Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...

Not on the question of greatness.

Parla claims "greatness" exists independent of being well-informed or not.   That is what objective means.

Vic.

First Vic thinks Paul Simon is the equal of Beethoven, now he thinks Justin Biber is the equal of Bach. C'mon victor, stop toying with our emotions.

Are these two working on the principle "if you can't deal with an argument, trivialise it"?

They are certainly well qualified with triviality, after all.

Vic.

Vic, my second paragraph in the post, that answered your original question on "the importance of the question of the greatness", is answering your new one.

I cannot imagine the day that this unique Music offered to us is going to be treated as pop, rock, ballroom dancing music and any other entertaining stuff (the pleasurable means to our measurable end: our Procrustean policy on Art).

Unfortunately (for people like me), this day is approaching. I see it in the concert halls, in the programs, even in the repertory. Easy come, easy go. Let's have a nice social evening, listening to a bit of innocent Mozart, a straightforward concerto and a mainstream Symphony.

While, whenever I visit Louvre, the people flock to admire and pay their respects to the undisputed, incontestable, objective Art of the Winged Victory of Samothrace or Venus de Milo or the Virgin of the Rocks of Da Vinci, the role of the monumental works of Classical Music may end up to be played in any kind of background, entertainment, elevator or department store music.

As for the objective criteria that you always ask and you never get, do I have to repeat that the structure alone is enough to show us the different and various degrees of how great musically a work is? You will repeat that structure is not a criterion, while, on the other hand, you don't know what is and how it works in a substantive work, such as Bruckner's Ninth. The same with orchestration. Ravel's Bolero is a reference work of the triumph of orchestration. If orchestration is not an objective criterion, then, play Bolero on the Piano and see if anyone, any listener, can stand it for more than 2-3 minutes. It would make no sense at all, apart from being utterly boring.

So, Vic, maybe we have to agree that for you and your like-minded pals, even the music value of Classical work is in the "mind of the beholder". However, I hope we may be in agreement that the "beholder" should be in a position to provide a judgement/evaluation on the technical issues of the musical value of the work, so that he/she can articulate a justified opinion (not simply "powerful stuff, nice melody, cool rhythm" etc.).

For people like me and like-minded old and new friends, the technical value of the music work is identifiable and verifiable through the score or the technical repeated listening, studying and research of the work and the composer. Even if you cannot believe or probably comprehend it, a professional and dedicated musician can identify all the criteria of the objective (technical) value of a Music work. The point is whether you trust the people who read, comprehend, recognise all the possible technical aspects of the actual work (see score) or you trust only the logic of your knowledge.

You see for you is still a question whether a small volume of works and a narrow scope are objective criteria. So, what you try to say is that there is no objective way to prove Bach is greater composer to Biber, but, however, subjectively, Bach is greater than Biber, because you cannot dare to claim Bach and Biber are of the same value. However, if we have to "prove", even subjectively, how Bach is greater than Biber, we will have to "accept" some technical references (and references are objective) to rely our subjective judgement. So, we are back in the same process as the objective well-informed, professionals, etc. follow. Most probably, the inevitable same conclusion will be reached.

An easy way out would be the following: if you admit that you simply enjoy the Classical Music works, you won't ever need greatness, as Caballe has suggested. Enjoyment is an end in itself. And a very solid one. For us, it's a different story, but you should not care.

Anyway, the matter has been saturated.

Parla

This situation has always existed. Opera between Monteverdi and Gluck had sunk at times into an entertainment that provided background music to a night out. However the 'pop' music of the time, does anyone remember the pop music of the time, no, of course not, it was meaningless noise.
The spending power of the working classes in europe will soon be at a relatively low point. The riches to be found in Rock, Pop and Football will soon deminish. The importance of Classical Music will emerge out of it's recent dark age in europe. It is reaching new heights in the Far East. Classical music is safe and will last forever. Our concert halls will be used for music when our football stadiums, rock venues and Vic's favourite jazz speak easy are turned into work houses for the unemployed and housing for the homeless. The middle classes will rise from their slumber, cast off the liberals that are holding them back and learn to enjoy themselves agian with music that matters. The future is bright.

You only have to look at Greece and Egypt Vic. Two relatively civilised countries, reasonably stable economically and politically. Now Egypt has banned football and there is talk that if Greece abandons the Euro that it's football season will not start. Rock concerts and large public gatherings by the working classes will also be banned. It's happening now Vic, put down your copy of the Guardian, turn the BBC news off and wake up to reality.
On the other hand the educated in these two countries are still enjoying classical music, and rightly so. The civilised are on the rise Vic, the time for libralism is gone, it has failed us and will drown in the new financial crisis. It's every man for himself now Vic. Grab what you can quickly, hold onto what is dear.
Bonkers, me bonkers. I prefer visionary.

I watched "A Fish Called Wanda" again the other night.  There's a scene in it that reminded me of you:

Otto: Gorillas don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do.  They just don't understand it.

Vic.