Donald Satz wrote:

>As we enter the 21st century, will the insiders determine the
>direction classical music takes or will the inbetweeners be in control? If
>the insiders do not take control, the direction will undoubtedly be toward
>crossover, fusion, and eclecticism.  Perhaps the insiders would take this
>direction also.  However, I think it will make a great deal of difference
>which group emerges with the power.

I think this is not a question about "controlling" the direction of
classical music, but rather of controlling what the term "classical music"
is to be applied to.

Music, of all kinds, is produced by composers and performers according
to their talents and inspirations, and listened to by any one who has
access to it and cares to listen.  Just what kinds of music get the label
"classical" slapped on them is probably of interest mainly to people who
have some vested interest in seeing this "prestige" term applied to their
stuff.

The trouble is, this allegedly "prestige" term is hardly that any more, to
the majority of the population.  In fact, it is more of a curse word -- as
in: "Oh, that classical stuff -- ugh!" So perhaps if we quit calling it
"classical," more people might be tricked into actually listening to it
without prejudice.

At any rate, I think that the great music that we on this list
consider "classical" will continue to take care of itself.  As for
future directions, if a certain kind of music that I dislike starts to
be generally referred to as "classical," I don't see why that should
bother me; it just means that there is another variety of "classical"
music I don't care for, and there are already a number of those.

Jon Johanning // [log in to unmask]