Re: klez go classical

[Stu Warshauer <swarshau...>]

The reality is that if Klezmer music  becomes  acceptable to concert hall
audiences, it will be  exposed to many thousands more people than in dance
halls or JCC function rooms, more tickets will be sold, more recordings will
be sold and there will be more opportunities for klezmer musicians, both
traditional and other. We should be thankful to Perlman, BOW and the others
for exposing Klezmer music to thousands of unsuspecting concert-goers.  Some
of them become converts and go to JCC function rooms and/or dance halls to
hear and twitch to more.

From: Josh Horowitz<horowitz (at) styria(dot)com>
To: World music from a Jewish slant <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: klez go classical


> Dear Daniel,
>
> Your mail is chock full of contradictions, which makes it fun to deal
> with but difficult to keep on a leash. As devil's advocate, do you mind
> if I rip it to shreds and then put it back together again ?
>
> In your response you mention 3 possible venues for the performance of
> klezmer music:
>
> 1) The concert hall
> 2) The JCC Function room
> 3) The Dance club
>
> In your own words, these 3 outlets offer varying degrees of
> 1) relevance
> 2) evolution
> 3) disaster
>
> Your definition of relevance and evolution are based upon 2 a priori
> assumptions, with disaster as the implied result if they do not occur in
> music:
>
> 1) That music is relevant when it can be danced to (you mentioned
> several times your preference for breakdancing)
> 2) That it allows "change and development in a variety of directions at
> once"
>
> That "variety of directions" excludes the classical venue, seemingly
> because it doesn't allow for you to breakdance and also because it
> encourages the act of listening (in your former email, you refer to this
> as the "sit-in-yer-seat experience").
>
> In spite of the fact that listening was a part of the original context
> (the wedding) in which klezmer music developed, and represents a further
> possibility for "change and development," it is banned from your list of
> outlets which allow klezmer music to evolve.
>
> Rather than antithesize the contradictions in your argument, I would
> rather manipulate them into a synthesized Socratic summary, using your
> own vocabulary:
>
> *Klezmer music in the concert hall does not allow klezmer music to
> remain relevant for people who want to dance to it. It cannot be said to
> evolve in this environment and is disastrous to its development.
> Development in klezmer music can be said to take place when it can
> accommodate breakdancing, which is what I like to do to it. The
> evolution of this music is possible when it " keeps a good solid eye on
> where the music has been, while still remaining part of a *living
> culture* which allows change and development in a variety of directions
> at once". This "variety of directions" can best be defined by what I
> like to do to the music (breakdancing) but excludes what I don't like to
> do (sit-in-a-seat-and-listen).*
>
> In spite of actually sympathizing with some of your sentiments, Dan,
> it's hard to resist uncovering a hidden agenda in your ideology. Josh
>
> ganzl azoi freyl wrote:
> >
> > sorry to prolong/revive this thread (sorta sorry anyway),
> > but i've been away from the machine and busy at work (where the email
is)
> > for the last three days and wanted to respond to a few things.
> >
> > i think the point i was trying to make about klez in the concert hall
went
> > completely by the boards in the discussion which followed--
> >
> > ari writes that brave old world's project is "building on tradition and
> > creating something, appropriate to a formal concert hall, that is new",
and
> > again, to "create music that is appropriate to the formal classical
setting
> > in the light of what they feel compelled to create as musicians".
> >
> > joshua responds that this raises the question of who (and with what
economic
> > interests) decides 'what is appropriate to the concert hall'.
> >
> > while joshua's point is well taken, the question that i was trying to
raise
> > was about the value (and effects) of making a klezmer that is
"appropriate
> > to the concert hall/formal classical setting" in the first place.
> >      to mildly overstate it:
> > ***why do we want to be in the concert hall, anyway?***
> >
> > when i talk about classicalization i'm not talking about musical
elements so
> > much as about the context in which the music is presented, the venues it
> > sees as its goal-- the concert hall, the JCC function room, or the dance
> > club, to name three.  by me, taking the first two of these (and
especially
> > the concert hall) as the goals of where klezmer should live is in the
> > medium/long-term a recipe for musical disaster and irrelevence, while
the
> > third holds more promise for the survival of klezmer as a living,
evolving
> > genre.
> >     i'm not dismissing brave old world or any other groups's music or
> > choices of venue (as everyone seems to agree, variety is good)(and i
love
> > "beyond the pale", and find michael alpert's rhyming flow on "blood
oranges"
> > very inspiring in my own attempts to put some breakdancing on the
klezmer
> > dancefloor), just pointing out what i see as a big-picture problem in
the
> > state of the 'revival'...
> >
> > i think i actually agree to some extent with henry sapoznik's
assessment,
> > though with a different emphasis...
> >      he writes:
> > "I think klezmer suffers from both high artification and from the
> > promiscuous fusionizers who meld it with music forms they understand far
> > better than they do klezmer."
> >      i can't really argue, henry, if by "klezmer" you mean klezmer as
played
> > by brandwein, tarras, and the other pre-khurbn luminaries.  but
'promisuous
> > fusionizers' are what makes genres evolve, and the ones that don't
evolve
> > die out quicker.  if "klezmer" can include the music made by kletka red,
> > cayuga klezmer revival, and the klezmatics more 'out' moments, rather
than
> > excluding them from the chosen fold, i can't agree that it's suffering
from
> > their experimentation.
> >     the fine and problematic thing (IMperhapsHO)is to make sure that
> > evolution keeps a good solid eye on where the music has been, while
still
> > remaining part of a *living culture* which allows change and development
in
> > a variety of directions at once.
> >
> > a last word, i hope.
> > sholem in gerangl,
> >
> > daniel
> >
> > ______________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> >
>
>
>

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+