In Brief

DECEMBER 2009

Worthwhile composers

December 5th » Your article on the problems of maintaining a collection of classical CDs is very interesting. It's not necessary to have 10 or more sets each of the complete symphonies of Beethoven, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Mahler or other great composers when there are so many interesting works from outside the standard repertoire available on CD. Those who are curious to hear obscure but worthwhile music by composers such as Zemlinsky, Pfitzner, Stenhammar, Balakirev, Magnard, Chadwick, Bax, Fibich, Szymanowski, Langaard, Medtner, Koechlin, Roussel, Taneyev and other lesser-known composers have never had it so good . It's like being the proverbial kid in a candy store! Robert Berger (NY, USA)

AUGUST 2009

Mindless applause

August 16th » [Re: "Listen, don't clap"] Applause of any sort should be banned at concerts. I find it ridiculous, embarrassing, pointless (not to mention standing ovations, where one has to smile and bow stupidly until people begin to sit down, or walk out) and extremely backward that this still continues at concerts. There are many other ways for the audience to get involved without clapping like idiots after falling asleep in the slow movement of a Schubert sonata (yes, that too at a performance by Brendel). It is just so bizarre that classical musicians hardly ever speak to the audience, or discuss works they are performing (as that is not concert etiquette) but still it is deemed perfectly okay for the audience to make a racket after the music has begun through mindless clapping (not to mention the coughing and spluttering that occurs between pieces too). KF (Canada)

Music in WSJ and Boston

August 15th » [Re: Survey] I was surprised to see the Wall Street Journal placed on your list of newspapers that ignore art music. In a typical week, there are sure to be at least two reviews of classical performances, usually in New York City, but occasionally in the hinterlands (like Boston!). Speaking of Boston, there is usually so little happening along the banks of the Charles River, except for free Esplanade concerts consisting mainly of audience "favorites", that the Boston Globe offers no coverage except for Tanglewood, 130 miles to the west. In the fall, there should be more coverage of art music in the many venues and genres available in the Hub of the Universe; ok, spiral arm of the galaxy. Laurence Glavin (MA, USA)

Physical appearances

August 11th » I don't know whether you take suggestions for columns, but I would like to see a discussion on the trend of commentators to focus upon the physical appearance of singers and musicians - if they are attractive. I hear both male and female performers described as "gorgeous", "hunky", "looks like a model", etc. It makes me cringe. Is this recent or have I simply not been paying attention? classicalcanuck (Canada)

It's all subjective

August 10th » You cannot contend that any genre of music is superior to any other genre of music for the simple reason that it's all subjective. Any claims about "depth" or "emotion" exemplify this - plenty of people would find a Beatles ballad or a Radiohead song much more deep and emotional than a Bach fugue. This is not to say Bach is bad, merely that the perception of Bach as good or bad is entirely a matter of taste and cannot be argued as an objective fact. But who said music had to be deep and emotional to be good? Enjoyment can be derived from the energy or the rhythmic drive of a rock song or Stravinsky's Rite of Spring, from the humour of The World's Most Unwanted Music or the second movement of Haydn's Symphony No. 101, from the intellectual qualities of Webern or Boulez, or from countless other sources I have undoubtedly failed to mention. The simple fact is that one's perception of music is subjective, and any attempt to formulate an objective criteria for measuring the quality of a piece of music will always fall into the trap of representing the views of one. This is not politics - there is no right or wrong, as it is not possible to objectively argue that a subjective perception is "better" than someone else's. If you personally do not derive any enjoyment from pop music, that is all well and good; that is your personal taste. However, once you try to make your tastes out to be better than everyone else's, you have crossed the line. Jack Swan (Argentina)

Business in art music

August 7th » Having read about your goals of much greater government support of art music, I say that this would be wonderful, but given the current political climate in America and the obtuse but adamant opposition to such government funding among so many Americans and conservative Washington politicians, that such funding would be extremely difficult if not impossible to create. Unfortunate, but true.

And I cannot understand your opposition to support for art music by business. I would be for any means of providing far greater support for our orchestras, operas companies, other performing groups, composers, music education etc., if it could be arranged. Have you considered the possibility of contacting wealthy and prominent individuals such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and others for possible support? I have no idea whether they would be willing to contribute to the support of art music in America; possibly not, or even if they listen to and enjoy art music at all. Perhaps this is a quixotic idea; but we must be willing to consider any possibility. Robert Berger (NY, USA)

Pop on BBC Radio 3

August 4th » Thanks for musoc! May I come at it from the angle of music on the radio?

BBC Radio 3 (and the Third before it) used to discriminate between art music and pop - by leaving the latter to other people.

That's all changed now. This week, on In Tune, for example we've had: 'I got rhythm', sung by Ethel Merman; Hello Dolly; more than one (set of) entertainer(s) trying to claim the benefits of mixing 'heavy metal' or folk, or jazz or other similar genres with serious music...'fusion'.

Do we know whether the BBC has hard evidence that the same people who respond to the subtleties of a Monteverdi motet and In the South, say, are truly taken in by the rather reduced and tuneless crudities of these other pieces? Or is it merely an attempt on the BBC's part to swing with the accessibility crowd? Louise Further (CA, USA)

Ivo Malec

August 4th » I enjoyed the ClassCAM recommendation of Ivo Malec. You recommended his cantata Epistola, which was lovely, as was the cello concerto Arc-En-Cello on that same disc. I enjoyed them enough to obtain a second Timpani label release, IC1086, including his Sonoris Causa, the violin concerto Attava Alta, and Exempla.

Malec's experience with musique concrete has clearly influenced his orchestral writing, or more accurately, the same aesthetic that attracted him to musique concrete - love of sheer sound - speaks in his orchestral pieces as well. I hope he remains in good health, because I got the impression that his best work is yet to come, the relaxed tone in these late works permitting a deeper level of engagement. He avoids traditional line and narrative by choice, but tantalizing hints peek through nevertheless. Simply dazzling orchestration. Though I can't say all of the pieces I've heard are entirely successful, I am glad to have heard them. Thank you again for the recommendation, and I look forward to the re-opening* of your ClassCAM list. John Blackburn (USA)

* The ClassCAM page has been discontinued

JULY 2009

Squarely handed asses

July 21st » I just wanted to be sure you noticed that you have had your asses squarely handed to you by Soho The Dog ['Small Wonder', July 4th]. I would tread lightly, though - Dr. Guerrieri does not suffer fools lightly and this sampling is a mere clearing of his throat. I honestly can't tell whether you're kidding or not with this, but it's pretty hilarious either way (though a little cowardly to be anonymous, you'd have to admit).

It is also impossible not to respond to the idea that everyone with a rational, informed point of view different from yours is a "bully", since you, yourselves have staked your existence on diminishing, bullying, and trashing everything you for whatever reason don't think is music. You come off as baselessly mug, vicious, and not a little ignorant. Not a good combination. But it's good entertainment. Alex Freeman (USA)

No applause between movements

July 18th » Your quite proper column on applause between movements left out a very important entity - the performers. Surely the short interval between movements is a chance for the performers to re-group themselves and shift gears for the next movement. It is a discourtesy to distract them by applause, however well-meaning. Jonathan Hayes (USA)

Wishy washy Tom Service

July 11th » I was alerted to your site by Tom Service's column in the oh so politically correct newspaper, The Guardian. Whilst I may find some of his writing quite interesting, I find his wishy washy stance on this issue quite spineless, too afraid to come out with a strong conviction; poor lamb, he might be accused of being elitist. Oh dear. David Foulger (UK)

July 9th »
[Letter deleted at author's request]

Music recommendations

July 9th » Your website is striking sparks clearly on behalf of a good cause, as described on the Telegraph website. But we could use a little more help to achieve the listening highs that you seem to espouse. Could you somewhere on your site recommend at least one piece of music every so often which is within the trammels of what you are saying, please? This is no way a criticism, more an observation that 'Chacun à son goût' may need a little help sometimes. It would also help a feeling of inclusiveness and give a focal point for music-based discussion. Good luck. Andrew J Lewis (England)

Not interested

July 8th » Cultural relativism can indeed be fatuous - one thinks of Wilfred Mellors, Schubert and the Beatles. But you're running him a close second for fatuity. If your world view cannot embrace the possibility that one brain might take equal pleasure at different times and in different circumstances in, say, Beethoven's 9th, Billie Holiday, Leonard Cohen, the Monteverdi Vespers and Nellie the Elephant, then I'm not interested. No doubt you're only doing it to annoy, and you are, indeed, annoying. Mike Petty

Debussy's Pelléas et Mélisande

July 6th » Do you consider Debussy's Pelléas et Mélisande the firstborn of a new century or the final exquisite rendering of the Wagnerian age? There has been significant lobbying over the past 30 years in both academic (e.g. Paul Griffiths) and compositional (e.g. Pierre Boulez) circles for the Debussy-as-Modernist view which has always included Pelléas et Mélisande. I have never seen it as a dawn, but as a sunset (like Debussy said of Wagner)... It is too romantic and lush to be 'modern' though the ending seems to point to a new beginning (new century?) I think poetic sensitivity and refinement of this order is always a very late phenomenon...In short - Debussy's incomparably beautiful opera ends the 19th century. I would appreciate your thoughts (however brief) on this. Jacinto Fernandez

Essentially in sympathy

July 5th » I address both your anti-pop arguments on musoc.org and the relativist responses of Service/Midgette in a blog post here. I am essentially in sympathy with your project, although I consider some of your arguments a bit misguided. Aaron (Osbert Parsley) (Canada)

Letters: 2009

This page is an archive of all letters for publication received by musoc.org in 2009. For the current Letters page and general information about submissions, please use the above link.

DECEMBER 2009

Done over like a kipper

December 17th & 21st » [Re: Hip Pains] I know space is always an issue on the web - oh no, hang on, it isn't - but perhaps you should publish the bit of my copy you've conveniently decided to edit out? The bit where I mention Haydn, Mahler and Cardew. Otherwise it might seem like you're deliberately distorting my intentions.

By the way, you omit to mention in your nod towards Finnissy's magnificent Transgressive Gospel [see ClassCAM, November 2009] that one of the voices used in the first performance was a jazz singer (Kate Westbrook) and that the work draws heavily on the blues. Michael Finnissy and Kate Westbrook both happen to be good friends of mine - in fact I introduced them, and Michael's piece was partly 'my fault'. Kate has had no classical training and by her own admission can hardly read conventional notation. Michael sent me the blues sections of Transgressive Gospel during the composition process to ask my advice because he wanted to make them as authentic as possible. Knowing him like I do, I'm sure he'd be horrified to be associated with your site.

And the punch line is - leaving the Finnissy up demonstrates how meaningless and arbitrary your definition of 'Art Music' is. But taking it down does the same thing because that would imply you listen with lazy prejudice, and not your ears. Done over like a kipper, I'd say. Philip Clark (Gramophone, UK)

NOVEMBER 2009

Some advice on 'reaching out'

November 23rd » Assuming your website is not just one big joke, and you are completely serious in your aims, then I'd like to try to help with some advice. I think your aim of promoting classical music is laudable, but I can't believe you'll get any serious support and thus make any sort of difference, because your website is just ridiculous. There are plenty of other good words to describe it, like embarrassing, narrow-minded and contradictory, but 'ridiculous' pretty much sums them all up.

For a start, your entire manifesto is built on an argument that simply doesn't hold up, which is this idea that art music is objectively superior to any other music. The 'superiority' of one type of music over another can only ever be a subjective opinion, and it is strange that you don't seem to have realised/acknoweldged that: you seem intelligent enough.

More importantly, and again it seems almost too obvious to say, if you truly want to nurture interest in classical music, how on earth do you expect to do so when you take such an elitist/exclusive approach that pushes away most of the people you should be reaching out to?

You say you are not evangelists, and you don't wish to convert people to your cause. But surely you can't expect to get anything you strive for - state funding, an art music radio station, 'sustenance and promotion' of art music - without a little bit of evangelising, without some public support. Or are you just hoping these things will drop out of the sky?

Thankfully, the amount of people who think as you do - that 'art music' is the only music worth bothering with - has got to be so small that, if those are the people you rely on for your support, you will slowly wiher out and die without doing any good at all.

If you want to get anywhere, you have to reach out to a wider range of people - people who don't listen to classical music but could learn to love it, people who enjoy classical music but also listen to pop, jazz, whatever. And I can't see how you will ever do that by taking such a sneering approach to the music that most people enjoy listening to most of the time.

If you truly care about promoting and sustaining classical music, you'll listen to this sort of advice (I imagine I'm not the first to come out with it), grow up, and present yourselves as an organisation to be taken seriously, that actually does want to make a difference. At the moment, you just seem to be wasting your own time.

Funnily enough, I've enjoyed your website - it's fun to get angry about things sometimes - and it's prompted quite a range of emotions. But at the end of the day I just feel pity for you, above anything else: because I am open-minded enough to see that you can find value in pretty much any music, I can get that sort of swooping-stomach feeling from a piece of rural Andean music, from playing Javanese gamelan, from hearing the folk fiddler Ben Paley play live, from sitting in the Barbican watching the African kora player Toumani Diabate, as much as I can from singing Walton's The Twelve at evensong, or playing Debussy's Rêverie on the piano, or listening to Prokofiev's piano concertos at home.

You are stuck with your own narrow view of what 'music' is, and I can be moved, excited by and simply enjoy so much more. I think, at the end of the day, that is a much healthier way to live.

Thank you for reading this - I honestly hope that it helps you to reflect on your views and take seriously your aims. Harriet Power (UK)

OCTOBER 2009

Importance of rejecting pop

October 9th » Thank you for putting together such an inspiring site at a time when it is most needed. Namely, a time when new music festivals have been playing the same anti-music for 50 years, a time when conservatories are far more concerned with offering novelty courses than teaching useful musical principles, and a time when one can hardly view the first two pages of search results on most art music related topics without being subjected to the drivel of the same few critics with nothing to say. Or rather, the same few pointless things to say: in addition to their invalid complaints about ticket prices and applauding that you reveal the truth about on your site, there are the equally invalid complaints about formal dress codes (especially absurd to anyone who attended the last opera I did and noticed how over half the people even in the most expensive seats were dressed) and about imaginary hordes of purist bogeymen, recurring nightmares of which drive the typical ArtsJournal or NewMusicBox contributor to plead incessantly for yet more tolerance and acceptance of rock, blues, jazz and 'world music' when there is obviously far too much already.

I am very pleased that you emphasise not only the value of art music, but the faults of pop and the subsequent importance of rejecting it. This is often overlooked by other ostensibly pro-art-music sites and articles that seem to confuse genuine art music enthusiasts with indescriminate dabblers who listen to a trivial amount of art music and a substantial amount of pseudo-music. The most extreme example in recent memory was a prominent early music organisation that enthused about the meaninglessly inclusive demographic of "an astonishing 98.5 million American adults listening to some early music in the past year on radio or in recordings"; of course, the figures for how many considered early music their favourite style were completely absent from the survey, demonstrating that they cared nothing about the degree to which the music was truly appreciated. Despite having never attempted painting and being unable to recognise many details that a painter would, it is not difficult for me to recognise a substantial difference in rendering quality between figures by Annibale Caracci and by David Hockney; likewise I would expect that many listeners, though unable to understand the details of text setting and intervallic relations in Palestrina masses, should be able to recognise a substantial difference in musical complexity and pleasantness between recordings of Palestrina and recordings of Linkin Park. A lack of the ability to recognise said difference in quality would be just as apparent in one who 'enjoys' both as in one who, having heard both, prefers the Linkin Park.

How excited would the owner of a five-star restaurant be to hear from a customer that his latest eight-course menu was "equally as enjoyable as my recent Burger King value meal"? The answer is of course 'not'; indeed such praise is uncommon, as it would be perceived as highly insulting by the owner and make the customer seem very foolish. Unfortunately, as the Alex Ross quote in your Rave New World article demonstrates, critics often lack that basic logical sense. This contributes to the unfortunate phenomenon of the same prices being paid for actual paintings as for canvasses covered in primitive splatters of paint, and for actual music as for recordings of asthmatic whining in strophic form about how his imaginary girlfriend left him, accompanied by eight-measure phrases in 4/4 time filled with block chords demonstrating improper voice-leading.

There certainly seem to be enough outlets online for noise addicts to scream hysterically about how closed-minded and intolerant others are for showing an interest in writing actual music, for minimalists to cry about how their favourite downtown elevator muzak for gamelan and electronics has been supressed by academia, and for the truly delusional to babble about how elitist everyone else is for either wearing tuxedos to every concert or being insufficiently awed by the imagined greatness of Radiohead. Outlets for the musically inclined to contact like-minded individuals and involve themselves in productive change, however, seem almost nonexistent. Your mailing list appears to be an essential first step in this direcion, and brings hope to an aspiring 27-yearold composer who has consistently faced one disappointment after another, thanks to a complete disaster of an art music scene. Dymitry Wos (USA)

AUGUST 2009

CBC Radio New 2's 'omertà'

August 30th » Although we believe that Art exists under many forms, including in various genres of commercial music, we welcome your tribune and its straight take-no-prisoner approach. It is time some air refreshed the stuffy classical music business that consists of trumpeting the same people all the time (at taxpayers' expense, of course) and which assumes a 'name' is a guarantee to high quality music-making (and its corollary: who cares what you do if you are not a celebrity!). Therefore, as a follow up to your August [2009] Hall of Shame, we thought you'd appreciate publishing the open letter below:

Svetlana Ponomarëva** plays Schnittke & Bach but NOT on CBC Radio 'New' 2. What is it CBC Radio New 2 classical programs In Tune and Tempo hosts and producers don't get that UK critics Norman Lebrecht and Jonathan Woolf, Canadian reviewer Rick Phillips and CKUA classical music host Mark Antonelli get? [**pronounced: pa-na-ma-riO-va, stress on penultimate syllable]

Consider: * Norman Lebrecht "enjoyed it very much"; * Jonathan Woolf compared her playing favorably to Boris Berman's who is considered worldwide a specialist in Schnittke's piano music; * Rick Phillips, former CBC Sound Advice host, who in 2006 called her "a pianist to watch" after his review of her Schubert/Liszt CD, "found it very strong" and added "Svetlana does an excellent job, especially with the Schnittke. The Bach too is strong"; and * CKUA "Classic Examples" played her Bach French Suite No.5 in February...

If you are a CBC Radio 2 listener, you would not know these critics are describing classical pianist Svetlana Ponomarëva's 2008 CD entitled 'Schnittke/Bach', recorded in CBC Studio One in Vancouver, independently produced without any subsidies from any level of government and distributed in Canada through Indiepool and Amazon.ca!

Svetlana is a Russian born and Moscow Gnesins Academy of Music educated pianist. She is a Canadian citizen. Detailed biography, reviews, videos and sound extracts can be accessed through her website.

A search on CBC's website reveals that, despite her having recorded her last three CDs in a CBC Studio in Vancouver and having been noticed on Sound Advice, the last performance on CBC was in April 2007 and none of her albums have appeared over the airwaves in 2008 or the first half of 2009...This is over two years of silence. And it is not because these CBC hosts and producers did not receive the recording: in the fall of 2008 at the launch of Svetlana's latest release, we contacted the two remaining classical programs susceptible to play the CD, namely: In Tune, hosted by Katherine Duncan in Calgary in October; and Tempo, hosted by mezzo-soprano Julie Nesrallah in Ottawa in November.

In the context of classical music program disappearance, we welcomed Ms. Duncan's show In Tune that purportedly wished to present the contemporary scene in classical music, as we feel that we are part of this scene here in Canada. After her acknowledgement of receipt of the CD, we have since heard nothing about it on In Tune. A simple review of the playlist suggests a very loose relation to the panorama of new classical music. For instance, despite 2008 marking the tenth anniversary of the world renowned Russian German composer Alfred Schnittke's passing, not a single recording of his music was played on this program.

As for Tempo, a performance of a Deutsche Grammophon Hélène Grimaud Bach recording prompted a detailed letter from Svetlana to the host explaining the Baroque articulation flaws in Ms. Grimaud's performance, including a challenge to play the same Prelude and Fugue BWV 849 by both performers. Svetlana brings to Canada her knowledge of the unique research by Russian academics on forgotten Rules of Articulation so critical to accessing the meaning of Bach's clavier music and its symbolism. A promise was made to "listen to the CD" but the challenge was declined. Meanwhile repeat programs are peppered throughout the year.

In January 2009, I shared with these producers Jonathan Woolf's review that appeared on the UK based MusicWeb International. Neither Katherine Duncan nor David Houston, producer for Tempo, acknowledged my email. When not treating the broadcast as its hosts' own garden, (Ms. Nesrallah was featured with the Gryphon Trio on February 20, 2009 and again on May 1st, 2009 and in a harp duet on August 4th), Tempo instead, despite the many other 'pure laine' Canadian musicians playing solo piano Bach repertoire, featured the Grimaud recording again three times in the past six months. As for In Tune, after months Ms. Duncan finally went to Italy to play a French Suite by Bach in her broadcast rather than play Svetlana's...

Genug, enough, basta! Why let some unimaginative CBC Radio 2 producers fail a first class pianist playing a world class repertoire? It is time to refresh the stuffy classical music business that consists of trumpeting the same people all the time, and which assumes a 'name' is a guarantee of high quality music-making and its corollary: who cares what you do if you are not a celebrity or a poster child for the social engineering crave of the day!

We believed, just as Rick Phillips, Jonathan Woolf and others did, that the CBC Radio 2 audience would be able to appreciate a quality Canadian-made recording if they were given the opportunity to listen to it. Such opportunity falls well within the CBC's mandate of reflecting the diversity of the Canadian musical landscape, which extends far beyond some insiders' circles. As self-funded contributors to the cultural diversity of this country, Canadian citizens and taxpayers, we refuse to silently accept the 'omertà' the new CBC Radio 2 keeps imposing on our production - hence this open letter. This is not a question of glory or fat cheques but of respect. Sincerely yours, Dr. Marc Villéger, producer (West Vancouver BC, Canada)

(Update, end December 2009: CBC Radio 2 still has not played Ponomarëva's CD, nor even acknowledged this open letter.)

Triteness of pop

August 3rd » Your website provides a new and welcome perspective on music and on cultural relativism. It is sad that many of those who over the last forty years have expressed a simple preference of, say, the Beatles over Bach have not appreciated the general triteness of the former compared with the depths of the latter. To lump all those who produce some form of pitch-varying noise under the general heading of 'musicians' and to describe their output as 'music' is to perpetuate the illusion that all such variations on this theme are comparable. That what you call 'art music' through its complexities is on first hearing harder to grasp than 'pop' has for many unfortunates, though themselves 'music loving', created a barrier to 'art music' and an illusion that 'pop' is an alternative and easier route to a similar emotional experience. Of course, they are wrong.

It is also remarkable that, though there are many who cannot distinguish two different pitches ('tone deaf'), yet the number of people who shy away from 'pop' on these grounds is minimal. So maybe one of the principal characteristics of all music, pitch variation, is not essential for an enjoyment of 'pop'. Maybe rhythm is the essence, the reminiscence of the mother's beating heart leading to a banal sense of well being which all can share.

This problem of using the same description 'music' for two fairly unrelated concepts is not unique. I would draw an analogy with cricket. 'Art music' is to 'pop' as 'test match cricket' is to '20-20' and the use of the same nomenclature, 'cricket', to describe both the latter two is now causing a similar problem for the English summer sport. Perhaps readers would like to suggest how this can be solved. But I digress from your website's noble aim... Christopher Bowring (England)

JULY 2009

Elitism

July 29th » I am writing in complete shock and almost disgust at this website. You say you are in no way elitist as "anyone can visit it", but by your very nature you are discouraging anyone who may listen to (shock horror) anything other than 'art music'.

This term in itself is derisive and incredibly infantile; it may well describe classical music for your own needs but it does not actually take away from the fact that there is a distinction between classical and Classical.

You also state on the website that 'art music' is not more elitist than 'pop'; this could not be further from the truth and your blog* is a shining example of that: ticket prices to 'classical' concerts and opera are sometimes double the price of 'pop' concerts (Covent Garden, Festival Hall and the fact you may have to wait 10 years to pay who knows what to get a seat at Bayreuth).

I am a fan of classical music and not just through the Classic FM school; I have varied interests and tend to go for composers who are off the beaten track. The main problem with classical music today is that you have two different groups:
--those that are interested in new music and discovering what young composers or forgotten composers can do without losing sight of where the music came from and the history of it
--then there are those who will not accept anything other than the standard greats, the Romantics and Classics.

You do address the point of Minimalism (and by default electronic music), but I would like to hear more on your views on this...what about Stockhausen, or Tippett (who borrowed heavily from trad and blues), Weill (Music for Johnny Johnson) or even Gavin Bryars??

The main point I would like you and those who are supporting you in your beliefs to explain is: If classical or 'art' music did not evolve beyond its parameters and think outside the box, would the Baroque period ever have happened, would the Romantic period ever have happened, would we have known the symphonic structure? Or even further, do you think that we would still have composers writing today using new melodies that we had not heard before or be able to still adhere to the formal structures of the Classical period? Ian Lee (UK)

* musoc.org does not have a blog

Mixed feelings

July 22nd & 23rd » I recently came across your interesting website and would like to offer some comments. My classical music blog is The Horn. I have mixed feelings about what musoc.org represents. On one hand, I applaud your commitment to the cause of furthering classical music and increasing government support for it. However, I have problems with your inflammatory rhetoric regarding other kinds of music. I feel that your negative comments on non-classical music are extremely counterproductive and could set back your cause a great deal.

When lovers of classical music make disparaging comments about popular music etc, they merely reinforce negative stereotypes about classical (or as you prefer, "art" music). This causes resentment on the part of those who love other kinds of music. And furthermore, when people who know little or nothing about classical music, and have never attenmded concerts or opera etc hear such talk, it gives them the idea that they should not even try classical music.

So many people's minds are closed. Permanently. This is not good. Although I personally prefer "art" music to pop etc, and consider it to be one of the crowning glories of mankind, I feel it is wrong to say that classical music is superior to other kinds of music. Some Jazz musicians, fans and critics may consider Jazz to be better than classical and preferable to it. Or admirers of other kinds of music.

I find art music infinitely more interesting, exciting and rewarding to listen to than pop music. But I don't begrudge others the right to enjoy other kinds of music. I also enjoy certain kinds of world music, such as the throat singers of Tuva, whose music is fascinating, and the traditional music of the Caucasus and Central asia, regions whose history, culture and languages I have long been interested in.

My classical music blog is geared toward people who are new to classical music and would like to learn about it. I cover all aspects of it, including orchestral music, opera, chamber music, choral works, current events in the field, history, explaining terminology, famous composers, famous works, and much more, even classical music jokes. But I make it a point never to make disparaging comments about other kinds of music, so that I do not come across as a snob or elitist. I have compared classical music with rock and pop etc, showing the differences, but that is all. No denigration.

I have been involved with classical music since I was a teenager as a horn player, substitute music teacher in public schools, and much else. For several years now I have been involved with music appreciation programs for the elderly and infirm at nursing homes, and people with disabilities such as cerebral palsy etc. I am hoping to expand my programs and to reach more people anywhere who are unfamiliar with art music and to increase its popularity.

Some years ago, I saw a debate on PBS over the question of whether the government should support classical music in America. The discussion was between an American opera singer whose name I don't recall and a prominent jazz critic, plus the PBS broadcaster. The jazz critic asserted that the US government should not support American opera companies, because (if I remember correctly) "opera is not really an American art form, and it's just a frivolous entertainment where wealthy people go to see and be seen, and to show off their finery etc."

I was outraged and disgusted by this individual's combination of arrogance and total ignorance of opera,and wish I could have been there to give him a piece of my mind. This critic was obviously ignorant of the fact that opera was popular in America long before jazz even came into existence, and that many distinguished American composers have written operas on American subjects which have been performed with considerable success at American opera houses and elsewhere. Furthermore, he ignorantly bought into the stereotypical view of opera as nothing but an excuse for wealthy people to socialize, ignoring that many people who are not wealthy but attend opera performances because they genuinely love opera. This appalling example of reverse snobbism is unfortunately not isolated. This is why it is important to defend opera and classical music in general. Robert Berger (NY, USA)

Defenestration of CBC Radio Two

July 11th & 12th » At the beginning of September, 2008, Canada's classical radio station, CBC Radio Two, became 'The New 2'. This was due to a search for a "new demographic" as the old demographic was perceived as, well, old. As in aging and, indeed, aged (an incorrect perception). The 'Old 2' was a very good classical station with knowledgable musicologists for hosts. They played a breadth of classical music not heard elswhere in Canada.

Then, the politicos who set the budget for this public station decided that the lowest common denominator must prevail. They installed into the board room the sort of people needed for the job of changing the CBC to the travesty it has become. These people hired in their own image and the process began. The current prime minister has, in the past, declared CBC Radio 2 "elitist".

But no more. It is now the epitome of the lowest common denominator. While there are some bright spots on the weekends, the supposed sop to the classical music devotees is a five hour program called Tempo. It airs from 9am to 2pm Monday to Friday and is hosted by Julie Nesrallah, an erstwhile singer who is into food and recipes as well as her own "big hair". She refers to Don Giovanni as "Donnie G".

I'd direct you to the New 2's blog archives to read the well thought out and heartfelt comments made by hundreds of protesters in 2008; however, they were removed last week as more changes were made to the website and the schedule was adjusted.

Further searching has not revealed any stated rationale for removing the comments from the archived blogs prior to December 01, 2008 - although conspiracy theories abound, as they are wont to do. The comments do remain for the blog topics after that date, however, the numbers have dropped commensurate, I am sure, with the number of listeners that have turned off their radios or tuned in elsewhere.

I'd like to nominate CBC Radio 2 for your next Hall of Shame. The defenestration of this station is nothing short of obscene.

One final shameful item of interest is the fact that, as of November 2008, the CBC disbanded the last radio orchestra in North America - it was called the CBC Radio Orchestra and was based in Vancouver, British Columbia. I believe the farewell concert was held mid-November.

Moving on: I was a Luddite prior to the changes at CBC but have been forced to become an intrepid internet explorer - as have any number of my fellow Canadians. A lot of us have found alternatives like ABC Australia.

One final shameful item of interest is the fact that, as of November 2008, the CBC disbanded the last radio orchestra in North America - it was called the CBC Radio Orchestra and was based in Vancouver, British Columbia. I believe the farewell concert was held mid-November.

Your website is like an oasis in the desert. I hadn't heard the term "art music" prior to this, but will use it from now on. It is apt. Thank you for undertaking this journey on behalf of thousands of like-minded people around the globe. classicalcanuck (Canada)

Media populism

July 10th » Your clarity of vision is a tonic! Congratulations on a remarkable achievement! You have produced pages of great importance, not in the usual form of a book, but better still on the internet where they will have immediate and continuing worldwide exposure.

The importance of your effort was emphasised a few days ago when on the BBC1's flagship news programme "News At Ten" significant time was allotted to cover the funeral and memorial service of Michael Jackson. Without wishing to personally diminish the Welsh child-singer who performed at that service, it was painful to hear him tell millions of world-wide viewers at the end of his performance that he wanted to thank Jackson for blessing him "and every single individual on this Earth with his amazing music." These were of course the words of a child, but their delivery exemplified so clearly the nonsense that the global market feeds upon. I believe the BBC, at least, should not have reported these words, but worse still has been the revelry of the general media in reporting that since Jackson's death global sales of his CDs "have exploded". This apparently is a wonderful thing - of which, no doubt, they would urge us all to be part.

Your endorsing only "those companies that appear genuinely interested in supporting the cause of art music" is to be applauded. The most effective way of bringing about change is to hit the rapacious recording companies you list where it hurts: sales.

Seeking to encourage the establishment of dedicated art music radio stations is an excellent aim, particularly when even the UK's previously excellent BBC Radio 3 has also fallen victim to populism. By way of the Internet we could easily be blessed by stations such as you seek to establish - and maybe even such a station already exists. There are already some internet-based "radio stations" which offer popular music round theclock as a result of hundreds of tracks having simply been uploaded to a server and looped. No ads, no commentaries, just the music: and the whole thing can be set up by just a couple of enthusiasts at home with an ordinary PC. Maybe this is something that Musoc could do at some point in the future - provided permission is given by enough copyright holders.

After having read your entire site, there are only a few things I would like to recommend. The first is that in your suggestions for the criteria of art music, new ways of creating sound ought to be permitted as well. And related to this, I think it needs to be acknowledged that the amplification of voices or instruments (acoustic or electronic) can act as an enhancement - for example, to provide greater volume or greater intimacy. I agree that sophistication and complexity should be criteria but I think this element should also be re-worded to allow for the spectrums of complexity and sophistication, i.e. one work can be complex while another may be extraordinarily complex. Lastly, in your definition of Classical Music, if art music "as a slightly wider term covers...a society's folk music heritage", then certainly the criteria of sophistication and complexity in the definition of art music ought to be re-worded.

To end, just out of interest, in the article Rave New World, when you refer to the art music of shopping precincts and bus stations, used to deter hooliganism, are you referring to the playing of easy-listening classics (as opposed to Henze, for example)? In the area where I live most public conveniences are filled with the sound of the "lollipops" of art music, for example, the popular performances of Pavarotti. I have always assumed they are provided as part of a desire to provide a very pleasant "convenience-experience" to the public, but perhaps they are really being played because to other ears they induce a strongly deterring and inhibiting effect! David Cade (England)

Champagne and monocle to listen to Beethoven

July 9th » Are you talking seriously in every line on the website? Many pop hits and some rock songs are a disapointment, but can you really say that a song like Sympathy for The Devil or Blowing in The Wind is not "music" or art ? What's your definition for "art"? I mean, really, what is it? Because the world I live in represents art as a form of material emotion, an expression of the deepest, either cultural or raw, feelings of the artist. I can see more emotion in the CD collection I have at home, than in Mozart or Beethoven, and believe me, I do listen to Beethoven and Mozart, along with Vivaldi and some other classical musicians. All your arrogance only makes you refute your own arguments. Musicians from classical music are fairly those with more status in society, and when that type of "brilliant" art music as you may call it appeared, kings paid the musicians fairly well. And without a crowd and a target population, there is no point in making music. I can make up a new definition of music and art and say that my feet tapping the floor is the only good kind of music. We all love Beethoven because we can drink champagne and use our monocle to look clever, right? I would like a very sincere answer, because somebody here is on really high doses of dope, and surely it ain't me. Sorry for my English, but I'm Portuguese. Paulo Oliver (Portugal)

Critics' contribution to musical dystopia

July 9th » A friend of mine, a former classical music critic, told me about your site, and I was delighted to see it. I share your view that we are in a dystopian period as concerns music. But there is no point in kidding ourselves about it and the opprobrium which awaits those who want some sort of standard in what they hear.

It is now clear that music criticism has contributed to the accelerated pace of music's slide. In my view not so much because it wants to acknowledge other music, but because it anathematizes those who want the mere freedom to not do so. It is in this spirit that I think Ms. Midgette's comments should be seen. She immediately begins with the buzzwords of opprobrium for those (they assume) nasty males: "aggressive" "creepy" etc. Pretty standard and workaday stuff. There is some sort of danger, it seems, in not ever wanting to hear Talking Heads at loud volumes. Ms. Midgette's criticism is in that long tradition of genteel lady critics, bland and wholesomely perky, only now that includes discussing pop bands for reassurance. Sadly, the Washington Post's Style section [...] is now a complete waste of time. All the writers, to their credit, seem fairly embarrassed and sheepish about their commentaries nowadays. Except when they are on safe ground, for ideological reasons I suppose, when enthusing about someone like Michael Jackson. Please continue your site, it is a genius idea. 'Corno di Bassetto' (USA)

Importance of repudiating cultural relativism

July 5th » I came upon your site quite by accident this evening and have been extremely impressed by the audacity and the necessity of your undertaking. The goal of repudiating cultural relativism in music is of paramount importance. As a musicologist (Ph.D. dissertation on Haydn) I cringe every time I see a program for the American Musicological Society and seemingly half of the papers are about hip-hop, rock or other types of performance 'art' that masquerade as music.

I wholeheartedly support the goals that you have adumbrated. In fact, I am actually startled to find out that an organization like musoc.org exists. The fact that critics like Anne Midgette and Tom Service have responded so viscerally to you shows that you are on the right track. I would imagine that Alex Ross will denounce you in short order. These fashionable music critics always go out of their way to let their readers know that they make few distinctions between art music and 'pop'.

I would also like to commend you for promoting the use of the term 'art music'. The term 'classical music' has always been a problem in music history since it denotes a late 18th-century style and then is also used as a generic term for art music. It's bad enough that the classical style in music occurs almost two millennia after the classical style in the visual artisan architecture and that neo-classicism in the visual arts and architecture occur in the 18th-century while neo-classicism in music is a 20th-century phenomenon. The term 'art music' clears up many problems of nomenclature and I hope that its use will one day become universal. Best wishes for success in the future. William Grim