So I was visiting a friend whom I know to have an extensive musical collection. She asked brightly, “Any particular favorite you’d like me to play?”
“Stravinsky!” I said, whereupon she went into a tirade about how Stravinsky is terribly, terribly pretentious (or rather, that the music of Stravinsky is liked by pretentious people).
Now, I’m one of those people who are fond of what they consider to be good music but have very little knowledge of music history or music theory and don’t travel in musical circles. (“I know what I like, and I like art!” I know, I know, I’m a philistine. )
So tell me: is listening to Stravinsky generally considered to be pretentious among musical folk, or is my friend simply a crackpot in this regard? (She also seems to have a bee in her bonnet about Shostakovich…)
Taste is taste. Making judgement calls on other people’s tatses is…
pretentious.
I’ve heard many rulings about tatse in classical music by all sorts of people. I don’t see any patterns except for the constant discussions about it all. Kind of funny, if you ask me.
FTR, I like the Russian composers. The novelists, however, I can live without.
I can’t see anything pretentious about admiring Stravinsky. He’s one of the most popular (and important) composers of the 20th century, so you’re certainly not getting into anything esoteric by digging Petroushka, The Rite of Spring, or Pulcinella. Among other things, his extensive use of themes (in both musical and conceptual senses) from the folk tradition helps keep his music from being too lofty.
Phooey on the notion that only pretentious people are fond of Stravinsky. I was once called “pretentious” because I like grand opera. Dammit, I don’t like opera because rich people dress up fancy to go to the performances. I like opera because I find it genuinely moving and entertaining.
Pretentious people like things because they want to bask in the intellectual aura associated with those things. If you really, truly like the thing itself, you aren’t pretentious.
I think it is his popularity that some snobs have a problem with. Everybody knows Stravansky, if you were real hep to the scene you would be listinging to a guy nobody has ever heard of and was considered insane and he died in a filthy seman and excrement stained padded cell. His only surviving work (that wasn’t burned by order of the State). “Concerto for Hate and washing machines in F minor” is the absoulte statement about the place of women in society and a powerful statement about music itself and how music shouldn’t make statement.
We now return to The Firebird.
Your friend, I’m afraid, is a musical ignoramus. Stravinsky’s music is much loved and respected worldwide, and there’s no question he was one of the 20th century’s greatest composers.
I’m crazy about his music, and have been since I was in middle school (which was kinda of a while ago). I never get tired of hearing Le Sacre du printemps, no matter how many times I’ve heard it, for one. I love his entire catalog of works, all the way through the Requiem Canticles.
IMO, the word “pretentious” generally means “I don’t understand it and I want to take it down a peg.” No offense to your friend, La Llorona; she may have rock-solid grounds for saying that. But in my experience, it’s a defense mechanism.
On the other hand, I’m not a huge Stravinsky fan. I do love Schoenberg’s quartets, though. And Pierrot Lunaire.
I have a big problem with neo-classicism in general, and with Stravinsky in particular. However, I wouldn’t dare to criticise such a huge and varied body of work with such dismissive contempt. Jeckelope has hit the nail on the head for that one. You can also encounter inverted snobbery, that people regard the popularity of the Firebird, Petrushka and the Rite as somehow demeaning either to the composer or to 20th century music in general. I’ve never got a coherent explanation out of these people.
I also do have a huge problem with Stravinsky-worship…both those that believe he never wrote a note that didn’t deserve adulation (Beethoven attracts the same types), and those who jump at your throat for criticisin him in any way when in fact all they know are the ‘big three’ ballets.
Oh, and a lot of people have a bee in their bonnet about Shostakovich, don’t worry about that one, he’s a highly-contentious figure in many circles
If you like Stravinsky (and The Firebird Suite may be my favorite piece of classical music), go ahead and listen to Stravinsky. Opinions are…well, you know the drill.
Maybe your friend was covering for the fact that her “extensive music collection” doesn’t include any Stravinsky, and she didn’t realize it until you brought him up.
I tend to listen to Le Sacre alone while dancing naked and drunk with the blinds closed. If it were pretentious, I wouldn’t do that, I’d just tell people I do that. Like I’m doing now. So I guess this post proves nothing. :dubious:
No, listening to his music is not pretentious. Stravinsky himself, on the other hand…
)