TrumpetMaster - View Single Post

Hags888 · 04-05-2007, 06:48 PM

There's a lot of really great stuff here. First, let me just get this out of the way, I am definitely a supporter of new music (as a trumpet player you almost have to be...half of our literature was written after 1930!). I'm sort of playing devils advocate with all these questions, but I am also, just seriously interested in what folks like Ed and others think about this issue. I ponder new music and the state of classical music in American society all the time. I have many non-musician friends who "don't get" what it is that I do and that scares me. It seems that perhaps something we as musicians must take upon ourselves in addition to simply performing the music is also educating the audience...since school boards and the governments don't seem to want to keep funding sources for public schools high enough to maintain music programs across the country (totally different issue though).

That said, the Minnesota Orchestra is definitely not performing new music "regularly", unless you consider music that is more than 25 years old as "new". They do perform new works, and have a composers symposium, and they do have Aaron Jay Kernis as an artistic advisor...but, the majority of the music they perform is standard orchestral literature from 1750-1940. Which brings me to another point...all of the groups that have been mentioned as being into new music, seem to *only* play new music. I get the sense that if you're going to do new music and you want an audience for it, you almost have to specialize the ensemble to only do "new music". One of the things that Adorno is noted for was his idea of music being a "commodity"...and I think he's absolutely right.

If music is a commodity that is bought and sold like any other product in our capitalist society, then it seems the most viable way to get new music out into the world is through specifically "new music" ensembles. I think it's incredibly difficult to put new music alongside the classical/romantic favorites...and it almost seems like a bad business decision too. Would you put a Stanley Kubrick and Walt Disney side by side in a special "double feature" package? I suppose you could, but then who would stick around for both? It seems pretty similar to putting Elliot Carter alongside Mendelssohn...

P.S. Ed, I couldn't get to the NYTimes article...I'm not a subscriber. I did the free registration, but it would charge me to read it. I'm interested...just not THAT interested. ;)

04-05-2007, 06:48 PM	#17 (permalink)
Hags888 Pianissimo User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Corpus Christi, TX Posts: 151	Re: Modern Music There's a lot of really great stuff here. First, let me just get this out of the way, I am definitely a supporter of new music (as a trumpet player you almost have to be...half of our literature was written after 1930!). I'm sort of playing devils advocate with all these questions, but I am also, just seriously interested in what folks like Ed and others think about this issue. I ponder new music and the state of classical music in American society all the time. I have many non-musician friends who "don't get" what it is that I do and that scares me. It seems that perhaps something we as musicians must take upon ourselves in addition to simply performing the music is also educating the audience...since school boards and the governments don't seem to want to keep funding sources for public schools high enough to maintain music programs across the country (totally different issue though). That said, the Minnesota Orchestra is definitely not performing new music "regularly", unless you consider music that is more than 25 years old as "new". They do perform new works, and have a composers symposium, and they do have Aaron Jay Kernis as an artistic advisor...but, the majority of the music they perform is standard orchestral literature from 1750-1940. Which brings me to another point...all of the groups that have been mentioned as being into new music, seem to only play new music. I get the sense that if you're going to do new music and you want an audience for it, you almost have to specialize the ensemble to only do "new music". One of the things that Adorno is noted for was his idea of music being a "commodity"...and I think he's absolutely right. If music is a commodity that is bought and sold like any other product in our capitalist society, then it seems the most viable way to get new music out into the world is through specifically "new music" ensembles. I think it's incredibly difficult to put new music alongside the classical/romantic favorites...and it almost seems like a bad business decision too. Would you put a Stanley Kubrick and Walt Disney side by side in a special "double feature" package? I suppose you could, but then who would stick around for both? It seems pretty similar to putting Elliot Carter alongside Mendelssohn... P.S. Ed, I couldn't get to the NYTimes article...I'm not a subscriber. I did the free registration, but it would charge me to read it. I'm interested...just not THAT interested. ;) __________________ Do or do not. There is no try. http://www.scotthagarty.com Last edited by Hags888; 04-05-2007 at 06:52 PM.