[ORigel]

I see ... the membership in the canon is decided by popularity. So McDonalds is in the canon of restaurants, but some three-star restaurant from the Guide Michelin is not, right?

I still don't see that there is a canon. There are works that are performed more than others, ok. But there are also newspapers that are read more than others.

Thank you.

I see. Concensus among whom? Can you clarify? Musicologists? Professional musicians? Amateur listeners? Or are different canons for these groups?

Is Dufay's motet "Nuper Rosarum Flores" in the canon? Or Boulez' "Marteau"? You can't deny that these are works that are highly regarded among experts as climaxes within their time, among guys that know what's going on and that choose their playlist maybe not from classic FM. Are they in the canon or not?

How many people are in poverty? You can choose some arbitrary threshold (like many organizations do), or you can say there is no precise answer. And you, in this analogy, says that because I can't say rather X family is in poverty or not, there is no such thing as poverty.

But there are people that everyone would agree are living in poverty, and people who everyone would agree are filthy rich.

 

[ORigel]

Conductors like Bernstein, Haitink, Solti and Abbado definitively changed something.

By their commitment, the crowd's view on Mahler changed from the former quasi-canonical judgement "Kapellmeistermusik" to something that marked more or less the peak of listener's attractivity.

(Haitink had some Mahler tradition by Mengelberg in Amsterdam.)

The canon can and has changed, but it's been stable for decades at this point. I'm reasonably confident that Mahler was/is a permanent addition to the canon

 

[Philidor]

How many people are in poverty? You can choose some arbitrary threshold (like many organizations do), or you can say there is no precise answer.

In the country where I live, the limit for poverty was at € 781 per month in 2020.

That's quite clear.

I agree that someone having € 782 cannot be called rich, but there is a definition. In other words, rich and poor are not a dichotomy.

 

[ORigel]

Already answered



So, yes, by Musicologists, Professional musicians, and Amateur listeners.

I'm perplexed that you continue to press for a concrete answer to what "Canon" is. There is no "official list".

There are works that everyone would agree on, such as Beethoven's 3rd, 5th, and 9th Symphonies, Handel's Water Music, Bach's WTC, Mozart's Jupiter Symphony, Holst's The Planets, Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring.

There's not been a single Judge or Moderator to say "Yay" or "Nay" to works. Some are in the public Consciousness, and some aren't. And there's a gray area of works that people disagree on.

But works that are generally agreed upon by "Musicologists, and Professional musicians" are probably part of the canon. If you include "Amateur listeners" the list might be a bit shorter.





I don't know. This might be the first time I've heard of either of them. So they're probably not "Canonical" works. Or maybe they are. I'm not the caretaker of "The Canon". I don't know how large the "canon" is. I know a good deal about Classical Music, but I am by no means a musicologist. But I learn all the time. I've learned a lot from this site.

But you're really trying to get people to defend this nebulous 'canon', when it's just a catch-all phrase meant to convey a sense of all the really important works and important composers.

In the country where I live, the limit for poverty was at € 781 per month in 2020.

That's quite clear.

I agree that someone having € 782 cannot be called rich, but there is a definition. In other words, rich and poor are not a dichotomy.

1. That threshold is arbitrary, so the clarity is an illusion.

2. There is not a dichotomy between obscure and canonical-- there are works that are not exactly obscure but probably not canonical. For example, Mendelssohn's string symphonies, Schnittke's Requiem, Dvorak's American suite.

 

[EdwardBast]

Is Dufay's motet "Nuper Rosarum Flores" in the canon? Or Boulez' "Marteau"? You can't deny that these are works that are highly regarded among experts as climaxes within their time, among guys that know what's going on and that choose their playlist maybe not from classic FM. Are they in the canon or not?

There are really multiple canons endorsed by different groups of people and institutions for different reasons. Both the Dufay and the Boulez are in the canon as far as academia is concerned. They're standard works and I've introduced them to undergrads in music history surveys.

 

[Philidor]

1. That threshold is arbitrary, so the clarity is an illusion.

The clarity is reality. The threshold is oriented at the actual needs, however, no one can say whether € 782 was really better than € 781.

There are really multiple canons endorsed by different groups of people and institutions for different reasons.

Imho this comes closer to some acceptable statement.

If at all, various groups have various canons. The existence of "the one and only canon" is nonsense imho.

There is a canon for well-educated people that need the feeling to belong some imaginary upper class (which is so imaginary as "the one and only canon"). They try to love the music belonging to "their" canon to underline their consciousness of "being part of it". "We are the good and knowing ones and we want to stabilize this for the decades of our lives."

Please acknowledge that I do not say that any honourable participant of this discussion is thinking in the way outlined in the preceding paragraph.

As a matter of fact, once you see how many masterworks such as Dufay's "Nuper rosarum flores" and Boulez' "Le Marteu sans maître" some of them actually don't know, you easily recognize the fiction of belonging to "the knowing ones".

Then there are musicologists that are looking rather for development than for settling a status. Which work put the development of music on fire? Bach's Mass in B minor did not (any successors or elements taken over to other works within the next 10 years or so?), Mozart's symphony No. 41 did not (was printed not earlier than in the 1810s), Schuberts unfinished symphony did not (the score was found not earlier than 1865), Beethoven's 9th did, Weber's Freischütz did. (I do not say that "putting on fire" is binary - it puts or it doesn't - it may happen more or less.)

So we have at least the gaps between popularity, mastery and relevance for development. Sometimes all three criteria meet, e. g. Tristan, however, that's not always the case.

So at least we need several canons - and imho we have to ask who uses which canon for which purpose.

 

[ORigel]

The clarity is reality. The threshold is oriented at the actual needs, however, no one can say whether € 782 was really better than € 781.

Imho this comes closer to some acceptable statement.

If at all, various groups have various canons. The existence of "the one and only canon" is nonsense imho.

There is a canon for well-educated people that need the feeling to belong some imaginary upper class (which is so imaginary as "the one and only canon"). They try to love the music belonging to "their" canon to underline their consciousness of "being part of it". "We are the good and knowing ones and we want to stabilize this for the decades of our lives."

Please acknowledge that I do not say that any honourable participant of this discussion is thinking in the way outlined in the preceding paragraph.

As a matter of fact, once you see how many masterworks such as Dufay's "Nuper rosarum flores" and Boulez' "Le Marteu sans maître" some of them actually don't know, you easily recognize the fiction of belonging to "the knowing ones".

Then there are musicologists that are looking rather for development than for settling a status. Which work put the development of music on fire? Bach's Mass in B minor did not (any successors or elements taken over to other works within the next 10 years or so?), Mozart's symphony No. 41 did not (was printed not earlier than in the 1810s), Schuberts unfinished symphony did not (the score was found not earlier than 1865), Beethoven's 9th did, Weber's Freischütz did. (I do not say that "putting on fire" is binary - it puts or it doesn't - it may happen more or less.)

So we have at least the gaps between popularity, mastery and relevance for development. Sometimes all three criteria meet, e. g. Tristan, however, that's not always the case.

So at least we need several canons - and imho we have to ask who uses which canon for which purpose.

The relevant canon for most purposes is the popular and semi-popular works in the reportoire. The canons among academia and in different countries differ, but when we say canon, we mean the most important composers and works to most serious* listeners

*For casual listeners, there's a pops classical assembly of warhorses like the Four Seasons, Albinoni Adagio, Blue Danube, Hungarian Dance No. 5, Beethoven's Fifth...stuff like that. They're a subset of the broader Canon since they're all super-popular.

 

[Philidor]

The canons among academia and in different countries differ,

Oh yes, important observation ... the canon in the UK might contain more Elgar, Vaughan Williams, Finzi etc, than elsewhere, whereas in Italy there could be a focus on Verdi, Puccini, Respighi etc.

 

[EdwardBast]

So at least we need several canons - and imho we have to ask who uses which canon for which purpose.

A couple you didn't mention:
The putting butts in seats with minimum risk and creative thought canon (the All the Pretty Warhorses canon).
The keeping the crowd happy at the free concert in the park canon (aka the Tchaikovsky with real cannons canon).

 

[N Fowleri]

The keeping the crowd happy at the free concert in the park canon (aka the Tchaikovsky with real cannons canon).

I personally wish the "real cannons canon" was larger. I guess I belong to the great unwashed masses.

 

[EdwardBast]

I personally wish the "real cannons canon" was larger. I guess I belong to the great unwashed masses.

Washing is overrated. They could add Wellington's Victory and make a night of it — and maybe my dad's old favorite, Victory at Sea.

 

[Philidor]

Washing is overrated. They could add Wellington's Victory and make a night of it.

Water for washing may be replaced by alcohol for drinking. The latter is even more funny. 🍾

 

[hammeredklavier]

*For casual listeners, there's a pops classical assembly of warhorses like the Four Seasons, Albinoni Adagio, Blue Danube, Hungarian Dance No. 5, Beethoven's Fifth...stuff like that. They're a subset of the broader Canon since they're all super-popular.

But why wouldn't you include [ Symphony No. 9 ~ Beethoven (113,330,632 views) www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3217H8JppI ] and [ Mozart - Requiem (104,450,736 views) www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi8vJ_lMxQI ] in that group? Because of the longer length? But apparently, the length isn't an obstacle for the casual listeners (the numbers of views on youtube even surpass those of Hungarian Dance No. 5, Blue Danube, for example). The distinction you make between casual listeners and serious listeners - strikes me as elitist.

Who are these "serious CM fans"? How are they distinguished from the "masses"? People like Simon Moon, who find the tonal tunefulness of Bach's B minor mass "trite", and rates anything by Ligeti, Schoenberg higher?

 

[hammeredklavier]

Experts

What makes them fundamentally different from us when it comes to music appreciation anyway? Wasn't Clement Greenberg an expert too?

"One critic shaped how we look at a half-century of painting. If Pollock was overrated, Clement Greenberg was the one doing it. We just followed his lead. So what is the correction here? It's not to discount Jackson Pollock. It's to give more attention to those other abstract expressionists as well. And to know the critic who decided which names we'd learn."

 

[Fredrikalansson]

I sought it [classical music] out at some point while I was in high school because I needed a reason to find joy in this world and classical music provided me with that joy.

I completely relate to what you said here. I discovered classical music quite by accident. There was nothing in my background that directed me in that direction or even let me know such music existed. My parents were Philistines (with apologies to all the Philistines out there). And at no point, did I say to myself "I bet listening to this music shows that I'm smart and superior". I was smitten by the beauty, the strange complexity and (to be honest) all the great cheap emotional thrills. I had discovered joy. My parents, of course, told me it was just a phase I was going through. Over fifty years later, it still brings me joy, and I'm still waiting for my real parents to show up in their space ship and take me home.

 

[Bernamej]

If I had total power, I would implement a classical music dictatorship, based on the natural order.
I would be called Das Kapellmeister and declare pop music and aotnal modern music our mortal enemies.
Scriabin’s atonal works would be spared censorship, and Scriabin would be declared a Friend of Beauty.
My political foundation would be Beauty, and I would fight nihilism with every instrument of the orchestra.
Dissonent notes would be allowed as long as they remain under Tonality’s control.
Relativism would be shamed as the expression of weak and ugly mongrels.

 

[adrien]

What on earth are these? No, really - I haven't any idea what this means.

pieties.

A whole bunch of people wearing ties, eat a whole bunch of pies.

 

[Philidor]

If I had total power, I would implement a classical music dictatorship, based on the natural order.
I would be called Das Kapellmeister and declare pop music and aotnal modern music our mortal enemies.
Scriabin’s atonal works would be spared censorship, and Scriabin would be declared a Friend of Beauty.
My political foundation would be Beauty, and I would fight nihilism with every instrument of the orchestra.
Dissonent notes would be allowed as long as they remain under Tonality’s control.
Relativism would be shamed as the expression of weak and ugly mongrels.

That's exactly what happened with all totalitarian régimes. Give easy stuff to appease the simple ones and suppress those thinking forward.

 

[advokat]

That's exactly what happened with all totalitarian régimes. Give easy stuff to appease the simple ones and suppress those thinking forward.

Speaking from the experience of XXI century Germany? Or you have read it on the internet? Be advised that moderators do not take lightly to obvious politics-tinged content, at least not from me.

 

[Philidor]

Speaking from the experience of XXI century Germany?

If you are talking of 20th century Germany (I suppose this is what you wanted to ask), the answer is clearly yes.

But it is not the only example. Think for Shostakovich in Russia, Ligeti in Hungary and many more.

Be advised that moderators do not take lightly to obvious politics-tinged content, at least not from me.

Thank you for pointing out this. Should I have violated any rule of this forum, I a willing to correct my posting for being in compliance with the given rule set.

Maybe my statement was a little to general and should be underlined with concrete historical examples such as Schreker, Ullmann, Pavel Haas or Shostakovich, Ligeti and many others.

At this point it is very difficult to separate musics and politics. There is no non-policial music. Take Bach's Overture No. 3: Trumpets were only allowed in this time to honour God and the Sovereign. Using trumpets in chuch was religious music, using trumpets outside the church was political music supporting absolutism.

It is not that easy ...