10-02-2016, 03:25 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
|
They/Them
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,914
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
?
It's a historical fact that classical music was not the music of the common man
it was funded by the wealthy for the wealthy, you would have heard it in the church that the affluent city folk attended but you would not hear it in a rural church of workers
the primary reason for this is it requires a lot of leisure time to learn and appreciate
|
The historical accuracy of your comment is not what is nonsensical — even though not all classical composers designed their music around the tastes of the wealthy.
It's nonsensical because its basis lies in the societal structures of then paralleling those of now, which is just incorrect.
The part in bold is incorrect as well. One does not need to learn/appreciate classical music in order to enjoy it. While it might be the case for some, this notion can be applied to any music.
For example, there was a time where I despised the music of The Beach Boys, but I eventually learned to appreciate and enjoy their music. The same can be said about The Fall (yes, I see your avatar). It took a while, but something eventually "clicked" after listening to (ironically enough) "The Classical." Now, they're one of my favorite post-punk bands, and Mark E. Smith stands as one of my favorite lyricists of all time.
Yet, I instantly loved The Goldberg Variations upon first listen. I didn't have to "get it" enable to enjoy it. I just enjoyed it for what it was.
|
|
|
Threaded Mode