Deryk Barker wrote:

>Karl Miller ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
>
>>Steve Schwartz wrote:
>>
>>>Eventually, there will come a point when my local symphony orchestra
>>>plays the Ninth, and I won't think it worth my time to go.
>>
>>Our orchestra does the 9th almost once every three years...  needless to
>>say I have not attended.
>
>Well that's your right Kar, but isn't there a danger of snobbishness
>here?  Isn't the Ninth (I'm assuming we're referring to Beethoven) a great
>masterpiece? Isn't it reasonable that it should be part of the standard
>repertoire? Isn't it reasonable that your orchestra's audience not be
>denied the opportunity of hearing it in the flesh?

Beethoven's Ninth is indeed considered a masterpiece by many.  However, I
am no longer moved by it.  Further, I would be amazed if I would find our
local orchestra and conductor (I should add I have great respect for both)
bringing anything to the work that I have not heard before.

Your comment also brings to my mind, some fundamental issues about
programming.  I wonder, what has the notion of a standard repertoire
done to classical music? Perhaps there are benefits, but all I see are
negatives.  Is Beethoven's Ninth so great that we must hear it over and
over again at the expense of so many other wonderful pieces? For me, how
wonderful it would be if there was a five year ban on performing the
Messiah and Nutcracker at Christmas.

I also believe the notion of a standard repertoire has given the general
public a limited notion of what classical music is all about.  It is a bit
like what NPR did with their "great pieces of the millenium" or whatever.

In some ways I see this tied into the current thread on Atonal Music.
There is such a wide range of expression in art music.  So many very
different ways of organization, harmonic and melodic styles...it seems to
me that I cannot help but wonder if we do not find some need for definition
of "music" to be so strong, since the range of gesture,etc.  in art music
can be so overwhelming.  I think about the notion of someone asking you,
"what kind of music do you like." "I like classical music." "Oh, so you
like Haydn and Beethoven." "No, I don't like Haydn, I do like Beethoven and
Boulez." "Boulez? who is he?" "Well, let's listen." "That isn't even music,
let alone classical music."

For me, the notion of a "standard repertoire" places music on the same
playing field as sports or any other aspect of life where "winning" is the
thing.  Is the Beethoven 9th a greater winner than Monteverdi's Vespers, or
the Delius Mass of Life? If so, what do we accomplish by thinking that way?

Karl