What do you think?
Rate this book
Who Needs Classical Music?: Cultural Choice and Musical Value
During the last few decades, most cultural critics have come to agree that the division between "high" and "low" art is an artificial one, that Beethoven's Ninth and "Blue Suede Shoes" are equally valuable as cultural texts. In Who Needs Classical Music? , Julian Johnson challenges these assumptions about the relativism of cultural judgements. The author maintains that music is more than just "a matter of taste": while some music provides entertainment, or serves as background noise, other music claims to function as art. This book considers the value of classical music in contemporary society, arguing that it remains distinctive because it works in quite different ways to most of the other music that surrounds us.
This intellectually sophisticated yet accessible book offers a new and balanced defense of the specific values of classical music in contemporary culture. Who Needs Classical Music? will stimulate readers to reflect on their own investment (or lack of it) in music and art of all kinds.
This intellectually sophisticated yet accessible book offers a new and balanced defense of the specific values of classical music in contemporary culture. Who Needs Classical Music? will stimulate readers to reflect on their own investment (or lack of it) in music and art of all kinds.
152 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2002
11 people are currently reading
97 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
August 1, 2023
"When we leave the musical work and return to daily life, we have tasted a different way of being, a different perception of the world. Potentially, this leaves us marked by the experience. It subsequently produces an altered perception of the world. . . this lingers as an aftertaste, a memory, it can disturb us in subtle but powerful ways like the memory of a dream. We don't discover the content of that dream in daily reality, but the dream may nevertheless make us see reality in a different light" (129).
In delving into the topic of classical music and music in general, Julian Johnson's "Who Needs Classical Music?" breaks ground in a broader discussion of art, and in many ways echoes C.S. Lewis's discussion in "The Abolition of Man" regarding the "use" of a work of literature versus the receiving of a work of literature for its own sake and on its own terms.
Here, Johnson argues that classical music must be received on its own temporal and musical terms, that it should be enjoyed not as an object (among other objects), but as an activity of attentiveness and contemplation. This stands in contrast to a marketplace understanding of different types of music simply as "things" that grant a desired mood, feeling, or emotion. As he points out, much of our experience of music, and certainly of classical music, is as background "noise," or ambience, to other activities such as driving, standing in an elevator, etc.
The overall thrust of Johnson's work presents critical discussion of an area of art and life that is most often treated as relativistic, expanding the stage further into matters of politics, culture & community, and ethics. I even found the nature of my own (positive) relationship to classical music challenged in helpful ways.
Definitely worth reading.
In delving into the topic of classical music and music in general, Julian Johnson's "Who Needs Classical Music?" breaks ground in a broader discussion of art, and in many ways echoes C.S. Lewis's discussion in "The Abolition of Man" regarding the "use" of a work of literature versus the receiving of a work of literature for its own sake and on its own terms.
Here, Johnson argues that classical music must be received on its own temporal and musical terms, that it should be enjoyed not as an object (among other objects), but as an activity of attentiveness and contemplation. This stands in contrast to a marketplace understanding of different types of music simply as "things" that grant a desired mood, feeling, or emotion. As he points out, much of our experience of music, and certainly of classical music, is as background "noise," or ambience, to other activities such as driving, standing in an elevator, etc.
The overall thrust of Johnson's work presents critical discussion of an area of art and life that is most often treated as relativistic, expanding the stage further into matters of politics, culture & community, and ethics. I even found the nature of my own (positive) relationship to classical music challenged in helpful ways.
Definitely worth reading.
April 28, 2015
Essentially a long essay on the value of classical music in contemporary society, "Who Needs Classical Music?" poses an important question. As a classical musician myself, I have often pondered it, and looked for good answers to justify our field's constant search for funding.
Johnson writes eloquently and passionately in defense of the art, and he makes some excellent points--most especially about the importance of "music-as-art," which he defines essentially as music which only makes sense when you hear it unfold over time, which does not offer immediate gratification or necessarily serve a specific function. He argues that we need tools--i.e., education--in order to fully understand this music and benefit from it, and laments the increasingly mainstream view that this is a waste of students' time and taxpayers' money. We don't question the need to study math or science in order to know it; why do we tend to feel that music which requires study is somehow "elitist"?
All great points, and I certainly don't need convincing about the benefits of music in education. But as a classical musician who was raised on rock, jazz, and the whole vernacular gamut--and who still practices these styles from time to time--I was disappointed to find that Johnson is yet another dyed-in-the-wool classical musician who really doesn't understand these forms and how they work. He takes it as a given that pop music cannot be art, that it is specifically and universally designed for instant gratification. I may be biased as a disciple of progressive rock, but I think there are many examples which contradict this view.
He also repeatedly dismisses pop music as harmonically and structurally "primitive," and wonders how a 1950's rock song could somehow ignore the genius of 20th century composers like Debussy, Stravinsky, et al. It's not primitive; it's African. The primary musical element is rhythm, and structure basically doesn't apply; the music is meant to unfold and change over a long period of time, which is why recorded rock music often relies on fade-outs--a device taken by Johnson as proof that rock musicians are too dumb to write a decent song ending.
There are many signs that classical music is in decline, and has been for a long time. It needs passionate advocates like Johnson. But with popular music clearly the dominant strain in our culture, we need to be building bridges for people to cross over and experience classical music in a meaningful way. As any engineer will tell you, you can't do that effectively if you don't really know the ground you're building on--on both sides.
Johnson writes eloquently and passionately in defense of the art, and he makes some excellent points--most especially about the importance of "music-as-art," which he defines essentially as music which only makes sense when you hear it unfold over time, which does not offer immediate gratification or necessarily serve a specific function. He argues that we need tools--i.e., education--in order to fully understand this music and benefit from it, and laments the increasingly mainstream view that this is a waste of students' time and taxpayers' money. We don't question the need to study math or science in order to know it; why do we tend to feel that music which requires study is somehow "elitist"?
All great points, and I certainly don't need convincing about the benefits of music in education. But as a classical musician who was raised on rock, jazz, and the whole vernacular gamut--and who still practices these styles from time to time--I was disappointed to find that Johnson is yet another dyed-in-the-wool classical musician who really doesn't understand these forms and how they work. He takes it as a given that pop music cannot be art, that it is specifically and universally designed for instant gratification. I may be biased as a disciple of progressive rock, but I think there are many examples which contradict this view.
He also repeatedly dismisses pop music as harmonically and structurally "primitive," and wonders how a 1950's rock song could somehow ignore the genius of 20th century composers like Debussy, Stravinsky, et al. It's not primitive; it's African. The primary musical element is rhythm, and structure basically doesn't apply; the music is meant to unfold and change over a long period of time, which is why recorded rock music often relies on fade-outs--a device taken by Johnson as proof that rock musicians are too dumb to write a decent song ending.
There are many signs that classical music is in decline, and has been for a long time. It needs passionate advocates like Johnson. But with popular music clearly the dominant strain in our culture, we need to be building bridges for people to cross over and experience classical music in a meaningful way. As any engineer will tell you, you can't do that effectively if you don't really know the ground you're building on--on both sides.
July 21, 2009
Even though the book was only 130 pages, it took me a long time to read it. I sometimes had to read a sentence 5 times to figure out what the author was trying to say. It's not that the book was laden with musical jargon (it wasn't), it was more that the author's writing was so abstract. I kept imagining that the author had a much more specific grounding in mind and, in an attempt to be general, gave the more abstract version. So, after almost every sentence I had to think about how to instantiate/exemplify what the author meant. I imagine that if the author gave a couple of examples for every idea, the book would be about 4 times the length.
All that being said, I got a lot out of this book. (I just had to put a lot in.) A lot of what the author says applies to art in general. This book covered a number of areas that were largely foreign to me: art, music history, culture, etc.. I imagine that a person versed in these areas might not get as much out of it, but I also imagine that they wouldn't have to put as much in.
All that being said, I got a lot out of this book. (I just had to put a lot in.) A lot of what the author says applies to art in general. This book covered a number of areas that were largely foreign to me: art, music history, culture, etc.. I imagine that a person versed in these areas might not get as much out of it, but I also imagine that they wouldn't have to put as much in.
October 26, 2017
Excellent, clear and concise. A clear statement of the issues and the questions at hand. I highly recommend this.
June 30, 2022
"Music has a particularly powerful link to subjective experience. It relates directly to the experience of our subjectivity because it mirrors the way our own sense of identity is established through time, by the persistence of defining features across time and their synthesis into a complex unity We recognize in music's temporal unfolding the internal narratives of our selves, a tracery of the same patterns that seem to define our emotional psychological, and spiritual experience. More than this, music can project a patterning of its materials that exceeds our immediate experience, offering us the experience of internal narratives, or musical journeys, that are not our own. In other words, we experience in music what we cannot ex perience outside of it. It structures time and identity in ways that we find intensely fulfilling precisely because they are not those of everyday life." (p. 66)
"There is a paradox here: a piece of music over a century old has the potential to provoke an experience of radical newness. Moreover, the work seems able to provoke this experience on repeated hearings. The en counter with newness, in Bach, Berlioz, or Boulez, seems diminished neither by the age of the work nor the number of times we revisit it: newness is, it seems, a property of the work, derived from the work's transcendence of its own boundaries." (p.109)
"There is a paradox here: a piece of music over a century old has the potential to provoke an experience of radical newness. Moreover, the work seems able to provoke this experience on repeated hearings. The en counter with newness, in Bach, Berlioz, or Boulez, seems diminished neither by the age of the work nor the number of times we revisit it: newness is, it seems, a property of the work, derived from the work's transcendence of its own boundaries." (p.109)
December 12, 2020
How many stars for what amounts to racist polemic against the music of others. A reduction of the category of music-I-love to music I ought to love because Im just that kind of person. Read Wagner on jewish music first, then Taruskin if you dont get the pattern. Even Adorno would have been embarrassed.
May 16, 2015
Not a very helpful defense of classical music. I wanted to like this book and be encouraged to really see the moral and cultural goodness of the classical music tradition. Instead it was a lot of arguments that seemed to be floating around with no foundation.
"Classical music is a humanist project."
Okay, I don't really care about humanism and don't think it should be advanced.
"Not teaching classical music undermines the ideals on which modern democracy is founded."
I think modern democracy should be undermined (but I still think we should teach classical music).
"Classical music when thoughtfully engaged can lead to transcendence."
Of what? And toward what?
Most of his arguments come across as special pleading. The damning problem with Johnson's project is he doesn't seem to actually believe that truth, beauty, and goodness must ultimately be grounded in the character and person of the Triune God.
"Classical music is a humanist project."
Okay, I don't really care about humanism and don't think it should be advanced.
"Not teaching classical music undermines the ideals on which modern democracy is founded."
I think modern democracy should be undermined (but I still think we should teach classical music).
"Classical music when thoughtfully engaged can lead to transcendence."
Of what? And toward what?
Most of his arguments come across as special pleading. The damning problem with Johnson's project is he doesn't seem to actually believe that truth, beauty, and goodness must ultimately be grounded in the character and person of the Triune God.
March 2, 2012
Johnson argues against the currently popular view that cultures and cultural choices are relative. He argues that far from cultural choices being matters of mere preference, some cultural choices are more valuable than others. More specifically, he argues that classical music has more cultural value than pop music. This is in part because it requires a level of thought and a way of thinking not demanded by pop music. To those who charge Johnson with elitism, he replies that the way to counter elitism is not to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator. The way to counter elitism is to ensure that education (in this case in classical music) is provided to people of every walk of life.
April 12, 2012
If I take one thing away from this book it's the importance of our cultural choices; And ultimately, the idea that Art, and in this case particularly Music, has the ability to expand the awareness of our possibilities, and thus choices, as creative beings. I really enjoyed it.
Read
August 3, 2013Kind of dry...
June 9, 2011
Este es de esos libros que podrían resumirse en 10 párrafos.
June 9, 2013
Really good defence of classical music, that does a great job on the idea that aesthetic judgements are based on "what I like..".
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews