At 12:00 PM 5/26/2007, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
>I don't have any answers, but there is a cultural shift that isn't limited
>to the US. The post below appeared on the Two New Hours list a few days ago
>(Larry Lake is the host of Two New Hours, canceled in March after a quarter
>century on the air).
>
>Here is Russell Smith's column in today's Globe and Mail:
This is perfect. Exactly what I am trying to say.
>-----------------------------------------
>How pop has taken over the arts
>RUSSELL SMITH
>May 24, 2007
>
>The word "culture" in media now means what was once called mass or popular
>culture; the word "art" - when it is used at all - means what we once called
>entertainment. Examples of this are everywhere: Almost no North American
>newspaper has a section called "Arts" any more because it would be
>dishonest.
The Boston Globe does.
>The word "music" has suffered the same fate. Popular music no longer must be
>specified as such; it's just music. It's the other forms of music that need
>a qualifier. In other words, "music" tends not to include classical music,
>which is an obscure niche not unlike the "fetish" section of your adult
>video store.
Exactly what I have been saying. THhs article is great.
>It's not included in most discussions of the form. (Actually, that's
>probably a bad example. Fetish porn is usually discussed or at least
>acknowledged in discussions of pornography, whereas classical music simply
>does not exist in most mediated discussions of "music." If you wanted to
>extend the pornographic metaphor a little, you could say that classical
>music is a bit like the old videos that the pornographers now label
>"natural" and classify as a fetish. They put the videos of un-enhanced women
>in the freaky section beside Latex Hotel and Plushy Party.)
Well, that is little beyond what I was saying. Maybe this guy is a little
overdone?
>Similarly, any "culture" section of a TV or radio news hour now means pop
>culture: It means discussion of hip hop and new trends in home decor. Again,
>I'm not denying that these things are culture, just pointing out that
>they're a particular kind of culture and not, I would say, representative of
>all culture.
Exactly. I think the people on this list are very insular and don't have a
conception of how classical music is viewed by the general public.
>What do I mean by this? I mean that every time I hear this usage, I feel
>excluded, and I feel I am meant to: I am meant to be reminded of my
>archaism, my "elitism," whatever that means, my essential difference from
>normal people. It's me who is out of place, me and all my unpleasant
>educated colleagues who insist on remaining all snotty about uncool and
>unlucrative things such as music without singing (and visual art and
>architecture and Web art and installation art and art theory and art
>criticism). Every time I hear an interview with an American sitcom actor
>referred to as culture - and culture it certainly is, although culture of a
>particular and narrow kind - I hear the low voice of normalcy murmuring in
>my ear: "Give up. It's all over. Just give up."
How many people here can relate to that statement?
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
