Post-Classical

Gee, there are people who read this blog, or used to. I didn't realize I hadn't posted for over 2 months. For those who have asked, I'm alive and well. There was a lot of family business in late July and August, then school starting, and I'm managing several class blogs (a great idea, which was a gift from Scott Spiegelberg). I've heard from enough people wondering where I went that here I am agian.

I'm also spending a lot of time organizing the "Post-Classical" Symposium here at DePauw, Nov. 29-Dec. 1. Joesph Horowitz, Greg Sandow, and members of eighth blackbird talking about the classical music crisis and "Preparing Music Students for the Post-Classical World." "Post-classical" is a term Joe coined, and his short explanation of it is on the symposium site, and worth quoting here:

The 19th century Boston critic John Sullivan Dwight, who more than anyone else defined “classical music” for Americans, did so in juxtaposition with “popular music,” with the concomitant notion that classical music was supreme. (Dwight called Stephen Foster’s “Old Folks at Home” a “melodic itch.”) Dwight’s
understanding of “classical music” illustrates why this term is poisonous today; it implicitly deprecates popular and indigenous music of every kind, Western and non-Western. We are challenged to find a term to replace it. For some time, I have opted for “post-classical” to designate a new and more variegated musical landscape into which classical music fits. I consider, eg, Philip Glass and Gidon Kremer “post-classical” musicians, and so are many others who matter nowadays. The term has been picked up with some alacrity by others.