Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!akgua!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-delphi!malik
From: malik@delphi.DEC (Karl Malik ZK01-1/F22 1-1440)
Newsgroups: net.music.classical
Subject: reponse to mr. ellis
Message-ID: <2669@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Jul-84 11:49:40 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.2669
Posted: Wed Jul 18 11:49:40 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 24-Jul-84 03:37:54 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 55

Mike Ellis said -

Another reason why classical music is not popular is that it is, for all
practical purposes, `dead'.

By which I mean there is relatively little experimentation with new ideas,
few or no new schools of thought, no exciting breakthroughs, and nothing
to attract the most brilliant new musical minds of our time.

Me > I love it. Not too long ago, there was a discussion of 'modern' music
in this newsgroup. The general consensus (with exceptions) was that the
classical vangard was TOO experimental, that it covered too much ground
too quickly. 

Look at the explosive development of classical in the first forty years of
this century (or in practically any other period since ~1600, except for the
equally dead `classical' period). Major new styles used to revitalize
classical music with each new generation, and the new music was eagerly
consumed by the listening public within 20 years after its invention.

> This is a bit of an exaggeration - Ives, Webern, Varese, etc are not
accepted by the general (non)listening audience to this day. And as we
reach present day composers, the number of people who genuinely appreciate/
understand the music grows smaller still. The same is true in physics,
logic, computer-science, etc. To (roughly) quote Milton Babbitt - 
'Contemporary music, like any area of advanced knowledge, is as inappropriate
for the general listening audience as presenting a paper on combinatorial
logic on the Johnny Carson show.'

Whereas now aging ideas (like serialism, which goes back to the 30's) are
still treated as overly modern, at least by the majority of the classical
listening audience. No wonder so many young creative composers prefer to go
into jazz, esoteric rock, &c, rather than waste their time with a listening
public that will not accept any innovation whatsoever.

> No argument here. Serialism (which goes back to the 20's) is an old
solution to an old problem. However, since then the innovations in style
and technique have been blinding (aleatoric, pointillism, indeterminate,
minimal, collage, electronic/computer, graphic-notations, bio-feedback
control, textural, multiphonics for woodwinds, etc. etc.).

> People go into classical, rock, jazz, etc. for a variety of reasons. I
have no doubt that there are creative minds in all areas.

Classical has died from an overabundance of conservatives.

> The concerts I go to are generally sold out, I receive newletters from
various American and European contemporary music groups, the bins at
my record store are well stocked with many new recordings; seems to
be alive and kicking to me.

> On the other hand, this newsgroup might die from an overabundance
of people on adolescent power-trips. 

						Best Wishes, Karl