Not trying to be arrogant here, but who listens to this?

[Cars-N-Cans]

As for the original piece in question, it sounds like the bastard-child of cold war psyop stuff and "nonconformist" modern art. Basically the musical equivalent of "The Embrace."

Maybe some people will say its "cultured and sophisticated" but really its classical music after its come down with Alzheimer's. Thinking more literally I'd imagine that is what a piano might sound like if it came flying down from the sky and plopped into the bottom of a canyon. Given the title and inclination for juxtaposition in modern art and music maybe that is what he was really trying to convey, but we missed it

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

I'm willing to try. Although I'll confess to some trepidation. I like all the ingredients, but for some reason mayo in anything but trace quantities makes me gag.

Its great when slathered alongside spicy brown or Dijon mustard on turkey sandwiches. Pretty much the only saving grace for leftovers after thanksgiving. Also can't have too much of it in egg or tuna salad. Disgusting as you say, but still yummy

 

[mhardy6647]

I like the "foodie" counterpoint of this thread. Seems apt in a deeply ironic way.

 

[ahofer]

Maybe some people will say its "cultured and sophisticated" but really its classical music after its come down with Alzheimer's.

Oof. I like poking fun at stuff, even if I like it, but this seems to dismissive to me. I try to take a Bayesian approach to established art I’m having trouble with - i.e. I don’t get it yet, but it has survived a lot of critique, so there’s likely to be something there. I take a Bayesian approach to equipment too, i.e. nobody’s demonstrated clear differences between amps/DACs operating within spec, so anyone claiming they can hear it is likely to be fooling themselves. Same approach, different result, because the odds seem different. But that's because art is art and sound reproduction is engineering with a singular goal.

Also my Dad is entering later stages of Dementia and it reminded me, but that’s a me thing.

My wife and I were arguing about the sculpture yesterday. I think it’s a failure. If you look at the picture, it’s all about their faces, and they are left to the imagination (at best) in the sculpture. She sorta thought that was the point. I can see there’s a point to making you look a little harder to see it, or imagine it, but the sculpture is a little too headless and open to misinterpretation to feel like it is honoring MLK’s vision and acceptance by the world.

 

[Multicore]

Oof. I like poking fun at stuff, even if I like it, but this seems to dismissive to me.

What's interesting to me is why (or how come) art upsets some people. In our podcast episode Ken relates a story of a concert of Birtwistle's music after which in a Q&A Birtwistle took questions. Some Bach fans had sat through the whole thing in order to denounce Birtwistle as some kind of an enemy of right and propery harmony, good taste, or something and as a traitor to the traditions of classical music.

The obvious question is: why bother? Why is it so important to them? There's no shortage of performances and recordings of Bach. Birtwistle and the performances of his work doesn't harm them. Any yet they feel they need to make a stand and be seen to be in opposition. It's really interesting what motivates this. There can be more than one kind of music. Nobody is saying you can't listen to what you prefer.

 

[computer-audiophile]

What's interesting to me is why (or how come) art upsets some people.

Good question, I don't get it either.

 

[ahofer]

What's interesting to me is why (or how come) art upsets some people.

Well...some art is intended to be upsetting.

 

[oivavoi]

Interesting thread with many good comments already!

Regarding the OP's question, yes lots of people listen very attentively to Messiaen, and similar kinds of music. I've been doing it myself for many years, even though this particular piece from Messiaen is not my favorite.

Why? Several reasons.

- Ok, some may do it to show off and try to demonstrate cultural capital, and differentiate themselves from the mainstream classical lovers who only listen to Mozart and Beethoven (for some even Messiaen has become too mainstream)
- For others it's about real musical pleasures.
- For some it may be both of the above.

With art in general it's usually the case that people who become very well acquainted with something start searching for more complex stuff, because they find the same old same old to be boring. Aesthetic pleasure often happens when there is just enough novelty. Too much novelty gets bizarre, too little gets boring and cliché.

Hardcore punk or metal is incomprehensible as an art form to many people, but meaningful and cool to those who know the style and like it. Same goes for many forms of jazz, various types of world or folk music, etc. That also applies to classical music, and contemporary music in the classical tradition.

At the same time, I have personally become more and more critical of some parts of contemporary classical music. Some composers and critics have partly cut off the idea that music should be enjoyable and speak to the emotions, and focus almost exclusively on the aspect that music should be "novel" or "interesting". Same goes for some contemporary art and poetry.

But I find lots of popular music and neo-classical romantic music to be just plain boring and full of clichés. For me there's too much novelty in some contemporary composed music, but too.little novelty in other types of music. Whereas other people probably find some of the music I listen to (within jazz, classical and metal) to be incomprehensible and bizarre. There's no correct answer here I think

 

[Multicore]

Well...some art is intended to be upsetting.

Yes, of course. I'm not saying that art or music can't be political or that people don't have reasons to be upset or even that the reasons they may have aren't valid. I'm saying that these reasons are interesting to me. What purposes are being served when I or someone else feels the urge to provoke or to denounce?

 

[Multicore]

- Ok, some may do it to show off and try to demonstrate cultural capital, and differentiate themselves from the mainstream classical lovers who only listen to Mozart and Beethoven (for some even Messiaen has become too mainstream)
- For others it's about real musical pleasures.
- For some it may be both of the above.

My father's interest in German romantic music was a life-long passion that started when he was an English teenager in the UK during WW2. He was too young to fight and so was put in the Home Guard. His nature was contrarian and skeptical and his response to the total rejection of all things German in Britain at that time was to take an interest in Beethoven during a time when everyone was stuck with Sibelius. So, according to his telling of the story, the origin of the hobby that he maintained for the rest of his life was, essentially, political. Music was culture, culture was national, and nations were at war. He felt Beethoven wasn't to blame. But there's no doubt in my mind that his love of the music was real.

 

[oivavoi]

My father's interest in German romantic music was a life-long passion that started when he was an English teenager in the UK during WW2. He was too young to fight and so was put in the Home Guard. His nature was contrarian and skeptical and his response to the total rejection of all things German in Britain at that time was to take an interest in Beethoven during a time when everyone was stuck with Sibelius. So, according to his telling of the story, the origin of the hobby that he maintained for the rest of his life was, essentially, political. Music was culture, culture was national, and nations were at war. He felt Beethoven wasn't to blame. But there's no doubt in my mind that his love of the music was real.

Wonderful story!
My story with jazz is somewhat similar but much less dramatic. I starten to listen to jazz in my teens. Have loved it ever since. But if I'm to be honest with myself, my love affair with jazz probably started because I was attracted to everything jazz represented to me, more than the music itself. For me, as an artistic and non conformist leftist teenager, jazz represented the promise of freedom and rebellion. It was also the music of the oppressed, I thought. So I listened to it even though much of it made zero sense.

But little by little it opened up to me, and I really began to enjoy what was previously just noise.

 

[ahofer]

Interesting thread with many good comments already!

Regarding the OP's question, yes lots of people listen very attentively to Messiaen, and similar kinds of music. I've been doing it myself for many years, even though this particular piece from Messiaen is not my favorite.

Why? Several reasons.

- Ok, some may do it to show off and try to demonstrate cultural capital, and differentiate themselves from the mainstream classical lovers who only listen to Mozart and Beethoven (for some even Messiaen has become too mainstream)
- For others it's about real musical pleasures.
- For some it may be both of the above.

With art in general it's usually the case that people who become very well acquainted with something start searching for more complex stuff, because they find the same old same old to be boring. Aesthetic pleasure often happens when there is just enough novelty. Too much novelty gets bizarre, too little gets boring and cliché.

Hardcore punk or metal is incomprehensible as an art form to many people, but meaningful and cool to those who know the style and like it. Same goes for many forms of jazz, various types of world or folk music, etc. That also applies to classical music, and contemporary music in the classical tradition.

At the same time, I have personally become more and more critical of some parts of contemporary classical music. Some composers and critics have partly cut off the idea that music should be enjoyable and speak to the emotions, and focus almost exclusively on the aspect that music should be "novel" or "interesting". Same goes for some contemporary art and poetry.

But I find lots of popular music and neo-classical romantic music to be just plain boring and full of clichés. For me there's too much novelty in some contemporary composed music, but too.little novelty in other types of music. Whereas other people probably find some of the music I listen to (within jazz, classical and metal) to be incomprehensible and bizarre. There's no correct answer here I think

I’ve also noticed that I often come to like things more on repeated exposure, and liked different things at different stages of my life.

 

[Multicore]

Interesting thread with many good comments already!

Agreed. A very interesting thread.

At the same time, I have personally become more and more critical of some parts of contemporary classical music. Some composers and critics have partly cut off the idea that music should be enjoyable and speak to the emotions, and focus almost exclusively on the aspect that music should be "novel" or "interesting". Same goes for some contemporary art and poetry.

There's a problem, especially in Europe, especially in Germany (because of how states compete culturally there) with composition to commission. Good music can be the result of commissions but often it can "condemn a work to success" because the performance of the work is guaranteed, whether it is good or not. Very often a new work gets its world premiere, a big round of applause, and is never plaid again. If, otoh, works had to compete with each other to be selected for performance then we'd be listening to different music.

The selection criteria are another matter, a complicated one. I'd like the music and program directors of the various cultural institutions to develop their own ideas and consider their local audiences and how they want to develop.

 

[Multicore]

My story with jazz is somewhat similar but much less dramatic. I starten to listen to jazz in my teens. Have loved it ever since. But if I'm to be honest with myself, my love affair with jazz probably started because I was attracted to everything jazz represented to me, more than the music itself. For me, as an artistic and non conformist leftist teenager, jazz represented the promise of freedom and rebellion. It was also the music of the oppressed, I thought. So I listened to it even though much of it made zero sense.

It is every generation's constitutional duty to scandalize its elders with its tastes. It's part of growing up. Young children are completely attached to and dependent on their parents. Mature independent adults aren't. In between there's a process of becoming independent, a schism. It often involves trying things on, the "clothing" of being different and sometimes, with time, it fits. I have my own history here too, and how I ended up making music like this and that and the other.

 

[ahofer]

Can’t resist one more art story:

 

[oivavoi]

There's a problem, especially in Europe, especially in Germany (because of how states compete culturally there) with composition to commission. Good music can be the result of commissions but often it can "condemn a work to success" because the performance of the work is guaranteed, whether it is good or not. Very often a new work gets its world premiere, a big round of applause, and is never plaid again. If, otoh, works had to compete with each other to be selected for performance then we'd be listening to different music.

I think this is key. Im generally in favor of public support of art and music, and don't want market forces to dictate everything. At the same time I do think that some forms of public support for art and music have ossified some forms of music that nobody would listen to or care about unless it had public support. I hadn't thought specifically about the Commission institution, but you're obviously right.

I don't have any answer for how to move forward, but I think we need to find a balance between public support for art and talent, and the requirement that it must somehow win listeners over in the marketplace of music.

 

[computer-audiophile]

For me, I prefer to experience contemporary music live. Much of it has a performative character and also appeals to the sense of sight.

 

[Sokel]

how do you feel about... salad dressing?
or Miracle Whip?

I think I felt my arteries building a nice crescendo just by looking at them

 

[computer-audiophile]

.... it must somehow win listeners over in the marketplace of music.

In my opinion, art does not have to be marketable. It can also live in niches. For many years, when we had a larger apartment, we held house concerts of contemporary music, for the enjoyment of us and our friends and to encourage young talent. We also did art exhibitions without commercial intentions.

 

[Multicore]

In my opinion, art does not have to be marketable. She can also live in niches. For many years, when we had a larger apartment, we held house concerts of contemporary music, for the enjoyment of us and our friends and to encourage young talent. We also did art exhibitions without commercial intentions.

That's true and I have spent much of my own time in these niches. But what a symphony orchestra can do in a symphony hall is really special and access to that resource is an important choke point. From the point of view of a composer, you have to figure out how to get through it. Part of it is learning how to jump through the hoops. But the networking, game playing and portfolio/brand building to get noticed and considered for selection and then the selection itself is all a competitive game. There's no way around it. It's the same kind of thing with the other big budget cultural institutions, like BBC drama or whatever. I don't think the word "markets" describes this kind of competition very well. But if these cultural institutions exist, there are legitimate questions about the nature of the access competition.