Yes, I think so. I am not about to deny that classical music is wonderful and important. I am a classical music major and I am sick of all the bullshit that surrounds classical music.
Classical music is dead and has been dead for quite some time. Orchestras and opera companies occasionally premiere new pieces but for the most part they play the same well known classical music year after year and it's a completely useless job because they are only playing what has been recorded hundreds of times by so many musicians that it doesn't even really matter if they perform it any better than anyone else.
Classical music is an aristocratic music which makes it inaccessible to many people. I myself have never had the opportunity to see an professional opera because it's so expensive. Jazz has a better chance of reaching a large audience but barely. Both classical music and jazz are difficult to enjoy without some familiarity of the music. Seeing as most areas of the country carry at most 2 jazz or classical stations, the general public are unlikely to become familiar with it.
Pop culture seems to have negative connotations which is really pretty silly. I love pop culture. It's proof that we are moving forward and that new and exciting things are happening all the time. For all you people who love classical music, listen to a random lot of music by lesser known composers within a span of 5 years in any era and you will see how much crap you have to wade through before you get to the good stuff. There is always a lot of mediocre stuff and a lot of good stuff. Few classical gems may emerge from our decade but there will be a lot of really interesting computer based music and, yes, a lot of amazing pop music and pop films. It would be wonderful if everyone could be given an appreciation for classical music and pop music because they are both so great!
In any case, classical music will never be totally eclipsed as long as snobs thrive and rich people want their children to be "cultured."
2007-07-10 10:08:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by autobon 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
This is a yes and no answer; in the 1800's and before there was nothing to do but to go to theatres, basically, and church was a big part of peoples lives, this was where a lot of your major artist got their starts. Now we have other forms of entertainment to take away from the focus of music. But this does not mean that it still does not excist or that it is being eclipsed. I have noticed though that the difficulty of music isn't as tough as it used to be and if i want to find a quality piece of music i have to search for a piece from the "classic" eras. But if you ever want to know if it has been eclipsed look at the nutrcracker audiences or the highschool performance audiences. go to a philharmonic concert u may realize that the seats arent as empty as you thought they would be. Another thing to take into consideration is the fact that a lot of artist were not liked or discovered during their time. Maybe there is music being made in the world right now that we wont know about until after the person has died.
2007-07-10 08:53:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
If you look at the flood of pop culture, you can't help but think that the answer to your query is true. But I digress.
Most pop songs drew their inspirations from classical music. Take That did that once - they took one of Chopin's music and made it into pop song. (I forgot which one...) Even Coolio took Pachelbel's Canon in D and had the biggest hit, C U when U Get There. Classical music is very much alive, even when it's disguised by the sweetened-up pop culture.
Classical music can never be eclipsed by pop, it just takes a backseat and laugh.
2007-07-11 04:03:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by jarod_jared 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Although it might seem that today's generation is mainly interested in pop culture, classical music will never be "eclipsed" by it or by any other music genre. It is sad to say how classical music has been put aside in contemporary societies when compared to its appreciation in its former years. Surprisingly enough though, you may play some songs like Spring from the Four Seasons, Beethoven's 5th Symphony, Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake or other classics and people will recognize them. Face it they are the classics and they will be for many years to come. Try doing that with a Snoop dog song a hundred years from now to see if you get the same reaction. :)
2007-07-10 09:57:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I don't think its being eclipsed, but is in very great danger of being,"dumbed down". Ravel never wrote anything but the Bolero: I attend classical concerts quite regularly, and here in the UK we are into the Outdoor Picnic season. Over the years the programmes have become more and more commercial. I have nothing against, "The Thieving Magpie" and, "The William Tell Overture", also sundry pieces that advertise lavatory paper, frozen peas and airlines. But at £30.00 a throw, there is so much more that could be included. It all comes down to bums on seats and the average man in the street street wants West Side Story and Andrew Lloyd Webber. This will probably be my last season outdoors. It will be the small specialist concerts in future - pity, I will miss it. We had some wonderful evenings 10 years ago.
2007-07-10 08:41:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I don't think so. I feel there will always be a market for 'serious' classical music & opera although it might remain small in this country as we are not traditionally interested in opera (unlike the Germans who often support their local opera house like we support a football team!) - one worry is that UK audiences tend to be people over 60 - will the upcoming generation inherit an interest in it, or will audiences die out? There does also seem to be a problem in that many people who listen to 'crossover' or 'popular' classical performers, like Russell Watson etc, believe that 'opera' means singing a single foreign language song into a microphone with a 'posh' voice - I've recently been called a liar by someone for telling them that actually 'opera' refers to a 'whole play set to music', not just one song! (sung into a microphone at the Royal Albert Hall or on a TV talent show!). Another problem is that, with our reluctance to show an interest in foreign languages in the UK, anything sung in a foreign language is seen as 'elitist', whereas no-one would say learning Karate is elitist (all the instruction is usually in Japanese i.e. 'foreign') But at least people are getting a taste for it, and they rarely lose it.
2007-07-10 06:12:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Julia 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
Just because pop is usually louder , it does not mean it has eclipsed classical music (of course , Wagner can be very noisy , too ....) . There will always be a place for classical music , it's the root of everything else and people's tastes are not generally that bad . Long live Mozart !!!!
2007-07-10 06:10:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Hippie 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
To save people you don't have to be like the world and do the things of the world. Look how Hollywood people act and dress and the things they do this should tell you there not Christian and you shouldn't like the things they do or accept them as a Christian this Society and Culture is like in the day of Noah before the Flood. God is coming back there are many that are falling into sin because of the Hollywood. The bible says come out from among them and be ye separate. Are you Separate form the world and Hollywood?
2016-04-01 07:12:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Classical, or other 'art' genre music, such as jazz, has never been 'popular'. It is worth noting that the music of, say J S Bach, Buxtehude and other Baroque-period composers was underwritten by the Church and other sponsors - many of these composers were either in the pay of a local noble, or employed in 'Kappelmeister' positions in major cathedrals and churches.
Therefore a lot of, say, Bachs's secular music was written in his 'spare time', although there was sufficient Court and Nobility patronage to ensure that some of these secular works were performed.
Furthermore, exposure to secular Classical music, until (UK) the mid-nineteen-thirties, was very much related to social class. The Aristocracy, Meritocracy, and the middle-classes attended concerts of classical music, whereas the general 'Working Class' were entertained by the music hall, George Formby and performers of similar ilk. The radio, and the gramophone record, opened up the world of classical music to the ordinary person.
I would add here that I am not working from a marxist dialectic, my point in mentioning social class is from a Weberian structuralist dimension - for non-Social Scientists, I'm not a Commie!
Appreciation of orchestral music in the UK was further boosted by the cinema - much film music was written by classically trained composers. World War 2 similarly increased exposure, ENSA concerts, the radio, all featured clasical music. The greatest fillip was given by the Butler Education Act of 1944, in which facilities were made available for musical education to the highest level to all students of all social classes.
The apogee of this was thephenomenon of 'Progressive' music, a genre that blossomed in the late sixties and early seventies, in which young, classically trained musicians combined the youth-ethos of the 'Beatles-type' pop music with classical and jazz techniques to create an exciting new sound, a sound both entertaining and cerebral - favourites among the young intelligentsia at University. Soft Machine, Egg, The Nice are examples of this particular sound.
'Entertainment' music, such as today's 'pop' - the songs that are trotted out on Radio One and the regional chit-chat stations, has always been with us, and, since it requires little effort to listen to, it will appeal to the masses. Peripheral to this are the various other 'pop' genres - Indie, Hip-hop, the various manifestations of rap, etc. These are social-musical phenomena - each sound being tailored to particular sectors of youth for the purpose of dance, social comment, entertainment, rebellion or just being a general nuisance.
'Pop' music has a huge media exposure, largely because you can sell things with it. Retro-pop - nostalgia music, is popular with older listeners who relive the certainty of their own past. There is no evidence, however, that Classical music is losing ground. It could be argued that general culture is being eclipsed by pop-culture, that gulfs are being driven between youth and adult society by the culture of pop, but this has been said since the days of the Teddy-boys. Pop-idiom, by its very existence, is a transient phenomenon - where today is Punk? Classical Music builds upon its own past, is grown from previous example, and is dependent upon skills other than those acquired though the manipulation of a mouse. Indeed, it is now the most 'classless' music, as its enjoyment does not depend on external adherences, such as to a particular hair-style, inverted baseball cap style of dress, or the need to insert a safety pin through the nose.
2007-07-10 08:49:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
actually, a lot of "pop" and dance music has incorporated classical music into a lot of hits. By this I mean a specific part of the piece is sampled and repeated throughout the song, its known as a "hook"
2007-07-10 05:57:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by xCassiEx 3
·
0⤊
0⤋