On a whim, today, I picked up the latest issue of [1] Wired magazine and a publication I’d never seen before, BBC’s Music. It came with a CD attached, and I love classical music, so I figured I’d give it a shot.

This really looks to be a solid publication, but there was on tagline that really caught my eye: “Can’t Cope with Copland: Why are the chattering classes so afraid of classical music?” (Emphasis mine.) Featuring Richard Morrison on “why we must strive to demystify classical music,” he says, “The galling fact is that serious music plays virtually no part in defining the cultural Zeitgeist of 21st-century Britain”.

Now, the article is fairly cogent, and anyone that really uses `Zeitgeist’ correctly gets an automatic bonus as far as I’m concerned. But I wonder if that question doesn’t answer itself unwittingly by calling people who don’t really appreciate classical music the “chattering classes.” I’m no Brit, granted, but I know condescension when I see it.

I’m not all about being politically correct. But this idea, that the classes of people that enjoy classical music are of a lower class, doesn’t help the “masses” get into it any more. Look, people want music that touches them, connects to them in some fundamental way. While it’s true that most uneducated individuals really don’t care for classical music, that’s because it takes some thinking to really “get” it—and if you don’t get it, you’re not going to connect with it or be touched by it as much as you otherwise would be.

Take something like punk, for instance. (Pop, country, and rap are tainted by more sociological factors than I’d like to consider presently.) Now, I have some friends who really appreciate divine music, and some of them are really into punk music. Not because it’s rebellious—though that frankly may be a part of how they were first exposed to it—but because they have cultivated, over time and much listening, a finely-tuned ear for the skills that separate good punk music from bad punk music.

Most people will tell you that “good punk” is an oxymoron at best. But my friends will contend that that’s because of ignorance.[1] They have spent hours listening to live and studio shows, attending concerts and talking with the bands’ members. You hear enough guitars, drums, distortions, vocalists—and suddenly you know what you’re talking about when you say X is better than Y.

The same goes for classical music. People who don’t know classical are going to think even the greats are boring or even nerve-wracking[2]. If they just spend time with them, they will come to know and love them.

I see the reason that so few appreciate classical to be the same reason as people don’t appreciate punk: they’re both difficult, complex, subtle genres, and a lot of people just really like it that way.

The thing is, people don’t really see classical music as a dynamic, growing force that can really express people’s feelings and thoughts in any core way anymore. Most people don’t realize that Haydn, for instance, was a Baroque-era pop artist in the sense that he was commissioned to write stuff that people wanted to hear (except he was barely making it, but nevermind that for now). People don’t realize how well classical music can communicate to them.

The solution is to get the word out. Why is a certain genre of music good? Why are the songs that category contains so well-done or ill-done? But at base: what about that piece speaks to your soul? Until classical music lovers lose the snobbery about “chattering classes” and whatnot, we’re not going to be able to share these wonderful songs with anyone else.

[1] Those that say that “all music [by that artist || in that genre] sounds the same” are complaining out of ignorance most of the time. No, all ska does not sound the same; no, all classical does not sound the same; no, not even all rap sounds the same. But if you haven’t developed a sophisticated appreciation for the nuances of the genre, you’re not going to be able to differentiate as well as one who is well-versed. Classical music happens to have a great deal of variety, myriad sub-genres, that are worth exploring.

[2] They may be right for a number of reasons, but consider: the man in the cave will cringe at the light when first exposed and may flee it before he realizes what illumination it brings when he adjusts. (Thanks, Plato!)

On a whim, today, I picked up the latest issue of [2] Wired magazine and a publication I’d never seen before, BBC’s Music. It came with a CD attached, and I love classical music, so I figured I’d give it a shot.

This really looks to be a solid publication, but there was on tagline that really caught my eye: “Can’t Cope with Copland: Why are the chattering classes so afraid of classical music?” (Emphasis mine.) Featuring Richard Morrison on “why we must strive to demystify classical music,” he says, “The galling fact is that serious music plays virtually no part in defining the cultural Zeitgeist of 21st-century Britain”.

Now, the article is fairly cogent, and anyone that really uses `Zeitgeist’ correctly gets an automatic bonus as far as I’m concerned. But I wonder if that question doesn’t answer itself unwittingly by calling people who don’t really appreciate classical music the “chattering classes.” I’m no Brit, granted, but I know condescension when I see it.

I’m not all about being politically correct. But this idea, that the classes of people that enjoy classical music are of a lower class, doesn’t help the “masses” get into it any more. Look, people want music that touches them, connects to them in some fundamental way. While it’s true that most uneducated individuals really don’t care for classical music, that’s because it takes some thinking to really “get” it—and if you don’t get it, you’re not going to connect with it or be touched by it as much as you otherwise would be.

Take something like punk, for instance. (Pop, country, and rap are tainted by more sociological factors than I’d like to consider presently.) Now, I have some friends who really appreciate divine music, and some of them are really into punk music. Not because it’s rebellious—though that frankly may be a part of how they were first exposed to it—but because they have cultivated, over time and much listening, a finely-tuned ear for the skills that separate good punk music from bad punk music.

Most people will tell you that “good punk” is an oxymoron at best. But my friends will contend that that’s because of ignorance.[1] They have spent hours listening to live and studio shows, attending concerts and talking with the bands’ members. You hear enough guitars, drums, distortions, vocalists—and suddenly you know what you’re talking about when you say X is better than Y.

The same goes for classical music. People who don’t know classical are going to think even the greats are boring or even nerve-wracking[2]. If they just spend time with them, they will come to know and love them.

I see the reason that so few appreciate classical to be the same reason as people don’t appreciate punk: they’re both difficult, complex, subtle genres, and a lot of people just really like it that way.

The thing is, people don’t really see classical music as a dynamic, growing force that can really express people’s feelings and thoughts in any core way anymore. Most people don’t realize that Haydn, for instance, was a Baroque-era pop artist in the sense that he was commissioned to write stuff that people wanted to hear (except he was barely making it, but nevermind that for now). People don’t realize how well classical music can communicate to them.

The solution is to get the word out. Why is a certain genre of music good? Why are the songs that category contains so well-done or ill-done? But at base: what about that piece speaks to your soul? Until classical music lovers lose the snobbery about “chattering classes” and whatnot, we’re not going to be able to share these wonderful songs with anyone else.

[1] Those that say that “all music [by that artist || in that genre] sounds the same” are complaining out of ignorance most of the time. No, all ska does not sound the same; no, all classical does not sound the same; no, not even all rap sounds the same. But if you haven’t developed a sophisticated appreciation for the nuances of the genre, you’re not going to be able to differentiate as well as one who is well-versed. Classical music happens to have a great deal of variety, myriad sub-genres, that are worth exploring.

[2] They may be right for a number of reasons, but consider: the man in the cave will cringe at the light when first exposed and may flee it before he realizes what illumination it brings when he adjusts. (Thanks, Plato!)