The May 29 column by John V. Bennett on the "seniority" of "classical" concertgoers assumes a narrow and exclusive definition both of orchestral music in America and the audiences orchestras reach. Such stereotyping may be causing a misunderstanding of the myriad ways orchestras interact with their communities, and brings into focus a fundamental question: Is "classical music" an accurate term for orchestral music today?
Contrary to Mr. Bennett's suggestions, millions of American children attend educational orchestral concerts each school year, presented in interactive, fast-paced formats. Close to home, more than 30,000 children in Pinellas and Hillsborough counties heard the Florida Orchestra in such concerts this year. Are these young listeners included in the so-called classical music audience cited in market surveys?
Millions of American parents and grandparents attend orchestra/choral concerts presented in elementary, middle and high schools. When the school orchestra starts to play, does the audience, by definition, suddenly become elitist and high-brow?
When half a million people gather on the Boston Pops Esplanade each July 4th to hear Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture and watch the fireworks, do they instantly become part of a so-called classical music establishment?
It is hard to deny that orchestras are almost completely identified with "classical music," which, in turn, is generally considered high-brow and esoteric. But are these depictions accurate? If not, what lies behind the misperception?
The problem stems from transferring the term "classical" from a commercial/industrial context to a cultural/civic context. As a general designation for musical products (such as CDs in a record store) or a market position for radio stations (such as Florida's WUSF-FM 89.7), "classical" may be a fair delineation from pop, rock or rap. But when "classical" is used to define orchestras as institutions, or to label live performance events, confusion ensues. And when "classical" - vaguely defined - surfaces in market surveys, the error is compounded.
After all, music of the classical era, that is, the late 18th-century works of Mozart, Haydn, and early Beethoven, represents only one portion of today's orchestral repertoire. Not only is the bulk of the repertoire actually from the Romantic 19th century and the eclectic 20th century, but American orchestras are engaged in commissioning and performing new works by living (yes, living) composers, exploring multiethnic musical traditions, and presenting the best of popular American music from Broadway, film, jazz, and pop vocal artists.
In other words, orchestras are actively engaged in music that is both contemporary and popular. But the word "classical" implies the very opposite.
Consider the repertoire performed by the Florida Orchestra just in recent weeks. Audiences heard Three Latin American Dances by 32-year old Gabriela Frank (composed only two months ago), Berlioz's revolutionary Symphonie Fantastique (composed in Paris in 1830 by a love-obsessed 27-year-old), a new set of pop orchestral works preceding a performance with K.D. Lang, and the anthems of all of the U.S. armed services on a program of patriotic music.
A recent weekend's concerts exuded classical grace and elegance in Haydn's Sinfonie Concertante, then exploded with Mahler's cataclysmic 5th Symphony - a late 19th-century paroxysm of emotional heights and depths and final euphoria.
Branding all this musical diversity as "classical" - that is, pertaining to aristocratic 18th-century Europe, or even to the aesthetic standards of ancient Greece and Rome, is not only a massive stretch of the imagination, but seriously illogical and misleading. And branding American orchestras as "classical institutions" rather than as the dynamic, cultural laboratories that they are (where every live performance is an experiment), not only denies their essential social value, but may well be threatening their very existence.
Certainly, Bennett is not alone in bandying these stereotypes. The word "classical" is out there - in headlines, features, and listings every day. In fact, the continuing, uncritical acceptance of so ambiguous a term by journalists and editors across the country is remarkable. Here's why.
As a general label, "classical" made sense back in the 1950s and '60s when composers born in the 19th century were still living, the recording industry was burgeoning and orchestras performed classic European repertoire almost exclusively. But today, two generations (and multitudes of immigrations) later, orchestras and American culture have changed dramatically. And with them, so have the meanings of words.
Today, classical has come to mean "not contemporary, not popular, formal and inaccessible to the general public." In other words, something fundamentally at odds with our democratic culture.
Even institutions as respected as the American Symphony Orchestra League and the National Endowment for the Arts seem not to recognize the alienating and polarizing implications of the word "classical" in the rough-and-tumble of contemporary commercial culture, now two and a quarter centuries removed from Mozart's Vienna. Today, the term suggests a gated community.
Fortunately, the relationship of words and language to public perception is discussed daily in newsrooms and editorial rooms across the country. If "classical" is no longer an accurate designation for concert music today, one hopes that editors will challenge it, and encourage a new, more comprehensive view of American musical activity.
American orchestras have a tremendous capacity to inspire citizens of all ages with the beauty and power of great music. Students, in turn, need to discover new and varied musical forms and traditions, and relate them to their own experience. In order for this learning to occur, the orchestra needs to be seen as an institution that validates and appreciates the diversity of its creative cultural environment.
Freeing it from the "classical" straitjacket may be a way to succeed.
Susan Haig is associate conductor of the Florida Orchestra.
