Music Circuit: Guests from Fabio Fazio to "Che fuori tempo che fa"

There would be a mountain of considerations to make but it's late, if I have time I'll write to them tomorrow... Summarizing to the utmost: to me, the thing feels like a marketing ploy.

Frank wrote:

Great perplexities regarding the little speech of the 36-year-old in jeans

...for example, does he smell like luxury hookers?

Can I say that I agree 100%? Can I say that music is a human matter destined for man, and that in every human being, no matter how brute, there is everything needed to understand and share beauty? Can I say that to enjoy art one does not need to have read or learned anything, as might be necessary to create it? Can I say that music as art will find its own renaissance only when it emerges from the towers in which it has locked itself, ceasing to consider itself a cultured thing for cultured people? Can I say that "high" musicians should stop getting irritated because they cannot reach the masses and think a bit more about how to communicate to reach those same masses? Can I say I don't find it scandalous that communicative tools are used which might have nothing to do with art but are useful for disseminating art itself? Can I say that the dissemination of art does not kill art, that various levels of listening and understanding can coexist, that playing Beethoven on a talk show does not prevent doing so in a theater or a church, that playing it in jeans does not prevent doing so in a tailcoat?

Everyone complains about general lack of culture, but what are we doing to fight against lack of culture?

I believe that the subject is truly complex and cannot be summarized much more than this, but I will try.

What I heard that guy say on the television program seems to me, and I say this without euphemism, a "fair of banalities," and I believe Frank was also referring to this, with phrases such as: "Classical music is detaching from our society," "36-year-olds in the hall is moooore difficult." A 12-year-old child taken to a concert for the first time would make the same considerations, and as far as I am concerned, I do not believe the problem can be solved by making conductors wear jeans as a sign of modernity and freedom of thought and speech when going to see a classical music concert for the sake of: letting them feel free to express themselves.

But the key phrase is this: "There are beautiful projects for young people to bring them closer to classical music, the problem is that the blame is always placed on others. [...] But in my opinion, the time has come to perform a self-examination. How do we present classical music? We have a ritual that is 100 years old. We want total and uncritical silence because you cannot say that you don't like it. I always hear people saying when leaving concerts: I don't understand anything, but... I wish they felt free!"

Well, aside from the fact that I disagree on some things... The problem of people not going to listen to classical music is not, in my opinion, to be sought in the way of behaving towards the audience; the problem comes before, namely in awakening interest in the audience, and this is not done by changing attitudes but by educating listening. By this I mean that if I don't like classical music, I won't go listen to a concert just because they give me certain freedoms there. To draw a parallel closer to non-experts, it would be as if I didn't like rock music but at some point went to listen to it because they thought of creating a girl band that acts cool like in pop music. That is not the problem! A certain type of music is not listened to because there is no interest in it. Those of my generation will not struggle to understand this because those few times we were taken to a concert by the school, many did not come (when the opportunity arose to skip a day of class without bringing a justification!) and those who did come would play with their cell phones, bored by the "pain in the ass." Only I, or very few others, were interested, because we were educated in listening to this type of music. Careful! The phrase "pain in the ass" does not come from a true and objective opinion, but from a stereotype to act cool!

Now, it should be clarified that classical music is a heritage of humanity that I judge to be inalienable, and to understand it and return it to its importance in society, one must work on education and one must overcome "coattismo" (thuggishness/crassness), which is an even more serious issue. This is a shitty world where the example to follow in schools are the thugs. The thugs are the ruin of people's sensitivity; in order not to be targeted, instead of following the path of virtue, they associate with this cheap rabble by imitating them and taking them as a point of reference to be considered "cool" like them in the eyes of others. Coattismo generates wrong stereotypes that must be eliminated, and serious measures would be needed towards these people who not only harm themselves but also and above all others. The problem then derives from the education imposed by parents... I have listened to classical music practically since I was born, along with other types of music, and I am able to identify the creative genius in it. Only as a last resort is all this derived from people's sensitivity. The problem is circumscribed to the cultural and social sphere which should provide some guidelines that are no longer there!

This is why, in light of these observations, I think that all this is merely a publicity stunt that will last as long as it finds an audience, but if all this were to work, welcome; the end justifies the means, and I am willing to eat back everything I have written by printing it on paper and physically eating the printed paper.

Anyway, in light of their desire for sincerity from the audience, I must say I was not so impressed by their Beethoven...

Good evening. On the contrary, I believe it is a good idea to freshen up the tradition. It could be more congenial for a young audience.

Of course, everyone is free to have their own!

Very well, very true.

Don't worry about the accusation of banality; I am used to it.

The fact that classical music is detached from society might be a banality, but you yourself acknowledge this when you say it is an educational problem.

So, will there be a reason why listening skills are not being taught (by parents, the usual parents in the first place)? Will it all depend on the Government, ministerial programs, or the usual school system? Or is it rather a social fact?

Why is classical music socially perceived (not just by the low-class thugs) as something difficult, something impenetrable without the famous "cultural background," without having had the luck of cultured parents (in 110% of cases, musicians themselves) who accustomed you to frequenting it from a young age?

Is it not primarily the responsibility of those who love and cultivate classical music to ensure that it is no longer perceived as an esoteric practice?

A responsibility that does not depend on treating music as a serious matter, or preferring elegance over blue jeans, or demanding sacrosanct silence when playing, but rather on criticizing literally any amateur or secular approach as sacrilegious vulgarization, a publicity stunt, or at best, banality.

Why should an approach to classical music that is perhaps low, vulgar, banal—or I would go further, commercial, whatever you want—prevent (perhaps in other settings and at other levels) the cultivation of the same music in a high, sophisticated, refined manner, etc... etc...?

Why should the idea of this "36-year-old in blue jeans" be contrary to education in listening to classical music? Why should it further "thug-ify" the world? By the way, who cares about thugs. I want to be even more banal: even the crudest of brutes has all the means to enjoy beauty, but it is obvious that it will always depend on their choice, and the world will always be full of imbeciles who choose the ugly regardless of any education.

Is it not possible instead that a (perhaps terrible, commercial, I don't care) Beethoven emerging (magically) from the television in any ordinary living room can make people realize that great music is normal, and that this music can be listened to even without having attended a conservatory?

Or perhaps it is not permissible to listen to Beethoven without having attended a conservatory?

Stop !! I haven't read your entire post yet, I stopped at the first line, I want to clarify! When I spoke of trivialities, I wasn't at all referring to you; I wasn't referring to your post, but to the 36-year-old conductor who went on the broadcast... I thought it was clear, having also quoted the exact phrases he said on air. That being said, I am proceeding with the rest of the reading...

I've already posted.

Obviously, there is nothing personal even in what I have written

All your observations are correct, but esotericism is not the solution. We cannot take the Mona Lisa and put it under ultraviolet light just because it looks cooler! The Mona Lisa is that... End of story. When I speak of education, I am not only referring to ministries, because it is evident that everyone knows the "guilt of their own misdeeds" within themselves, but that the environmental and therefore social factor being the core of the matter seems like a fact to me. If I speak of education, I am not referring to the academic education of the conservatory, but to listening education which unfortunately, especially in schools, no longer exists because of these idiots who, instead of being treated as the heroes of the situation, should be examples of how NOT to become and should be severely punished!

Forgive me Simone, it's not that I want to drag out idle discussions.

However, I notice some inaccuracies that I wanted to clarify:

- I was saying that music should not be felt as "esoteric" (where by esoteric one means a practice reserved for initiates);

- I don't think I meant to say to put the Mona Lisa under ultraviolet rays, but rather not to criticize it if it is shown on a talk show (which in any case does nothing to the Mona Lisa, which will always remain what it is).

I found this article, any other opinions on the matter

http://onlinemusiclass.altervista.org/matthieu-mantanus-dice-banalita-da-fabio-fazio/

I am skeptical in general.

@pestatasti

No idleness at all, of course; you are right to clarify your reasoning and opposing ideas are more than welcome, after all, that is what the forum exists for!

The fact of this esotericism, however, is something we have to deal with... Classical music (according to the stereotypes of music most commonly listened to today) is something different and separate, and I continue to believe that in a certain sense, if one does not prepare oneself for listening, it might generate little interest. Just to say that if I am used to always eating savory dishes, if once they give me chocolate that I have never tasted before, it would feel strange to me. It would feel even stranger if the stereotypes most emulated by society told me that eating chocolate is for "losers." I believe this example is quite fitting, given that chocolate, more or less, is something that more or less everyone likes.

I also read the article posted by Ettore and he expresses in certainly better Italian what I also think, starting from the title with which I began in the second post I wrote in this discussion (I swear I hadn't read it before). One sentence, in my opinion, is illuminating and connects back to the discussion made about the Mona Lisa: "It is probably true that the world of cultured music needs a change, but I do not think a coat of white paint on the surface is enough. If a revolution must be made, it must be done in a much deeper way, rather than 'changing the packaging so as not to change the substance.'"

@Ettore

Thank goodness you posted this link; it goes hand in hand with my theory on the matter.

It is probably true that the world of classical music needs a change, but I don't think a coat of white paint on the surface will suffice. If a revolution is to be made, it must be done in a much deeper way, rather than "changing the packaging so as not to change the substance"

I have read everything but I haven't seen the broadcast because I can't manage it from here.

However, I think I have understood the problem, which is also not a novelty!

So, I would start from this sentence, which in the article in question, however, is the end and has no answer.

What must be done to ensure that classical music does not die?

I think, first of all, we should ask ourselves whether the increasing thinning out of those who listen to classical music is an irreversible fact or not, linked to cultural changes etc. etc..

Once this question has been answered, in the hope that the answer is negative, we must nevertheless begin to identify how to stem and reverse what is, at present, a matter of fact.

A couple of things come to mind for now:

1) Musical education, as Simone says, is certainly essential, and in this regard, it can only be the responsibility of those who are tasked or should be tasked with providing it: school and non-school music teachers, and this, obviously in the hope that music becomes part of every type of school. - It is useless to count on parents for this - It is certainly not enough to teach musical education by giving a small overview of music history - often poorly - and teaching the most elementary practical rules for reading and playing music as is done in middle school. What instrument teachers often do with their students is equally insufficient. They are the ones who must personally be able to transmit the passion for great music, granted (though not conceded) that they actually have it.

2) Rather than clothing and applause between movements - which can exist, why not? Once upon a time, people even ate in the theater - so why not start thinking about mixed spaces - which could even be the opera houses themselves - where one can access and listen to any type of music, without limits or exclusions? Who knows? Perhaps this could start to unlock something! Naturally, with very competitive prices!

The first problem is certainly how to reawaken interest in classical music, and then one would need to try to maintain it. Do we want to change something? Well, why not hold concerts similar to readings? Before playing, the conductor tells us a bit of history about that composer and that piece we are about to listen to. Perhaps doing so in a very soft way, suitable for young people, inserting a few sober jokes along the way. I refuse to believe that there is no longer interest in culture in general; rather, I believe that the method used to arouse this interest has changed. It is my opinion that the best strategy for learning is learning while having fun. At university, there were often people who would fall asleep during lectures because some professors were, quite frankly, a bore. On the contrary, there were several teaching assistants who knew how to make the right little jokes at just the right moment to bring the students' attention back. Among them all, I remember this one: when discussing the Nyquist theorem, which states that in order not to lose information on a signal, it must be sampled at twice the maximum audible frequency (20,000 Hz -> sampling at 40,000 Hz)—it is a theorem involving a lot of mathematics and is therefore not light at all. The assistant came out with: "I wonder if by sampling at higher frequencies and then bringing the signal back to audible frequencies, we might hear something we've never heard before, like the voice of the Virgin Mary!". Obviously, we all burst out laughing, but it was precisely this joke that brought attention back to what the Nyquist theorem was and fixed it firmly in our minds. I believe that students' attention must be captured by adopting the right approach both toward them and toward the subject matter. Mathematics, just as an example, does not necessarily have to be boring, just like physics and all other branches of teaching. A first change should be made precisely in this direction.

I taught for a couple of years at the University of Tor Vergata as an assistant to a professor. My lessons were not a nuisance, even though I had to talk about analytical geometry all day long, and I assure you that the students enjoyed the classes because here and there, I used to insert some moments of relaxation and fun. There are also studies showing that it is impossible to maintain attention for more than 15 consecutive minutes. The results were evident during exams... Almost all the students passed the exam with high marks; some even thanked me by suggesting me as a permanent professor. Teaching is not something that is learned over time; I truly consider it a talent that one either has or does not have. It is like the ability to create synergy with others; it depends on one's character. You are either sociable or you are not... You either know how to teach or you don't, even if you might be a genius in your subject; teaching is something else entirely. Perhaps Italy needs more Teachers with a capital T and fewer professors who are only there to collect a paycheck at the end of the month.

This is my opinion...

Certainly, parents also have their responsibilities, but in this sense, less so than teachers... After all, it's not guaranteed that all parents know analytical geometry...