´We are all love lists¨
Wed, Jun 8 2011, 7:27PM
So reads the first words of Gramophone´s new feature on their website´s homepage. Elementary level foreign student of English grammar aside, and not wishing to sound too self-obssessed, who exactly is this we?, because it most certainly doesn´t include me. I have despised lists and league tables all my life, with their insidious undertones of superiority and inferiority, and their plain stupidity in areas of cultural endeavour. I imagine children who have been held up to public ridicule for finishing bottom of the exam result list, or anyone who has had their sense of self worth and importance as a human being measured by their position on some list might agree, or maybe I am wrong.
The feature continues ¨In the vast world of opera, it is almost impoossible to come up with a credible top ten list´. I couldn´t agree more, with the caveat that I would omit ´almost´ from the previous sentence, so why indulge in such credibility defying nonsense?
So I am curious to know if I am a lone cantankerous voice here, what do other contributors think of lists?
Here´s a few more lists you can add if you get stuck:
1. Top Ten ways to improve the coffers of Amazon.
2. Top ten ways to make Gramophone into a pedestrian publication and rid it of its uniqueness to many customers.
3. Top Ten ways to talk about the same recordings all the time to the detriment of the vast majority of the available catalogue.of lesser known works and recordings.
Thu, Jun 9 2011, 6:15AM
#2
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
I don’t get why people are so list-crazy nowadays. I think a list is sort of an easy way out; a shortcut for consumers to find the “Greatest Of All Time” without having to do any research. But a person cannot learn anything from lists alone. True understanding of music comes through careful listening and reading from musicologists, composers and musicians. For me, lists are simply a means to an end. I quickly look over a list to see any composers or compositions I may have overlooked and that’s about it.
Well, I guess lists aren’t so bad if they have some credibility to offer, but it’s too often that they’re unreliable. I used to search “The Greatest Compositions of All Time” on Google in hopes of finding some incredible overlooked music. But the lists I come across seem rushed, as if they slapped them together for fun without any serious commitment towards accurately ranking the works. When I see Shostakovich’s 7th symphony ranked higher than his 8th, 10th and 15th symphonies, I can’t help but think this person has no fully examined Shostakovich’s music enough. His 7th symphony, along with his 1st and 5th symphonies, are his most popular works, but I doubt they were his best. I get the feeling these lists are written by authors who are lazy or by people who have scant knowledge of classical music: they steel from the canon of popular opinion, listing the most popular works and as opposed to actually researching the history of music and seeing for themselves what truly was the best. Not only are these lists often inaccurate, but they’re also quite narrow in scope. How often do you see modern music appearing on these lists? There is a colossal amount of great works just from the second half of the twentieth century alone: the works of Luigi Nono, Stockhausen, Boulez, and Carter are revolutionary but they never appear on any lists. Why? Sometimes I wonder if popular music magazines / websites are serious about representing all of the greatest music throughout history or are they just catering to the tastes of its consumers.
But even with an accurate all-encompassing list of the greatest works of music, I still think a person’s understanding of music’s history, as vast and complex as it is, can only come through painstaking research. Not lists.
Thu, Jun 9 2011, 12:33PM
#3
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
Plus lists always encourage pedantry from those people who think they are more knowledgeable than the general population.
Which reminds me...someoneone appears to beleive that Vivaldi's Four Seasons was used in the soundtrack for Kramer versus Kramer. No it wasn't - it was the double mandolin concerto in C.
See what I mean about pedantry?
thttp://gramophone.co.uk/editorial/top-ten-classical-works-used-in-the-movies
Thu, Jun 9 2011, 7:28PM
#4
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
Surely the only purpose of lists is to get people all wound up and hopefully inspire debate. Problem is, we're listed-out these days. I expect many of us looked through the recent Gramophone 'top conductors' list, felt our blood pressure begin to rise then shrugged our shoulders and said 'whatever........'.
Thu, Jun 9 2011, 9:15PM
#5
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
My rule of thumb about lists tends, if I may be tongue-in-cheek in listing it, to be:
1) While of course critical standards are vitally important, once you get beyond a certain level of achievement it's a rather redundant exercise to say that x is superior to y - a statement likely to say much more about the person doing the judgement than about the people/works being judged;
2) This applies to composers - 'who's better, Mozart or Schubert?';
3) And it applies to the art of interpretation: great music is always greater than it can be played, sustaining all sorts of approaches, and there's therefore no definitive reading of, say, Brahms's 2nd Symphony; conductors may be wrong-headed, but unless they're incompetent, they're likely to have some insights which should be considered;
4) In any case, favourites are for people who don't really like things: anyone who can unequivocally name their three favourite symphonies probably doesn't know that many symphonies.
Thu, Jun 9 2011, 9:05PM
#6
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
I hear ye Tagalie, if the purpose of lists was to inspire some kind of rational, worthy debate; I´d be all for them, but in my experience all they do is cause you to say to yourself ´you must be having a laugh!´, send you into a rage and then make you realise there is no point in even saying anything, because it is all utterly pointless. There are no lists without agendas, and on a serious point which frostwalrus alluded to, the near impossibility of opening any music publication these days without being assailed by some idiotic list or other smacks of extreme laziness and simplification on the part of editors filling pages with lists rather than articles, in a desperate bid to be first in the only list that matters, profit margins, by succumbing to the lowest common denominator. Every business exists to make profit, but that doesn´t mean you have to be like all the others, there´s more than one way to skin a cat as it were, and if you play follow the leader rather than doing your own thing, you´ll probably go down all together.
I´ve just read John´s post ´favourites are for people who don´t really like things´. There speaks a true poet. If you like something you will be too busy enjoying it to have time to blab to others about how it is no.4 in your all time top ten.
Fri, Jun 10 2011, 7:58AM
#7
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
1. Coat hanger
2. Vertigo
3. It Ain't Half Hot Mum
4. Strepsils
5. Nigeria
6. 2
7. Socks
8. Hangover Square
9. Extension plug
10. Liszt
Fri, Jun 10 2011, 2:47PM
#8
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
Marvellous, that list makes as much sense, and is far more entertaining, than any of Gramophone´s Top Tens.
Fri, Jun 10 2011, 3:25PM
#9
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
Dubrob - in the light of this and other recent debates on subjectiveness v. objectiveness and favourite symphonists etc...I have had a brainwave.
Suppose we get you, Tagalie, Frostwalrus, Chriswaldren, Dave F and myself and all the other people who regularly contibute to the forum to form a body called OFCOMP. The purpose of this body is to regulate the work of composers. I am sure we will be able to get funding from somewhere!
We will use a simple tick-sheet set of objective criteria to judge a new symphony or orchestral work. Does the symphony have the following:
- a clear three or four part structure
- an introduction,exposition, development, recapitulation and coda in the first movement
- an expressive slow movement
- an inventive scherzo
- a suitable finale
- is there opportunity for solo display
- does the piece include a variety of sounds/colours/moods
- does the piece make a valid contribution to symphonic literature
Ah yes Mr. Ambrose Obscure, your symphony has passed the test and has been graded 'good, with elements of outstanding'. You will be listed in the index to 'The 21st Century symphony'. In fact, you may even become a footnote. Overall Mr. Obscure you represent good value for taxpayers' money!
Then of course we rank composers and draw up league tables - premiership, championship, developing composers, hopefuls and also-rans.
We would of course be able to influence bodies such as BBC as we would have suitable authority. We could 'dictate' or 'suggest' in pc speak, the content of concerts and lists in various publications. We could become an undisputed authority!
Partsong
Fri, Jun 10 2011, 3:37PM
#10
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
1. Coat hanger
2. Vertigo
3. It Ain't Half Hot Mum
4. Strepsils
5. Nigeria
6. 2
7. Socks
8. Hangover Square
9. Extension plug
10. Liszt
Is that your shopping liszt?
I could list the number of times I've participated in arguments about lists but I don't see the point because:
1. Lists tend to be subjective rather than objective;
2. It's difficult to be objective in a forum where some think Solti was great;
3. It only leads to bitter arguments;
4. It is rare for me to think of a list of at least ten items or points.
I'll leave it at that because I'm feeling listless!
Fri, Jun 10 2011, 5:07PM
#11
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
Hi all,
We've introduced lists as a fun way of having another kind of conversation about classical music. We've had fun putting them together and we hope that readers will have fun reading them. They don't take the place of or preclude other types of article - other recent features on this website have included an appreciation of the neglected organist Edwin Lemare and a piece about the composer Jacob Obrecht, for instance. So, plenty to enjoy, we hope, for everyone.
All the best,
James
Fri, Jun 17 2011, 7:18PM
#12
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
I´ve just read a post from a contributor to Martin Cullingford´s latest blog, where he says that after 38 years of unbroken purchase of Gramophone, he stopped his subscription because of this recent infatuation with lists. It´s uncanny how similar this post is to my own situation. For this reason I think you at Gramophone are taking liberties when you state that ´we all love lists´, as it is adamantly not the case.
Fri, Jun 17 2011, 7:54PM
#13
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
For this reason I think you at Gramophone are taking liberties when you state that ´we all love lists´, as it is adamantly not the case.
I've got a little list - I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed - who never would be missed!
Sounds, dub, like you and W.S. Gilbert are of like mind, about lists I mean, not society offenders. Or both.
Fri, Jun 17 2011, 10:46PM
#14
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
The Editor states that the lists have been introduced as a fun way to have another kind of conversation about classical music. What does another kind of conversation about classical music mean exactly?, and why does everything have to be fun? What about people young or old who would like to learn more about classical music and would like to do so in a serious manner? Should they go to another place for that kind of conversation about classical music?, because from list after list they are going to learn nothing, nor receive any help or advice. Lists are what they see when they stand in the aisles of Tower Records, or flick through the pages of Amazon as I imagine is more to Gramophone´s liking.
The whole thing for me about lists is that they are anti conversation, and don´t telll you anything. If you look at the contributions posted on the Lists feature, there is nothing except more lists. It reads like the pages of a record catalogue, and is just as dull. There is no debate, just people saying I agree or I disagree, without any kind of interesting additions, great fun, indeed.
Lists make conversation impossibe because they basically work like this :
1. I state my subjective totally random opinion.
2. You agree wholeheartedly, conversation over or,
3. You disagree, conversation over, or which is more usual
4. You disagree more vehemently, tell me my opinion is rubbish, that I am talking through my hat, you are not going to waste any more of your time listening to my codswallop, stand up, storm off and slam the door, conversation over, never to be resumed again.
I´m sorry there are only four points in my list, but I hope it was fun.
Lists are all part of this modern phenomenon of Sky News type soundbites without any content, because you think the people you are talking to don´t have the attention span or the brains to read anything longer than a paragraph, or lasts more than 30 se and is conds.
Anybody who is prepared to shell out for and is going to listen to an opera for example, is prepared to spend hours listening to it, reading the libretto, listening to it again, in order to understand and absorb it. Soundbites are useless and insulting to these people. They deserve better. I would imagine that people turn (or maybe they won´t if this keeps up)to Gramophone for something with a bit more substance and seriousness. Presenting a list of works without any detailed considered explanation as to why they are rated so, or higher than other works in the repertoire is utterly useless to anyone trying to get a grip on classical music, and I would contend more frustrating than it is fun.
More seriously to me is that this list culture is to the long term detriment of classical music as a whole. If this is the kind of way you are going to present classical music, we are going to end up with a situation where the only CD that gets bought will be, the 50 Greatest pieces of classical music, people will stop going to concerts because they only want to hear three minute bits, schools won´t see any point in teaching it, nor parents any sense in encouraging it anymore.
You may argue that you have other more detailed features, or the Collection section of the magazine for example, with which I won´t disagree, so why not just provide more of the same.
Sat, Jun 18 2011, 12:24AM
#15
RE: ´We are all love lists¨
Strange that those who are so offended, if that is the right term, by lists have such a lot to say about them.
In actual fact it was hearing "soundbites" from operas that first aroused my interest. The "soundbites," of course, were the arias, choruses, etc.
I could list those excerpts that interested me the most as a teenager but I know how low an opinion you have of lists.
Incidentally, you are not the same person who finds Nielsen boring?
How about top ten curmudgeons?
Now who could possibly top that? Hmmm!