Accessibility of "classical" music

[jas]

I just read an interesting article about classical music and its place in today's society. The writer expressed concern about the "politically correct" way of dealing with culture and the arts today. It's not p.c. to have an "elite" section of society anymore -- a section that has its own arenas for the discussion of something that's not at all understood by the majority -- so culture instead is dumbed down and brought to the masses, for the simple reason that it's not "right" to have a subject in the public arena that isn't "popular," or simple enough to be within the reach of everyone. So time and money that could be spent by broadcasting corporations on more worthwhile cultural pursuits is being pretty much wasted, catering for people who have no real interest in the topic, anyway. The author uses a programme by Harry Enfield (the article was written in 1993) -- a Guide to Opera, as an example. Those who know about -- listen to, study, etc. -- opera don't need to be told what they already know, and those who don't might watch it but don't really care. Programmes like this may encourage a small proportion of its viewers to get to a library, but generally, they're pretty useless.

The author believes that it's harmful that people can't discover culture for themselves anymore, because of all the "rough guides" we're bombarded with on TV. He thinks young people have nothing to find out about on their own terms because everything is handed to us on a plate, in a version that holds mass appeal.

What does everyone else think? Should classical music be accessible to everyone, with no effort involved, or should it be something that you have to put something into to get something out of it? Is it elitist to believe that people who know nothing about it shouldn't be pandered to, to the expense of more "worthwhile" academic study, and that if they want to find out about it they'll just have to do a bit of reading and listening? Funding for the arts, and libraries, is being squandered on half-baked programmes that are of use and interest to a very small (and, the author suggests, lazy) portion of society: those who pretend to be interested but won't do anything about it beyond putting the TV on. "Classical" musical and other specialist publications have dropped dramatically, while pop magazines and gossip magazines have increased exponentially.

I'm curious, because I'm very much in two minds about it. I'd be interested in other opinions.

Cheers,
Jas

[alzado]

I think I understand your point . . .

Well, classical music has deviated considerably from today's popular music.  At times in the past, SOME classical music COULD actually BE the popular music of the particular culture.  This, for instance, can be true of opera. 

No doubt Strauss waltzes were popular, and probably were danced to.  Examples could go on.  Even music we think of today as very highbrow was often heard by average persons, since Tocattas and Fugues were played in an ecclesiastical (church) setting.  Even today, at the cathedral we attend, these types of classical pieces are played on the organ as a preludium before the service, and again -- a different piece -- as a postludium after the service.

I just suggested instances where classical and popular music were much closer.  For another instance, the popular music of the common people -- folk songs of the country people -- became a prime "mine" for melodies and inspiration for certain composers.  Most melodies that Ralph Vaughan-Williams used in his classical work comes from the folk music -- some hundreds of years earlier.

Today popular and classical seem far apart.  Perhaps something is happening such as has happened to poetry.  It has sort of been taken over by University literature professors.  It has become pretty rarified, and sometimes you almost have to have a doctorate in comparative literature to even understand it (e.g., T.S. Eliot).

The highbrow music establishment perhaps has staked out what we call "classical" music as a kind of preserve.

There was a post a few weeks ago where a student was rather hurt that her teacher was so "bitchy" after she played a popular piece.  She had herself found this piece, learned it, and hoped to be praised.  Another subscriber replied, "perhaps the teacher was very vexed that you dared to play other than classical, and thought that perhaps it was beneath him to even assist you with it."  (Paraphrase)

Well, here's my EFFORT to reply.  Hope I am not too far off the mark --