In Reply to: I don't want to sound cynical, but... posted by sser2 on April 11, 2007 at 20:37:10:
For a long while, it was the "favored" genre for patrons and the intellectual strivers. It was supported and nurtured by well-educated musicians and MANY composers bringing out new "product". The "patronage and government funding model" was supplemented by a broad-scale PAYING audience that also PAYED for recordings during the past 75-100 years, making the viability of the genre live, perhaps, longer than it would have. To deny the generational cycle and the economic impact upon Classical music as being nothing than "more of the same" is like saying one shouldn't be concerned with the art of the clock-maker, or hand-carved furniture or even the availability of high-end, non-mass-produced audio equipment.The CRAFT of Classical music is laborious, requires considerable focus and concentration (to complete a major work) and cannot be performed by folks who have other things to do simply to put food on the table. Boomers drove the economic cycle that supported this art for a half-century, and the support net is fading. Specific attention will need to be applied by those who care through their support of living artists (NOT just "performers" of the art, but creators). Otherwise, it will become EXACTLY like the "Mona Lisa": the relic of a bygone day.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Classical music -- now -- is not the same as it was... - SE 04:43:22 04/12/07 (1)
- The main point?: Get ready for the Classical Music Downsize!... - SE 05:08:40 04/12/07 (0)