Who Will Stand the Test of Time?


This morning I was listening to a wonderful record - Quartetto Italiano plays Early Italian Music - Cambini, Galuppi and Boccherini, all from the mid 1700s or so. Do you think there are any 20th century artists people will be listening to in the year 2300? For purposes of this thread, let's be optomistic and presume that society is not going to devolve into "Escape from New York", which it definitely will. But let's put that aside for now. BTW - If you like string quartets, Quartetto Italiano is really good.
chayro
Assuming that some semblance of civilized society still exists in 300 years, it is inconceivable to me that the music of 20th century classical composers such as Prokofiev, Stravinsky, and many of the others who have been mentioned will not have withstood the test time over that period.

But does that mean that those composers will be broadly known and have wide appeal at that time? Not at all. Is the music of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, etc. broadly known and possessed of wide appeal today? Sadly, my perception is that it is not. Remarkably, not even among a majority of high-end audiophiles, as I perceive it.

For evidence of that, look no further than this very forum. While we certainly have many members who are extremely knowledgeable about and/or interested in classical music, such as pretty much everyone participating in the current 140+ post Beethoven Symphony thread, my perception has been that the musical tastes of a majority of our members extend little further than rock music. (Yes, I know, there are lots of jazz enthusiasts too). And I would expect that the fraction of the general population having an interest in classical music is far smaller than it is here.

In saying that, I hasten to add that I am not casting any aspersions on that kind of music. I happen to like a lot of rock music myself, and it comprises a significant fraction of my collection, although most of my collection and most of my listening is classical. But I would have to say, consistent with Brownsfan's well put comment, that I would expect very little of it to have staying power over the centuries.

Consider, for instance, the substantial number of recordings that were released during the early part of the rock & roll era that were re-do's of "old standards" from earlier in the century. They were typically done so differently than the earlier versions as to make any claim of the staying power of those tunes (as well as the artists who originally performed them) pretty much meaningless. And that was all essentially within a time frame of one generation, not centuries.

Regards,
-- Al
Jmcgrogan2,
I have one of those but it has a bagpiper in kilt on the end. :^)
Lloydelee21, Thomas Ades is a young Brithish composer writing some of the most interesting and adventurous orchestral music today; IMO, one of the leading living composers along side the already mentioned John Adams, Part and others already mentioned by Brownsfan. Try "Asyla" with Simon Rattle conducting the City of Birmingham Symphony on EMI; very imaginative music.

Johnny Mandel was (passed very recently) an American jazz composer/arranger with a very distinctive style. He wrote many songs represented as part of the Great American Songbook. Try Shirley Horne's "Here's To Life", songs/ arrangements by Johnny Mandel. One of my very favorite vocal recordings; an absolutely gorgeous recording.
I think great music never dies,just changes in the form of new arrangements.
I am optimistic about the future of classical music, and music in general. There will always be a segment of the population that seeks out quality music, and will support it enough to sustain it, and that of future composers. For a fascinating read on this subject and related subjects, and to put this in a historical perspective, read this great article:

http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_3_urb-classical-music.html

Now, as far as "popular" music is concerned. Look at it this way: just how much lower in quality can it get? We now have a very popular form of "music" that is devoid of one of the previously essential ingredients of music: melody. We can argue about what exactly constitutes a good melody, but I think we can at least agree that it doesn't have to be traditional melody. BTW, if you like string quartets, and on the subjects of 20th century music that will stand the test of time and non-traditional melody, try the Bartok string quartets. Challenging music for sure, but brilliant and sure to stand the test of time.

I believe (hope?) that the time will come when the masses will be so starved for the kind of stimulation that only quality art can provide that many will return to the appreciation of quality music. I think that some of the points raised in the linked article point to this very real possibility. I also think that we should be careful about indulging in too much negativity and fatalism around this subject. If we truly care about the future of quality music, should we not take an even more active role in it's promotion and survival? At least by staying as open minded as possible when it comes to supporting music that may be challenging, and less safe and familiar, to our musical palettes. By not doing so we run the risk of letting our "preferences" become a kind of elitism that will do nothing to promote the creation of new quality music.

BTW, the Emerson Quartet's recording (DG) of the Bartok quartets is wonderful.