Philharmonic

The Metropolitan Opera is playing Friday at 8.

Full scoop in the NY Times today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/arts/music/20oper.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=opera&st=nyt&oref=slogin

Your welcome- but I have to say that I hooted and hollered after every tune to give them the props they deserved (well, not the husband, but certainly her). Got some dirty stares from some old folks who don't realize that classical WAS THE POP MUSIC OF ITS TIME. I really can't stand it when people act aesthetically to music. It's MUSIC people. It's supposed to affect you.

Isn't it obvious that WhyFi is talking about the many, many people who go to these performances and talk during every piece? Look, I subscribe to the opera and the ballet and I happily applaud when the best dancers walk on or at the end of favorite arias, but that kind of enthusiasm is a far cry from the four fortysomething women sitting near us this evening who blabbed on and on and on about "THIS GOUDA IS REALLY GOOD, IT'S DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE WE GOT LAST TIME" or "REMEMBER WHEN WE WENT TO THE CONCERT WITH SPENCER? I REALLY MISS HIM. I WISH WE COULD DO THAT AGAIN" or a zillion other noninteresting items in totally inappropriately loud voices.

He's right, I'm grateful to the people (some of them under the age of ten) who manage to eat, drink, and divert themselves during the performances at volumes that don't spoil it for other people. How is that "putting on airs"? Sheesh.

WhyFi wrote: [quote=Emily]Isn't it obvious that WhyFi is talking about the many, many people who go to these performances and talk during every piece? Look, I subscribe to the opera and the ballet and I happily applaud when the best dancers walk on or at the end of favorite arias, but that kind of enthusiasm is a far cry from the four fortysomething women sitting near us this evening who blabbed on and on and on about "THIS GOUDA IS REALLY GOOD, IT'S DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE WE GOT LAST TIME" or "REMEMBER WHEN WE WENT TO THE CONCERT WITH SPENCER? I REALLY MISS HIM. I WISH WE COULD DO THAT AGAIN" or a zillion other noninteresting items in totally inappropriately loud voices.

He's right, I'm grateful to the people (some of them under the age of ten) who manage to eat, drink, and divert themselves during the performances at volumes that don't spoil it for other people. How is that "putting on airs"? Sheesh.

Bingo.

I was irked by the people that seemed to be there despite the concert, rather than for the concert. Don't get me wrong - this is a social event, and mausoleum silence isn't expected, but at the same time, diminishing the performance to background music is terribly selfish and disrespectful to both the performers and other listeners. In short, the Met Opera is not a glorified jukebox with a classical playlist.

While I agree on some level- the music philosopher in me takes umbrage. If you were at any other outdoor show, you wouldn't have a problem, yes? "but I miss the quiet parts in the classical show..." and yes, I agree the classical is going to be harder to hear in that environment. But, that's going to be an issue with an outdoor, classical concert.
Many people play classical music in their homes as background music. You do this, correct? Or do you sit in front of your stereo and listen with rapt attention? The point I'm making, and I'm not justifying plain rudeness, is that as classical is background music to a great many people when they listen at home, so too will they in a live setting. Surrounded by friends, food, and good drink.

In music education philosophy, they call what you do "aesthetic listening." Music that should be listened to in a "dispassionate and disassociated" manner. (This is the terminology they use which started in the 1940's-50's) It is to be enjoyed for its pure aesthetic value, engaging the critical thinking portion of the brain. That is why there are seats at a classical show- large imposing stage, a separation between the musicians and its audience. This is a Western philosophy of music, what some deem as "real" music, in which the audience is expected to NOT be a part of the music at all. They are not worthy of being near such artistry and indeed, are kept at arm's length. Many, many cultures do not subscribe to this philosophy of music.

These classical concerts in the park started with a genius who felt it unfair that the masses couldn't see a classical piece performed because they didn't have the money. Music for all! The conductors, the singers, and the musicians all realize that in an outdoor setting, they will experience a different kind of audience. One that screams out, hoots and hollers when they are moved. And the "during the music" parts? Well, you can't make anyone in a park all be quiet because there's music playing. If you want quiet, you need to go to Lincoln Center where everyone behaves.

EMILY & WI-FI-I'm curious to know where you guys were sitting. Were you up close to the stage or further back and watching the monitors? I do think that the background music listeners probably should sit in the back, thereby not disturbing the more serious listeners, but if they get there early enough...

belzjm wrote: sorry, but i've been to other concerts in the park...people are much quieter for indie rock performers and the like...the rufus wainwright concert in central park was very quiet actually.

Bullshit. Rufus ain't indie rock, first of all. Second, name a REAL indie rock concert where everyone was silent.

belzjm wrote:
i've been to many nyphilharmonic and met opera concerts in the park and honestly these days, i only go to see friends and get drunk. if i actually want to HEAR the music, i go to lincoln center.

Emily and W-Fi's point, exactly.

Whatchuwant wrote: In music education philosophy, they call what you do "aesthetic listening." Music that should be listened to in a "dispassionate and disassociated" manner. (This is the terminology they use which started in the 1940's-50's) It is to be enjoyed for its pure aesthetic value, engaging the critical thinking portion of the brain. That is why there are seats at a classical show- large imposing stage, a separation between the musicians and its audience. This is a Western philosophy of music, what some deem as "real" music, in which the audience is expected to NOT be a part of the music at all. They are not worthy of being near such artistry and indeed, are kept at arm's length. Many, many cultures do not subscribe to this philosophy of music.

These classical concerts in the park started with a genius who felt it unfair that the masses couldn't see a classical piece performed because they didn't have the money. Music for all! The conductors, the singers, and the musicians all realize that in an outdoor setting, they will experience a different kind of audience. One that screams out, hoots and hollers when they are moved. And the "during the music" parts? Well, you can't make anyone in a park all be quiet because there's music playing. If you want quiet, you need to go to Lincoln Center where everyone behaves.

I long thought that idea of being quiet during a classical musical performance was a late 19th century idea. But it's even more recent than that- there are recordings of live performances from the 1940s & 50s at halls like Lincoln Center where the audience would clap between movements.

Musicologists have wondered about the boring bits in classical symphonies, or why some endings go on for so long. It's because after a thrilling section, 19th century audiences would hoot and holler so much that you couldn't hear the music.

Of course, that's not for everyone. If you want an audience that's quiet, you've got Lincoln Center. And I'm NOT defending people who may have been rude in Prospect Park.

The performers kept repeating during the on-stage interview that they were excited to bring this music to a new venue. A few years ago, classical musicians were morose at the idea that nobody was going to listen to them any more. Now, there's such a vibrant scene. Geez, people are even arguing about it on the web in Prospect Heights.

(PS: I'm a classically trained composer, for what it's worth.)

Whatchuwant wrote: While I agree on some level- the music philosopher in me takes umbrage. If you were at any other outdoor show, you wouldn't have a problem, yes? "but I miss the quiet parts in the classical show..." and yes, I agree the classical is going to be harder to hear in that environment. But, that's going to be an issue with an outdoor, classical concert.
Many people play classical music in their homes as background music. You do this, correct? Or do you sit in front of your stereo and listen with rapt attention? The point I'm making, and I'm not justifying plain rudeness, is that as classical is background music to a great many people when they listen at home, so too will they in a live setting. Surrounded by friends, food, and good drink.

In music education philosophy, they call what you do "aesthetic listening." Music that should be listened to in a "dispassionate and disassociated" manner. (This is the terminology they use which started in the 1940's-50's) It is to be enjoyed for its pure aesthetic value, engaging the critical thinking portion of the brain. That is why there are seats at a classical show- large imposing stage, a separation between the musicians and its audience. This is a Western philosophy of music, what some deem as "real" music, in which the audience is expected to NOT be a part of the music at all. They are not worthy of being near such artistry and indeed, are kept at arm's length. Many, many cultures do not subscribe to this philosophy of music.

These classical concerts in the park started with a genius who felt it unfair that the masses couldn't see a classical piece performed because they didn't have the money. Music for all! The conductors, the singers, and the musicians all realize that in an outdoor setting, they will experience a different kind of audience. One that screams out, hoots and hollers when they are moved. And the "during the music" parts? Well, you can't make anyone in a park all be quiet because there's music playing. If you want quiet, you need to go to Lincoln Center where everyone behaves.

EMILY & WI-FI-I'm curious to know where you guys were sitting. Were you up close to the stage or further back and watching the monitors? I do think that the background music listeners probably should sit in the back, thereby not disturbing the more serious listeners, but if they get there early enough...

Upon first reading this post, I had mentally composed responses to many of your... points. Upon rereading, it became clear that there were two things going on - the point that Emily and I are trying to make and the completely different discussion that you're holding.

It seems to me that you're either pontificating to argue an uncontested point or you're arguing an uncontested point as a means to pontificate (the uncontested point being the propriety of hooting and hollering when the music moves you - by all means, hoot and holler). In addition to being wildly inaccurate in my case, it's neither here nor there ("dispassionate and disassociated" listening? Hardy. I wouldn't have a BMW's worth of stereo gear in my living room if music didn't have a strong emotional connection).

Moving on to the point that Emily and I are making (sorry to assume that I'm speaking for you Emily, speak up if I'm wrong) -

Whatchuwant wrote: And the "during the music" parts? Well, you can't make anyone in a park all be quiet because there's music playing. If you want quiet, you need to go to Lincoln Center where everyone behaves.

This, to me, reeks of justification by means of "I expect everyone else to be rude, I might as well be rude, too." Sorry, didn't hold water with my mother when I was a kid, doesn't hold water now.

It seems that you're trying to paint a picture with only black and white, because it suits your position. I have neither stated nor implied that the performance should be the only focus. Also, no one is trying to dictate the right way to appreciate music, as you seem to think is happening. Instead, my point has been that the music, at a performance such as this, should be the main focus... as opposed to being 4th or 5th on the list, with chatting being a higher priority.

Appreciate the music in any way you see fit, but don't ignore it while conducting yourself in a manner that makes it difficult for others to appreciate it (And the comparison of listening to classical music in the background at home? It's absurd to the point of being disingenuous. You're really going to draw a comparison to a live, fleeting performance of a full orchestra to hitting play on the stereo? :roll:)

Whatchuwant wrote: I never said that and would never say that. I'm saying that you cannot expect everyone who attends an outdoor concert to treat the music as the main focus. I may, you may, but some don't. I may get pissed when the person next to me is trying to sing along ( a personal pet peeve of mine) but I can't do shit about it.

Man, teh silliness! You make it seem as if we're talking about an infinite number of monkeys clacking away at an infinite number of keyboards and having one churn out the script for "Ishtar" - we're talking about the majority engaging in rude, distracting behavior. (Also, what's the difference between "you can't expect everyone to [be polite]..." and "it's okay if someone [isn't polite]"?)

Whatchuwant wrote: Again, you can't expect people "at a performance such as this" (reeks of elitism, btw) to behave the way your mother (or my mother for that matter) raised us.
It also sounds to me like you are trying to dictate how people should be appreciating the music by thinking that they should make it their main focus "rather than the 4th or 5th on the list."

Way to attack tangents while leaving the heart of the matter out of the picture! To a casual reader it looks as if you're making solid points in justifying rudeness! The full quote is "...as opposed to being 4th or 5th on the list, with chatting being a higher priority." Again - distracting, rude, selfish behavior. (BTW, my "at a performance such as this" statement was in reference to the type of performance (concert vs. oh, let's say a violinist in a posh restaurant), not genre, etc, so keep looking for elitism if you'd like.)

Whatchuwant wrote: My point was that some people consider classical music to be background music and that to them there is little difference between live and Memorex.

Well, these hypotheticals would probably not give a hoot to go the the performance in the first place. Also, a lot of people do a lot of things while listening to recorded classical music, that doesn't make those same activities appropriate for the concert. Hell, I like to listen to classical music when I drive - would it be appropriate for me to rent a ZipCar and drive in circles around your picnic blanket for the duration of the concert?