#12tone

A Response from a Classical Geek

So this video by the ever insightful 12tone channel came up in my YouTube recs, and I knew from the clickbait title I had to respond. To be fair to him, the argument is much more legit than the title would give off, but there are still some points that I want to comment on

“Can you name a Beethoven tune?”

He starts off saying most people can maybe hum a few melodies, but probably don’t know most of Beethoven’s work. Bee’s one of my favorite composers, and I have listened through all his major works. But sure, there are many classical fans who either haven’t listen to much of Ludwig, or don’t even like what they have heard so they listen to others. However, the general public? Well how much of the general public can name a Van Gogh other than Starry Night? How many know the name of the painter of The Scream? If you showed a random person on the street a set of Renaissance paintings, could they tell which artist painted which? What about impressionist paintings? Or have they read anything by Flaubert or Ibsen or Woolf? I’m not trying to gatekeep or be a snob [I couldn’t name the Renaissance painters, and I haven’t read any of those three], but rather to point out that “greatness” in art doesn’t have to equate with popularity. And Beethoven is definitely more popular than most classical ‘greats’.

The Canon

This is a pretty big insight that more people should reflect on. Why is Beethoven programed so much? Because he sells, and he sells because of people who like his music, but also people who want to be the people who like his music because Beethoven is a mark of cultural capital. Doesn’t mean they don’t “really” enjoy it, but that there could be an subconscious [or maybe deliberate/weaponized] desire to show others “I appreciate fine art”. Again, not trying to gatekeep, but think of the difference between...I don’t know, a random teenager who comes across Beethoven online and falls in love with the power of the scherzo from the 9th and wants to hear more, and someone like Ben Shapiro playing a Beethoven violin sonata after making a podcast about how Rap isn’t real music or that today’s music is “worse” than the Western greats. You see what I’m getting at? There is unfortunately a vocal minority of classical fans that want to use the music as fodder for their reactionary arguments.

Next, he does a great job covering the history of “the canon” and the cultural factors that created it.

We say Beethoven is good because of German-centric nationalism

Partly true. It’s especially funny to look at what composers of the 19th and early 20th century were thinking and saying about Beethoven and the Germans. Both the French and the Russians were annoyed by the German superiority being pushed in the music world and wanted to make their own cultural standards for ‘greatness’. And famously, both Debussy and Ravel were sick of Beethoven and were “anti-Wagnerian” in their aesthetics, and most of the “classics” of the Modern era were reacting to and against Beethoven, Brahms, and Wagner. Of course it doesn’t mean that Beethoven’s music isn’t great, rather that German nationalism and also ethnic pride coming from the German immigrants of 19th century America has a lot of cultural dominance. Ask a French person who the greatest composers are and they’re likely to say Couperin before Bach, Berlioz before Beethoven.

He then points out that, while the Canon is a cultural agreement, it is kept fixed and fossilized.

Focusing on Beethoven keeps music students from focusing on what they care about

You don’t have to love Beethoven. But if he’s saying that schools should only focus on what is ‘culturally relevant’, then are we throwing Shakespeare out of the curriculum? I don’t live in the same culture and time as him, but I still find Macbeth compelling, and Julius Caesar, and Othello...they are still great stories, and forget the idea of ‘high art’ because they’re full of lowbrow death and murder plots, sex jokes, fart jokes, and have a lot of badass moments [the witches of Macbeth, the ghosts of Hamlet, the assassination of Caesar, the sword fights and taunts of Romeo and Juliet, etc.]. I don’t live in Beethoven’s time either, but the Eroica pounds in my heart. I don’t think that the old classics should be the only thing we look at, but I don’t think we should only look at contemporary popular culture either. And frankly the best academic courses and professors are those who examine both with a similar eye. We always draw cultural parallels across art through time.

Who gets left out of the Canon?

This is a legit thing to look at. Lately there has been a greater shift at performing and looking into the music of otherwise ‘marginalized groups’. Though it may be too little too late, especially when the zeitgeist of today is knowing that there are so many stories and perspectives that are ignored or shut out from a canon. How often do you see the distinction of “women composers” instead of mentioning people by name? The same happens with “black composers”, or composers from non-European or non-”Western” countries. It’s important and overall a better thing for our culture to highlight these people, but there is still the connotation of them as a footnote to the “real” canon that doesn’t need a modifier [I mean, how often do you hear someone call Beethoven a great German composer, instead of just “great composer”? Lili Boulanger is a great composer who is almost always called a great woman composer…]

I also agree that there is the issue with the idea of teaching only what’s “important” for understanding a class, especially with art since it is cultural but usually it is taught like a forward thinking narrative. The major influencers are mentioned while great artists who can’t serve the narrative are left out. An interesting example would be Schopenhauer and his philosophic influence on classical music for his time, even though his major ideas are from Hindu and Buddhist theology filtered through 19th century German philosophy.

The Invisible Hand of the Canon

Also a great point. Why do we assume that the music of black composers isn’t “good enough”? Or “women composers”? Or “Turkish composers”, “Mexican composers”, “Filipino composers”, etc.? Where are these standards coming from? Let’s bring up two other greats, Mozart and Debussy. Who is better? Really, it falls down to opinion, because the music aesthetics of the two are so different, that you cannot make a real judgment without admitting that you’re assuming one set of standards over the other. Now, the music of Boulanger is much closer to Debussy than Mozart, so why would we judge her against Mozart to determine if she deserves to be sanctified into the Canon?

And I hate to be a gatekeeper, but I love out-snobbing the snobs, so when someone takes the conservative position of the Canon’s greatness, I wonder are they able to listen to a piece by Schoenberg and explain its relation to the German romantic tradition, regardless of if they enjoy it or not? Because I have seen ignorant defenders of Beethoven and Mozart call his work “random noise that a cat could play” and I want to know if they actually engage with the music beyond listening to 30 seconds and getting a rage wedgie

Does Beethoven suck?

He admits no, it was just clickbait. But his attitude or proposed attitude toward Beethoven is much more honest. The ‘greatness’ of his work is the experience you get from listening to it. Or, you can respect his art without really caring about it or listening to it much. But yeah, the more we acknowledge the artifice of the Canon, the easier it is for us to look at more music with a more critical eye, and I think that’s much more engagement than passively agreeing with the assumption of greatness for cultural capital. No, Mr. Shapiro, you don’t look smart or impressive for talking about Mozart instead of Lamar at a cocktail party. And if you do, it’s because you’re trying to impress stick-in-your-ass dull rich people who have no taste.

This video is a RIDE!

Amazing.

‘Understanding Rage Against The Machine’s Killing In The Name’ by 12tone