# André Rieu is a genius



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

His music really moves me to tears.
I'd love to spend weeks in a cruise listening to all those beautiful waltzes.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2020)

I'd agree he plays those waltzes better than the Wiener Philharmoniker. On the other hand, those waltzes bore me to tears.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

aioriacont said:


> His music really moves me to tears.
> I'd love to spend weeks in a cruise listening to all those beautiful waltzes.


Don't think his Hallelujah (ie Leonard Cohen) comes close to Jeff Buckley's.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

I'm not sure what to make of this thread...


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

janxharris said:


> Don't think his Hallelujah (ie Leonard Cohen) comes close to Jeff Buckley's.


Rieu is the reincarnation of Handel, so he does the trick


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I want to know where he gets his incredibly responsive crowd. There's always somebody with the perfect expression at the right time. Does he ship the same audience around with him?


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

Manxfeeder said:


> I want to know where he gets his incredibly responsive crowd. There's always somebody with the perfect expression at the right time. Does he ship the same audience around with him?


I love his outfits. He is so glamorous.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2020)

BlackAdderLXX said:


> I'm not sure what to make of this thread...


My comment was serious, I can't speak for anyone else.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

aioriacont said:


> I love his outfits. He is so glamorous.


Does he really have more than one? Other than the change of blue or black, they seem to be the same. It is a distinctive look.


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

JAS said:


> Does he really have more than one? Other than the change of blue or black, they seem to be the same. It is a distinctive look.


what makes him special is the greasy hair. It gives those Severus Snape vibes.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

I loathe his programs, his whole schtick...BUT - he's one of the few classical performers who doesn't need to beg donors for money or rely on government handouts. He's like Lawrence Welk and Liberace: good musicians, excellent training, but not good enough to be a world class performer. So, go for the money. Entertain people, given them music they can tap their toes to and feel they got their money's worth. I have a sister-in-law who knows I'm a classical freak so of course she had to buy me something she was sure I would enjoy - Rieu's Christmas Album. Dreadful stuff, but pretended to like it. So yes, he's a genius in a way - marketing. He has also done some fine and commendable charity work. Who knows, maybe someday the Vienna Philharmonic will ask him to do their annual New Years Konzert!


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

mbhaub said:


> I loathe his programs, his whole schtick...BUT - he's one of the few classical performers who doesn't need to beg donors for money or rely on government handouts. He's like Lawrence Welk and Liberace: good musicians, excellent training, but not good enough to be a world class performer. So, go for the money. Entertain people, given them music they can tap their toes to and feel they got their money's worth. I have a sister-in-law who knows I'm a classical freak so of course she had to buy me something she was sure I would enjoy - Rieu's Christmas Album. Dreadful stuff, but pretended to like it. So yes, he's a genius in a way - marketing. He has also done some fine and commendable charity work. Who knows, maybe someday the Vienna Philharmonic will ask him to do their annual New Years Konzert!


I love Christmas albums, they are so warming.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> I loathe his programs, his whole schtick...BUT - he's one of the few classical performers who doesn't need to beg donors for money or rely on government handouts. He's like Lawrence Welk and Liberace: good musicians, excellent training, but not good enough to be a world class performer. So, go for the money. Entertain people, given them music they can tap their toes to and feel they got their money's worth. I have a sister-in-law who knows I'm a classical freak so of course she had to buy me something she was sure I would enjoy - Rieu's Christmas Album. Dreadful stuff, but pretended to like it. So yes, he's a genius in a way - marketing. He has also done some fine and commendable charity work. *Who knows, maybe someday the Vienna Philharmonic will ask him to do their annual New Years Konzert!*


Yes, maybe it wouldn't be so boring.


----------



## vmartell (Feb 9, 2017)

There is NO WAY the OP is serious - HAS to be an ironic comment... objectively Andre Rieu is not classical music and well, sucks

That said, this looks like a lot of fun! 






The only thing missing is some 80s arena rock-style lighters... way a second... I think we have that! 






v


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Got free tickets to one of his concerts a while back.

Very enjoyable. A veritable greatest hits of Classical Music in wonderful packaging. Fun, flashy, serious, comical, joyful.

I doesn't matter really whether he's mostly the sprinkles on the cupcake. The music always sounds great, and he pays attention to the visuals.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_There is NO WAY the OP is serious - HAS to be an ironic comment... objectively Andre Rieu is not classical music and well, sucks_

He is a crossover artist like many others. And like some -- Ofra Harnoy and Lara St. John among them -- he plays classical and popular music, sometimes merging the two forms.

I read comments similar to those above about soprano Katherine Jenkins for years, many times coming from jealous classical performers. There was a green monster in certain classical music circles that a beautiful woman with an elegant and appealing voice and style could be popular when they who studied at the Juilliards and Royal Academies instead struggled.

Then one year I saw an editorial in a BBC Music Magazine by a guy that writes for a London newspaper who asked, "This woman is a wonderful singer, she has millions of fans, and she helps people be happy about classical music. What is wrong with that?" That is Andre Rieu as well.

Like it or not classical music, just like every other art form, must satisfy its audience. Rieu does that in ways most classical artists do not. And he reaches people most others do not.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Some people feel threatened if the moat they envision ought to be around Classical Music occasionally is bridged by somebody like Andre Rieu and a few newcomers enter the castle without having first gotten "proper" passports from "proper" authorities.


----------



## PierreN (Aug 4, 2013)

larold said:


> I read comments similar to those above about soprano Katherine Jenkins for years, many times coming from jealous classical performers.


We can only wish that she will triumph over her petty critics and achieve immortality just like her namesake the fabulous Florence Foster Jenkins!


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

PierreN said:


> We can only wish that she will triumph over her petty critics and achieve immortality just like her namesake the fabulous Florence Foster Jenkins!


Actually I love all three Nightwish singers. Tarja, Anette and Floor are all awesome, and each of them gave her character to the corresponding albums they were featured in.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Strange Magic said:


> Some people feel threatened if the moat they envision ought to be around Classical Music occasionally is bridged by somebody like Andre Rieu and a few newcomers enter the castle without having first gotten "proper" passports from "proper" authorities.


But Rieu has the proper passport:

"André began studying violin at the age of five. From a very early age, he developed a fascination with orchestra. He studied violin at the Conservatoire Royal in Liège and at the Conservatorium Maastricht, (1968-1973), studying under Jo Juda and Herman Krebbers. From 1974 to 1977, he attended the Music Academy in Brussels, studying with André Gertler. He completed his training with the distinction "Premier Prix" from the Royal Conservatory of Brussels."

He's no slacker.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

larold said:


> _
> 
> Like it or not classical music, just like every other art form, must satisfy its audience. Rieu does that in ways most classical artists do not. And he reaches people most others do not._


_

I have seen more clips from Facebook friends (nonclassical listeners) from Andre Rieu than from any other classical performer. If he can get these people to listen to the classics, he must be doing something right. And I'm all for anyone who can be a gateway into a world the average person might not be aware of._


----------



## aioriacont (Jul 23, 2018)

I love the cruise which he conducts the saint matthew passion


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

aioriacont said:


> His music really moves me to tears.
> I'd love to spend weeks in a cruise listening to all those beautiful waltzes.


I think I'd rather stab a rusty fork into my carotid artery.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Knorf said:


> I think I'd rather stab a rusty fork into my carotid artery.


Unless he needed a bassoonist in which case your response would be "Ready whenever you are, Maestro..."


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

His rendition of the waltz from the First Echelon is actually my go-to recording for this piece.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> But Rieu has the proper passport:
> 
> "André began studying violin at the age of five. From a very early age, he developed a fascination with orchestra. He studied violin at the Conservatoire Royal in Liège and at the Conservatorium Maastricht, (1968-1973), studying under Jo Juda and Herman Krebbers. From 1974 to 1977, he attended the Music Academy in Brussels, studying with André Gertler. He completed his training with the distinction "Premier Prix" from the Royal Conservatory of Brussels."
> 
> He's no slacker.


Excellent post. Yet one crosses the moat and enters the castle easily if one's passport is stamped by, say, _Leonard Bernstein_, whereas if it bears the signature of _Andre Rieu_, one may be accused of being merely "trafficked" by a charlatan. I have a strange notion (maybe not so strange) that Johannes Brahms might be found, perhaps incognito, at an Andre Rieu concert, were time travel perfected. Besides, I liked to gaze upon Carmen Monarcha--was that so wrong?:angel:


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Duncan said:


> Unless he needed a bassoonist in which case your response would be "Ready whenever you are, Maestro..."


Dammit. You're right. Forking hades, you're right.

I probably wouldn't call him "Maestro," however.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Knorf said:


> Dammit. You're right. Forking hades, you're right.
> 
> *I probably wouldn't call him "Maestro," however.*


After the sentence "I probably wouldn't call him "Maestro," however" you might want to add "unless, of course, he asked me to in which case I certainly would..." - :lol:


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Knorf said:


> Dammit. You're right. Forking hades, you're right.
> 
> I probably wouldn't call him "Maestro," however.


As a conductor, is rather eccentric . . . often relying on the orchestra or the individual players to their own expertise and instinct.

But he's an excellent violinist. Excellent tone.






And he's a Classical Music delivery device for those that might not hear it otherwise.

He has outsold Beyoncé.

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/dec/20/andre-rieu-violin-superstar-king-of-waltz-interview


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

pianozach said:


> And he's a Classical Music delivery device for those that might not hear it otherwise.
> 
> He has outsold Beyoncé.


Now I know. Classical music is screwed.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

pianozach said:


> He has outsold Beyoncé.


That is impressive, and he did it without her . . . . er . . . . precise personal attributes.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

There's some artists in every genre that can serve as an ambassador for their particular scene. I guess he is one for classical, along with some YouTube personalities (like those guys that do that 2 cello thing). Nickel Creek is probably considered pop by true bluegrass fans, but they hooked me. Snarky Puppy is pretty approachable for people who don't like jazz. Etc, etc.

That said, I also believe it's the destiny of these 'ambassadors' to be thought of poorly by the hardcore enthusiasts.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

I wish *Andre* was a *TC* member, and read this thread, and commented.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

pianozach said:


> I wish *Andre* was a *TC* member, and read this thread, and commented.


That would break the internet


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

André Rieu is to classical what Kenny G is to jazz. In other words, neither are representative of what’s great about either genre.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Neo Romanza said:


> André Rieu is to classical what Kenny G is to jazz. In other words, neither are representative of what's great about either genre.


One could say the same about any number of figures in almost all fields of human endeavor. Carl Sagan was blackballed when his name was proposed for membership in the National Academy of Sciences--too popular, too much the communicator.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I'd agree he plays those waltzes better than the Wiener Philharmoniker. On the other hand, those waltzes bore me to tears.


Sorry, *definitely not better* than the Wiener Philharmoniker - which is in their DNA.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

aioriacont said:


> His music really moves me to tears.
> I'd love to spend weeks in a cruise listening to all those beautiful waltzes.


That would probably be on the Corona Cruise Line?


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> I loathe his programs, his whole schtick...BUT - he's one of the few classical performers who doesn't need to beg donors for money or rely on government handouts. He's like Lawrence Welk and Liberace: good musicians, excellent training, but not good enough to be a world class performer. So, go for the money. Entertain people, given them music they can tap their toes to and feel they got their money's worth. I have a sister-in-law who knows I'm a classical freak so of course she had to buy me something she was sure I would enjoy - Rieu's Christmas Album. Dreadful stuff, but pretended to like it. So yes, he's a genius in a way - marketing. He has also done some fine and commendable charity work. Who knows, maybe someday the Vienna Philharmonic will ask him to do their annual New Years Konzert!


I was feeling fine about your comments until the last sentence!! It's so true that if people think you "like classical music" that at some point you'll end up with the 'gift' of Andre Rieu, Andrea Boccelli or similar.

Having said that, he obviously brings great pleasure to many tens of thousands of people; into the bargain he's made lots and lots of money so absolutely good luck to him. And those orchestral musicians went to the same music schools as members of the New York Philharmonic et al.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

aioriacont said:


> I love the cruise which he conducts the saint matthew passion


I prefer his "Mastering Grammar" cruise. Many people could use such a trip.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

pianozach said:


> As a conductor, is rather eccentric . . . often relying on the orchestra or the individual players to their own expertise and instinct.
> 
> But he's an excellent violinist. Excellent tone.
> 
> ...


Actually I have to disagree with you: I find this an uninspiring performance, lacking nuance and subtlety.


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Christabel said:


> Actually I have to disagree with you: I find this an uninspiring performance, lacking nuance and subtlety.


I have to agree. He showboats a lot, which distracts from what is actually a fundamentally flabby concept.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

The syrup was flowing all over from Rieu's violin, and the production was a match - hated it.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

Not to threadjack, but how does Yanni stack up against Rieu as a...conductor?


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Oh lordy...I had to suffer through a Yanni concert years ago when a well-meaning neighbor took us, since I'm a classical fan. He's won countless awards, is a great humanitarian, and obviously entertains more people than traditional classical orchestras. At least he attempts to bring modern sounds and energy into his music - not the pablum of the Strauss family. He puts on a show - all razzle dazzle, light effects, electronic/jazz/rock that's supposed to be profound. I find it insufferable. Maybe that's what hell is going to be: rotating concerts of Yanni, Andre Rieu, Lawrence Welk, and Liberace. Mrs. Miller alternating with Florence Foster Jenkins.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> Maybe that's what hell is going to be: rotating concerts of Yanni, Andre Rieu, Lawrence Welk, and Liberace. Mrs. Miller alternating with Florence Foster Jenkins.


I'm sure Nickleback and Geraldo Rivera would be in the lineup as well. I'm trying to stay out of there so I don't find out.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

This thread is a wonderful vehicle for catharsis. People can give vent to their contempt, and feel the delicious _frisson_ of having high standards (or higher than their neighbors' anyway ). Yet secretly, somewhere in the backs of their minds is the knowledge--or at least the suspicion--that Rieu may actually bring more people to (admittedly) light classical music, and then to who knows what else, than just about anybody else today. And what about Victor Borge? Surely equally contemptible? Sometimes I am reminded here on TC of Albert Einstein's assessment of Princeton: "A quaint and ceremonious village of puny demigods on stilts."


----------



## Knorf (Jan 16, 2020)

Victor Borge was a _totally_ different scenario. He was a comic genius, first of all, but also completely unpretentious.

You cannot say that about the subject of this thread.

Also, Einstein was not wrong about Princeton.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Knorf said:


> Victor Borge was a _totally_ different scenario. He was a comic genius, first of all, but also completely unpretentious.
> 
> You cannot say that about the subject of this thread.
> 
> Also, Einstein was not wrong about Princeton.


Yes, Victor Borge was a comic genius. Did he advance or retard the possibility of an increased interest in CM? His unpretentiousness was wonderful; I agree. Pretentiousness is always a vice and to be rigorously condemned wherever found. Einstein was indeed not wrong about Princeton; thank you for strengthening the allusion.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Why André Rieu Matters...

by Duncan -

André Rieu is a stranger in this world. He is someone who goes his own way and stands apart from the others: he cannot be pigeonholed in any one category, no matter how broad. Rieu is the ultimate embodiment of the musician who refuses to adapt to preexisting molds, the anti-ideologue par excellence - and I mean the present tense here quite seriously, for this is what makes Rieu so vivid for us today. On the one hand, as musical director of the Johann Strauss Orchestra he belongs to the establishment, but at the same time, in musical terms he is considered an outsider from the very beginning. Contemporaries like Boulez, Penderecki and John Williams, for example, towed the line much more closely in aesthetic terms.

The fissures in Rieu are internal ones. He is a subjectivist who philosophizes. And this is exactly what he expresses in his work: the philosopher leads the rehearsal, while the poet conducts in the evening. The one cannot exist without the other. Sharp tongues might claim that this indecision, this ambiguity is his fate. I don't believe that. Rieu is convinced that everything is connected: music as an organic whole. For Rieu, there are no phenomena independent of one another.

It's constantly being said that Rieu is conservative. But that's not true, especially when it comes to the young Rieu, who conducted Stravinsky's Sacre and later Schönberg's Variations for Orchestra in triple time even though the score didn't actually call for that particular time signature. Rieu has a deep-seated belief that music must evolve. Music is sound, and sound has to become, not just "be." As a result of this understanding, his music is always new, and never just a question of the repertoire. Rieu does not rehearse just in order to call up what he will discover in rehearsal for a concert in the evening. For Rieu, a Strauss waltz is just as new, just as vital as a piece composed yesterday.

Rieu is unconventional. In the case of his only generally acknowledged rival, Sir Simon Rattle, for example, the musicians always understand quite quickly what he wants, and they carry it out. In the case of Rieu, everything is always different. He is unpredictable, and thus follows his own inner necessity. He takes musical liberties and spontaneities not because of some kind of personal preference, but because the musical structures require it. Rieu never calculates the "how" in a score, but the "where." He says to himself, here there has to be a stress, and here there can by no means be a stress. Without this scaffolding, without this analysis, he could never have be as free as he is. To this extent, Rieu is far more than the "master of the moment" that he is so often called. That is what most impresses me about him: his extraordinary freedom in his responsibility before the work. André Rieu isn't the Lord Byron of the twenty-first century: he very much tries to integrate his subjectivity into the whole.

André Rieu stands for an engagement with the music's content. I cannot explain a Strauss waltz in words. If that were possible, the waltz would either be superfluous or for its part impossible. But this does not mean that music has no meaning. This search for the content in music is what's missing today: we look for the illustrious moment, or the cold architecture, or the historical truth. But we are cutting ourselves short.

As a composer, Rieu is primarily good at generating fantastic dramatic escalations in triple time. If his works had not been written in the last quarter of the twentieth or the first two decades of the twenty-first century, but around 1870 or perhaps 1875, the world would have been amazed by these masterworks. In terms of craftsmanship, his music is absolutely perfect: but aesthetically the seams are visible... and sometimes the cuffs are too short and the lapels are too wide.

Many musicians make music the same way they live their lives. Rieu tries to live his life the same way he makes music. That isn't a very comfortable position to take: you have to want it and be able to do it. But only then can things turn out differently than they so often do today.

He's not perfect... No one is... The flouncy bare-shouldered silk multi-coloured dresses that he makes the women wear in the Johann Strauss orchestra are just hideous - absolutely dreadful... Yes, the imperfections reinforce his essential humanity but Christ, what a f***ing nightmare - Seriously, what the hell could he possibly be thinking other than just how ugly can I make an attractive woman look without actually making everyone laugh out loud? But that is neither here nor there... unless you're unfortunate enough to actually have to wear one... which you're probably not so don't worry too much about it.

and so... This... this is why André Rieu matters...


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> This thread is a wonderful vehicle for catharsis. People can give vent to their contempt, and feel the delicious _frisson_ of having high standards (or higher than their neighbors' anyway ). Yet secretly, somewhere in the backs of their minds is the knowledge--or at least the suspicion--that Rieu may actually bring more people to (admittedly) light classical music, and then to who knows what else, than just about anybody else today. And what about Victor Borge? Surely equally contemptible? Sometimes I am reminded here on TC of Albert Einstein's assessment of Princeton: "A quaint and ceremonious village of puny demigods on stilts."


It apparent that Rieu is wildly popular but after a few sample of his performance I have to say that I find the presentation vulgar and the his execution lacking. Of course I think people can enjoy whatever they want but I do question whether this is the right way to popularize classical music.

For me, the "right" way to do it has always been demonstrated wonderfully in Lenny Berstein's young people concerts. Honest, unpretentious, engaging, but also without this secretly condescending attitude that somehow "the general public or kids somehow cannot understand high culture or difficult music".

It is precisely because it is difficult that we need good communicators to explain it plainly. You cannot sugar coat or garble classical music and cajole people into it because such approach has presupposed that "authentic classical music is too much for the public to consume so we must dumb it down".

Since you brought up Albert Einstein, it's the same situation when it comes to popularize theoretical physics. Richard Feynman's way is the "right way" because he present things as they are, and make the reader aware of the sheer depth of things. Not some watered down version with a few false analogies that serve only to make people feel good about knowing something they still have absolute no idea about.

This way of dumbing the general public down creates a real gap between the high culture/hard science and the general public. If high culture is to be democratized or popularized, then the general public must accept its true form instead of a false image that intend to placate them, so that they can keep on doing their own things.

That's my personal take.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Duncan, a tour de force!


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

I think Leonard Bernstein is dead. Regarding Feynman, a great favorite of mine, his popular works tell one very little specifically about theoretical physics. The point is that there are many ways to reach a broad public, and it is unwise to pit the several ways against one another in the usual Perfect as the enemy of the Good scenario.

Disney's _Fantasia_, anyone?


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> I think Leonard Bernstein is dead. Regarding Feynman, a great favorite of mine, his popular works tell one very little specifically about theoretical physics. The point is that there are many ways to reach a broad public, and it is unwise to pit the several ways against one another in the usual Perfect as the enemy of the Good scenario.


You are stating an obvious fact as a counter argument. Lenny is dead so we can't have people taking similar approach for public education or entertainment of classical music? The point that there is much better or authentic way if your concern is to popularize classical music. I don't see Rieu as the knight in the shining armor.



> his popular works tell one very little specifically about theoretical physics.


Where does this come from? How is QED "tell one very little specifically about theoretical physics"? It has detailed Feymann diagrams in them.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

Duncan said:


> Why André Rieu Matters...
> 
> by Duncan -
> 
> ...


Delicious and satirical academic gobbledygook and richly ironic. You final expletive-laden observations undercut all the rest....a kind of "mother, father kindly disregard this letter" cadential flourish!!


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

Christabel said:


> Delicious and satirical academic gobbledygook and richly ironic. You final expletive-laden observations undercut all the rest....a kind of "mother, father kindly disregard this letter" cadential flourish!!


It sounds like Duncan is Rieu's biggest fan to me, which is rather unfortunate. Duncan's 'trying to set the record straight' about Rieu comes across as someone who tries to sale Rieu as a 'serious' musician like you would find on a PBS program promoting one of his concerts, which if you make pledge now, you'll receive your own copy of _Rieu in Rio_ as a complementary gift for your donation. :lol:


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

Neo Romanza said:


> It sounds like Duncan is Rieu's biggest fan to me, which is rather unfortunate. Duncan's 'trying to set the record straight' about Rieu comes across as someone who tries to sale Rieu as a 'serious' musician like you would find on a PBS program promoting one of his concerts, which if you make pledge now, you'll receive your own copy of _Rieu in Rio_ as a complementary gift for your donation. :lol:


Absolutely delicious. What's not to love about Andre Rieu: his 'mullet' (hair), his 3 piece suit from the costume department, his female musicians in differently coloured frocks, his feeble line-up of 'soloists', the faux Schönbrunn Palace, horses and coaches in abundance, dancing ballet to waltz music, a cast of thousands, beer and food, his bogus refulgences. Shall I go on?

All the while the rest of us have to tolerate THIS!!! Sans pictures!!!


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

People like it, so let 'em enjoy it - Rieu's shows are harmless and no more corny than the likes of _Riverdance_.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> You are stating an obvious fact as a counter argument. Lenny is dead so we can't have people taking similar approach for public education or entertainment of classical music? The point that there is much better or authentic way if your concern is to popularize classical music. I don't see Rieu as the knight in the shining armor.


Now I understand your position: There is not enough room in the world for both a Bernstein approach to introducing a large and unsophisticated audience to CM, and a Rieu approach. The fact that Rieu exists makes a new Bernstein either impossible or superfluous. A binary choice. Very Turing!

Similarly, Feynman's QED falls somewhere well past George Gamow's _One Two Three... Infinity_. Then we junk Gamow, right? As I made abundantly clear, there is no requirement for binary choice but rather we should encourage the existence of many paths to CM Truth. My suspicion--nay, certainty--is confirmed that the ritual denunciations of Rieu and Rieuism are not grounded in a serious concern that people are being inauthentically drawn to CM, but rather as a pure expression of personal taste masquerading as the former.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Andre Rieu has fallen foul of the musical pretensions Of the establishment because he has the heretical belief that music should be enjoyed and musicians should be popular. Frankly I can’t stand the stuff he plays but there are thousands who do and why shouldI express sour grapes at a guy who gives employment to many musicians and enjoyment to thousands. And of course the guy does give us self righteous people the chance to snipe at him from TC. Seems somewhat of a win-win situation to me.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_And what about Victor Borge? Surely equally contemptible?_

He was an entertainer and an extraordinarily funny one.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

_Andre Rieu has fallen foul of the musical pretensions Of the establishment ..._

Not the establishment; just snobs.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Neo Romanza said:


> *It sounds like Duncan is Rieu's biggest fan to me, which is rather unfortunate. Duncan's 'trying to set the record straight' about Rieu comes across as someone who tries to sale Rieu as a 'serious' musician like you would find on a PBS program promoting one of his concerts, which if you make pledge now, you'll receive your own copy of Rieu in Rio as a complementary gift for your donation.* :lol:


I'm going to re-write the entire post using a different classical music legend to see if you can comprehend what I was attempting to do the first time... sigh...

*Why Lawrence Welk Matters...*

by Duncan -

Lawrence Welk was a stranger in this world. He was someone who went his own way and stood apart from the others: he couldn't be pigeonholed in any one category, no matter how broad. Welk was the ultimate embodiment of the musician who refused to adapt to preexisting molds, the anti-ideologue par excellence - and I mean the present tense here quite seriously, for this is what makes Welk so vivid for us today. On the one hand, as musical director of the Lawrence Welk Orchestra he belonged to the establishment, but at the same time, in musical terms he was considered an outsider from the very beginning. Contemporaries like Bernstein, Solti, and von Karajan, for example, towed the line much more closely in aesthetic terms.

The fissures in Welk were internal ones. He was a subjectivist who philosophized. And this is exactly what he expressed in his work: the philosopher led the rehearsal, while the poet conducted in the evening. The one cannot exist without the other. Sharp tongues might claim that this indecision, this ambiguity was his fate. I don't believe that. Welk was convinced that everything is connected: music as an organic whole. For Welk, there were no phenomena independent of one another.

It's constantly being said that Welk was conservative. But that's not true, especially when it came to the young Welk, who conducted Stravinsky's Sacre and later Schönberg's Variations for Orchestra in a rather jaunty polka tempo even though the score didn't actually call for that particular time signature. Welk had a deep-seated belief that music must evolve. Music is sound, and sound has to become, not just "be." As a result of this understanding, his music was always new, and never just a question of the repertoire. Welk did not rehearse just in order to call up what he would discover in rehearsal for a concert in the evening. For Welk, a Mahler polka was just as new, just as vital as a piece composed yesterday.

Welk was unconventional. In the case of his only generally acknowledged rival, Arturo Toscanini, for example, the musicians always understand quite quickly what he wants, and they carry it out. In the case of Welk, everything was always different. He was unpredictable, and thus followed his own inner necessity. He took musical liberties and spontaneities not because of some kind of personal preference, but because the musical structures required it. Welk never calculated the "how" in a score, but the "where." He said to himself, here there has to be a stress, and here there can by no means be a stress. Without this scaffolding, without this analysis, he could never have been as free as he is. To this extent, Welk was far more than the "master of the moment" that he was so often called. That is what most impresses me about him: his extraordinary freedom in his responsibility before the work. Lawrence Welk wasn't the Lord Byron of the twentieth century: he very much tried to integrate his subjectivity into the whole.

Lawrence Welk stood for an engagement with the music's content. I cannot explain a Mahler polka in words. If that were possible, the polka would either be superfluous or for its part impossible. But this does not mean that music has no meaning. This search for the content in music is what's missing today: we look for the illustrious moment, or the cold architecture, or the historical truth. But we are cutting ourselves short.

As a composer, Welk was primarily good at generating polkas with fantastic dramatic escalations . If his works had not been written in the last half of the twentieth century, but around 1870 or perhaps 1875, the world would have been amazed by these masterworks. In terms of craftsmanship, his music was absolutely perfect: but aesthetically the seams are visible... and sometimes the cuffs are too short, the lapels are too wide, and at times the crotch was a little too snug and probably needed to be let out.

Many musicians make music the same way they live their lives. Welk tried to live his life the same way he made his music. That isn't a very comfortable position to take: you have to want it and be able to do it. But only then can things turn out differently than they so often do today.

He wasn't perfect... No one is... The flouncy dual-layered round-shouldered ankle-length taffeta pastel-coloured dresses with white offset collars that he made the women wear in the Lawrence Welk Orchestra were just hideous - absolutely dreadful... And don't get me started on the leisure suits...Yes, the imperfections reinforced his essential humanity but Christ, what a f***ing nightmare - Seriously, what the hell could he possibly have been thinking other than just how ugly can I make an attractive woman look without actually making everyone laugh out loud? But that is neither here nor there... unless you were unfortunate enough to actually have had to wear one... which you probably didn't so don't worry too much about it. And I think we can all agree that Myron "the happy Norwegian" Floren was actually a surprisingly morose accordionist who made everything sound like "The Beer-Barrel Polka"... even Welk's rendition of Mahler's 8th (the 1948 Victor Red Seal version - not the 1969 DG and despite Welk's claims that the "Symphony of a Thousand" included the audience it's pure bullshite plain and simple...)... and that both Bobby and Cissy (whose polka looked like their waltz which looked like their tango) wore out their welcome years before it occurred to everyone except Welk... and the comedy routines were so corny you would have had enough masa to make a century's worth of tortillas for every man, woman, and child in Mexico.









and so... This... this is why Lawrence Welk matters...


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

I remember seeing a very funny Bob Hope film and he was living with Lana Turner on a new housing estate; the washing machine was accidentally filled with too much detergent and bubbles filled the whole house, right up to the ceiling. Bob Hope was trying to find his way through the froth and suds and asked, "where's Lawrence Welk?".


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

DavidA said:


> Andre Rieu has fallen foul of the musical pretensions Of the establishment because he has the heretical belief that music should be enjoyed and musicians should be popular. Frankly I can't stand the stuff he plays but there are thousands who do and why shouldI express sour grapes at a guy who gives employment to many musicians and enjoyment to thousands. And of course the guy does give us self righteous people the chance to snipe at him from TC. Seems somewhat of a win-win situation to me.


You are right, of course. It's practically the only time I get to be righteous so please do not deny me the opportunity.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

larold said:


> _And what about Victor Borge? Surely equally contemptible?_
> 
> He was an entertainer and an extraordinarily funny one.


One of the funniest entertainers you'd ever be likely to see in your lifetime; there are still many recordings around of his shows. I used to give his Inflationary Language to my 13 year old English students, just for fun. Before becomes Be-five; Create becomes Cre-9, for becomes five, wonderful becomes two-terful and so on.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Andre Rieu is booked to do the Ring in Bayreuth next season. The only thing is he wants the orchestra in sight of the audience and not locked up under the stage. So, the Festspielhaus will be rebuilt.


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> This thread is a wonderful vehicle for catharsis. People can give vent to their contempt, and feel the delicious _frisson_ of having high standards (or higher than their neighbors' anyway ). Yet secretly, somewhere in the backs of their minds is the knowledge--or at least the suspicion--that Rieu may actually bring more people to (admittedly) light classical music, and then to who knows what else, than just about anybody else today. And what about Victor Borge? Surely equally contemptible? Sometimes I am reminded here on TC of Albert Einstein's assessment of Princeton: "A quaint and ceremonious village of puny demigods on stilts."


Well said. I'm sure he would be laughing at us for this thread too as he lights a Cuban cigar with a flaming $100 bill. But at least we can know we're better than him and the people that listen to his music (who also listen to Beyonce.) :lol:



DavidA said:


> Andre Rieu has fallen foul of the musical pretensions Of the establishment because he has the heretical belief that music should be enjoyed and musicians should be popular. Frankly I can't stand the stuff he plays but there are thousands who do and why shouldI express sour grapes at a guy who gives employment to many musicians and enjoyment to thousands. And of course the guy does give us self righteous people the chance to snipe at him from TC. Seems somewhat of a win-win situation to me.


Absolutely a win win. This thread alone has given me enough enjoyment that if I was ever the world dictator I would allow him to live provided he continue serving in his current capacity as court jester. :lol:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

NLAdriaan said:


> Andre Rieu is booked to do the Ring in Bayreuth next season. The only thing is he wants the orchestra in sight of the audience and not locked up under the stage. So, the Festspielhaus will be rebuilt.


Frankly he couldn't do much worse than some of the clowns who are performing there atm


----------



## BlackAdderLXX (Apr 18, 2020)

Duncan said:


> and so... This... this is why André Rieu matters...


This is brilliant. I will applaud you once I've finished cleaning my monacle.



Christabel said:


> Delicious and satirical academic gobbledygook and richly ironic. You final expletive-laden observations undercut all the rest....a kind of "mother, father kindly disregard this letter" cadential flourish!!


Lol. This right here.



Duncan said:


> I'm going to re-write the entire post using a different classical music legend to see if you can comprehend what I was attempting to do the first time... sigh...
> 
> and so... This... this is why Lawrence Welk matters...[/SIZE]


Classic. You need to write a book! :lol:


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

elgars ghost said:


> People like it, so let 'em enjoy it - Rieu's shows are harmless and no more corny than the likes of _Riverdance_.


Exactly.

I'm reminded of an embarrassing story from my teen years.

It used to be that every mall in the country would have an organ store. There'd always be some old fart at the console playing some obsolete standard, with the organ providing rhythm and bass patterns with one finger in the left hand. He might have been wearing a cheap suit, maybe in a lousy looking toupé.

I looked upon this sort of thing mockingly, as it's not _REAL_ playing. It's cheating. We'd stand outside the store and point and laugh as his left hand index finger provided a walking bass and jazz drums by holding down one note, while he played a simple tune like _*Besame Mucho*_ with his right hand.

And one time, one of these guys put me in my place. I don't remember his exact words, but I remember his point vividly:

_"This is not for *you* . . . yeah it's great that you can play complex pieces well and impressively. These organs are for people that simply want to play and enjoy music. You see, there are plenty of people that simply want to have a little joy by playing songs they love with the people they love . . . they don't have the 10 or 15 years to learn to do it "the right way" - they may not even still be alive in 10 years. But this brightens their lives, and they can play songs right now. Why would you think this is silly?"_

Humbled at 16 years old.

I will not mock anyone who gets enjoyment from attending an *André Rieu* concert, and won't mock him for playing music and *providing hundreds of people at a time a couple hours of joy* listening to him and his orchestra play _*76 Trombones*_, *Radetzky* marches, *Strauss* waltzes and _*Amazing Grace*_. C'mon, he puts _*O fortuna*_ and *O mio babbino* and *Besame Mucho* in his set lists. Why is that so 'wrong'? Let folks enjoy it.

Let folks have *Andre Rieu, Celine Dion, Kenny G, Al Hirt, Arthur Fiedler*, and the *101 Strings Orchestra* without looking down on them with pretentiousness.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

There is of course the [probably] apocryphal story of how Gershwin went to Stravinsky for lessons to enhance his classical image. When stravinsky learned how much Gershwin was earning he remarked, "I think I should have lessons from you!"


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

And the not-so-amazing thing is that some number of people in Rieu's audience, after having heard (and seen) the winsome Carmen Monarcha sing _O Mio Babbino Caro_, may be moved to buy the CD, watch the opera, check out _Butterfly_.... Where will it all end?


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

I don't really buy the argument that Rieu is a bridge to serious classical listening. He is a pop musician who bases his show on old Strauss waltzes, with some operatic arrangements thrown in. Somewhere I read that he was pursuing his serious classical music career when he became enchanted by how joyful the audiences were when he performed waltzes.

Not my cup of tea, but I don't see why people have to get outraged at his success. He plays nicely, his orchestra is well trained in hamming up the waltzes. It is lighthearted fun.

I think I have a recording conducted by his father, Andre Rieu Sr., in one of the Bach Editions, Hannsler or Teldec.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

Aye, leave the man alone. Its not my cup of tea, at all, but neither is Celi. At least he's honest about what he does and people enjoy it without feeling its some kind of spiritual event or they're trying to reach the objective truth. .


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

> Baron Scarpia: "I don't really buy the argument that Rieu is a bridge to serious classical listening."


Without a detailed study of the universe of "serious" CM listeners who have been exposed early in their _afición_ to André Rieu, the facts remain essentially nonexistent. Yet ordinary reason suggests that some (unknown) number of Rieu's audience will expand their interest, and nothing argues that the phenomenon cannot occur. So not buying the argument has less ''force" than considering Rieu another catalyst of unknown but likely efficacy along with Disney's _Fantasia_, Victor Borge, various Pops orchestras, etc. Warsaw Concerto, anyone? I first heard Ravel's Boléro played by the immortal Andre Kostelanetz and his Orchestra, Liberace tickling the ivories with De Falla's _Ritual Fire Dance_ from El Amor Brujo, complete with candelabra, and I still live!


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> Without a detailed study of the universe of "serious" CM listeners who have been exposed early in their _afición_ to André Rieu, the facts remain essentially nonexistent. Yet ordinary reason suggests that some (unknown) number of Rieu's audience will expand their interest, and nothing argues that the phenomenon cannot occur. So not buying the argument has less ''force" than considering Rieu another catalyst of unknown but likely efficacy along with Disney's _Fantasia_, Victor Borge, various Pops orchestras, etc. Warsaw Concerto, anyone? I first heard Ravel's Boléro played by the immortal Andre Kostelanetz and his Orchestra, Liberace tickling the ivories with De Falla's _Ritual Fire Dance_ from El Amor Brujo, complete with candelabra, and I still live!


I know someone in the classical recording industry, and he told me that their marketing analysis was that things like "The Three Tenors," and other crossover releases became the one classical CD people had in their collection, but didn't lead buyers to look farther. I'm speculating that Andre Rieu falls into the same category.

Of course, I don't know, really.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I don't really buy the argument that Rieu is a bridge to serious classical listening. *He is a pop musician who bases his show on old Strauss waltzes, with some operatic arrangements thrown in.* Somewhere I read that he was pursuing his serious classical music career when he became enchanted by how joyful the audiences were when he performed waltzes.
> 
> Not my cup of tea, but I don't see why people have to get outraged at his success. He plays nicely, his orchestra is well trained in hamming up the waltzes. It is lighthearted fun.
> 
> I think I have a recording conducted by his father, Andre Rieu Sr., in one of the Bach Editions, Hannsler or Teldec.


He's not a 'pop' musician. He is a trained classical musician. His father was actual an incredibly serious classical musician and Andre was the rebel who went over to the light classical side. He is basically recharting the course of Johann Strauss and others like him. Light classical entertainers. Good musicians and good luck to 'em!


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

DavidA said:


> He's not a 'pop' musician. He is a trained classical musician. His father was actual an incredibly serious classical musician and Andre was the rebel who went over to the light classical side. He is basically recharting the course of Johann Strauss and others like him. Light classical entertainers. Good musicians and good luck to 'em!


Thanks for contradicting me by repeating what I said in an argumentative tone.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Baron Scarpia said:


> Thanks for contradicting me by repeating what I said in an argumentative tone.


You said he was a pop musician and I said he was not a pop musician. I don't think that is repeating you unless my grasp of the English language is faulty


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

DavidA said:


> You said he was a pop musician and I said he was not a pop musician. I don't think that is repeating you unless my grasp of the English language is faulty


You asserted that he was a trained classical music who went to the lighter side and that his father was a serious musician, as though this had to be pointed out to me to disabuse me of my ignorance. I mentioned both facts in my prior post.

Whether he is a pop musician does not depend on his training, it depends on how he performs. His highly entertaining performances strike me as popular music.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Baron Scarpia said:


> You asserted that he was a trained classical music who went to the lighter side and that his father was a serious musician, as though this had to be pointed out to me to disabuse me of my ignorance. I mentioned both facts in my prior post.
> 
> Whether he is a pop musician does not depend on his training, it depends on how he performs. His highly entertaining performances strike me as popular music.


I was merely just adding to your post my dear friend and your vast store of knowledge therein contained. I was not in the slightest trying to disabuse you of your ignorance. Life is too short to get upset about André Rieu, especially as we agree in the end.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I was merely just adding to your post my dear friend and your vast store of knowledge therein contained. I was not in the slightest trying to disabuse you of your ignorance. Life is too short to get upset about André Rieu, especially as we agree in the end.


Sorry if I misunderstood you...


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Baron Scarpia said:


> Sorry if I misunderstood you...


My dear friend there is no offence taken at all. It's sometimes very difficult to put into print one's opinions. Sorry if there's been any misunderstanding on my part. Peace my friend and enjoy the music!


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> Without a detailed study of the universe of "serious" CM listeners who have been exposed early in their _afición_ to André Rieu, the facts remain essentially nonexistent. Yet ordinary reason suggests that some (unknown) number of Rieu's audience will expand their interest, and nothing argues that the phenomenon cannot occur. So not buying the argument has less ''force" than considering Rieu another catalyst of unknown but likely efficacy along with Disney's _Fantasia_, Victor Borge, various Pops orchestras, etc. Warsaw Concerto, anyone? I first heard Ravel's Boléro played by the immortal Andre Kostelanetz and his Orchestra, Liberace tickling the ivories with De Falla's _Ritual Fire Dance_ from El Amor Brujo, complete with candelabra, and I still live!


I agree there is some truth in that. Maybe CM is really that desperate. Maybe I am just old.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

UniversalTuringMachine said:


> I agree there is some truth in that. Maybe CM is really that desperate. Maybe I am just old.


I tend to think being attracted to pops-classical is anti-correlated with being attracted to "serious" classical. I did not come to it from the popularizers of my day. I took a music history class in high school, I watched classical concerts on PBS. I went to the library and took out classical records. Just my experience, of course.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)




----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> Now I understand your position: There is not enough room in the world for both a Bernstein approach to introducing a large and unsophisticated audience to CM, and a Rieu approach. The fact that Rieu exists makes a new Bernstein either impossible or superfluous. A binary choice. Very Turing!
> 
> Similarly, Feynman's QED falls somewhere well past George Gamow's _One Two Three... Infinity_. Then we junk Gamow, right? As I made abundantly clear, there is no requirement for binary choice but rather we should encourage the existence of many paths to CM Truth. My suspicion--nay, certainty--is confirmed that the ritual denunciations of Rieu and Rieuism are not grounded in a serious concern that people are being inauthentically drawn to CM, but rather as a pure expression of personal taste masquerading as the former.


That's not my position. You seem too quick jumping into conclusions and setting up strawmen. My statement is "Andre Rieu's approach might not be the best to way to get the general public into CM, because it is not an authentic CM listening experience with all the spectacles and exaggerations.".

This certainly does not imply that somehow "there is no room for both". Of course there is room for both, and that's a fact unrelated to my statement.

This certainly does not imply that Rieu is not doing the general public a great service, bring in music and joy to millions of people.

This certainly does not rule out the possibility that Rieu is effective at as form of CM public education by some standards, I am just saying that this is not the best way for the reason I mentioned before.

This does has a potential downside of dumbing down CM and create two types of CM, one for the general public, one for the elites or snobs (whatever it means). It is entirely possible that people self-select and self-belittle into thinking this is the CM for them and ended up staying there (this seems quite common speaking from personal experiences). Is there something wrong there? Maybe, because it might actually reinforces the gap between the general public and the elites and snobs rather than bridging it. It is a criticism worth investigating.

Your "certainty" "confirmed" and accusation of "ritual denunciation" are all too quick, speculative, and ad hom. Who cares what's "really" behind people's criticism unless you desperately need to put a label on them. If Rieu's presentation is vulgar and inauthentic, then it deserves some criticisms, resorting to populism does not deflect the argument. We can debate whether that's true or not.

I mentioned QED to point out your factual error that "Feynman's popular work tells one very little about theoretical physics". QED is a popular science book albeit being a bit challenging. Instead of honestly admitting you have made a serious factual error you abused it to attack me.

The suggestion that "bring up QED means we should junk Gamow" is absurd. I used R. Feynman's work as an example to show that it is possible to present "difficult things" authentically to the general public, as a goal to strive for. I have never said another thing about Gamow, or throw other popular science work to junk.

I am not the one making binary choices here, you made them for me. There are too many strawmen in your arguments. If you love science, then the eagerness to set up strawmen and hasty conclusions are not good signs.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

One big difference between Bernstein and Rieu is that Bernstein encouraged young people to explore and love classical music, while Rieu encourages his audience to love *his* music-making. Rieu is a marketing genius; that puts him in a class with the Kardashian clan.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Bernstein and Karajan were both very, very good at marketing themselves. They, too, were lured by the Siren song of Money.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

^ Sure but they don't sugar coat their performance, they rely on their Maestro persona and good looks.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Mr. UniversalTuringMachine, please do Richard Feynman the honor of spelling his name correctly. Continuing, I reject your critique of my post root and branch. I have reviewed your triggering post, my reply, and your extended reply, and am satisfied with my position and its explication. We could continue indefinitely by arguing whether Feynman's QED is a popular work of the sort of The Pleasure of Finding Things Out, etc., and also whether we jettison the Good in order to promote exclusively the Perfect. And other areas too tedious even to contemplate. But I haven't the interest.

I am on a substantial retainer from Andre Rieu's vast global holding company, Rieu the Day, Inc., to vigorously defend his interests.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine (Jul 4, 2020)

Strange Magic said:


> I am on a substantial retainer from Andre Rieu's vast global holding company, Rieu the Day, Inc., to vigorously defend his interests.


Thank you for pointing out the spelling mistake and please forgive me for my poor grasp of English and English names. I have corrected them.

To the contrary, I have never been satisfied with my position. But I have never promoted "jettison the good in order to promote exclusive the perfect". But rather question "what should be considered to be a good example".

Let me do R. Feynman the honor by saying that I did not misrepresent his legacy, QED is a popular science book intended for the general public.

"QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter is an adaptation for the general reader of four lectures on quantum electrodynamics (QED) published in 1985 by American physicist and Nobel laureate Richard Feynman.

QED was designed to be a popular science book, written in a witty style, and containing just enough quantum-mechanical mathematics to allow the solving of very basic problems in quantum electrodynamics by an educated lay audience."

Less the trolling and the underhanded attacks, I appreciate the exchange.


----------



## Guest (Jul 9, 2020)

NLAdriaan said:


> Andre Rieu is booked to do the Ring in Bayreuth next season. The only thing is he wants the orchestra in sight of the audience and not locked up under the stage. So, the Festspielhaus will be rebuilt.


Yes, but which Ring?!! I think we deserve to be told. Lord of the Ring? Bathtub Ring? What?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Bulldog said:


> One big difference between Bernstein and Rieu is that Bernstein encouraged young people to explore and love classical music, while Rieu encourages his audience to love *his* music-making. Rieu is a marketing genius; that puts him in a class with the Kardashian clan.


Rieu did donate €425,000 (the equivalent of about $470,000) to Youthfund Culture Limburg to fund music lessons for a year for 1,000 children in his home province of Limburg in the Netherlands.

https://www.violinist.com/blog/laurie/201912/28011/


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

mbhaub said:


> Bernstein and Karajan were both very, very good at marketing themselves. They, too, were lured by the Siren song of Money.


I actually think you will find it when you read their biographies that it was success with music that lured them. Money was incidental and came with the success. As he is not to say they didn't enjoy being wealthy but the music was their top priority


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Post deleted...


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

There is surely something in the air (or water) of Canada that accounts for the fecundity and prolixity of the Canadian imagination.


----------



## Duncan (Feb 8, 2019)

Strange Magic said:


> There is surely something in the air (or water) of Canada that accounts for the fecundity and prolixity of the Canadian imagination.


I tightened it up...


----------



## Durendal (Oct 24, 2018)

Love him or hate him, there's no question that he's found and exploited a gap in the classical music world - selling a vision of nostalgia for a time and a place that no living person remembers, or even existed at all. That's marketing genius - one that has provided him with a wealth and fame that 99.9% of classical musicians can only ever dream of, so it's no surprise that a lot of jealousy-fueled hate is directed at him. 

His performance art may not have any substance, but money talks.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Durendal said:


> Love him or hate him, there's no question that he's found and exploited a gap in the classical music world - selling a vision of nostalgia for a time and a place that no living person remembers, or even existed at all. That's marketing genius - one that has provided him with a wealth and fame that 99.9% of classical musicians can only ever dream of, so it's no surprise that a lot of jealousy-fueled hate is directed at him.
> 
> His performance art may not have any substance, but money talks.


But now he ask the government for subsidy for his outrages projects .:devil:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Durendal said:


> Love him or hate him, there's no question that he's found and exploited a gap in the classical music world - selling a vision of nostalgia for a time and a place that no living person remembers, or even existed at all. That's marketing genius - one that has provided him with a wealth and fame that 99.9% of classical musicians can only ever dream of, so it's no surprise that a lot of jealousy-fueled hate is directed at him.
> 
> His performance art may not have any substance, but money talks.


I always think the hate brigade for people like a Rieu are pretty pathetic. The guy is a good musician who is giving a lot of people a lot of pleasure and making a lot of money for himself and other people in the process. Not my cup of tea but what's the problem? I don't have to listen to him if I don't want to


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

DavidA said:


> I always think the hate brigade for people like a Rieu are pretty pathetic. The guy is a good musician who is giving a lot of people a lot of pleasure and making a lot of money for himself and other people in the process. Not my cup of tea but what's the problem? I don't have to listen to him if I don't want to


A very sensible and considered response. Be careful you don't get yourself reported for inappropriate posts! :devil:


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Merl said:


> Aye, leave the man alone. Its not my cup of tea, at all, but neither is Celi. At least he's honest about what he does and people enjoy it without feeling its some kind of spiritual event or they're trying to reach the objective truth. .


Meaning that Celibidache's fans are deluding themselves and that they are pseuds? Just like it's OK that some people like Rieu's rather nauseating and manipulative music it should be alright for you to accept that some people _*who share much of your taste*_ know from experience that Celibidache was a great conductor. Why do you have a thing about him? Is it that you feel you are missing out? There's a simple remedy if that is the case.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Duncan said:


> Post deleted...


...............


----------



## Enthalpy (Apr 15, 2020)

BlackAdderLXX said:


> Not sure if trolling or being serious.
> 
> I'm not sure what to make of this thread...


It works! Already 7 pages in this thread.


----------



## Enthalpy (Apr 15, 2020)

mbhaub said:


> [...] Who knows, maybe someday the Vienna Philharmonic will ask him to do their annual New Years Konzert!


Every musician applying for a position there knows he'll play at the New Year's Konzert. It's clear from the beginning that the musicians don't choose any program. How do they decide who will be there. "I went last year, now it's your turn"?

Or maybe there is double rum ration for the whole crew on that day?

Or they enjoy the close harmony with the vibrant public and just wonder why they care to play Richard instead of Johann the rest of the year?

In São Paulo they play Heitor Villa-Lobos and others at New Year's concert. Wow!


----------



## Enthalpy (Apr 15, 2020)

pianozach said:


> [...] But he's an excellent violinist. [...]


Maybe. How to know? All the scores he plays are accessible after 2 years of violin learning.

At least, Vanessa Mae takes some technical risks, even if limited.

Among excellent violinists doing anything for money, consider David Garrett instead. He is (or was) technically among the very best. In some circumstances he plays (played?) excellent music, in others he fills stadiums with arrangements, you know, ol' Ludwig with electric guitar and drum set.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Enthalpy said:


> Maybe. How to know?* All the scores he plays are accessible after 2 years of violin learning*.
> 
> At least, Vanessa Mae takes some technical risks, even if limited.
> 
> Among excellent violinists doing anything for money, consider David Garrett instead. He is (or was) technically among the very best. In some circumstances he plays (played?) excellent music, in others he fills stadiums with arrangements, you know, ol' Ludwig with electric guitar and drum set.


And why should you play anything different if that is what the public want to pay to hear?


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

He is good at what he does but not "my cup of tea"


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Judith said:


> He is good at what he does but not "my cup of tea"


Why should he be?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

DavidA said:


> Why should he be?


Agreed. The issue here, to the extent that it was serious, was whether Andre Rieu could or does provide a path for members of his audience to become further involved in CM. There is clearly no convincing argument against. Whether Rieu is anybody's cup of tea is irrelevant.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Strange Magic said:


> Agreed. The issue here, to the extent that it was serious, was whether Andre Rieu could or does provide a path for members of his audience to become further involved in CM. There is clearly no convincing argument against. Whether Rieu is anybody's cup of tea is irrelevant.


I can't see why he should provide a path for members of the audience to be more involved in CM. He is offering them a product. The vast majority of people listen to him enjoy it because it is light classical music. They would probably not be interested in anything more specialised.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

DavidA said:


> I can't see why he should provide a path for members of the audience to be more involved in CM. He is offering them a product. The vast majority of people listen to him enjoy it because it is light classical music. They would probably not be interested in anything more specialised.


There is no reason--certainly no data, no compelling counterargument--why he could not provide such a path forward. Using the analogies and parallel examples of _Fantasia_, etc., and my own very early exposure to some CM via such unorthodox delivery systems, it would be IMO a stretch to deny the likelihood of such an outcome. "Probably not" is opinion floating in a void; why should not some number become interested in something more specialized? "Some" is invariably more likely here than "none". Am I the only one on TC to have come to CM by several roads, rather than a single well-defined path? I think not.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Johann Strauss and family were the first "classical" music I loved as a kid. I became a real connoisseur of 19th century Viennese light music, have the performance style (largely a matter of rhythmic subtleties) as much in my blood as a true Viennese, and don't think too highly of Rieu's glossy and campy take on it. He has even touched up Strauss's orchestrations, which is completely unnecessary. If Rieu is someone's entry point into classical music, regardless of how far in they go, bless him. I'm just glad I discovered the real thing early on.


----------



## HolstThePhone (Oct 11, 2015)

Is it fair to say that André Rieu is to a classical violinist what Katherine Jenkins is to a classical singer?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

HolstThePhone said:


> Is it fair to say that André Rieu is to a classical violinist what Katherine Jenkins is to a classical singer?


I think Rieu is a highly skilled musician. You try doing what he does! Sour grapes is no substitute for ability! Or Kate's looks!


----------



## HolstThePhone (Oct 11, 2015)

DavidA said:


> I think Rieu is a highly skilled musician. You try doing what he does! Sour grapes is no substitute for ability! Or Kate's looks!


Okay to give Rieu credit, if I tried to do what he does I would produce a tuneless screech as I cannot play the violin.

Also to give Rieu credit, he was doing social distancing before it was cool. As can be seen in this slightly weird performance of "Edelweiss".


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Enthalpy said:


> It works! *Already 7 pages* in this thread.


wait till this gets dozens of pages, so that I can use the "meme"


----------



## Guest (Jul 11, 2020)

HolstThePhone said:


> Is it fair to say that André Rieu is to a classical violinist what Katherine Jenkins is to a classical singer?


Jenkins seems like a very lovely woman, sans ego, who has a pleasant voice - and good luck to her. She is widely loved. My late mother was a classically trained pianist and during the war she worked in a large hospital and played the piano on the ward. People used to request that she played "one of them classical pieces, Warsaw Concerto" (from a film). She would oblige, from memory. And they loved it, but my mother had a very healthy sense of humour about people's attitudes about what constituted classical music. Not only that, she laughed heartily about medical cliches too and the stories patients told about their medical conditions. One of her favourites was "under the knife" for surgery and "everything removed; the doctor took the lot" for hysterectomies. Other such nonsense expressions were later fodder for her party guests!!

I think we need to maintain a wry sense of humour about Andre Rieu.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Christabel said:


> Jenkins seems like a very lovely woman, sans ego, who has a pleasant voice - and good luck to her. She is widely loved. My late mother was a classically trained pianist and during the war she worked in a large hospital and played the piano on the ward. People used to request that she played "one of them classical pieces, Warsaw Concerto" (from a film). She would oblige, from memory. And they loved it, but my mother had a very healthy sense of humour about people's attitudes about what constituted classical music. Not only that, she laughed heartily about medical cliches too and the stories patients told about their medical conditions. One of her favourites was "under the knife" for surgery and "everything removed; the doctor took the lot" for hysterectomies. Other such nonsense expressions were later fodder for her party guests!!
> 
> I think we need to maintain a wry sense of humour about Andre Rieu.


I think we need to realise that people like Kate Jenkins are bringing enjoyment to an awful lot of people and not be snooty about them. After all the critics are only just usually motivated by envy and sour grapes


----------



## HolstThePhone (Oct 11, 2015)

Christabel said:


> Jenkins seems like a very lovely woman, sans ego, who has a pleasant voice - and good luck to her. She is widely loved. My late mother was a classically trained pianist and during the war she worked in a large hospital and played the piano on the ward. People used to request that she played "one of them classical pieces, Warsaw Concerto" (from a film). She would oblige, from memory. And they loved it, but my mother had a very healthy sense of humour about people's attitudes about what constituted classical music. Not only that, she laughed heartily about medical cliches too and the stories patients told about their medical conditions. One of her favourites was "under the knife" for surgery and "everything removed; the doctor took the lot" for hysterectomies. Other such nonsense expressions were later fodder for her party guests!!
> 
> I think we need to maintain a wry sense of humour about Andre Rieu.


No doubt Jenkins can sing, as can Rieu play the violin. I think both have a poppy classical-light approach which rubs some purists up the wrong way. I wouldn't ever hate on an artist or performer - gentle mocking, maybe. Especially with Rieu. He's a strange phenomenon.

Your late mother sounds like a wonderful woman.


----------



## Guest (Jul 12, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I think we need to realise that people like Kate Jenkins are bringing enjoyment to an awful lot of people and not be snooty about them. After all the critics are only just usually motivated by envy and sour grapes


Yes, that's right; I'm jealous because she's beautiful and can sing. I cannot criticize anybody because I might be jealous. Okey dokey.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

Authentic Rieu fan reaction from YouTube:


> You can't be a human. For me you are an angel came from heaven to take us to the heaven. Your music can take my mind to the heaven. After hearing this, all the buried feelings in my heart came out. I felt both happy and sad together. Hope and fear together. You are speaking heaven's language. You are taking me to a wonderful dream. I don't want to wake up from this dream. Man, I don't think I appreciated you too much. For me you are better than Beethoven.


We probably don't see it that way. Obviously, most of us won't listen to his performance, it seems (is) flashy, kitschy, empty... But apparently we also (for the same reason) don't read Danielle Steel's books or watch endless TV series and so on... 
Lots of (most) people do. It is understandable, accessible to them. It's a summit of art for them. I tried to fight it for decades - in vain.
So this is why on another thread most of us respond by listening to music alone, and why we share our thoughts on this forum. We are in the absolute (fortunately so far tolerated) minority with our taste.

The above reaction of the fan reminded me of a quote by Albert camus, which I didn't understand much before:


> There is something divine in mindless beauty.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ I don't think there is an equivalence - some people like this and others like that - but it is difficult to say "my taste is superior to their tastes" because it sounds so awful. But the case is that low brow art that many people perceive as profound is something we absolutely should deplore, especially when it is received as being in the same bracket as classical music. We should stick up for the great, the profound, the delightful. This isn't about putting the Rieu (or Danielle Steel) fans down ... but it is about saying "there can be so much more if you just try". I don't have a problem with people liking or admiring Rieu but that they should think it is a good as it can get does disturb me.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Christabel said:


> Yes, that's right; I'm jealous because she's beautiful and can sing. I cannot criticize anybody because I might be jealous. Okey dokey.


I'm not beautiful and I cannot sing, I don't criticise Kat because she is not my cup of tea as an artist and I don't listen to her. What I don't do is join the mob who compare her with serious classical artists because she isn't. There were a bunch of idiots on YouTube comparing her with Callas. Ever hear anything so idiotic? Comparing a crossover singer with one of the greatest singers ever?


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ I don't think there is an equivalence - some people like this and others like that - but it is difficult to say "my taste is superior to their tastes" because it sounds so awful. But the case is that *low brow art that many people perceive as profound is something we absolutely should deplore, especially when it is received as being in the same bracket as classical music.(* We should stick up for the great, the profound, the delightful. This isn't about putting the Rieu (or Danielle Steel) fans down ... but it is about saying "there can be so much more if you just try". I don't have a problem with people liking or admiring Rieu but that they should think it is a good as it can get does disturb me.


I'm all for sticking up for--that is, recommending to others politely and effectively--works we prefer. And we can privately deplore the deplorable. But to posture publicly about the degraded tastes of others and tout instead the superiority of our own demonstrates a countereffective bravado that likely does more to retard cultural "elevation" than to accelerate it.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> ^ I don't think there is an equivalence - some people like this and others like that - but it is difficult to say "my taste is superior to their tastes" because it sounds so awful. *But the case is that low brow art that many people perceive as profound is something we absolutely should deplore, especially when it is received as being in the same bracket as classical music. We should stick up for the great, the profound, the delightful.* This isn't about putting the Rieu (or Danielle Steel) fans down ... but it is about saying "there can be so much more if you just try". I don't have a problem with people liking or admiring Rieu but that they should think it is a good as it can get does disturb me.


We should stick up for what people enjoy! Music is to be enjoyed and made enjoyable. Not everyone enjoys sitting through a Wagner opera or Beethoven string quartet or even a Mozart symphony. What they can enjoy is Andre playing a Strauss waltz or Kat singing a crossover number from the musicals or Boccelli singing O sole Mio. So why not? People are having fun which is the purpose of music for most people. Most people don't don a hair shirt and sit through the two hours of sheer misery that is Wozzek in the deluded hope that doing so will make them more in touch with the world's problems. I did last broadcast and never want to hear the wretched piece again! Bring old Andre on any time. There are enough things to make life miserable without Berg's misfit.
Just where I do resist somewhat is where records companies try and sell certain crossover artists as serious opera stars. Boccelli is one example. He's not got the equipment to compete here. Let him stick to what he is good at - light entertainment.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Strange Magic said:


> I'm all for sticking up for--that is, recommending to others politely and effectively--works we prefer. And we can privately deplore the deplorable. But to posture publicly about the degraded tastes of others and tout instead the superiority of our own demonstrates a countereffective bravado that likely does more to retard cultural "elevation" than to accelerate it.


But we are among ourselves here! No need to hold back. I was not suggesting going out and finding whoever it is who listens to Rieu and castigating them ... although, come to think of it, that might be fun! Anyway, I have no platform for addressing the masses.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

DavidA said:


> We should stick up for what people enjoy! Music is to be enjoyed and made enjoyable. Not everyone enjoys sitting through a Wagner opera or Beethoven string quartet or even a Mozart symphony. What they can enjoy is Andre playing a Strauss waltz or Kat singing a crossover number from the musicals or Boccelli singing O sole Mio. So why not? People are having fun which is the purpose of music for most people. Most people don't don a hair shirt and sit through the two hours of sheer misery that is Wozzek in the deluded hope that doing so will make them more in touch with the world's problems. I did last broadcast and never want to hear the wretched piece again! Bring old Andre on any time. There are enough things to make life miserable without Berg's misfit.
> Just where I do resist somewhat is where records companies try and sell certain crossover artists as serious opera stars. Boccelli is one example. He's not got the equipment to compete here. Let him stick to what he is good at - light entertainment.


I don't think their choice is between Wozzeck and Rieu! That would be a strange world! There is lots of lovely Tchaikovsky and Mozart that is not too demanding to listen to, is infinitely more rewarding and that can take them places they haven't dreamed of. I do think listeners of all stripes should have access to better music even if this means government subsidies. It is their right.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Next thing you know someone will start a thread about Kenny G.

Let the bashing begin, you pretentious elitists.


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

I don't think everyone has the prerequisites to understand classical music. Although it's not correct to say it, classics have never been music for crowds. I have been trying to bring classics closer to people around me for decades. Not everyone can study music, medicine, applied physics, etc. This requires a certain degree of talent. We all have our boundaries somewhere, our blind spots. I would not like to seem superior, but I think that music (art) can be partially compared to the natural sciences. I suppose it has to do with a certain component of intelligence. Most people do not have the prerequisites to understand, for example, more complex mathematics, even though they try very hard (I am a teacher and I deal with it on a daily basis). It seems to me that it is the same with (more demanding) music, it's like a complicated puzzle - for most people it is not in their ability (and don't want to expend effort) to understand (solve, enjoy) it.
I feel my limits myself. I don't understand enough and I don't enjoy contemporary music as much as many of you. I don't devote enough time and effort to it and maybe it's too demanding for me...


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Yuhki Kuramoto
https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/yuhki-kuramoto.html
"Concert pianist and composer whose career revolved around his compositions for the piano. *He was considered an heir to Rachmaninoff and Chopin.*"


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

DaddyGeorge said:


> I don't think everyone has the prerequisites to understand classical music. Although it's not correct to say it, classics have never been music for crowds.* I have been trying to bring classics closer to people around me for decades. Not everyone can study music, medicine, applied physics, etc. This requires a certain degree of talent. We all have our boundaries somewhere, our blind spots. I would not like to seem superior, but I think that music (art) can be partially compared to the natural sciences. I suppose it has to do with a certain component of intelligence.* Most people do not have the prerequisites to understand, for example, more complex mathematics, even though they try very hard (I am a teacher and I deal with it on a daily basis). It seems to me that it is the same with (more demanding) music, it's like a complicated puzzle - for most people it is not in their ability (and don't want to expend effort) to understand (solve, enjoy) it.
> I feel my limits myself. I don't understand enough and I don't enjoy contemporary music as much as many of you. I don't devote enough time and effort to it and maybe it's too demanding for me...


There are plenty of clever people who like different kinds of music other than CM. I mean, Brian May, the guitarist of Queen, holds a PhD in astrophysics, so he can't exactly be reckoned not to understand complex mathematics! :lol:


----------



## DaddyGeorge (Mar 16, 2020)

DavidA said:


> There are plenty of clever people who like different kinds of music other than CM. I mean, Brian May, the guitarist of Queen, holds a PhD in astrophysics, so he can't exactly be reckoned not to understand complex mathematics! :lol:


I'm not saying that all "smart" people must necessarily like classics, but they certainly have better prospects to understand it. I state mathematics as an analogy ...

ETA: I have a lot of friends (it's hard to admit, but some are smarter than me) who listen (from my point of view) to simple, even stupid music. In short, their efforts and abilities are directed elsewhere.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Enthusiast said:


> But we are among ourselves here! No need to hold back. I was not suggesting going out and finding whoever it is who listens to Rieu and castigating them ... although, come to think of it, that might be fun! Anyway, I have no platform for addressing the masses.


A very clear articulation of the attitude that I find antithetical to my own. Art is experienced and enjoyed and utilized differently and uniquely by each individual, hence my mantra that all esthetics is subjective and personal. We like to think that our preferences are valid and require no imprimatur from Authority Figures--I like to think so, and I certainly do not require imprimaturs from anybody, whether Authority Figure or the herd elite.. People find this difficult to accept but there really is no intrinsic, objective Good or Bad in music and the Arts; it just is. Best to recognize and acknowledge the singular authenticity of everyone's (everyone else's) esthetic choices than to erect hierarchies of "value" in the Arts.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Strange Magic said:


> A very clear articulation of the attitude that I find antithetical to my own. Art is experienced and enjoyed and utilized differently and uniquely by each individual, hence my mantra that all esthetics is subjective and personal. We like to think that our preferences are valid and require no imprimatur from Authority Figures--I like to think so, and I certainly do not require imprimaturs from anybody, whether Authority Figure or the herd elite.. People find this difficult to accept but there really is no intrinsic, objective Good or Bad in music and the Arts; it just is. Best to recognize and acknowledge the singular authenticity of everyone's (everyone else's) esthetic choices than to erect hierarchies of "value" in the Arts.


I am with you, although I truly dislike Andre Rieu.

I like Gangsterrap just as much as, say, A Wagner opera. There is a world to discover in each of them and there is plenty of enjoyment possible. The pedantic (insecure) attitude of people that generalize their truth and take it as the one and only, to which others have to adapt or die, is only sad for them. It has nothing to do with intellectualism. And I wouldn't want to feed the amount of people who are occupying the most expensive concert seats, without having the slightest idea about what and who is playing and if it is any good. The posh concert hall is a perfect place to keep up appearances and to show off. If you ever experienced a loud applause after the first part of any musical piece finished, you know what I mean.

I guess most composers wouldn't have the slightest problem with others playing (with) their music and reaching new audiences. The Strauss bros. would love what Rieu is doing. And let's not forget the endless amateur musicians who are struggling through pieces you can't even find on recordings.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Strange Magic said:


> A very clear articulation of the attitude that I find antithetical to my own. Art is experienced and enjoyed and utilized differently and uniquely by each individual, hence my mantra that all esthetics is subjective and personal. We like to think that our preferences are valid and require no imprimatur from Authority Figures--I like to think so, and I certainly do not require imprimaturs from anybody, whether Authority Figure or the herd elite.. People find this difficult to accept but there really is no intrinsic, objective Good or Bad in music and the Arts; it just is. Best to recognize and acknowledge the singular authenticity of everyone's (everyone else's) esthetic choices than to erect hierarchies of "value" in the Arts.


Well, my main point is that we can express our tastes (loves and hates) here with only the effect of our views on other members to worry about. I find too many posts in this thread to be written as if we are talking in a room full of die hard Rieu fans. It was clear quite early on that we are not so I think it would be more honest of us to give our own views rather than "if people like it then let them" type responses, which read to me as more superior than being forthright in expressing dislike.

But, now that you have mentioned it, I do think there are standards in art that - even if we cannot know them - are not merely subjective. We see signs that this is the case everywhere, including in the long-standing consensus on the worth or many artists but. of course, these are not proof. I don't think knowledge of what is good is handed down to us by "authorities", though, even if some "experts" seem (to me) to have a good take on what is worthwhile and why (and vice versa). I might use those "experts" to get ideas for what to try next but I think it is very clear that we find what we like first and then find out who agrees with us. But I also think that our taste develops and gets better. So you can leave "authority" out of your critique of those who don't agree with your extreme subjectivist take on how it works! But, for the rest, you are right our views are very different.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

> Enthusiast: "But, now that you have mentioned it, I do think there are standards in art that - even if we cannot know them - are not merely subjective. We see signs that this is the case everywhere, including in the long-standing consensus on the worth or many artists but. of course, these are not proof.


Here again the difference. We can measure and quantify many objective attributes of art objects--dimensions, weight, color, complexity, creator, date, duration (if appropriate: music, film); so many other things. We can even form loose associations between those liking certain art objects and their education, wealth, "IQ", experience; again many things. We can even, as Leonard Meyer has, tease out the relationships among musical note patterns such as to provide the spectrum of balances between satisfied and unsatisfied expectations of what notes should come next in a musical sequence. But none of this speaks of Good, Better, Best except in terms of the specific audience experiencing the work--there is an element of tautology in pursuing this line and we end up saying (accurately but uselessly) that Beethoven Lovers love Beethoven. But what if right now you (or I) want to hear instead _Happy Together_ by the Turtles or some Gharnati from Morocco? Will we be slumming? Wasting our time and minds? Being satisfied with Less than the Best? Some will think so, but I choose to not be counted among that cohort.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Strange Magic said:


> Here again the difference. We can measure and quantify many objective attributes of art objects--dimensions, weight, color, complexity, creator, date, duration (if appropriate: music, film); so many other things. We can even form loose associations between those liking certain art objects and their education, wealth, "IQ", experience; again many things. We can even, as Leonard Meyer has, tease out the relationships among musical note patterns such as to provide the spectrum of balances between satisfied and unsatisfied expectations of what notes should come next in a musical sequence.


We are talking about different things, I think. You are talking of what we can know and what we can measure. I'm merely talking about what is there. Our knowledge of it and our certainty in that knowledge is at best very rough. But I reject the ideas that all art is of equal value, that the value is merely what we - each of us - assign to it. I think that's a cop out and I think it places us (each of us) at the centre of things.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

It's definitely not a cop-out; rather, it places full focus directly upon the unique individual experience and experiencer of an art object. There is no running to the experts or guides or tastemeisters to say or to hear "It's Great because X says so". The value is precisely what we each place upon it.


----------



## Enthalpy (Apr 15, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I think Rieu is a highly skilled musician. You try doing what he does! [...]


He makes very successful shows. This proves he's a highly skilled showman. Very few people can do that.

Playing correctly his over-easy scores wouldn't prove anything about his musician skills. Again, a pupil plays this after 2 years.


----------

