Hi Thump, Weeeeeellll... if many of these tunes were "insignificant throwaways," then how did they achieve such popularity? And more significantly, how did they stand the test of time? They must have meant something to *somebody* for *some* reason. Even though Rodgers and Hart might have considered "Valentine" insignificant, I seriously doubt they considered it "bad." Otherwise they wouldn't have released it to the world with their names on it. Granted, none of the pieces you mentioned are "high-brow" pieces, and like you, I don't care much for some of them, but does that make them musically bad? Let's not forget that even Mozart wrote music for the common (wo)man (on the side, as it were), in the same sense that Shakespeare wrote for common audiences. Their low brow works are not considered "bad" or even trite. In all of this mix, let's also not forget that music is more than just music. Music often reminds us of things that were significant in our lives -- perhaps a special evening with a special someone -- perhaps someone who went off to war and died in battle. It also gives us a sense of history. For me, part of the appeal of early 20th Century music (and cinematography) is the opportunity to step through a time portal and experience a culture foreign to my own. I'm inexplicably mesmerized by pieces like "Mississippi Mud" (in all its racist glory) and "I'll See You In My Dreams," which can only be fully appreciated by pulling out a genuine 78 and spinning it on a genuine Victrola. I'm doubly mesmerized by movies such as "The Grapes of Wrath" and "To Kill a Mockingbird," which can only properly be viewed in black and white. Music and art document and preserve our history in ways that words simply cannot. This all boils down to the question of what makes music good. Different people have different opinions, of course, but I like to think that music is good when people find it meaningful, or when it paves the way to further growth and diversification of the art form that people find meaningful. In this broad sense, I must grugdingly concede that "rap" must somehow be good too -- in some sense that I truly do not comprehend. In my opinion, all art must, somehow, be good, if only to the artist, or else it wouldn't "be." I'm not about to tell anyone that the art he or she loves is in any way unworthy -- even though I admit to having to bite my lip to keep from suggesting to kids that music perhaps *should* have elements such as notes, melodies, etc. ;-) Others will of course disagree with my entire assessment of music and art, insisting that it must exhibit certain elements in order to be good. They might be right, but on the other hand, I don't think we would have the rich diversity of art we enjoy today if we had heeded their conservative voices throughout history. But of course the issue is the crowd-pleasing favorites that you are asked to play ad nauseum. I suggest that familiarity breeds contempt, even though the music may not be inherently "bad." I remember my mom telling me of having attended a concert conducted by Igor Stravinsky. At the end of the concert, the crowd roared, "Firebird! Firebird! Firebird! Firebird!..." Having completed what he thought was an excellent performance of other works, he just stood there, motionless, in disbelief. After a very long pause, he drew a long, deep breath and said, "OK, OK.... Firebird," and indulged them with an encore. Apparently the "Firebird Suite" had become one of his most hated works. Me? I enjoy Firebird, but I don't have to hear it as much as Stravinsky did. ;-) Peace, Sarah ----- Original Message ----- From: "gordon stelter" <lclgcnp@yahoo.com> To: "Kevin E. Ramsey" <kevin.e.ramsey@cox.net>; "Pianotech" <pianotech@ptg.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 1:46 PM Subject: "The Monstrous Medley of Maudlin Melodies" OT > Dear Sarah, > Sorry if I stepped on your toes! "I'm a > sentimemtal sap, that's all...", and I love > "tearjerkers" as much ( or more ) than anyone! > "A portrait of Jennie" and "7th Heaven" ( Jimmy > Stewart, Simone Simone version ) being my two top > "12 hankie" films. BUT I DO draw the line at > "My Funny Valentine", which > Rodgers and Hart considered an insignificant > "throwaway", and which sounds, for all the world, like > a funeral dirge! > ( Gimme "Sweet Lorraine" anyday! ) > But Rodgers is my #1 all time favorite American > composer. > Thump > > > --- "Kevin E. Ramsey" <kevin.e.ramsey@cox.net> wrote: > > Hey, if we didn't have true romantics, we'd be out > > of business in short order anyway. > > > > I just don't want to hear them go into a long medley > > of these tunes, that's all... Yeah, but if they > > insist, I'll listen. Oh well! > > > > Kevin. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Sarah Fox > > To: Pianotech > > Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 8:04 PM > > Subject: Re: NYNY...OT Haha! "The Monstrous Medley > > of Maudlin Melodies" > > > > > > Dunno, Thump... > > > > > and, finally, "My Funny Valentine" > > > > I think the folks who love this piece probably > > also love Moonlight Serenade > > and 'Round Midnight -- and Casa Blanca, African > > Queen, and probably most of > > Frank Capra's movies. They're gushingly > > sentimental sorts of folks, and > > they enjoy romance. IMO, they're not trying to be > > "sophistikated." They're > > quite sincere, knowing that their tastes are kinda > > corny. > > > > Of course I can appreciate how pianists must groan > > at having to play these > > classics hundreds of times for sentimental > > audience members. > > > > Peace, > > Sarah > > ... who is thusly afflicted > > > > _______________________________________________ > > pianotech list info: > https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway > http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ > _______________________________________________ > pianotech list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC