[log in to unmask] wrote:
>But that is besides my real point here: The real reason classical
>music is viewed as "dying" is due to lack of funding. If there was
>more government support (fiscally and culturally), classical music could
>flourish and be more accessible as Karl pointed out it has been in the
>past. Young composers (They are there. I know them and was one) are
>not able to make a viable living from these pursuits (I know many talented
>musicians who transitioned into careers in computers). Those who might
>become composers can't perceive it as a potential life style.
For me one needs to ask why there might not be the money and also, why
must it cost so much. I am reminded of the history of orchestras where
they started out as cooperative ventures. The musicians simply divided
the "profits" amongst themselves. We now have many orchestras which are
corporations with very well paid administrators and musicians. However
the bulk of music making is done by those less so well paid.
As one who was trained as a composer, when I finished my schooling,
I never thought of making a living through composing. I, like the
rest of my fellow composers, looked for a teaching job. I was the only
one out of four that year to find a teaching job! In those days there
were only a few that made their living composing. Even Copland taught
and conducted, Roy Harris taught, Bill Schuman was an educator and
administrator. Today, there are a handful who make their way just
by composing...I believe Stephen Paulus is one. Even Vivaldi taught!
I don't believe lack of money is the central issue. I believe it a
question of changing interests of society.
The CLASSICAL mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's HDMail
High Deliverability Mailer for reliable, lightning fast mail delivery.
For more information, go to: