25. March 2008 · 2 comments · Categories: Links

Must music have a point? And what does it mean to have a point, anyway? I’m really just not sure … I’m not trying to be annoying (even though I am usually annoying).

Vaughan Williams’ composition [The Lark Ascending] is Classic FM listeners’ favourite piece of classical music. Like the station, it’s blameless but pointless

Read here.

Thoughts?

Here’s another article on the people’s choice. (McCartney? Really? Guess I’ll have to listen to that piece sometime; I hadn’t heard much good about it, but I shouldn’t judge it without hearing it … um … or should I?)

Update
It appears that Maestro Beecham didn’t care much for Vaughan Williams. Read about it here.

2 Comments

  1. The point of music is music, sheesh. It evokes emotions or feelings – not necessarily strong ones or even “good” ones. It can be as mild as making one “feel good” or strong enough to make one cry or wince or even feel uncomfortable.

    That, to me, is the beauty part of obtaining any level of mastery over any sort of musical performance activity – you get past the mechanics to where you can actually perform things musically. The higher the level of mastery, the greater the opportunity to make music, and the greater the ability to truly play as part of an ensemble.

    Here I’m speaking strictly about “classical” music, pretty much – don’t know if it’s different for pop/rock/hip-hop etc.

    Them’re my opinions, anyhow.

  2. To me, even beauty is a “point” … even though there were a number of years where “beauty” was treated with disdain. (I suppose it still is by some.) But yes, Tim, I’m with you on being moved by music … and sometimes discomfort is exactly what one should feel (think Threnody for the Victims of Hiroshima).

    I think the writer was actually just trying to “diss” the general public for choosing Vaughan Williams “Lark” … possibly because it’s pretty. Who knows? (And, I suppose, who cares?) :-)