Friday, February 02, 2007

 

Music and the radical opinion

When one discusses orchestral music, Bach, Beethoven, Mozart, Tchaikovsky manage to always capture a portion of the conversation. However, while I give all credit to the masters for their work, I am often irritated by the idea that no orchestral pieces written in the last 100 years are worth anything but a casual dismissal as "soundtrack music."

Curiously, much of what we call "classical music" were soundtracks for various stage productions of the day, or more likely, were written for the edification and glory of God. Like I earlier stated, I am taking nothing away from any of these composers or their accomplishments.

However, I am of the radical opinion that some of the soundtrack music written for motion pictures is the equal of some of the famed compositions of old. Shocking, and the purists will pour out their derision and dismiss my contention as that of an uncultured philistine. To that end, I admittedly am so much the philistine that the only thing I fear is a long-haired man with a jawbone of an ass attacking me on the plains of Judah. Nonetheless, to offhandedly decide that a piece of music is somehow a lesser piece of work simply because it was written for a motion picture seems an overly simple conclusion, and not one that shows any deeper consideration for music. This does not mean that every soundtrack contains gems worthy of the masters, since most do not, but there are certainly outstanding pieces that in my estimation rival and even surpass the Old Ones.

I know that the explosion of horns at the beginning of "Star Wars" gave me goosebumps for years when I would hear the fanfare in darkened theaters, I felt my pulse race when those same horns spurred on "Superman" to catch Lois, and then the helicopter and gracefully deposit them both unharmed on the top of the Daily Planet building. More recently, the uillean pipes unleashed on the bonny shores haunted by William Wallace reminded me that my ancestry is closer than I think, and James Horner (who will be forgiven for Titanic someday) has acquitted himself worthy of notice in many varied compositions. Another favorite of mine is Hans Zimmer, whose blend of styles has led me to purchase many of his soundtracks, and I would be utterly remiss to omit the work of Howard Shore, who led us there and back again in only three short years. My folder of mp3's from those CD's comprises much of the music I listen to while I write.

To that end, I have updated my Finetune selection with a few of my favorites, but by no means all since they limit the number of tracks per artist.

I acknowledge that the purists will unhesitatingly denounce me soulless. That is certainly their prerogative, and I do wish them well in their ivory towers of myopia. The idea that because a work of art is new should not lessen it's value, to assume so only closes the mind of the listener, the observer, the beholder.

Comments:
You vile, soul-less chump, you.

Feel better, now?

Nah, you are surely correct. Williams, and to a lesser extent Horner, are the Classical music guys of today, since they are doing precisely what Beethoven, Mozart, and their ilk did.

Entertain.

(I must admit to finding it tiresome, hearing Horner re-use Trek movie riffs in 'most everything he does.)
Thanks for stopping by at my place. Come back anytime.
 
Oh, oh....

Are you familiar with Alex North?
He did the soundtrack for "2001".
The REAL soundtrack.
He did not learn that Kubrick went with the original "classical bits" underscore until he saw the movie's premiere.
 
I've been borderline considering that for some time. Edging my way there without saying it or putting it into words even. I'm still a bit of a snob, in a way, and partly out of prejudice against Hollywood, but also from a conservative nature on some topics.

Anyway, I'm sitting here listening to several things, among them, Leonard Cohen. You brought him up on someone's blog a bit ago. It finally trickled through and I had to find him and put him on. Just wanted to add a thanks for the minder. I should have a tumbler of scotch too... yeah, I think so.

You don't have an email or I would have used that, since you don't seem to let comments on.
 
The idea that because a work of art is new should not lessen it's value

Oh, please. Shostakovitch, Stravinsky, Schnittke, Pärt, Scriabin and Bartok, to name a few, all wrote orchestral music in the twentieth century which is regarded as EXTREMELY valuable by music snobs. I should know, my mother IS the original music snob. I think she likes John Williams okay, too.

The issue is really that anything which is popular with the lumpen masses, and earns the creator an inordinate sum of money, is automatically looked down upon by starving snobs. We must feed upon pride, if our larder is bare.
 
Utterly off-topic, but--

Thanks for your comment. I'm gladyou enjoyed the piece, but mostly it's just that people saying things like that is what keeps me writing :)
 
Pretty Lady,

"The issue is really that anything which is popular with the lumpen masses, and earns the creator an inordinate sum of money, is automatically looked down upon by starving snobs. We must feed upon pride, if our larder is bare."

So well put. That's just beautiful, powerful, in it's raw, bare, honest, humble elegance. It thrumbs some cords here, even if I'm numb to much and not in that moment.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?