Re: Re: Re: Baseball-A Music Related Commentary


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Richard on August 31, 2002 at 16:34:25:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Baseball-A Music Related Commentary posted by Jay Bertolet on August 31, 2002 at 13:47:26:

Unfortunately the FPO website doesn't have the 2002-03 programs up yet, so we can't really see concrete examples of your programming tastes at this time. I would just say, I don't think it dumbs down anything to maintain a stream of familiarity throughout a season to keep your listeners in their seats. At the same time, it's a delicate art to throw in some new stuff from time to time - delicate in terms of where to put it, and in terms of what works or composers are chosen. If it's really new, and only the conductor or the composer are familiar with it and there's no recording, it's hard for others to pass judgement on it's merits before the fact. But at some time or another, subscribers need to be confronted by the unexpected and the unfamiliar or the art form dies. Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Francisco Symphony appear to be doing well in this regard.

On a related note, whenever Dvorak 8th is suggested, someone should stand up and shout, no let's do the 6th. When Tchaik 5 is suggested, it should be NO NOT AGAIN, how about Tchaik 1, 2, or 3? And how about the symphonies and orchetral works of Vaughan Williams. Most people admire them, but they're rarely played, when they are, as #4 was by the Dallas Sym last season, they bring the house down. And Elgar actually wrote a number of pieces other than Enigma Variations. There are symphonies by Carl Nielsen. There are works by Copland other than Appalachian Spring and Fanfare for the Common Man. Works by Bernstein other than Candide Overture and Symphonic Dances from West Side Story. The point is there is a ton of accessible repertoire that many listeners have never heard that could drawn upon to liven up and freshen programs, without the polarity of warhorses vs. bs avant garde.


Follow Ups: