outside of the film.

[W.A. Mozart]

I don't think anyone is arguing that John Williams is not a good composer.  His film scores are masterpieces of the genre.  And that genre is film music.

The genre "film music" doesn't exist.


This piece originally composed for a film is hispanic music.

This other piece originally composed for a film is jazz.

This other piece originally composed for a film is classical music.

If "film music" was a genre (i.e. a musical form-style) all soundtracks would be written in the same style-form, and more precisely in a style-form that exists only inside soundtracks.

Since this is not true, film music can not be considered a genre. Perhaps the generic film music can be classified as "cinematic music", but it's important to note that not all soundtracks belongs to the genre of "cinematic music" and that therefore, although we can consider cinematic music as a genre, we can not consider film music as a genre.


The word "film music" only tells you that the music has been originally composed for a film, but it says nothing about style-form.

If I search pieces in a database of hispanic music, I want to find the piece of Havana.

If I search pieces in a database of jazz music, I want to find the piece of The Faboulous Baker Boys.

If I search pieces in a database of classical, I want to find the piece of Sense and Sensibility.


If the pieces are omitted from their respective databases for ideological reasons, it's censorship!

In fact, to the extent someone makes a strenuous argument that film music should be considered classical music, there is a whiff of insecurity about the intrinsic worth of film music and this person appears to need to enhance the value of film music by association with classical music.

No, actually the purpose of my posts is simply to criticize the nonsense, not to elevate film music. Infact, If I thought sincerely that film music is never classical, I'd simply say that film music is as good as classical music.

I say that some film music is classical because I really think that it's classical.

[W.A. Mozart]

Classical composition is primarily the craft of manipulating motivic cells, harmonic movement, and other musical materials, and the development of long form structures.

It's strange that @Florestan  didn't remind you that not all classical music is written in the sonata-form.


Is the Wedding March of Mendelssohn written in the sonata-form?

Is "Dies Irae" of MOzart written in the sonata-form?

Is the March of the Toy Soldiers of Tchaikovsky written in the sonata-form?

Is a minuet written in the sonata-form? It's 2 minutes and 18 seconds a long form?

Are the waltzers of Strauss written in the sonata-form?

and in the process creates larger structures beyond what is found in film scores, pop songs, or any other kind of music which may sound something like classical music.

This is also false, because inside classical film music you can find pieces written in a simple form (like the Mozart's minuet here above) as well as pieces written in a complex form.

That said, this an other good argument in favour of many soundtracks being classified as classical music.
Soundtracks usually don't use the song-structure like pop music, but more complex forms.


The problem is that often the soundtracks are offered to the public in simplified forms to make them more accessible.

Here below a good example.


In Youtube you find "The Victory Theme" of The Gladiator...

... but in the original soundtrack the piece "Victory Theme" doesn't exist.


The theme is the final climax of a long and complex piece titled "Barbarian Horde" in the original soundtrack.
The so called "Victory Theme" is at 09:17.

Someone cut the theme from "Barbarian Horde" and repurposed it in a simplified form for the middling listeners of Youtube.

The serious fans of soundtracks not only will listen to the original piece, but they will also listen to a suite and not to a single piece extracted from the context.

My Youtube channel targets the serious listeners.


The video, which contains a selection of the best parts of the suite, is structured as follows:
00:00 The Kiss [main theme]
02:09 The Greatness of Rome
04:30 Patricide
08:33 Am I Not Merciful?
15:14 Barbarian Horde [final reprise of the main theme and final climax]

[Luke]

[Re The Piano] I was not speaking about the score, but about the diegetic music, i.e. the music played by the pianist inside the film.

When it comes to the score, you can use contemporary classical music even if it's a film set in the 18th Century (I'd avoid to use/write rap music, however).

On the other hand, when it comes to the diegetic music, you should use music that actually existed at the time, or at least compose music written in the same style of the music of that time.

The piece I posted above might still pass as music of the 19th Century, but this other piece absolutely not. It's completely out of place.

I thoroughly disagree with this, in the case of The Piano, for the reasons I outlined above - that the piano of the film, and its owner/player, find themselves in an alien environment, in extraordinary circumstances, and that the collision of cultures and the emotional turmoil the film depicts is mirrored in the piano's music, where Scottish folk music and other familiar things collide with The Other. It is a fanciful but plausible vision of the music someone sensitive and talented, uprooted from their Scottish homeland and flung halfway around the world, surrounded by strange and unsettling things, might have improvised. Nyman's score also tells us what the main characters, especially the elective mute Ada, are feeling and thinking - it speaks for Ada, in fact.

"My Father's Favourite" of Sense and Sensibility infact is diegetic music: there is a character who plays the piece in the film. When the main characters leave the room where the music is played, it continues as a score.
While the diegetic music is for the piano solo, the score is for orchestra + piano, reminescent of a piano concerto.

In few words, when it comes to the appreciation of the music in itself, you can appreciate the music of Nyman as well as the one of Patrick Doyle.
However, Doyle did a better job in respect to the setting (it's realistic fiction). The operation of Nyman is antistorical, because the contemporary-style classical music didn't exist in the 19th Century.


Various users here are saying that it's a bad thing to compose Classical music today, but:

1) For me is not a bad thing: it's a valid style, and art is not prescriptive. If today you write a good piece in Classical style, I'll consider you a good composer.

2) In the specific case of Patrick Doyle, there is also the fact that his operation was historically correct. I value accuracy in films and his piece is nice to listen to even outside of the film.

I would point out that Doyle's music is far from 'historically correct,' deviating in many ways from the practices of the period. It is instead a clever pastiche of the music of the period, tinged with ways of writing which make that historically distant style more 'present' in the effect they have on most listeners  - their idea of what music of that period sounded like, rather than what it actually sounded like. My wife hates me (I suspect) when I nerdishly point out the stylistic impossibilities in the music for these films (which she loves) - and she's right to do so! But it is true, nevertheless. In the 'diagetic' piece you point out, 'My Father's Favourite' there are plenty of little things that tell us that this is not music of the period, particularly as it develops and becomes quite formless (deliberately, I suspect, so that we focus on the dialogue)

[Luke]

It's strange that @Florestan  didn't remind you that not all classical music is written in the sonata-form.

I don't think San Antone said anything about sonata form.

[Szykneij]

I very rarely post here, especially in a thread that's significantly contentious, but I think I'm running a fever which might be affecting my brain. On top of it, this post is going to be pretty much off-topic because, frankly, I don't think anyone really knows what the topic is anymore.

To stay somewhat on point, I'm happy with the term "Orchestral Film Music", which often incorporates different aspects of classical styles.

When I was in high school, I had a keen interest in music but very limited historical knowledge of it. I went to see a 1973 horror-mystery film titled "Don't Look Now" starring Donald Sutherland and was blown away by the soundtrack, especially the music during the "Through the Streets of Venice" scene, which I think was truncated for the youtube clip. There are certainly Baroque elements to it, followed by some uncharacteristic harmonies. But, it got me to investigate genuine composers of the Baroque, which is my favorite musical era to this day. The soundtrack was composed by classically-trained violinist Pino Donaggio, who also scored one of my favorite movies, "Body Double".

Going back further in time, I remember watching "To Kill a Mockingbird" on television with my father and being greatly affected by the scoring (which was rife with impressionistic elements) even at the young age of probably ten years old. Elmer Bernstein later became one of my favorite film composers, and Debussy and Ravel among my favorite classical composers. There are also some distinctly "Coplandish" elements there, too.

So, what's the point of all that? I'm not sure. But how would you classify the "Downton Abbey" clip? My wife used to watch the show, which I likened to watching paint dry, but I did appreciate the music. The soundtrack was written by Scottish composer John Lunn, who, in addition to scoring numerous television shows, has also composed several operas and a violin concerto. The youtube clip is a suite he arranged from the Downton soundtrack material, so does this have more consideration as "classical" because it was intended as a stand-alone work?

At any rate, "Orchestral Film Music" does it for me.