I normally save the non-political posts for the weekend, but this can't wait.
On October 3, Gustavo Dudamel -- a young Venezuelan genius -- conducted the Ninth Symphony of Beethoven at the Hollywood Bowl. Now, the Bowl was never the classiest of venues. (Decades ago, I had a summer job there. Any place that would hire me must have a high tolerance for riff-raff.) But in the old days, things weren't this bad.
The audience applauded wildly every chance it got. At every movement break. In the middle of the fourth movement. And we're not just talking about applause: They shouted WOOOOO WOOOO, as if attending a taping of the old Arsenio Hall show -- in mid-movement!
If you're new to the world of real music, let me clue you in: This ain't rock. This ain't hip-hop. This ain't interactive.The concert is not about you. You don't express yourself; the composer expresses himself.
These days, most people think that all of life is an endless episode of The Me Show. That's why those cretins kept applauding: They felt compelled to insert themselves into the proceedings.
Speaking as a connoisseur of the higher pleasures, I say fuck that. If you want to appreciate great art -- of any kind -- you must learn to follow one simple rule: Do not exist.
Be passive. Turn off your mind. Just soak it in. Do not exist.
Most Americans cannot follow that rule -- due, perhaps, to their daily intake of caffeine, sugar, cocaine or meth. Or maybe they are simply too damn insecure to go two consecutive hours without shouting "Me! Me! It's all about ME!" Such people should not attend classical music concerts. Neither should they visit museums or libraries.
The proper time to applaud is at the very end of the piece, after the last note has fully died away. (Granted, this can be a little hard to determine, especially with a work such as the Mahler Fourth.) And even then, if you really want to show your appreciation, hold off on applause for a long, breathless moment, as if entranced. That period of awed silence is the greatest compliment a musician can have.
If you must vocalize, go with "Bravo!" instead of "WOOOOOO!!!" And if you must act like a rube, don't show up.
14 comments:
Happily, quite a few well-known classical performers -- and all but the last 100 or 150 years of concert-going experience -- disagree. The discouragement of applause (up to and including "woo! woo!") is a relatively recent anomaly intended primarily to underscore the differences between those of a class capable of appreciating high art and the unwashed masses. In classical music, as in the rest of life, the appropriate time to applaud is when something merits applause, not when a self-anointed cultural elite says it's OK to applaud...
I would generally agree with you re: the applause. However, this guy is going to breathe new life into classical music in this country. And the entire Venezuelan Sistema project is extremely important. As someone who makes their living partly in the classical music realm, it's a very good thing to bring new people into the fold. The number of symphonies has been declining with every decade.
Didn't Stravinsky's music once cause a riot amongst the audience?
And---ok, I know this isn't an example of "high brow" but it's an example of crowd inspiration---one of my most memorable movie experiences was seeing Dr. Seuss' only live action film, The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T, at a restored vintage theater. After the orchestral piece in the middle of the movie, the entire *movie* audience got up and gave a standing ovation.
In general, I agree with you, Joseph...I detest audience members who ruin a listening experience. But, for me, anyway, that means self-centered twits who whip out their fucking glowing cell phones every five minutes to compulsively text someone...not people who are wrapped up in the performance.
You know, this is quite interesting. In my younger days I collected Pink Floyd bootlegs. The ones recorded in Britain or Europe, the applause always came a couple seconds after the last note (or sound effect) died away. The entire performance of each song was completely free of audience noise. However, the recordings from the USA almost invariably featured loud, raucous crowds throughout pretty much every second of the performance (though not on the really early recordings...anything before 1973 or so, when they became superstars).
But really, as a musician myself, I appreciate applause (or even Woo Woo!) whenever it happens. For listening, I admit, I usually prefer it if applause is reserved for the end of a piece.
Years ago, my husband was fried to a crisp after a project. A woman friend, who was an opera singer, invited us over for a dinner party where she arranged to have two gifted and popular sopranos perform for him. The basic idea was that they would sing, within reason, whatever arias he requested and he would understand that some of them wouldn't have been rehearsed. So, the time came and she sat him in a comfy chair in the middle of the room. The two singers stood before him and began their spell. These were world class singers who had just returned from a tour of Europe. Not 25 feet away from these magnificent women, the other guests chattered on as they sang. They couldn't even be bothered to take it outside.
Mostly, I think this is the impact of the VCR. People have gotten used to chatting during performances and are carrying it into venues where it is inappropriate.
If they were singing just for him, as you implied, why did it matter that other people were talking?
traditionally people would hire musicians to play at their social gatherings, and nobody was required to sit there in rapt attention. It was considered background music, something pleasant to have on, not something that you had to sit and stare at.
And also: what Mazoola said. I've attended operas in Europe and it's wonderful to see how emotionally wrapped up people get in the performances--yes, even the great unwashed in the (government-subsidized) cheap seats.
Now, people talking or texting during movies -- that's unbearable.
From the wonderful link Mazoola posted (THANKS MAZOOLA), I especially liked this comment:
"When people clap between movements at our concerts, I always celebrate it becuase it’s clear they are newcomers. The last thing we want to do is scare newcomers off by chastising them when they try to show their enthusiasm. A year or so ago, when we performed Scheherazade (R-K not Ravel!) our concertmistress finished one of the big violin solos and someone from the audience started yelling and whooping like it was a rock concert or like someone had taken a jazz ride. It was actually fun. I think what we most need is to encourage more excitement and engagement at our concerts"
Mr. Cannon - you are absolutely correct. And exactly for the reasons you have already mentioned. Classical music is not about "you".
Throughout my 19 year career as a symphony musician the Classics audience (as opposed to "pops") applauded only after the end of the last movement. Of course there were a few exceptions, such as the trick ending in Sibelius' Symphony No. 5. This was in the cultural center of the universe - Tulsa, Oklahoma. So step up people of LA - if Tulsan's can appreciate the music and still show the respect expected, you can too.
One of our music directors had a little trick. If someone started to clap before the end, the conductor would remain facing the orchestra, but extend a hand in back to wave off the premature applauder. It always worked, and it helped to train classical audience newcomers that it was not appreciated.
I agree with you completely, Joseph. Riot and throw bouquets on the stage after the last notes have died away...
djmm
Mahler's Symphony Number 4, nicknamed "The Interminable."
Perry, I like you, but if you ever send in another comment dissing Mahler you are banned here forever.
Incidentally, I've owned about twenty different recordings of the Mahelr Fourth over the years.
Like temporal mechanics, economics gives me headaches. Thanks, Capt. Janeway.
Our crumbling infrastructure? Rebuild? Jobs? Not so much.
In classical music pieces are generally meant to be experienced as a whole; it's far less often that there are even places to applaud (right after solos is a notable exception).
Some small applause between movements I can possibly see. Same goes for after solos. But whenever you feel like it?
Opera is a special case, as it is a mixture of music and the theatre. One can laugh, gasp, in general react as if one were watching a play. That is not what Joe is speaking of here.
(And it's not a "class" issue. Jazz is a "lower class" music and yet people only applaud -at least, in my experience - after each "solo" and at the end.)
DO -
If they were singing just for him, as you implied, why did it matter that other people were talking?
In this example, the other people should have behaved as proper guests are expected to...and respected the wishes of the host.
Sergei Rostov
[Update: Upon reflection, firmed up my opinion from above comment -SAR]
[Cross-posted at Mazoola's link; quote is from said link - SAR]
If this is all OK at he opera, why should we sit silently by as Evgeny Kissin or Yefim Bronfman finish a movement of Rachmaninoff or Tchaikovsky which should bring us to our feet, and gets a few coughs and rustles instead?
Opera goes according to the rules of theatre. One reacts to the drama of the story (by laughing, gasping, etc.) , to notable exchanges, or to notable soliloquies (such as arias).
If you don't want the audience to hear the flow of each movement to the next, or to have a pause for reflection (a large part of most classical pieces), let its members know they can applaud bewtween movements and so not hear that. If you want them to applaud between movements and so have you lose the mood and your own sense of the contrast between those movements let them do so. Go even further: be you a soloist or an orchestra or anything in between, if you want them to miss all the nuances of your unamplified performance (which is the whole point of having different performers play the same piece in the first place), then let them know they are free to make noise at any time and so miss all the subtleties you worked so hard on. But in that case the audience is not hearing what YOU are playing, but is really either hearing just parts of it, or relying on some generalized/generic idea of the piece rather than hearing YOU playing it. So you may as well have a computer play all your pieces for you, and save yourself the effort of actually performing.
Sergei Rostov
Post a Comment