Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
At 4:44 am -0400 10/16/04, dhbailey wrote: Classical music is music you have to get dressed up all fancy to go sit in a concert hall for, where you don't applaud after the solos, don't applaud everytime the music stops, don't get up and dance, where they don't serve beer while it's being played, isn't usually performed in sports facilities, and if you don't follow the unwritten rules the blue-haired folks around you will glare at you as if you were an ugly insect. Oh yes, and where you have to turn off your cell phones and pagers or the entire audience as well as the conductor and other performers will all glare at you if it rings. So basically 'Classical' music is music that happens when you're wearing uncomfortable clothes, can't figure out when to clap, have to hang around with people you'd never like, can't do anything fun, and can't even have a drink for consolation. Sounds like I'd hate it. Except for the cell phone part. Now if we could just get rid of the glaring and go directly to fully automatic weapons -=-Dennis . ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it? (too long)
On 15 Oct 2004 at 19:25, John Howell wrote: Possibly a C theme, or a variation on the B theme. Prior to the late 18th century, ALL music was ephemeral. . . . And: Development section. Guess what? The music of Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven NEVER WENT OUT OF STYLE! Bach had Palestrina in his repertory. In Salzburg, the sacred repertory included music of the previous 100 years (though all of it by local Salzburg composers). In Leipzig, Bach's music never disappeared (contrary to the hagiography of the Bach revival), and his music was studied and valued by many composers outside Leipzig (including, quite notably, Mozart, Beethoven, Schumann (before Mendelssohn's big revival) and just about everyone we've heard of and many we haven't). What changed around 1800 was how widespread the acclaim for these musicians became. Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven were the first composers to have European-wide reputations that outlasted them. A couple of things caused this: 1. development of commercial mechanisms to allow publishing and distribution continent-wide (culture-wide). 2. the rise of a middle class to buy music (and perhaps doing so as a way of taking on the airs of the upper class). Before that time music was largely local (with many notable exceptions, of course, but none with the reach of either of the Classical period's big three). So, I would argue that the beginning of the Classical canon is probably a result of the industrial revolution. There's also a huge role in there for the rise of German nationalism, but that's another thesis entirely. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
On Oct 15, 2004, at 12:57 PM, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. If you expect to make money on it, it's pop; if you expect to lose money on it, it's classical. mdl (paraphrasing Michael Tippett) ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
Mark D Lew wrote: On Oct 15, 2004, at 12:57 PM, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. If you expect to make money on it, it's pop; if you expect to lose money on it, it's classical. Doesn't jazz fit into the latter category, that of losing money? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
Mark D Lew wrote: On Oct 15, 2004, at 12:57 PM, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. If you expect to make money on it, it's pop; if you expect to lose money on it, it's classical. mdl (paraphrasing Michael Tippett) Possibly the only way to define classical music is to begin with a list of composers from which classical music has descended, naming sample composers along the way. Or how about this: Classical music is music you have to get dressed up all fancy to go sit in a concert hall for, where you don't applaud after the solos, don't applaud everytime the music stops, don't get up and dance, where they don't serve beer while it's being played, isn't usually performed in sports facilities, and if you don't follow the unwritten rules the blue-haired folks around you will glare at you as if you were an ugly insect. Oh yes, and where you have to turn off your cell phones and pagers or the entire audience as well as the conductor and other performers will all glare at you if it rings. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
On Oct 16, 2004, at 3:34 AM, Mark D Lew wrote: On Oct 15, 2004, at 12:57 PM, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. If you expect to make money on it, it's pop; if you expect to lose money on it, it's classical. mdl (paraphrasing Michael Tippett) Oh, darn! And here I was expecting to lose money playing jazz! Does this mean I am really playing classical music (or as Duke Ellington called it - black classical music) or that it's bad pop? 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
I wish Gunther Schuller (sp?) were able to weigh in on this topic. His efforts at blending the classical and jazz genres were really significant. He called it Third Stream, and created some most interesting sounds. I don't think he's still alive, but I'm not sure. Dean On Oct 16, 2004, at 8:34 AM, Christopher Smith wrote: On Oct 16, 2004, at 3:34 AM, Mark D Lew wrote: On Oct 15, 2004, at 12:57 PM, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. If you expect to make money on it, it's pop; if you expect to lose money on it, it's classical. mdl (paraphrasing Michael Tippett) Oh, darn! And here I was expecting to lose money playing jazz! Does this mean I am really playing classical music (or as Duke Ellington called it - black classical music) or that it's bad pop? 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Para mí, la música es la respiración de la vida y de Dios. Per me, la musica è l'alito di vita e del Dio. Pour moi, la musique est le souffle de la vie et de Dieu. Für mich ist Musik der Atem des Lebens und des Gottes. Dean M. Estabrook Director of Music St. Andrew Presbyterian Church Yuba City, CA ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
On 16 Oct 2004, at 02:35 PM, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: I wish Gunther Schuller (sp?) were able to weigh in on this topic. His efforts at blending the classical and jazz genres were really significant. He called it Third Stream, and created some most interesting sounds. I don't think he's still alive, but I'm not sure. Gunther's still with us, Dean. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
At 11:27 AM -0700 10/16/04, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: On Oct 16, 2004, at 1:44 AM, dhbailey wrote: Classical music is music you have to get dressed up all fancy to go sit in a concert hall for, where you don't applaud after the solos, don't applaud everytime the music stops, don't get up and dance, where they don't serve beer while it's being played, I know it's begging the issue, but the old Boston Pops programs (in which classical music was played), were accompanied by the serving of beer. And, as I think about it, and re-beg my comment of a couple of days ago, when that orchestra switched from classical to pop, one of the percussionists always sat down at a trap set and provided the unvarying, pop beat which, I still believe, is one of the identifiers of pop music. And that makes me think of those recordings which came out several years ago of Mozart and Beethoven symphonies with the disco sound (ugh) ... the only significant difference between their classical renditions and the ever so popular recordings was the introduction of the previously mentioned rhythm section (and the typical octave-leaping, disco, bass line). I know, I know, Bolero ... Well, when the Swingle Singers were at their peak, scatting Bach and Mozart very effectively, Ward Swingle would introduce their drummer and bass player as our 9th and 10th voices. And at about the same time, in the mid-60s, a young pianist fresh out of Juilliard, Peter Nero, made quite a profitable splash for a while by taking pop songs and playing them in the style of, or taking classical pieces and playing them in the style of, or combining both pop and classical pieces in very creative ways. One that I still remember is a combination of Tchaikovsky's 5/4 waltz with Rodgers and Hart's (I think) Dancing On the Ceiling in the same 5/4 style. As i've said before, it's all music, and trying to pin down its classification as pop or classical is kind of futile if it's capable of being presented in a crossover or fusion setting that is artistically valid and musically convincing. Bach's music is virtually indestructible, and surprisingly enough it appears that the songs of Lennon and McCartney share that quality. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
On Oct 16, 2004, at 5:31 PM, John Howell wrote: At 11:27 AM -0700 10/16/04, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: On Oct 16, 2004, at 1:44 AM, dhbailey wrote: Classical music is music you have to get dressed up all fancy to go sit in a concert hall for, where you don't applaud after the solos, don't applaud everytime the music stops, don't get up and dance, where they don't serve beer while it's being played, I know it's begging the issue, but the old Boston Pops programs (in which classical music was played), were accompanied by the serving of beer. And, as I think about it, and re-beg my comment of a couple of days ago, when that orchestra switched from classical to pop, one of the percussionists always sat down at a trap set and provided the unvarying, pop beat which, I still believe, is one of the identifiers of pop music. And that makes me think of those recordings which came out several years ago of Mozart and Beethoven symphonies with the disco sound (ugh) ... the only significant difference between their classical renditions and the ever so popular recordings was the introduction of the previously mentioned rhythm section (and the typical octave-leaping, disco, bass line). I know, I know, Bolero ... Well, when the Swingle Singers were at their peak, scatting Bach and Mozart very effectively, Ward Swingle would introduce their drummer and bass player as our 9th and 10th voices. And at about the same time, in the mid-60s, a young pianist fresh out of Juilliard, Peter Nero, made quite a profitable splash for a while by taking pop songs and playing them in the style of, or taking classical pieces and playing them in the style of, or combining both pop and classical pieces in very creative ways. One that I still remember is a combination of Tchaikovsky's 5/4 waltz with Rodgers and Hart's (I think) Dancing On the Ceiling in the same 5/4 style. As i've said before, it's all music, and trying to pin down its classification as pop or classical is kind of futile if it's capable of being presented in a crossover or fusion setting that is artistically valid and musically convincing. Bach's music is virtually indestructible, and surprisingly enough it appears that the songs of Lennon and McCartney share that quality. John -Yep. Dean ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
I figured there would be lots of answers to this tough question. I personally think it doesn't matter what you call it. I touches your soul or it doesn't. It isn't so important to put music into categories. Thanks for your feedback. Jane - Original Message - From: Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2004 12:56 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it? On 16 Oct 2004, at 02:35 PM, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: I wish Gunther Schuller (sp?) were able to weigh in on this topic. His efforts at blending the classical and jazz genres were really significant. He called it Third Stream, and created some most interesting sounds. I don't think he's still alive, but I'm not sure. Gunther's still with us, Dean. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. Are movie scores such as Star Wars classical music? I would say no probably. Jane ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. Are movie scores such as Star Wars classical music? I would say no probably. You'll get as many different answers as you have people you ask this of. For me, the answer is I know it when I hear it. Or, to paraphrase Louis Armstrong's response to the question of what is jazz: If you have to ask, you probably won't understand the answer. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
At 01:57 PM 10/15/04 -0600, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. Ow ow ow. Stop my lips from speaking! Mmewuvdascdjaldlasjlf.. Phew. Just in time. Anybody else? :) Dennis ...exclusively using nonpop since 2001 ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
A difficult question. In german we have an expression E-Musik (ernste Musik) (serious music). Well? What about Mozart? I think as long as we look at baroque, classic and romantic music, it is obvious. In the 20th century there are problems. Up to dodecaphonic and serial music, it is clear. But for example minimal music - is it classic? Jazz? In between? Something else? What about Gershwin? What about Bernstein? What about film music? What about John Williams? There are mixtures. Film music often uses a big romantic orchestra and romantic techniques as Leitmotive (don't know the english counterpart). But it uses also more harmonic freedom, elements from pop and jazz. I think it is also a question of understanding of classical music. Bernstein and Williams certainly have the background and knowledge... There are mixtures of Pop and classics. And there are Jazz arrangements that don't lack classical knowledge. But there are certain elements that clearly define music as Jazz!?! So what? In most cases, you can hear it wether it is classical music or not. But there are blends and crossovers. So in certain cases it's enough for me to discern between good and bad music. Or music I like / I don't like...;-) And this needn't be classical music... Kurt At 21:57 15.10.2004, you wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. Are movie scores such as Star Wars classical music? I would say no probably. Jane ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
I was about to give an incessant, unvarying pounding from a rhythm section as a symptom of non-classical music, until I thought about Bolero. Oh well ... Dean On Oct 15, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Kurt Gnos wrote: A difficult question. In german we have an expression E-Musik (ernste Musik) (serious music). Well? What about Mozart? I think as long as we look at baroque, classic and romantic music, it is obvious. In the 20th century there are problems. Up to dodecaphonic and serial music, it is clear. But for example minimal music - is it classic? Jazz? In between? Something else? What about Gershwin? What about Bernstein? What about film music? What about John Williams? There are mixtures. Film music often uses a big romantic orchestra and romantic techniques as Leitmotive (don't know the english counterpart). But it uses also more harmonic freedom, elements from pop and jazz. I think it is also a question of understanding of classical music. Bernstein and Williams certainly have the background and knowledge... There are mixtures of Pop and classics. And there are Jazz arrangements that don't lack classical knowledge. But there are certain elements that clearly define music as Jazz!?! So what? In most cases, you can hear it wether it is classical music or not. But there are blends and crossovers. So in certain cases it's enough for me to discern between good and bad music. Or music I like / I don't like...;-) And this needn't be classical music... Kurt At 21:57 15.10.2004, you wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. Are movie scores such as Star Wars classical music? I would say no probably. Jane ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Para mí, la música es la respiración de la vida y de Dios. Per me, la musica è l'alito di vita e del Dio. Pour moi, la musique est le souffle de la vie et de Dieu. Für mich ist Musik der Atem des Lebens und des Gottes. Dean M. Estabrook Director of Music St. Andrew Presbyterian Church Yuba City, CA ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 01:57 PM 10/15/04 -0600, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. Ow ow ow. Stop my lips from speaking! Mmewuvdascdjaldlasjlf.. Phew. Just in time. Anybody else? Oh heck, it's Friday afternoon, I'll take a stabG... As another poster pointed out, there are periods of art/music history that are already more-or-less agreed upon, such as the baroque period, the romantic period, etc. Based on that timeline classical music is generally agreed upon to be from those periods, which is circular reasoning to a point, but since people like labels it works. Modern music is a little more difficult to classify simply because we don't have the frame of reference. One of the things I remember from my junior high school music classes is that classical music was defined, in part, as music that stood the test of time. That is, we were still listening to it hundreds of years later. But I remember that same teacher explaining to us that very little popular music of the 60s and early 70s would survive that same test of time. Hmmm... In college we dug a little deeper, and we looked at the popular mechanisms that formed the framework in which classical music was created. Which led to another attempt to create a dividing line, the so-called serious music vs. popular music. Serious music had some mystical power that we couldn't really defineG! For my own meager attempt to categorize my record and cd collection I tend to create the line by whether it is the composer or the artist that gets top billing. Certainly folks like Bernstein and even John Williams are more likely to be the draw than the orchestra that performs them. (Of course there are recordings of certain classical pieces I buy specifically because they were performed by the London Symphony Orchestra or the Philadelphia Orchestra or whatever - this doesn't really blur the line because it is still the composition that I am most interested in.) Conversely, I really don't want to hear a cover of Chicago Transit Authority, I want to hear the boys who created it. The same is true of folk artists, blues artists, pretty much any popular music. Jazz, of course, makes a mess of that whole theory, since there are both pieces and artists that get the limelight. However, at least for the purpose of me finding a specific album, my composer vs performer concept helps. I mean you have to have some name by which to alphabetize things... don't you? In the same line as the serious vs popular, jazz, at least the stuff that the serious jazz magazines write aboutG, is not nearly as accessible as pop. Could there be a dividing line based on accessibility? I don't think so, I think that borders on arrogant. Almost anyone can learn to appreciate classical or jazz music, I'm not certain the same is absolutely true for pop music! For one example, let's look at artists like the belly baring blondes or the boy bands... they don't write their own music, they don't provide their own backing tracks, and they are not taken particularly seriously by anyone over the age of about 14. (And yes, I am very aware of the history of labels like MoTown... different rant for a different dayG). Will I ever learn to appreciate the music my 14 year old step-daughter listened to? I'm not sure, but I sort of hope not. Which is not to suggest that I dislike good pop music. I admire anyone who can write a great hook. However, I didn't hear great hooks in that stuff. For another example, examine rap. I'm not about to argue the social issues, but the general level of anger, hate, etc, present in a lot of the music makes it inaccessible to me. There are rap artists I really like, but they tend to go past the boundaries of anger and hate. Check out Back on the Block by Quincy Jones if you want to hear what can be done in this idiom. As my final example take a look at all the ambient and soft jazz stuff. I love experimental and electronic music, but I don't get the majority of the ambient music I've listened to. (Echoes is produced locally, and I do listen to it, and I even like some of it, but a lot of it gets past me.) And soft jazz? UGH! I just don't get the appeal of that stuff. So, can any person learn to appreciate any musical form? Is that limited to serious music? Heck if I knowG! Have a great weekend... Bill -- Bill Thompson Audio Enterprise KB3KJF -- All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them. Galileo Galilei. -- ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
On Oct 15, 2004, at 5:23 PM, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: I was about to give an incessant, unvarying pounding from a rhythm section as a symptom of non-classical music, until I thought about Bolero. Oh well ... Good thing, too, as that would have put Jack deJohnette, an interesting, highly-varied jazz drummer, squarely into the classical domain. Whew! Dodged that one! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
How about this: Classical music is everything found in the classical music section of your local record store. Not there, not classical. ;-) Christopher (Sorry Dennis B-K, but that would mean that a whole bunch of really great and interesting music isn't classical. It also wouldn't be folk, jazz, techno, pop, soundtrack, or anything at all, since a whole bunch of really great and interesting music is NOT found at all in your local record store. I guess it isn't music at all. Drag.) 8-)=) (big joker grin, signifying that I don't believe that at all, and I don't want my legs broken.) ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
What about ECM? Paert besides Garbarek / Hilliard Ensemble besides Jarret besides Molvaer? Kurt At 00:01 16.10.2004, you wrote: How about this: Classical music is everything found in the classical music section of your local record store. Not there, not classical. ;-) Christopher (Sorry Dennis B-K, but that would mean that a whole bunch of really great and interesting music isn't classical. It also wouldn't be folk, jazz, techno, pop, soundtrack, or anything at all, since a whole bunch of really great and interesting music is NOT found at all in your local record store. I guess it isn't music at all. Drag.) 8-)=) (big joker grin, signifying that I don't believe that at all, and I don't want my legs broken.) ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it?
At 1:57 PM -0600 10/15/04, Jane Frasier wrote: Are movie scores such as Star Wars classical music? I would say no probably. Then maybe sacred music would not be classical music, either? Some fine music has been written for both movies and the church by famous composers through the years. Carlberg Jones Guanajuato, Gto. MEXICO ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: 'Classical music' what is it? (too long)
At 1:57 PM -0600 10/15/04, Jane Frasier wrote: I have been asked by some non-musician friends what the definition of classical music is. How is it different from non-classical music. I have not been able to come up with a very good answer. That's because it's a pretty difficult question, Jane! Let me share a couple of things that I tell the students in my Survey of Music course, early in the 2nd semester (all non-music majors). The term classical properly refers to Classical Greece and Rome, and the learning and ideas of those writers and philosophers and those times. From time to time throughout the history of Western Europe, there have been periods of rediscovery or renewed interest in the old guys and their ideas. The late 18th century was one of those periods of Classical revival. That's why Monticello looks like a Greek temple. OK, time to bring in the B theme. In most cultures above the subsistance level, music (and other arts) serve two very specific functions in society: ritual and entertainment. Sacred music enhances the ritual of workship, formal music enhances the rituals of coronations, weddings and funerals, and pep band and marching band music enhances the rituals of athletic competitions. Entertainment music, on the other hand, tends to be fairly specific to the various social classes in a society, and one has to remember that until very, very recently European society has been rather rigidly stratified by social class. In fact, some of the world's great literature is based on someone's trying to assume a rank in society they are not entitled to, and the consequences of that attempt. What we tend to call classical (small c, in quotes) or art music was, in almost every case i can think of, intended for the entertainment of the upper classes, who could afford to hire the best musicians and the best composers, who could afford to support opera houses and concert halls and ballet companies, and who were presumably better educated and more discerning than the middle and lower classes. (They weren't, of course, but they liked to think they were!) Back to the A theme, with variations. The late 18th century was a period of classical revival, but the one art that could not be studied was Classical Greek music. Even now it's a mystery to all but a few specialists, and we're not even sure they're on the right track. So what the late 18th century composers working in and around Vienna adopted came from Greek visual art--the sense of balance and proportion that does, indeed, mark the music of Mozart, Haydn and their contemporaries. Possibly a C theme, or a variation on the B theme. Prior to the late 18th century, ALL music was ephemeral. Entertainment music depends on fashion and fad, and those were more likely to change among the upper class than among the middle and lower class. There was a constant market for new music because old music fell out of fashion and was dropped from use. I would imagine that the half-life of upper class entertainment music was much shorter than that of middle and lower class music, because the lower classes tended to be more conservative in their taste and much of their music was traditional or folk music. Development section. Guess what? The music of Mozart, Haydn and Beethoven NEVER WENT OUT OF STYLE! It is virtually the first entertainment music in history to live on after its natural life span as fashionable music ran out. Now at this point I am purely speculating and playing with terminology, and our European friends may (correctly) point out that I'm reading too much into that terminology. Since the music of the Viennese school was Classical in the sense of coming out of a period of Classical revival, that term somehow got hung on the music and stuck. So the entertainment music of the upper classes became, in effect, concert music for the concert hall after a few bloody revolutions reduced the number of European aristocrats considerably. And the middle class audiences who supported public concerts got to like that music, and so classical music was born both as a term and as a concept of high class music. Now the 20th century dichotomy between classical or art music and popular music has always bothered me. I'm a musician, period, and I try to do everything I can without worrying about such artificial distinctions. I was a professional musical entertainer for close to 20 years, kept my hand in with classical music whenever I got a chance, and got really interested in early music when I finally got around to grad school. Why did everybody make such a big deal about classical vs. popular music; isn't it all music? Purely by accident, I came across a wonderful, thought-provoking book by Alan Gowans: The Unchanging Arts. His thesis was that every art serves a function in society, and that while the forms of each art change with fashion, the functions remain the same.
