Product Description
During the last few decades, most cultural critics have come to agree that the division between “high” and “low” art is an artificial one, that Beethoven’s Ninth and “Blue Suede Shoes” are equally valuable as cultural texts. In Who Needs Classical Music?, Julian Johnson challenges these assumptions about the relativism of cultural judgements. The author maintains that music is more than just “a matter of taste”: while some music provides entertainment, or serves as … More >>
Who Needs Classical Music?: Cultural Choice and Musical Value
Tags: assumptions, Beethoven, blue suede shoes, Choice, Classical, classical music, Cultural, decades, judgements, julian johnson, matter of taste, Music, Musical, Needs, relativism, texts, Value
#1 by Dr. Howard Charles Yourow on April 22, 2010 - 9:26 pm
Unfortunately, time does not permit me the luxury of the in-depth critique that this important and useful book does indeed deserve.Perhaps I shall be able to return to this task in the not-too-distant future, in order to do the critique detailed justice, following the shining example of fellow-reader John Grabowski.
But I believe that it may be fairly written, in brief, that while
the defense of the wonderful Western classical or art music tradition is a necessary and noble undertaking, it is almost impossible to divine defender Johnson’s soul through his too-thickly-textured intellect. Thus, if the work is meant for the cognoscenti, the author has the ear, so to speak, of those most sympathetic to his sometimes slightly-tortured arguments. But if it is meant as a paean unto THE WORLD AT LARGE, including the dubious as well as the barbarians at and inside the gate, Defender Johnson has created an uphill battle for himself — for the simple reason that THE WORLD AT LARGE, including the dubious and the barbarians at and inside the gate, cannot and will not be persuaded or convinced by argument overloaded with sophisticated intellect but woefully empty of the kind of good-old-fashioned passion which is the very hallmark of the beauty which he seeks to preserve, protect, and defend! { I hope my quasi-Teutonic sentence structure here hasn’t been overly-influenced by the mode of the book itself! }
If the text were only imbued with the spirit of the title — direct,engaging, challenging, alive — well, then, we might have a five star special on our hands. But alas, I fear that the work,
with whose major premises I wholeheartedly agree, will not have the reach that a defense of this precious tradition ought to have in its very real hour of need.
That’s tragic — and frustrating.
Rating: 3 / 5
#2 by Erico Stern on April 23, 2010 - 12:07 am
I awaited this book with much anticipation, but I have been somewhat disappointed by its contents and style.- I found it repetitive, as well as very dry, condescending and pseudo-highbrow.- It certainly has its interesting points, but these are far in between and repeated over and over again.-
Rating: 2 / 5
#3 by Henry Fogel on April 23, 2010 - 12:31 am
Julian Johnson confronts the complex issue of the value to society of art music — and the differences between art music and popular music. Although densely written (this is not a book for skimming, nor for light reading), I found the book compelling and cogently argued. Johnson tries to define the relationship between art music and our human qualities — and argues convincingly that there are real differences between popular and serious culture, and that those differences should not be minimized in the name of political correctness. It is not easy to summarize the book, because of the complexity of its subject and the depth of his argument. But anyone with an interest in the place of classical music in our society today should read this.
Rating: 5 / 5
#4 by Sekais on April 23, 2010 - 1:14 am
As someone who stands out for having no interest in popular music and a love of classical music, I was overjoyed to discover this book. Finally, someone out there who finds current trends in music as depressing as I do, someone who is willing to defend classical music from the myriad of charges against it (and there are certainly many).
I was surprised by Johnson’s approach. I was expecting something comparing the complexity of classical music to popular music when I first heard about it. Nonetheless, I was surprised and pleased to see that Johnson followed a more philosophical approach, focusing on the purpose of classical as compared to pop. Specifically, Johnson argues that classical music is important because it represents art rather than mere entertainment.
Although I found it to be a very good book, I withheld a star because it does have some shortcomings. It is a very short read and I think it would have been better if it went into more depth on issues it only touched on. Johnson notes that rock music is quite rhythmically impoverished and that popular music relies on decidedly archaic harmonic language, for example. These are very good points, but he does not elaborate on them as much as I hoped he would.
I would have also liked to see his take on the various forms of jazz and progressive rock that I often see cited by those arguing in favor of popular music. Many seriously argue that they constitute art on the same level as classical music. Given that, it seems unlikely that a staunch fan would find this case for classical music particularly convincing. Though Johnson makes a good case that there is more than taste at work, I fear that alone will do little to save classical music.
Rating: 4 / 5
#5 by John White on April 23, 2010 - 1:47 am
First off, this is not a an academic or musicological book. But it is a very thoughtful one. It felt like a grouping of essays from which one could base discussions.
During this last paragraph of this book I was reminded of Wynton Marsalis’ comment in the Ken Burns Jazz documentary that, Beethoven does not come to you, you have to come to him. Johnson seems to be expressing that classical music requires determined effort to truly appreciate.
I personally came to classical music from the standpoint that a good deal of effort is put into creating it and much of it require virtuosity, so surely a good deal of insight can be gained from it, as long as one puts forth the patience and can maintain some modesty towards it. At the very least, it should be respected. Classical music requires that you don’t use it as mood music, but that you earnestly devote your attention and immediate focus to it.
In the final chapter, Johnson goes on a bit more of a modern society rant. e.g. Television being the antithesis of classical music in that only the most minimal involvement is required to absorb its full meaning.
Although he makes some decent arguments for setting classical music apart as mindful art music, there are errors in his logic/proofs. Surely some Satie, Chopin, Schubert lieder, and works of Bach are no different from our songs (lieder) of today of a similar ABA structure. Though he used Beethoven’s Fifth as a example of the discursive quality of classical… it would be hard to lose the argument if all classical music were as potent!
Self-referrentiality, also, was a component of his argument for classical, yet Jazz and Hip Hop are loaded with it. Jazz has its references to bop, dixieland, cool jazz, free jazz, etc. I think it is hard to see some Hip Hop being respected 50 years on when every other line makes a soon-to-be-outdated pop culture reference. (But then Beethoven and Mozart used Janissary music references – pop culture in their time, yes?)
Don’t get me wrong, there are a lot of great morsels in here, like his reference to the popularity of the fade-out as the “solution” to the lack of denouement in pop songs. I also appreciated his reference of the polarity of modern life: think hard at work so you can come home and turn off your brain via TV or the Spice Girls. Rarely do we budget our meager free time towards leisure activities requring mental effort.
While his overall argument has its foibles, myriad directions are delightfully taken that would otherwise be ignored in a less thorough and less entertaining survey.
Rating: 4 / 5