Kevin Sutton:

>I am not saying (and perhaps I could have said it better) that it is
>not available to everyone.  It does, however, require some effort on the
>part of the listener.  If art music is to be put on a par with pop music,
>then why do we bother to work so hard to perform it well.

Let me assure you that most professional pop-music performers work very hard
indeed.  In fact, they work hard to make it look as though they're not
working hard.

>Let's just learn three chords and do the Pachelbel Canon all day.

This by you is the equivalent of pop music?  Where does Arlen or Gillian
Welch fit in?

>That's what sells.  Sure, all of humanity may in enjoy it if they want
>to, but all of humanity should put forth some effort.

You know, classical music is beginning to sound too much like work.
I was so looking forward to something I could just enjoy.

>>I think the elitist view of CM, this-is-mine-because-I'm-smarter-than-you,
>>is dangerous to the survival of the form.  It's what turns off young
>>people, it contributes to the general decline of record sales and concert
>>attendence, and it doesn't get us in the business anywhere at all.
>
>It has thus survived for nearly a thousand years now.  Why is there a
>problem with elitism?  When I was a young(er) person, I thought I was
>pretty special because I DID understand Beethoven.  Elitism is a fact
>of life, and it's necessary.

This debate reminds me of an unfortunate argument I had with somebody.
I commented that there was not one excellent public school in the city
of New Orleans.  This raised her hackles, and she nominated the best one
in the city (from which her son had graduated), which I thought merely
acceptable.  I said so, adding that I had lived in many more cities than
she had.  Of course, I should have kept my mouth shut.

This woman happens to be an outstanding math teacher (and a good mezzo).
She teaches, among other courses, remedial math at the main 2-year school
in town and regularly deals with the products of the New Orleans school
system.  I asked her, among her brighter students, whether she found
them ill-prepared for college work.  She agreed and then added something
far more elitist than anything I had said that night (I thought I wasn't
elitist, by the way -- merely realistic): that there are people who never
should have math because they simply haven't got the brains.  I was
stunned, speechless -- although we later also got into a fight about
pornography.

Mortimer Adler put it best for me: You have two ways to go.  Say you
have three kids -- one can drink a glass of the best nourishing milk,
another can drink less of it, and the last even less.  Do you water down
the milk so that each child can drink a full glass of whatever, or do
you give each child as much of the best milk as they can drink?  I think
people should know as much of the best as they can.  The best, by the
way, does not always mean classical music; it may very well mean music
with three chords.  The point is, if you don't know the first-rate, you
won't recognize third- and fourth-rate for what it is.

About standing ovations: It all depends on what it means to you, as we're
discovering in this forum.  To me and to Kevin, it means something about
an experience of excellence we've both had, to which we want to remain
true.  To others, it expresses spontaneously the pleasure they feel.
If I had never been to a classical concert before or heard a piece of
classical music before, and I heard a good, but not great performance
of, say, Orff's Carmina Burana (with its built-in standing-ovation ending)
I'd probably shout and leap to my feet, too.  Some people never lose
that overwhelming rush.  More power to 'em!  As long as they don't
disapprove of *my* considerable rear end staying firmly in the chair,
I've got nothing against it and even enjoy the fact they got such a kick.
Now TALKING during a performance is something else entirely.  THOSE
people should be shot.

Steve Schwartz, who has ALWAYS stood during the "Hallelujah" Chorus,
because he was singing it at the time