The week in media shows us how new music is both more and less popular in ways we never even imagined.
Does new music always have to be so, um, new? A little inventive non-innovation goes a long way too.
One of the things I’m looking forward to most about getting older
(actually, one of the only things I’m looking forward to) is the right
to be as intellectually and creatively lazy as possible.
While initially my wife and I were extremely excited about an iPod (after all, our society instills in us the desire for the latest technological innovation), the charm wore off as soon as we talked about what music we would put on it.
There’s nothing more revealing than borrowing colleagues’ MP3 players; it can be a revelatory window into their psyches, not only for what they listen to, but how they listen and organize.
Is “classical music is not dying” the new “classical music is dying”?
History is a strong force, but when we’re able to suspend its effects, even temporarily, some amazing things can happen. Is it really worth it to grapple with the burdens of the past?
It may be the Information Age, but maybe we need those magic ruby slippers to see that the real creative wealth may be in our own backyards.
Sometimes extraneous noise, while hindering the ability to listen with undivided attention to the actual performance, is part of what makes concerts in alternative spaces exciting, socially-engaging events.
Why do so few composers go to the players who premiered their pieces to get their honest feedback about what worked and what didn’t in the music?