re:klez go classical

[ganzl azoi freyl <d6l...>]

reprise....

>>i'm in no way opposed to sitting in a concert hall listening
>>to klezmer (or tuvan 'throat singing' or stravinski for that matter). what 
>>i see as potentially dangerous is the concert hall
>>becoming the *only* or *primary* site for klezmer music.
>
>This hyperbole didn't appear in your posting. As for *dangerous*, do
>concert halls have canines?

only when they?re going to the dogs?<pause for groan>
     seriously, though, this is the first time i?ve _ever_ heard a sentence 
with two separate qualifying clauses (?potentially?, ?only or primary?) 
called hyperbole... if you?re missing the qualifiers on my critique, you?re 
missing my entire point, which (as i?ve said) is about going too far (or too 
exclusively) towards the concert hall, not about going there per se.  your 
own testimony about the strange responses to budowitz? rough edges in 
comparison with (by me, overly) slick & concertized klez bands seems only to 
demonstrate my point about the risks in creating an expectation of klezmer 
as concertante.

>>finally, it seems more than a bit disingenuous to describe "listening" in 
>>the concert-hall sense as part of the traditional >> wedding context of 
>>klezmer.
>
><10/13> That's not from me.

actually, it is:

><10/12> listening was a part of the original context
><10/12> (the wedding) in which klezmer music developed

but to address the point you made most recently:

>I'll repeat and elaborate: the listening genres of
>klezmer have their roots in the context of the wedding. One modern-> day 
>logical extension of the genres created in that context would be the 
>concert hall.

i?ve never had a word to say about _genres_ of klezmer except to say that 
i?m in favor of their proliferation and to cite a few versions that i like.  
your comment here doesn?t seem particularly relevent to our conversation.
   of course the kinds of *klezmer* which are played in the concert hall are 
extensions of wedding music?- by definition.
   however, the kind of *listening* that takes place in the concert hall has 
no precedent in the traditional wedding context.  concert-hall listening, in 
the decorous and abstract form we now know, is a _very_ recent phenomenon 
even in concert halls?-it certainly bears no relation to the ways in which 
early klezmorim?s audiences listened to the music which accompanied the 
ceremony, meal and dancing at a wedding.

>Whereas the modern-day Jewish wedding typically offers
>less opportunity for listening genres of music than did the earlier
>weddings, the concert hall represents a logical outlet for them. That says 
>nothing about the way in which the concert hall alters the
>aesthetic direction of those genres, but rather merely that it offers 
>another context in which they can propogate.

sure.  but as i said, you?ll have a hard time persuading me that such a 
thing as a ?listening genre? of klezmer emerged before the music had been 
_outside_ the wedding context for a while.

>>p.s. "hidden agenda"?  what's *hidden*?
>
>that's easy: You want to molotov-cocktail all the concert halls in New York 
>  playing concertized Yiddish music,

yes indeed...  when i bomb carnegie hall, i will be playing concertized 
yiddish music...

so, to let someone else in on the conversation (though it?s an issue i?ve 
been deliberately avoiding?-one kettle of worms at a time is my motto)...

stu writes:
>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 <...>

yes, perlman, BOW, etc. deserve their high praise for getting lots of 
otherwise un-reached listers to take a listen at klezmer.  but i?m not so 
sure about the larger economic argument.  [what i?m about to say applies to 
the u.s.; in europe, where there?s government support for the arts, the 
situation is different, i expect, especially as far as ticket prices go]
    seems to me that the concert halls that book klezmer (and that?s not all 
of them) don?t book it that often.  in boston, where i grew up, f?rinstance, 
there?s a number of Klezmer Conservatory Band gigs a year (including the big 
First Night show), but only a handful at best of performances by out of town 
bands that play in concert halls.  the klezmatics? debut in boston was, i 
think, with perlman?and i think that?s more likely because of lack of 
booking interest than hatred of bostonians.  and boston is a town with a lot 
of concert halls, a fair number of local klezmer outfits, and a large jewish 
community, so there?s not really an incentive for the halls to hold back on 
bookings.
     concert halls get more people at a pop than clubs, but over time (given 
the fairly small number of klezmer concert-hall shows, and the fairly small 
number of ensembles who get them), my bet is more people (especially young 
people, who often can?t afford concert-hall tickets?-i speak from 
experience) pass through other venues than through the halls.  i expect all 
the list?s musicians to correct me if i?m wrong...
     luckily, as i?ve been saying all along, we *don?t* *have* *to* 
*choose*.

     my point continues to be that the current tendency in a large part of 
the klezmer world towards choosing concert halls (and concertized 
performances in clubs, a la zorn?s wonderful bar kokhba band) and ignoring 
clubs and other venues is seriously problematic?-if what ?we? want is a 
klezmer music which is and is part of a *living* tradition and culture, not 
a nostalgia trip or a piece of quaint folklore.

hopefully

daniel

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

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