between level of education and the love of classical music? This is a sensitive question for some but it need not be. And it can be said that those with higher levels of education have been EXPOSED to classical music more, and that is the reason they like it. But I think a person can complete college and graduate school and still not have any exposure to classical music, or at least no more than the person who left high school before graduation. This question has occurred to me more than once in the past and I was wondering if anyone has an opinion on it. The question is actually twofold: Is there any relation at all? and if so, why? Why would having more education predispose one to like classical music more than, say, a tradesman or manual laborer. They all have equal access to radio stations. The educated person did not acquire their liking of classical music by talking about it with others. So this is a serious question and believe me, it is not meant to plt uneducated vs educated, nor is it an idle speculation. It is a very interesting topic. So the arguments that educated people have more exposure to classical music or that they hear it more often or that they talk about it with others etc all those arguments seem to fall by the wayside and I am no nearer understanding this relationship (because I do think one exists) than I was before considering all these varied arguments. If the moderator feels that this is too controversial a topic, I will understand its deletion from the forum, but I have wondered about this for years. It is a little different with, say, English literature, because of exposure in college. E.g. it is highly unlikely that on a loading dock somewhere, there will be a discussion of Beowulf. This is neither good nor bad; it is just that it is highly unlikely, and that is because of lack of exposure. But educated people are no more exposed to classical music than uneducated. (?) So what does account for the perception that it is mostly educated people who like classical music? Where did this liking of classical music come from and why is it not seen nearly so often in the ranks of people who, say, are high school graduates?
With education comes (hopefully) a broadening of horizons, and that may be the simple answer to all of it. Maybe there is no more to it. But broadening one's horizons does not necessarily include getting to like classical music.
well, there might be a positive correlation, but nothing definitive. Take my father for instance, he was simpy not into music, so getting an advanced degree from an university doesn't really mean he is should listen to classical music. There are famous examples about famous composers who weren't well educated too, take Bruckner for instance, i doubt that he was that well educated (besides music of course). So, it's hard to say.
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 11:55:46 AM
nd it can be said that those with higher levels of education
Is there such a thing in this day and age?
Thanks. Do you think this topic is offensive? There is something about it that seems slightly offensive to me, but I am not sure why, and I am the one who began it. And I wondered how many have ever thought about this before and wondered about any correlation?
Good point, as to "higher levels of education" these days. But let's just leave school as such out of it and ask only about education, by whatever means, self, without schools, etc.
If there is a conspiracy that results in 'the educated' being exposed to (and therefore, presumably, liking) classical music more than 'the uneducated', then I've somehow slipped through the conspirator's sifting process. ;D
In brief, my background: poor, white working class from the rough suburbs of a British seaside town; left school at 16 with no real qualifications to speak of; spent a decade working on (would you believe it?) a loading dock; blagged my way into advertising nine years ago, and now living in a well-to-do commuter village. So I have, I think, joined the lower ranks of Britain's white middle class. Yet long before my rags to not-quite-riches journey began, I started exposing myself to classical music, and my tastes developed slowly over a 15-year period.
My lack of erudition embarrasses me not a jot. This is possibly because I work as a writer, hence others assume I went to university (in fact, I've often been asked which one I attended - usually, by those who went themselves). I'm not especially well read on any subject, I'm certainly not 'academic' (and thank God for that, as I've met some disagreeable academics over the years; some charming and good-humoured ones, too, it's true), and I definitely don't consider that a lot of book learning necessarily predisposes anyone to anything ... except, perhaps, a little intellectual arrogance in the company of those less learned (see: the aforementioned academics).
If one enjoys an art form, then surely, it is for its own sake - or else, that 'enjoyment' is little more than a pretence. I'd rather hear a plumber whistling a piece of popular classical music heard on Classic FM (yes, even Nessun Dorma), than I would listen to a studied chap banging on at length about an opera for which he cared little but about which he knew a lot because the dictates of his social set demand such knowledge. Let the music speak for itself, and let learning be only an enhancement to the music, not the reason for liking it.
Nope.
Many of the most discerning listeners I've been lucky enough to meet have been thoroughly working-class.
Taste and discrimination will out, regardless of a person's background, if you give them enough time and experience.
I agree with both of you. I am a high school dropout. But I think that there is more to this, somehow.
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 12:23:09 PM
But I think that there is more to this, somehow.
Perhaps you should elaborate further.
And please, don't saddle yourself with a lame label such as 'dropout'. History is littered with those who 'dropped out' of formal education but went on to achieve successes great and small. Have more self-respect. ;)
Mark, that is what I am getting at. You would not usually hear a plumber whistling a classical music piece. And my question is, Why not? He is just as exposed to classical music as anyone else. What accounts for this disparity in musical tastes, leaving education aside, although I don't think we can.....what accounts for the idea that for every plumber who whistles Mozart, there are ten thousand who do not and will not? There is nothing about the plumber his or her self. So what is it? A lack of exposure? No. He or she has a radio. Talking about it with others? No. This still leaves me wondering.
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 12:27:15 PM
Mark, that is what I am getting at. You would not usually hear a plumber whistling a classical music piece. And my question is, Why not? He is just as exposed to classical music as anyone else. What accounts for this disparity in musical tastes, leaving education aside, although I don't think we can.....what accounts for the idea that for every plumber who whistles Mozart, there are ten thousand who do not and will not? There is nothing about the plumber his or her self. So what is it? A lack of exposure? No. He or she has a radio. Talking about it with others? No. This still leaves me wondering.
Maybe he is too busy working all the time, to make ends meet and don't have the amount of leisure time that some people do.
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 11:55:46 AM
between level of education and the love of classical music?
Perhaps in some general sense?-- but I tend to think otherwise. I think simple EXPOSURE to classical music is far more important than the level of education (I've known people very educated who had no liking or knowledge of classical music at all). I know that surely I'm not the only person here who came to classical music simply on my own as a teenager (and a rather low GPA) on my own. I just took to it-- I was HOOKED early on. I was very fortunate to have heard some bits of classical music without genuine interest when I was younger-- which certainly didn't hinge on my level of education! And I come from a lower-middle class family, FWIW.
Many people have never really HEARD any classical music, aside from the occasional commerical or soundtrack or stereotypes in movies-- they've not been exposeed to it. And classical music is typically viewed as "stuffy" music or music for rich snobs, another stereotype. As a teenager I got picked on a lot for listening to classical music, but I just simply had to learn to not give a damn about what they thought of me (I've never been one to keep up with what is "trendy" and what isn't LOL).
Classical music often demands more attention in terms of quality (doesn't always make for good background music), and demands more in terms of quantity (not a lot of 3:30 minute pop songs here!)-- that doesn't fit in with the world of the sound byte-- that takes patience & a desire to expand one's horizons. There's more DIS-incentives for people to listen to classical music and on the surface, very little reward or exposure to it.
I think exposure matters more than education (and HOW one is exposed), and at least from what i've encountered, exposure and education are hardly synonymous. --in fact, I have been rather disappointed with those encounters with "educated" people (and "educated" is definitely not that same as "intelligent"-- in this day and age, "education" seems to be nothing more than just "training" in a very specialised field).
I think if a lot of people were more exposed to what classical music has to offer, to hell with all the stereotypes, people of all levels of education would be more likely to enjoy it. Over the years I have always tried expose people to classical music that really didn't know much about it that I thought there might be a glimmer of interest-- often with a degree of success (I'm not saying they're buying up CDs of Schoenberg of course), with some going on to purchase their own CDs of classical music new to them.
Exposure plus DESIRE is what really drives the potential listener. Education might be an extra, but I certainly don't think it *hinges* on it. I think the PERCEPTION that educated people tend to listen to classical music is just a stereotype. its also off-putting-- when I have opened people's ears up to classical music, I often have to re-assure them that "you don't have to be educated to listen to this"-- its like having to break though this cultural programming.
Just my $0.02...
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 12:10:36 PM
Thanks. Do you think this topic is offensive? There is something about it that seems slightly offensive to me, but I am not sure why, and I am the one who began it. And I wondered how many have ever thought about this before and wondered about any correlation?
Good heavens, if you think this is offensive, you ain't seen nothing here yet. And I have had many discussions on loading docks about Beowulf. (Not really, but I don't frequent loading docks much these days.)
I honestly don't know the answer to your question. I suppose one way of finding it out is to investigate the results of surveys put out by leading orchestras, where they ask the education level of subscribers and other attendees. Or you could construct your own little poll here, asking people to state their own educational level. But I think you will find high school graduates, people with undergraduate degrees, and some with post-graduate work. Maybe a more productive question would be to our group: how do you correlate your education with your interest in music? or are there factors you think contributed as much or more?
You underestimate the power of marketing, my friend.
Classical music has long been packaged and sold in a way that appeals more to those born to money and influence (or those with the ability to acquire either or both), rather than to the 'masses'. For them, there is pop music, TV dinners, crap gameshows, beer, smoking, violent films and dog racing. I exaggerate, of course, but I hail from a working-class background, so I do, perhaps, have a better perspective on this than many.
You see, the kind of people I was brought up with were easily convinced that stealing or claiming benefits was their lot in life. No one came along and tried to sell them anything more aspiring - and I'm not certain that education was the only barrier. Folk tend to stick with what they know. And many are quite comfortable with that arrangement. But some aren't - and I was one of those. So they move on, try new things, learn a little, even if not academically. And eventually, they find themselves somewhere new, somewhere ... and I hate this word, but it's the one that gets used ... 'better'. Do we not speak of 'bettering' ourselves? Some can and do. Some can but don't. Many could but won't (a sense of 'tribal belonging' is as powerful a force as that of marketing, believe me); and some just can't. All this said, I see it that education has only a small part to play in determining who 'rises', and who stays put.
I think there is more to it, and, regarding an earlier post, the term "high school dropout" denotes no less self-respect than the description "failed to complete high school". The former is a kind of buzz word these days and the latter is just a description. But anyway, maybe there is nothing to this at all and perhaps there is no correlation at all between liking classical music and education, be it formal or informal or self-taught or not. But Mark, I think you are right. People break out of what they are doing, and that may be the key to it all. Education may play a part but it is this determination to break out and away and go off in a different direction that makes the most sense.
I think it is time for another topic. Will start one now
Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 12:38:52 PM
Folk tend to stick with what they know. And many are quite comfortable with that arrangement. But some aren't - and I was one of those. So they move on, try new things, learn a little, even if not academically. And eventually, they find themselves somewhere new, somewhere ... and I hate this word, but it's the one that gets used ... 'better'. Do we not speak of 'bettering' ourselves? Some can and do. Some can but don't. Many could but won't (a sense of 'tribal belonging' is as powerful a force as that of marketing, believe me); and some just can't. All this said, I see it that education has only a small part to play in determining who 'rises', and who stays put.
Very well, put,
Mark.
It is human to desire. Once you desire, you begin to aspire. From there, you can go as far as your abilities, inherent or learned, can take you. And of course, you can always acquire new abilities - like an ability to enjoy and appreciate classical music. ;)
Quote from: just josh on March 17, 2008, 12:45:07 PM
Very well, put, Mark.
Some days I am lucid, Josh. Others, I'm an arse. :P
Mark, you may have hit the nail on the head with the description re breaking away. But I began a less "controversial" topic.
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 12:50:46 PM
Mark, you may have hit the nail on the head with the description re breaking away. But I began a less "controversial" topic.
Don't imagine for a moment longer that this topic is in any way controversial. Round here, it's almost as tame as it gets. For real controversy, start a topic on religion ...
Statistically higher education and classical music are definitely correlated (but don't ask me any quotes 8)).
I don't think they are directly linked, but they have two factors in common: above-average intelligence and, to a lesser extent, social class. IMO the former contributes to developing an ability to understand & appreciate art in general, including classical music, the latter provides a higher chance of exposure to it.
Q
I definitely don't think higher education necessarily means above-average intelligence ;)
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 17, 2008, 01:22:10 PM
I definitely don't think higher education necessarily means above-average intelligence ;)
I
know it doesn't. If you'd worked alongside some of the thick-as-f**k graduates that I have in my time, you'd agree. :)
Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 01:23:58 PM
I know it doesn't. If you'd worked alongside some of the thick-as-f**k graduates that I have in my time, you'd agree. :)
I bet they didn't listen to Beethoven. ;D
Q
Quote from: Que on March 17, 2008, 01:39:35 PM
I bet they didn't listen to Beethoven. ;D
Q
Or common sense, which many of those I've had dealings with seem to lack in abundance.
Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 01:42:55 PM
Or common sense, which many of those I've had dealings with seem to lack in abundance.
Is common sense rather the most important thing to have when listening to classical music? ???
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 17, 2008, 02:01:41 PM
Is common sense rather the most important thing to have when listening to classical music? ???
No. I was talking generally. ;)
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 12:27:15 PM
What accounts for this disparity in musical tastes, leaving education aside, although I don't think we can.....what accounts for the idea that for every plumber who whistles Mozart, there are ten thousand who do not and will not?
And for every college graduate who whistles Mozart, there are ten thousand who do not and will not.
Quote from: mar208 on March 17, 2008, 11:55:46 AM
between level of education and the love of classical music? This is a sensitive question for some but it need not be. And it can be said that those with higher levels of education have been EXPOSED to classical music more, and that is the reason they like it. But I think a person can complete college and graduate school and still not have any exposure to classical music, or at least no more than the person who left high school before graduation. This question has occurred to me more than once in the past and I was wondering if anyone has an opinion on it. The question is actually twofold: Is there any relation at all? and if so, why? Why would having more education predispose one to like classical music more than, say, a tradesman or manual laborer. They all have equal access to radio stations. The educated person did not acquire their liking of classical music by talking about it with others. So this is a serious question and believe me, it is not meant to plt uneducated vs educated, nor is it an idle speculation. It is a very interesting topic. So the arguments that educated people have more exposure to classical music or that they hear it more often or that they talk about it with others etc all those arguments seem to fall by the wayside and I am no nearer understanding this relationship (because I do think one exists) than I was before considering all these varied arguments. If the moderator feels that this is too controversial a topic, I will understand its deletion from the forum, but I have wondered about this for years. It is a little different with, say, English literature, because of exposure in college. E.g. it is highly unlikely that on a loading dock somewhere, there will be a discussion of Beowulf. This is neither good nor bad; it is just that it is highly unlikely, and that is because of lack of exposure. But educated people are no more exposed to classical music than uneducated. (?) So what does account for the perception that it is mostly educated people who like classical music? Where did this liking of classical music come from and why is it not seen nearly so often in the ranks of people who, say, are high school graduates?
Where you or are you a member of talkclassical b/c i used to roam those forums and this topic came up and man was it controversial.
Aside from that to to put my 2 cents in, i think the "educated" have a better appreciation for music that would not be considered "accessible to the masses." Such as Bach in come situations. Though Bach's Art of the Fugue is not easy to listen to at first i was inthralled in it's ingenuity. It is beyond me, it is beyond astounding. I love it, and being a composer i am envious of that work. It is hard to understand it's wonder if you have not tried to write in counterpoint. Hard hard hard hard hard hard hard hard. Especially with 4 voices and the complexity he uses. I am astounded by Bach every time i listen to his work but the Art of the Fugue, though not the most expressive of works, is a masterful piece of the "architecture of sound."
But on the other hand i have some of the "well educated" will dislike works that are full of wonder just because they might not by of a high academic level. I was told by one of my professors that Tchaikovsky's 5th was shit. To me saying that was blasphemy as well as a near mortal sin. I hope he changes his was before "judgment day":).
So in hindsight i think it doesn't really matter all that much. As long as your love it then you are good. What does upset me though is when people try to say something is devoid of quality and they are just too ignorant to see it's beauty. It's okay to state your opinion but when you say something is bad and proclaim it is truth, that where people go wrong.
I think that the most likely way for people to be introduced to classical music is through learning an instrument, usually as a child. If there's a relationship between education and appreciation of classical music it's a third variable one and not a direct causal link imo.
Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 02:14:19 PM
No. I was talking generally. ;)
Aha! :D That explains why one reads so much non-sense even in a classical music forum.
Quote from: Que on March 17, 2008, 01:39:35 PM
I bet they didn't listen to Beethoven. ;D
One can buy and listen to music all he wants and still remains a Philistine. (Feel
the contempt Mozart held for Archibishop Collerado.) Culture is not always like
capital or power in this regard, unfortunately.
Quote from: fl.traverso on March 18, 2008, 01:20:52 AM
One can buy and listen to music all he wants and still remains a Philistine. (Feel
the contempt Mozart held for Archibishop Collerado.) Culture is not always like
capital or power in this regard, unfortunately.
Agreed, but I did not mean to include the
nouveaux riches who occupy the best seats in the Concertgebouw on Sunday concerts with tickets freely provided by sponsors, and who pretend to be interested in the music - only to confirm their elitist status. 8)
Q
One of the reasons I call myself "johnQpublic" is that I grew up in an extremely lower middle class family/neighborhood. No one in any part of the family went to college. In fact, my father didn't even technically graduate from high school. And yet I was into Classical Music by 8th grade. Meanwhile a dear aunt who worked the pen/pencil counter of a stationary shop held season tickets for the Philly Orchestra.
So I see no relationship.
Quote from: johnQpublic on March 18, 2008, 11:20:49 AM
One of the reasons I call myself "johnQpublic" is that I grew up in an extremely lower middle class family/neighborhood. No one in any part of the family went to college. In fact, my father didn't even technically graduate from high school. And yet I was into Classical Music by 8th grade. Meanwhile a dear aunt who worked the pen/pencil counter of a stationary shop held season tickets for the Philly Orchestra.
So I see no relationship.
I've read on several occasions that research shows that classical music lovers
on average have enjoyed higher education and are of middle/upper class origins. Note that I'm speaking of (statistical) correlations - it does
not mean this is always the case. You decribe your middle class origins, mine are middle class as well, but are you highly educated? But then again, education is not the same thing as intelligence. Intelligence and exposure, that's all that is needed IMO. I've worked in a classical music store for seven years and have never encountered a classical music lover (a
real one) of low (or not more than absolute average) intelligence.
Q
Que, could you clarify what you mean by 'intelligence'? I always make a clear distinction between an intelligent man (one who relates well to his surroundings and can assimilate and act on knowledge readily), and an intellectual man (someone with a lot of book learning but who isn't particularly good at applying his knowledge in a practical way). I realise these are only my subjective distinctions, but experience reveals that when people talk of 'intelligent', they often actually mean 'intellectual'. It's the intellectuals with whom I've had the greatest problems - many of those that I've met are very bright indeed, no doubt, but have little or no common sense and don't seem to relate well to everyday situations.
Quote from: Mark on March 18, 2008, 11:53:19 AM
Que, could you clarify what you mean by 'intelligence'? I always make a clear distinction between an intelligent man (one who relates well to his surroundings and can assimilate and act on knowledge readily), and an intellectual man (someone with a lot of book learning but who isn't particularly good at applying his knowledge in a practical way). I realise these are only my subjective distinctions, but experience reveals that when people talk of 'intelligent', they often actually mean 'intellectual'. It's the intellectuals with whom I've had the greatest problems - many of those that I've met are very bright indeed, no doubt, but have little or no common sense and don't seem to relate well to everyday situations.
That's easy
Mark, I was thinking of the level of development of cognitive abilities, not "intellectual".
Q
Quote from: Que on March 18, 2008, 12:09:59 PM
That's easy Mark, I was thinking of the level of development of cognitive abilities, not "intellectual".
Q
That's cool. I had worried for a second that you were referring to those who simply hadn't had the benefit of further or higher education. But as you clearly didn't mean that, it makes your posts on this subject much easier to appreciate. So thanks. :)
Quote from: johnQpublic on March 18, 2008, 11:20:49 AM
One of the reasons I call myself "johnQpublic" is that I grew up in an extremely lower middle class family/neighborhood. No one in any part of the family went to college. In fact, my father didn't even technically graduate from high school. And yet I was into Classical Music by 8th grade. Meanwhile a dear aunt who worked the pen/pencil counter of a stationary shop held season tickets for the Philly Orchestra.
So I see no relationship.
Nor do I. I see no correlation between educational level and a love and/or appreciation of classical music. My mother was married at 16 and had her first child (me) at 17. Her education ended with high school. And yet she was an astonishingly skilled pianist and organist and loved the classics. For whatever reason, I fell in love with classical music at age five, which predated my entering college by a year or two ;D I can definitely say educational level had nothing to do with it. Some of my earliest memories are watching the Voice of Firestone on television circa 1954...the year I graduated kindergarten.
Sarge
The only difference I would suggest, is that the more educated tend to be narrowly-focused in period, composer, repertoire. They seem to delight more in deeper analysis of a subject. 8)
Quote from: Mark on March 17, 2008, 01:23:58 PM
I know it doesn't. If you'd worked alongside some of the thick-as-f**k graduates that I have in my time, you'd agree. :)
MBAs are such a nuisance. Things usually get back on track, but not before much time and money being wasted.
Quote from: BorisG on March 18, 2008, 12:44:27 PM
The only difference I would suggest, is that the more educated tend to be narrowly-focused in period, composer, repertoire.
In other words, they are narrow-minded ;D
Sarge