Contemporary classical music is often performed in various settings and contexts. However, it is one of the least popular types of music. While many enjoy modern music, classical music has difficulty reaching a wider audience beyond like-minded composers and musicians. Indeed, some factors push people away from enjoying contemporary classical music, including elitism, people’s attitudes regarding art music, performance requirements, and systemic issues regarding race and culture.
The attitudes of composers such as Milton Babbitt played a role in the development of intellectual music from an academic perspective. However, his ideas seem egocentric and exclusionary, discouraging a wider audience from enjoying modern music. In his 1958 High Fidelity article “Who Cares if you Listen”, originally entitled “The Composer As Specialist”, Babbitt discusses the significance of academic music, as well as the idea that music becomes more obscure and unapproachable for the general public as it gets more complex. Towards the beginning of his article, Babbitt emphasizes this increasing “societal isolation” and musical complexity. Regarding his work, he states, “The general public is largely unaware of and uninterested in his music. The majority of performers shun it and resent it.”
Consequently, Babbitt’s music is rarely performed and primarily at poorly attended concerts before an audience consisting mainly of fellow professionals. “At best, the music would appear to be for, of, and by specialists.” While this is an accurate description of the classical academic music of Babbitt’s time (1916-2011), he elaborates on this by stating that such a divide between musical complexity and the general public is “not only inevitable, but potentially advantageous for the composer and his music”. However, this may imply that writing academic music is more important than composing other types of music and that “art music” cannot be simultaneously complex and enjoyable. In this way, Babbitt supports a musical aesthetic with no room for the general public’s opinions, restricting it within the bounds of academia.
Additionally, Babbitt elaborates on his argument for “musical and societal isolation” by comparing modern music to science or math-related fields, which invalidates the emotions of the general public and demeans the value of music and science. He makes assertions and generalizations about nonmusicians to strengthen his points, frustratedly stating, “Imagine, if you can, a layman chancing upon a lecture on ‘Pointwise Periodic Homeomorphisms’. At the conclusion, he announces: ‘I didn’t like it…’under duress, our layman discloses precise reasons for his failure to enjoy himself; he found the hall chilly, the lecturer’s voice unpleasant, and he was suffering the digestive aftermath of a poor dinner… ‘I don’t like it, and I cannot or will not state why.'”
While Babbitt’s attitude may demonstrate a hasty generalization about audiences, it also highlights Babbitt’s frustration with people who don’t support his musical aesthetic and values. In this way, he seems arrogant and close-minded, as the mentality of “people just don’t understand” may indicate a common, intersubjective egocentrism among like-minded composers and theorists. Babbitt’s comparison between music – a form of art – and science seems to demean the importance of both fields. Unlike science, a major component of art is its ability to evoke a wide range of emotions, such as joy and nostalgia, regardless of its complexity.
Also, unlike academic music, scientific research can have a long-lasting impact on the general public, as it could cure diseases, directly mitigate environmental issues, and lead to global technological advancements. In these ways, Babbitt’s “societal isolation” is not beneficial for science, and his comparison between art music and science subjects music to emotionless obscurity and discredits the extent of scientific and medical research. For these reasons, Babbitt’s opinion may contribute to a lack of appreciation for contemporary classical music to make room for academia. Perhaps he could have enhanced his perspective by discussing psychological reasons why individuals dislike modern classical music instead of simply being dismissive. As a whole, Bibbitt’s article may have played a role in pushing classical contemporary music further into obscurity.
In his 1964 speech “On Receiving the First Aspen Award”, Benjamin Britten (1913-1976) discusses “occasional music”. However, despite his emphasis on emotional content and on suiting particular audiences, some impracticalities arise.
Britten embraced the idea of a strong emotional connection with contemporary classical music, as he thought about the type of audience, performers, concert hall acoustics, and “even sometimes the age of the listeners and performer” that would be playing his works. Britten expresses that “There should be special music made and played for all sorts of occasions: football matches, receptions, elections (why not?), and even presentations of awards!” In this way, and unlike Babbitt, Britten cherishes and advocates for a classical musical aesthetic without diminishing the values of other types of music.
His work carries a strong emotional connection that it is written with particular audiences in mind. However, it may be difficult for a wider audience to enjoy Britten’s compositions, as it is only most effective in limited, specific performance contexts. While Britten’s music may not completely fall into this realm, some of his works, such as his War Requiem, may be difficult to perform in an ideal setting, as Britten envisioned the work’s performance in a large, resonant Cathedral. Perhaps, unlike Babbitt, Britten would be satisfied if his work was performed in “less-fitting” contexts.
Britten also alludes to occasional music to criticize pedagogical aspects of music composition, which in turn, may help people develop a stronger appreciation for modern music. For example, he describes that there are “snobs who demand the latest avant-garde tricks; critics who are already trying to document today for tomorrow…These people are dangerous – not because they are necessarily of any importance in themselves, but because they make the composer, above all the young composer, self-conscious, and instead of writing his own music, music which springs naturally from his gift and personality, he may be frightened into writing pretentious nonsense or deliberate obscurity…he may end by creating grandiose clap-trap when his real talent is for dance tunes or children’s piano pieces.” Britten is alluding to the pressure young composers face – from professors or other authority figures– to write music that fits within some methodical aesthetic instead of the music they genuinely care about or want to write.
This suggests that if student composers are taught to express themselves how they want, their music would more effectively convey emotions and would reach a wider audience. In this way, Britten is willing to challenge the implications of elitism that may be ingrained within budding composers’ minds and also reflects “occasional” music, as Britten supports the diverse possibilities and performance contexts in which young composers can explore and write without viewing one compositional approach as more important than another.
Colin Eatock is a composer who writes extensively on musical topics, including 2010’s “What’s Wrong With Classical Music?“, which explores connections between music business-related issues, elitism, and systemic problems. For example, he mentions that “classical music in public places is often deliberately intended to make certain kinds of people feel unwelcome. Its use has been described as ‘musical bug spray,’ and as the ‘weaponization’ of classical music. At the Bathurst Street Subway Station [Toronto], the choice of music conveys a clear message: ‘Move along quickly and peacefully, people; this is not your cultural space.'” Indeed, this type of emotional manipulation could discourage people from enjoying contemporary classical music, as it seems to target people “who come from economic and cultural backgrounds that have never embraced Western classical music”.
This reinforces the systemic elitism within classical music and abuses music as an art. However, it is also an unethical way of controlling society and minority cultures. A section of Eatock’s article discusses the popularity of classical music in comparison to other genres, stating, “Culturally speaking, classical music is insignificant, with record sales that would be considered a joke in the pop music industry…Yet even with public support, tickets to classical concerts are prohibitively expensive.” While Eatock’s statement may be blunt –as classical music does, indeed, have cultural significance – it proposes valid reasons for lack of interest in the genre. Society has done a poor job of encouraging people to attend classical concerts,” Eatock says. “The concerts themselves are stuffy and convention-bound – and the small, aging audience that attends them is an uncool mixture of snobs, eggheads, and poseurs pretending to appreciate something they don’t.” So pretentious attitudes – perceived or otherwise– and historical and systemic issues have contributed to this problem, as “classical music is ‘elitist’: originally intended for rich Europeans who thought they were better than everyone else, and composed by a bunch of dead white males.”
Eatock also discusses aspects of traditional concert hall etiquette, which also puts classical music in a negative light. For example, he expresses that the concert hall was historically suited towards people of wealth and high social class, and that there were standards for concert hall etiquette: “What one era finds formal, solemn, and proper, another may find stilted, boring, and oppressive – and that’s where we are today.” This idea alludes to several undesirable modern issues regarding concert hall etiquette, such as sitting through a piece in complete silence or receiving glares for snapping a photo, clapping between a movement, or for an accidental phone buzz. To a large extent, attending classical music concerts, especially those in smaller halls, can feel punishing rather than pleasurable.
In some ways, contemporary classical music struggles to acknowledge the work of minority cultures, which feeds into art music criticism and Eurocentric tendencies. For example, Meredith Monk is an incredibly popular 21st-century composer. However, her culturally diverse influences create controversy in her music and in reviews of her work. In a 2023 Gramophone article by Pwyll ap Siôn, “What makes Merideth Monk one of contemporary music’s most original, individual, and innovative figures?”, the author discusses Monk’s explorations of diverse vocal techniques and influences of Inuit throat singing, Tibetan chanting, Balkan nasality, and Japanese kabuki. Siôn seems to portray these sounds as exotic and unusual without discussing their cultural meaning. As suggested by the article’s title, it seems that multicultural sounds are used to glorify Monk and Western music, posing her as a leading figure in modern music, without understanding how the context in which she uses them may upset or misrepresent the merit and traditions of non-Western groups.
The article describes aspects of her music as “croaking, gurgling, moaning, shouting, squealing, wailing, whispering and yodeling…With infant shrieks, stentorian coughs, bird calls, miaows, animal chatter, priestly chanting, nonsense syllables and ritualistic incantations, Monk’s voice swoops, dives, soars, floats, flies, and falls.” This response to Monk’s work ignores the cultural significance of her non-Western influences. While there does not seem to be ill-intent in Siôn’s writing, perhaps he could have described non-Western sounds more respectfully, as his quote seems to allude to stereotypes of indigenous people, portraying non-Western cultures as uncivilized or as using exotic communication methods. To some extent, this shines a negative light on a genre already unpopular among a significant portion of the global population, alluding to systemic issues within classical music and reinforcing its Eurocentricity and “elitist” stereotypes.
A similar problem in modern music is composers’ advocating for others without fully understanding the extent of the issue or of the individual’s circumstances. For example, Steve Reich’s Come Out is a work for tape that responds to a horrific event that took place in the 1960s, in which the “Harlem Six”, a group of black teens in New York City, were wrongfully accused of murder and consequently faced police brutality, abuse, and torture. One of the victims, Daniel Hamm, was refused hospital treatment because his bleeding was not visible, which led him to intentionally cut open his bruises to expose the bleeding and cruelty that he had faced. Reich’s piece uses a recording excerpt taken from an interview with Hamm shortly after the incident, repeating and editing the text “come out to show them”, which refers to the bleeding and violence that Hamm had experienced.
While it seems Reich had good intentions in advocating for civil rights through Come Out, some negative implications arise from this work. While Hamm remained imprisoned for nine years after the incident, Reich “benefited” from part of his suffering by using his voice. Some may feel that the composer, as a white male, does not understand the full extent of the prejudices and systemic issues that many black Americans experience. In this way, people may view Reich’s work as only a surface-level understanding of civil rights concerns.
Western contemporary classical music has various issues contributing to its lack of popularity and engagement, including elitist attitudes, misrepresenting other cultures, performance impracticalities, and systemic issues. Understanding and overcoming these problems can help contemporary classical music composers create music as varied as the world itself – and draw in its longed-for audience.
Works Cited
Babbitt, Milton. “Who Cares if You Listen?” High Fidelity, February, 1958.
Beta, Andy. “Blood and Echoes: The Story of ComeOut, Steve Reich’s Civil Rights Era Masterpiece”.Pitchfork. 28 April 2016.
Britten, Benjamin. 1964. “On Receiving the First Aspen Award“. AspenMusicFestival. 31 July 1964.
Eatock, Colin. “What’s Wrong With Classical Music?” colineatock.com. 4 October 2010.
McVeigh, Bronwen. “Civil Rights in America” Lecture, Eastman School of Music. April, 2023.
Siôn, Pwyll. “What makes Merideth Monk one of contemporary music’s most original, individual, and innovative figures?” Gramophone. 19 January 2023.