# Music as a relfection on the state



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

We can see throughout history how not only music but art as a whole is a reflection of the social attitudes of the period. That would mean that today's pop music is a reflection of our Western societies, but then where does that leave classical music?

This banishment from the mainstream of society can perhaps be compared to Gypsy and folk music in the 18th and 19th centuries, except this time it's the other way around; it is the music of the people that's at the forefront of all classes of society. Factory workers to Harvard students seemingly share the same tastes.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Is the question: does contemporary classical music reflect the "attitudes" or values of our contemporary society, and if so, in what way?

I think it can be presumed to reflect attitudes and values current among its aficionados. Our society is very diverse, even fragmented, and no music can reflect a social consensus or unity which doesn't exist. We're a niche culture, and the niches continue to subdivide. Homogeneous societies with unified value systems and art expressive of those are now artifacts of history, unlikely to return unless there's a revival of life after the bomb or a giant asteroid wipes most of us out.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Yes, we're in an age when people from all classes have embraced pop culture. We saw it coming decades ago. Look at the bozos running for US president. Not one of them has ever expressed any interest in opera or classical music. It would instantly be seen as elitist and snobby. Have you read Robert Bork's brilliant book, Slouching Towards Gomorrah? Or Morris Berman's Twilight of American Culture? An older book, one of my favorites, Culture of Narcisism, by Christopher Lasch really hits home, even today nearly 50 years after he wrote it. We are living in a culturally impoverished era compare to our forebears. And lest we get despondent about the state of music, recognize that the same deplorable situation is affecting movies, newspaper and magazine, television and even sports.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Whatever the consensus music of our society is, it evidently doesn't include classical.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> Yes, we're in an age when people from all classes have embraced pop culture. We saw it coming decades ago. Look at the bozos running for US president. Not one of them has ever expressed any interest in opera or classical music. It would instantly be seen as elitist and snobby. Have you read Robert Bork's brilliant book, Slouching Towards Gomorrah? Or Morris Berman's Twilight of American Culture? An older book, one of my favorites, Culture of Narcisism, by Christopher Lasch really hits home, even today nearly 50 years after he wrote it. We are living in a culturally impoverished era compare to our forebears. And lest we get despondent about the state of music, recognize that the same deplorable situation is affecting movies, newspaper and magazine, television and even sports.


I haven't read any of those books and so would like to ask what you think is the route of this cultural impoverishment you describe (if that is indeed where we have got to)?


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> I think it can be presumed to reflect attitudes and values current among its aficionados. *Our society is very diverse, even fragmented, and no music can reflect a social consensus or unity which doesn't exist. *We're a niche culture, and the niches continue to subdivide. Homogeneous societies with unified value systems and art expressive of those are now artifacts of history, unlikely to return unless there's a revival of life after the bomb or a giant asteroid wipes most of us out.


Rap music has probably done so; today you'll hear it across all classes, if we can even call them that because more and more they share a culture. This pop culture is everywhere now.

You say there is fragmentation but I don't see it anywhere else but the internet. Young people all act the same, dress the same, listen to the same music, watch the same series, movies, etc. If there is any difference it must be hidden; all must be equal.

It's international too, there are very little differences between all Western nations and their people.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

mbhaub said:


> *Yes, we're in an age when people from all classes have embraced pop culture. *We saw it coming decades ago. Look at the bozos running for US president. *Not one of them has ever expressed any interest in opera or classical music. It would instantly be seen as elitist and snobby. *Have you read Robert Bork's brilliant book, Slouching Towards Gomorrah? Or Morris Berman's Twilight of American Culture? An older book, one of my favorites, Culture of Narcisism, by Christopher Lasch really hits home, even today nearly 50 years after he wrote it. We are living in a culturally impoverished era compare to our forebears. And lest we get despondent about the state of music, recognize that the same deplorable situation is affecting movies, newspaper and magazine, television and even sports.


Yes, you put it very well.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Music as a reflection on the state? As in:

a prelude to the three pieces about Plato that was supposed to be released today?


----------



## Bluecrab (Jun 24, 2014)

1996D said:


> Rap music...


Rap music is an oxymoron.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Fabulin said:


> Music as a reflection on the state? As in:
> 
> a prelude to the three pieces about Plato that was supposed to be released today?


This is a separate topic, the music will come later today.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Did somebody mention rap music?

“…any musical innovation is full of danger to the whole State, and ought to be prohibited. So Damon tells me, and I can quite believe him; he says that when modes of music change, of the State always change with them.

Yes, said Adeimantus; and you may add my suffrage to Damon’s and your own.

Then, I said, our guardians must lay the foundations of their fortress in music?

Yes, he said; the lawlessness of which you speak too easily steals in.

Yes, I replied, in the form of amusement; and at first sight it appears harmless.

Why, yes, he said, and there is no harm; were it not that little by little this spirit of licence, finding a home, imperceptibly penetrates into manners and customs; whence, issuing with greater force, it invades contracts between man and man, and from contracts goes on to laws and constitutions, in utter recklessness, ending at last, Socrates, by an overthrow of all rights, private as well as public.”

--Plato


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

1996D said:


> Rap music has probably done so; today you'll hear it across all classes, if we can even call them that because more and more they share a culture. This pop culture is everywhere now.
> 
> You say there is fragmentation but I don't see it anywhere else but the internet. Young people all act the same, dress the same, listen to the same music, watch the same series, movies, etc. If there is any difference it must be hidden; all must be equal.
> 
> It's international too, there are very little differences between all Western nations and their people.


I have to wonder what are your sources of information on this cultural/artistic homogeneity you claim to find. There are bound to be majority groups and corresponding tastes. But look at KenOC's table above. It doesn't even include all genres (e.g. folk, ethnic, world, new age). Rap, across all classes? I don't know what "classes" you hang out with, but nobody I've known in my entire life listens to rap. And yes, there are classes, and they're growing farther apart economically. There are subcultures in this country who have so little in common they can't even have a conversation, or want to.

As for young people, they acted the same, dressed the same, listened to the same music, watched the same series, movies, etc. sixty years ago as well as today. I know. I was there. Don't confuse "youth culture" and "media culture" with culture. They're important parts of it, but far from the whole. The ubiquity of mass media both reveals and conceals diversity.

So what point are YOU trying to put across in this thread, and to what are you seeking assent? I know you're looking mostly to be agreed with.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Bluecrab said:


> Rap music is an oxymoron.


There are notes in it so it's technically music. Can you believe that young people in supposed high society listen to it?


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> I have to wonder what are your sources of information on this cultural/artistic homogeneity you claim to find. There are bound to be majority groups and corresponding tastes. But look at KenOC's table above. It doesn't even include all genres (e.g. folk, ethnic, world, new age). Rap, across all classes? I don't know what "classes" you hang out with, but nobody I've known in my entire life listens to rap. And yes, there are classes, and they're growing farther apart economically. There are subcultures in this country who have so little in common they can't even have a conversation, or want to.
> 
> As for young people, they acted the same, dressed the same, listened to the same music, watched the same series, movies, etc. sixty years ago as well as today. I know. I was there. Don't confuse "youth culture" and "media culture" with culture. They're important parts of it, but far from the whole. The ubiquity of mass media both reveals and conceals diversity.
> 
> So what point are YOU trying to put across in this thread, and to what are you seeking assent? I know you're looking mostly to be agreed with.


Not at all, I'm in the learning mood.

Rap didn't get going until the 90s so it's easy to explain why you don't know anyone who listens to it. The oldest rap fans are probably in their late 30s and that's not the kind of rap I'm talking about. Modern rap is with the youth across all social classes, take my word for it.

It also crosses the line with pop music, there are almost one and the same now; the singers often work together and have the same writers and producers behind them. It is one industry, the record labels are owned by the same conglomerates.

It has a huge role culturally, very much like classical music had in aristocratic Europe.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Oh great, another _O tempora, O mores_ thread, we haven't had one of these in ages.

Yes, we long to go back to the time when classical music was vastly more important than it is now in this cultural wasteland...

_Ireland, 1847_

Newspaper: MENDELSSOHN DIES

Irish person: Oh no.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> I don't know what "classes" you hang out with, but nobody I've known in my entire life listens to rap.


Your circle of friends must be strangely composed. "For the first time, R&B/Hip-Hop became music's most-consumed genre in July and held the position for the rest of the year. Also, nine of the top 10 most streamed artists were R&B/Hip-Hop artists."

--Nielsen 2017 year-end report


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

Nereffid said:


> Oh great, another _O tempora, O mores_ thread, we haven't had one of these in ages.
> 
> Yes, we long to go back to the time when classical music was vastly more important than it is now in this cultural wasteland...
> 
> ...


It won't be like that forever though, it'll come back around, perhaps sooner than later.


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

I see music education always embracing classical . But when music education is deleted from a school because of school poverty ... ? Then what ? Saviors become a necessity . Saviors are an eccentric sort of hero . The classic education will become more inventive .

I do not care for consumer theory .


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

janxharris said:


> I haven't read any of those books and so would like to ask what you think is the route of this cultural impoverishment you describe (if that is indeed where we have got to)?


*Electronics*. Radio, the phonograph, TV and the movies (and now the cell phone) have done more to destroy the human intellect and culture than anything else. All started out wanting to bring high class culture to the masses, but it didn't last. Long gone are the orchestras of CBS, NBC on the radio and TV. There used to be many movies made where classical music played a role - unlike today where it's nonexistent or listened to by a psychopath. The record companies and radio broadcasters learned a long time ago how to make a lot of money with short, simple, popular songs. Watch the PBS series by Ken Burns on Country Music - it explains quite well what happened to classical broadcasting. Of course, without electronics we wouldn't be sharing ideas here, we wouldn't have the easy availability of CDs, or streaming services.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

The digital revolution is the biggest two-edged sword in our society. On one hand, I am incredibly grateful for the existence of streaming services that allow me to virtually "collect" and listen to all the music I'll ever need for $10 a month rather than having to go out and buy CDs just to feed my passion. Ditto for all the other information "at our fingertips." Conversely, I firmly believe that technology has dulled the patience of our culture. For cripes' sake, we get frustrated when our Internet connection slows down to watch YouTube videos - no wonder this generation isn't interested in sitting through a 90-minute symphony or a 3-hour opera. Classical music, literature, and other art worth immersing oneself in, is about the painstaking, time-consuming process of appreciating details and searching out beauty. The "information age" has soullessly ripped away that instinct and that desire IMO.


----------



## Fabulin (Jun 10, 2019)

Crutches make the smart stronger and the dumb weaker.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Patience was once a virtue; now it's a prime indictator of indecision.

For better or worse, speed is the essence of our times.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

We officially acknowledged that we had become cretins when CBS (who had brought the masses Leonard Bernstein in the '50s and '60s) decided it could cut away from Ozawa conducting the vocal part of the Ninth Symphony to cap the opening ceremonies of the Nagano Olympics, and trust that few would care.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> *Electronics*. Radio, the phonograph, TV and the movies (and now the cell phone) have done more to destroy the human intellect and culture than anything else. All started out wanting to bring high class culture to the masses, but it didn't last. Long gone are the orchestras of CBS, NBC on the radio and TV. There used to be many movies made where classical music played a role - unlike today where it's nonexistent *or listened to by a psychopath*. The record companies and radio broadcasters learned a long time ago how to make a lot of money with short, simple, popular songs. Watch the PBS series by Ken Burns on Country Music - it explains quite well what happened to classical broadcasting. Of course, without electronics we wouldn't be sharing ideas here, we wouldn't have the easy availability of CDs, or streaming services.


You're referring to_ A Clockwork Orange_?


----------



## Ariasexta (Jul 3, 2010)

I beg to disagree, many ancient thinkers value music as the universal language, but the state is nothing more than a tool for people`s common good, a system of law. How can music be as low as a reflection of the state? The state is too mundane, earthly, unholy to be a theme for good music. No wonder most patriotic musicians are bad musicians.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

Ariasexta said:


> I beg to disagree, many ancient thinkers value music as the universal language, but the state is nothing more than a tool for people`s common good, a system of law. How can music be as low as a reflection of the state? The state is too mundane, earthly, unholy to be a theme for good music. No wonder most patriotic musicians are bad musicians.


I was thinking the same thing. "The state" as a subject for music? The state is basically a legal construct. Society is a much broader term but I don't think all music necessarily "reflects society". What is that even supposed to mean?
I'd say music reflects the composer first of all. It's a personal expression, using the musical language of its time. I think most of the time, music doesn't concern itself at all with such tangible, earthly subjects.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

KenOC said:


> Whatever the consensus music of our society is, it evidently doesn't include classical.


I wonder what that table is about. Does it reflect the world or a particular culture? I'm guess a bit of both. And how were the preferences measured? I'm guessing by number of downloads?

I also wonder what a similar table - but one that genuinely measured people's preferences - would have looked like 100 years ago or 200 years. There are exceptions - perhaps opera in Italy in the 19th century? - but in general I think that what we call classical music has always been a minority interest. And before the 19th century an awful lot of classical music listened to (by the minority who listened at all) would have been new - there was not that much interest in the "unfashionable" music that came earlier.

It is time we dropped this depressing litany of "classical music is dying". As times change audiences and their preferences change but I am fairly certain that more people listen to classical music now than have ever done.


----------



## Iota (Jun 20, 2018)

janxharris said:


> You're referring to_ A Clockwork Orange_?


Or possibly Hannibal Lecter, who seems to get a not inconsiderable amount of pleasure from Bach's Goldberg Aria after a busy afternoon's slaughtering in The Silence Of The Lambs.

It seems very hard to judge the relative merits of one's own epoch. We may be at a peak or a trough of civilisation, or a peak in some ways and a trough in others, I'm not sure anybody can really know. Today's 'problems' will seem more pressing/dystopian by virtue of the fact they are more immediate, the human mind at least seems to respond like this, time heals etc. 
Classical music is going to have to roll with the punches and find its way, but it would be good to rid itself of the yoke of being a beacon of cultural/moral correctness that some seem to wish it to carry, however true it was in the past. And the idea of it deserving special privileges/protection seems a touch precious (said by someone who values very highly most of the canon from Hildegard to Norgard). Dust takes time to settle and diversity (as evolution has shown) can turn out to be a very creative thing indeed, and I don't see why this shouldn't apply to music.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Enthusiast said:


> I also wonder what a similar table - but one that genuinely measured people's preferences - would have looked like 100 years ago or 200 years. There are exceptions - perhaps opera in Italy in the 19th century? - but in general I think that what we call classical music has always been a minority interest.


Yes. I did some digging on this topic a few years ago When Did Classical Music Start To Fade In Popularity? and it would seem that in the 18th century, the audience size was about 1% of the population. One difference between then and now is that back then the 1% represented the economic and political elites, whereas today's 1% covers a broader swathe of society. For those lamenting the death of civilization, the historical 99% can safely be dismissed as irrelevant, but today's 99% are too hard to ignore.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Was it 1% of the world's population or of a more localised one? 

I'm not sure myself why we should be too bothered with percentages. We are all different and we all have tastes that can be and are catered for. Some of us will discover new tastes as we go along. 1% of the world's population (perhaps 8,000,000,000) gives you 80,000,000 people! Individuals matter. 80,000,000 individuals matter a lot.


----------



## Nereffid (Feb 6, 2013)

Enthusiast said:


> Was it 1% of the world's population or of a more localised one?
> 
> I'm not sure myself why we should be too bothered with percentages. We are all different and we all have tastes that can be and are catered for. Some of us will discover new tastes as we go along. 1% of the world's population (perhaps 8,000,000,000) gives you 80,000,000 people! Individuals matter. 80,000,000 individuals matter a lot.


The historical 1% that I looked at was England, which I suppose could be a reasonable proxy for some other European countries. I suspect KenOC's figures are for the US only. I'm not too bothered with the percentages, only in so far as "1% of the population" doesn't quite match the OP's claim about "the mainstream of society".


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ Yeah - I missed the mainstream bit. I'm not sure I have ever been close to the mainstream in anything!


----------

