这篇文章长得很，我就不转贴了。连接在此：
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01721.html
简单地说，就是华生顿邮报请Joshua Bell 匿名在地铁站里拉了四十分钟的古典名著音乐，一大早上班时间搞的试验。一千多人擦身而过，很少人停下来欣赏，只有一个人认出了Bell，他总共收钱三十几块。
[分享]WashPost: Classical Music in Subway Station (小E请入)
I haven't read the article, but based on what I have heard, the person who devised this gimmick should find something better to do with his time. Just because people didn't stop and exclaim"Wow, Joshua Bell!", it says something about the culture of the commuting public? When did recognizing Joshua bell become analogous to culture? 
Hahahaah, carrots and lettuce, good one, Jun. 
Okay, if this helps Washington Post to sell newspaper, it's a good use of their time. I just don't see the point. Good music is like fine wine, it has its place and time. Take it out of its context, it changes its meaning. And has Joshua Bell become a brand name now?
On the other hand, I have to say at least 60% of concert-going audience know nothing of music. They are usually the ones who clap the loudest, as if to convince themselves the $75 ticket is worth it.
Okay, if this helps Washington Post to sell newspaper, it's a good use of their time. I just don't see the point. Good music is like fine wine, it has its place and time. Take it out of its context, it changes its meaning. And has Joshua Bell become a brand name now?
On the other hand, I have to say at least 60% of concert-going audience know nothing of music. They are usually the ones who clap the loudest, as if to convince themselves the $75 ticket is worth it.
Ain't that the truth! But you have to cut some slack for these slobs. I'm sure some of them are dragged into the concert hall by their wives, girlfriends, significant others, parents, social peers, or just a desparate vanity for artistic sophistication.I have to say at least 60% of concert-going audience know nothing of music. They are usually the ones who clap the loudest, as if to convince themselves the $75 ticket is worth it.
Not to mention the few young women/men who go for the good-looking young musicians looking spiffy in tux and a mop of flying hair.
(In the article Weingarten specifically exclaimed, "... and he's straight!!!" So typical American.)
I am not a huge classic music fan and definitely don't have the fine taste to enjoy a good concert to the extend that it deserves. but I can get high from it too. (Emotionally high, people!) Have to say you snobs should cut us some slack. Unlike fine wine is completely wasted on someone who has no educated tongue but only looking for a buzz, music can be shared by many, and therefore not a pity when 60% or even 90% audience are not sophisticated enough by the musician's standards.有事找我请发站内消息
I am serious, people in the audience who are doing standing ovations just want to get their money worth. The last time I went to a Mahler concert, people were clapping fervently at the end for an encore. I was like, hello? Weren't you just there? We just had 70 uninterrupted minutes of melodrama, isn't it enough? Do you really want more of it?
Another time I was at a concert where the Goldberg variations was performed. Again people clapped and clapped for an encore. I was so buffled. What can you follow Goldberg variations with? There were freaking 30 variations, and when they are done, they are done. What, now you want Glinka?
Another time I was at a concert where the Goldberg variations was performed. Again people clapped and clapped for an encore. I was so buffled. What can you follow Goldberg variations with? There were freaking 30 variations, and when they are done, they are done. What, now you want Glinka?
thanks for sharing. i started reading with a large dose of skepticism, out of reactive self-defense and instinctive relativism, but i have to say his writing did strike, if at times overwrought, a genteel enough tone that i was taken by his very simple and basic message. it's a message that i doubt anyone would've objected to; it's the trappings that we would love to find fault with, and understandably so. (the author's good at chats for sure.)
and even though i'm partial to the violin i have not an iota of knowledge or training in classical music; it's just how things turned out. but i'm taken by the audio. it is a powerful sound, and i would've loved listening to it in that setting more than in a concert hall.
(and give me back the two hours i was supposed to spend on a presentation!)[/list]
and even though i'm partial to the violin i have not an iota of knowledge or training in classical music; it's just how things turned out. but i'm taken by the audio. it is a powerful sound, and i would've loved listening to it in that setting more than in a concert hall.
(and give me back the two hours i was supposed to spend on a presentation!)[/list]
Now that happy moment between the time the lie is told and when it is found out.
The article itself is all right, although I was a bit annoyed at all the gushing, blah blah blah. Underneath the snobbery, it's really an amateur's reverence to classical music as "pure" and "high" art. Gene Weingarten was careful not to look too snobby and gushy. Heck he even quoted Kant! But the insecurity of a classical music outsider is still there, quivering with self-consciousness. (Not that there's anything wrong with it.)
Karen is right. Context matters. People talk about "framing" (the time, location, and Bell's clothes) as if it was something to apologize for or ashamed of. I don't think so. Any neurologist or psychologist can tell you the mind processes information quickly through context. We see or hear things largely based on our experience and context. The brain simply cannot take in every stimulus at any given time. So assumptions and pre-wiring are important. People rushing in and out of a Metro station at 8 am on a weekday morning are preconditioned to ignore the street musician. There's nothing wrong with that. We're humans and we think and behave like humans.
So the reaction is clearly not the same if you change the context from "OMG I'm late for work" to "Wow that's a hotly debated article let me check out the video/audio on the web site." And both reactions would be equally honest.
Karen is right. Context matters. People talk about "framing" (the time, location, and Bell's clothes) as if it was something to apologize for or ashamed of. I don't think so. Any neurologist or psychologist can tell you the mind processes information quickly through context. We see or hear things largely based on our experience and context. The brain simply cannot take in every stimulus at any given time. So assumptions and pre-wiring are important. People rushing in and out of a Metro station at 8 am on a weekday morning are preconditioned to ignore the street musician. There's nothing wrong with that. We're humans and we think and behave like humans.
So the reaction is clearly not the same if you change the context from "OMG I'm late for work" to "Wow that's a hotly debated article let me check out the video/audio on the web site." And both reactions would be equally honest.
Hey isn't that the real point of the article? We are too busy to carry out our "duties" even though they may not be truly important to our heart?give me back the two hours i was supposed to spend on a presentation!
That's exactly what I mean. A true classical music insider does not feel "in awe" but really knows it; therefore she feels no need to put it on a pedastal and gush about it, or mystify it. A true insider would sound as matter-of-fact as Karen.
I don't know the first thing about any kind of music. I listen to Nora Jones and that is it. But I seem similar patterns in art and literature and, of course, in wine and French cuisine etc. Anything can be turned into a bottomless well on which snobbery is built.
I don't know the first thing about any kind of music. I listen to Nora Jones and that is it. But I seem similar patterns in art and literature and, of course, in wine and French cuisine etc. Anything can be turned into a bottomless well on which snobbery is built.
for sure. i'm not sure if you're disagreeing or agreeing with me but point taken either way. 
i'll confess to having a degree of snobbery (does "standards" make it sound better?) when it comes to literature and argumentation, though i'm sure my standards reveal more my mediocrity and conformity than anything else.
i'll confess to having a degree of snobbery (does "standards" make it sound better?) when it comes to literature and argumentation, though i'm sure my standards reveal more my mediocrity and conformity than anything else.
Now that happy moment between the time the lie is told and when it is found out.
I think it's less to do with being an "insider", more to do with being secure with one's taste. Quite a number of my friends are really into music, all sorts of stuff, none of them classical. When I told them to come to a Mozart concert given by Brendel, they came and listened. No one made a big deal out of it, and no one was apologetic or defensive for not knowing who he is. Why should they? They are knowlegeable elsewhere. Just like when I can't tell the tenor saxonphones apart in a big band, so what? I still like it.
And Nora Jones' new album is pretty good, I have it playing in the car.
And Nora Jones' new album is pretty good, I have it playing in the car.
I don't know. I think I was just talking about different things. I don't think it's such a tragedy that few people stopped to listen to fabulous classical music in this particular case. Also I feel sorry about Washingtonians' pathetic rat-race life (yes, I include myself).
Again I stand corrected by Karen. It is a lack of insecurity rather than knowledge itself (or the lack of) that's behind snobbery.
I like this, I don't like that, and I have not the faintest idea what those stuff is about -- but I reserve the right to come up with an opinion once I learn something about it. No need to get defensive or high-and-mighty about any of it. If I like or dislike something, at least I promise my opinions are totally honest and personal.
Often I read a critique of a piece of art and think, "WTF is he/she talking about? What you're explaining makes absolutely no sense." I call this academitis.
Again I stand corrected by Karen. It is a lack of insecurity rather than knowledge itself (or the lack of) that's behind snobbery.
I like this, I don't like that, and I have not the faintest idea what those stuff is about -- but I reserve the right to come up with an opinion once I learn something about it. No need to get defensive or high-and-mighty about any of it. If I like or dislike something, at least I promise my opinions are totally honest and personal.
Often I read a critique of a piece of art and think, "WTF is he/she talking about? What you're explaining makes absolutely no sense." I call this academitis.
She's always good.well, people who were clapping and asking for encore might actually want to hear more, if they really liked it. It's not like 70 minutes are not enough, it's just that for people who love the performance/performer, they always want to see/hear more. It's no different than a rock-n-roll concert or a 刘德华 concert, for a fan, it's always better to hear more, be there longer. Doesn't really matter what the encore songs are.karen wrote:I am serious, people in the audience who are doing standing ovations just want to get their money worth. The last time I went to a Mahler concert, people were clapping fervently at the end for an encore. I was like, hello? Weren't you just there? We just had 70 uninterrupted minutes of melodrama, isn't it enough? Do you really want more of it?
Another time I was at a concert where the Goldberg variations was performed. Again people clapped and clapped for an encore. I was so buffled. What can you follow Goldberg variations with? There were freaking 30 variations, and when they are done, they are done. What, now you want Glinka?
I am not sure how much Jun love Norah Jones, for me, if I were able to hear menuhin played live at his best time -- not even his best time just he played live -- I am pretty sure I would like to hear as much as he's willing to play. Or, maybe I should put it this way, if Jun got a chance to talk to Paul Giamatti in person, wouldn't she feel the longer the better?
我自横刀向天笑，笑完我就去睡觉。
如果不是象Patzak大哥或者Cina阿姨那样的耳朵和痴迷程度，就那么一小会儿是挺难听出来个道道的。而且象Tiffany说的，心思全在别处，估计听了也不往心里去。我自己最喜欢的K219和K364，如果一边抓虫虫一边听Grumiaux演奏的版本，获得的享受或者说乐趣实在不大。
所以花上好些钱去音乐厅听还是有道理的，至少没有噪音的干扰，声音的品质不会太失真，听众也能做好欣赏的准备。象我这种怪物当然要找出好几个版本预习打底，理清楚作者的时代和创作背景，读一读相关的乐评，决不浪费我的每一分钱。（真变态啊！）看La Bayadere之前我反复读Cina阿姨她们的评论，尤其是关于铜偶的讨论，几乎到了滚瓜烂熟的地步，不然现场看肯定要错过狂多细节，对不起演员的辛苦努力啊。听众的态度即使不能象演奏者一样认真但是也不要太马虎了，回头吃亏的是自己呢。
对我来说，只有寥寥几个人能让我在半分钟之内辨识出他们的演奏或是演唱，Joshua Bell不在其列，估计永远也不会进入这个列表。
所以花上好些钱去音乐厅听还是有道理的，至少没有噪音的干扰，声音的品质不会太失真，听众也能做好欣赏的准备。象我这种怪物当然要找出好几个版本预习打底，理清楚作者的时代和创作背景，读一读相关的乐评，决不浪费我的每一分钱。（真变态啊！）看La Bayadere之前我反复读Cina阿姨她们的评论，尤其是关于铜偶的讨论，几乎到了滚瓜烂熟的地步，不然现场看肯定要错过狂多细节，对不起演员的辛苦努力啊。听众的态度即使不能象演奏者一样认真但是也不要太马虎了，回头吃亏的是自己呢。
对我来说，只有寥寥几个人能让我在半分钟之内辨识出他们的演奏或是演唱，Joshua Bell不在其列，估计永远也不会进入这个列表。