Classical Critics Survey
8. Coverage of pop music
exceeds that of classical coverage in most mainstream
media outlets. Does this concern you as a critic and
listener?
LLOYD SCHWARTZ
Sure it concerns me (partly because I don't feel
there's a whole lot of interesting things to say about
an awful lot of current pop music--except maybe in the
abstract); but given how many and what kind of records
sell, it doesn't surprise me in the least.
ANTHONY TOMMASINI
Sure, it concerns me. But I understand the
reasons. Classical music is a high art form (an awful
term, but true). Still, I think that so much pop these
days is commercial, slick, gimmicky and empty that
young people are looking for authentic and challenging
experiences. The Miller Theater (at Columbia
University) has become a hotbed of contemporary
classical music programming. And most nights the
crowds there look like they just wandered in from a
rock club. So, I have hope that classical music can
reach young people. That's my main mission. If I
didn't believe it possible, and didn't see things
getting better, I would give up this work.
ANNE MIDGETTE
Decline in arts coverage in general concerns me.
Although I really would like to see more space given
to classical music, it's hard for me to justify
ramming reviews down the throats of people who don't
want to read them. I confess that I myself am not
always all that interested in a performance three days
ago by some obscure orchestra I haven't heard of. I
think what's really needed is to explore new ways to
do coverage that could make it more lively and
interesting: perhaps by juxtaposing conventional
reviews with the kind of column format Kyle Gann has
at the Voice, allowing a critic to discuss a few
different performances and put them into some kind of
context for the reader. The issue is to make it
something people want to read, rather than something
that's good for you (or good for society); because in
the struggle for space in a financially strapped
market, "good for you" is not going to win.
This is partly
because in today's youth-focused culture, when to be
old is to be used up and when the media as a whole is
trying ever harder to pursue the young and hip, a
magazine like Time is no longer willing to take the
quasi-parental role of informing the mass audience of
things it might not know but might be interesting--like a ranking of America's top orchestras, or a profile of the world's leading pianist. As a result,
there's no way to challenge the status quo, which is
that this music does not have great importance to the
majority of people in this country. On the radar of
truly mainstream media--People, Time, the nightly TV
news--classical music barely exists; and I don't see
that changing any time soon. Nonetheless, there are a
lot of people out there going to a lot of classical
concerts.
KYLE GANN
The concern with numbers is self-propagating. For
instance, Pulse
magazine discontinued its classical coverage because
it did a poll and found
that its readers weren't interested in reading about
classical music. But the
kind of people likely to answer a Pulse
magazine poll are not at all the kind of people
interested in classical music. Pulse didn't
appeal to the classical music fan assiduously enough
in the first place to inspire classical types, already
cynical about the magazine's slim coverage, to answer
the poll. It is as dangerous for the media to follow
polls as it is for politicians to do so. If the media
(and the politicians) lead, people will follow. If
magazines make something seem interesting, people will
get interested in it. But mainstream media outlets go
for short-term profit and the quick fix. People will
respond quickly, reflexively, to subjects they already
know about, but that doesn't mean they aren't sick and
tired of reading about the same thing over and over.
Every young rock fan I know is sick and tired of the
commercialization of rock, and they all go after small
alternative bands that the mainstream press never
covers. To reach those people, the media would have to
give up going after the largest possible audience with
the most recognizable names. "Most recognizable" does
not mean "best loved." It simply means most frequently
repeated in the mainstream media.
GREG SANDOW
No. Why shouldn't pop music get more coverage? It's more popular. It's also more interesting. Just read pop critics, and compare them to classical critics. The good ones raise deeper and more intriguing issues. Why shouldn't they get more space? What does concern me is that the classical music
world--musicians, critics, marketers,
everybody--doesn't seem to know how to draw attention
to itself. We can't just whine that we deserve
coverage because we're so artistic. We have to give
people something to care about.