World Class Violin Concert for Free

[cannon_fodder]

In Washington D.C. the Post had a child prodigy turned world class Concert Violinist play his 1713 Stradivarius in the subway during morning rush hour.  No publicity, no fanfare, and no indication of who he was.  Simply to see what would happen.

The result is this story, "Pearls Before Breakfast"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040401721.html

It is one of the most interesting commentaries I have read in a long while.  The people's reactions (or lack thereof) and the story behind it all.  Its an interesting snapshot of life in America - "what is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stop and stare."

Its long (15 pages printed), but well worth the read I guarantee.

[rwarn17588]

I think it's a bogus commentary because:

1) the performance was done during the morning rush hour, when people are hustling to get to work on time and preserve their jobs.

2) Less than 3 percent of the nation's album sales are classical music. Not to mention you have a substantial fraction of people who don't listen to music. So if you had 4 out of 100 stopping to watch this performance, you'd be doing well.

I think the violin player would have had a better response had he done it during the evening, when people are coming home from work and a bit more relaxed in their schedules.

I'm not impressed by the story's premise. It's a bunch of hand-wringing over nothing.

[tulsa1603]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

In Washington D.C. the Post had a child prodigy turned world class Concert Violinist play his 1713 Stradivarius in the subway during morning rush hour.  No publicity, no fanfare, and no indication of who he was.  Simply to see what would happen.

The result is this story, "Pearls Before Breakfast"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040401721.html

It is one of the most interesting commentaries I have read in a long while.  The people's reactions (or lack thereof) and the story behind it all.  Its an interesting snapshot of life in America - "what is this life if, full of care, we have no time to stop and stare."

Its long (15 pages printed), but well worth the read I guarantee.

Maybe I'm taking it wrong, but what turns me off about this is the attitude of the writer.  He has a somewhat holier than thou attitude, but it's easy for him to act that way since he was in on the experiment.  To the average listener, the player isn't any more wonderful to listen to than the average performer who might stand there day after day expecting a handout.  Oftentimes in architecture, someone who is a major architectural influence will design a house of great quality and design, but when placed next to an ordinary tract house, I guarantee you, most people don't appreciate or understand the difference, and would probably prefer the tract house anyway.  Same thing goes for art, theater, etc.

[cannon_fodder]

I didnt get the impression that the author was trying to belittle the passersby and he frequently commented on the lack in common insight into classical music.  I thought the point was that a random person was playing fantastic music and few people took a moment to appreciate it.  No one stopped to smell the roses, if you will.

It was done during rush hour precisely to illustrate this point.  I'm not knowledgeable enough to tell the difference between a good violin player and a world class player nor would I recognize Mr. Bell, but I like to think I would at least pause for a second if I heard this on my way to work:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/04/09/VI2007040900536.html

The point isnt that he was famous and no one noticed, nor that he is THE best and no one noticed... the point is there was something truly amazing presented to people and they simply ignored it, didnt appreciate it, or didnt bother to pay attention.  What are the odds that any of these people bothered to notice if it was a nice day out.  Or if some mural on the wall was recently finished.  Or that they managed to brew the perfect pot of coffee?

That's that I got out of it.  But that's just me .

[rwarn17588]

I'm gonna jump on my populist stump for a bit, but I largely think people didn't care because it's classical.

During the 1700s and 1800s, what we call classical music was the pop music of its day.

That started to change with Stephen Foster and other folk- and blues-oriented songwriters. This was music that appealed more to Joe Beerbottle.

Those who lament the dearth of classical music in the modern era is missing the point. The Beatles, Hank Williams, Bob Wills, Ray Charles, Johnny Cash, Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers, Led Zepellin and U2 ARE our classical music.

[TheArtist]

Music is just like painting, writing or any other art.  One can still be enthralled by mastery, creativity or genius of execution, whether it be in relation to something modern or contemporary.  But I do agree on the rush hour thing that people were busy and had to get to work.  I found the story interesting and did not think the writer in any way looked down on anyone.  He fairly laid out many possible reasons for why people may not have stopped.  Too busy, lack of context, not familiar with classical music, phone, ipod, etc.

I do think that one has to learn the "language" of any art to really appreciate it, and bemoan the fact that it does seem that many people today in the US do not take the time to learn those languages.  So even if they were exposed to something superb, they wouldn't be able to understand that it was superb.  

Paintings are very much that way. I had a "Paintings in the Louvre" book that I would just devour.  Some paintings that were filled with figures, drapery, detailed architecture, etc.  I would find to be amazing.  I remember this one dark little painting that didnt have much to it, very simply done with loose brush strokes, all in browns and a bit of gold tones,,, to be quite boring.  It was by Rembrandt.  Years and years later as I was flipping through that worn out book for for the umpteenth time, I came to the page with that simple bland painting and suddenly it struck me to the core. I was astonished and moved.  How could I have not seen it before as I saw it then? So beautiful.  Twilight, a single sunbeam, lighting up a small patch of dark landscape under huge heavy rain drenched clouds. Caught in the sunbeam a tiny, solitary figure and a mule crossing a bridge.  You can almost see that sunbeam softly glow through a break in the clouds for a few moments, magically lighting the middle of this space, and then dimming away. A breath of a moment, not lost forever, but somehow captured, forever.  I then realized why Rembrandt was so revered.  I then knew why he was given more accolades than the artists of those other paintings that had early on seemed so impressive. Even today I can just stare at that Rembrandt and feel humility, while those other paintings bore me.  But I bet if I were to put that Rembrandt next to one of those other paintings and show someone who is new to "reading" art, they would find the first one to be impressive, while thinking the Rembrandt not worth a second glance.

It takes time and learning to be able to "read" and appreciate a great sonnet, painting, sculpture, archtitecture, and yes music. Not just time to learn the language but also time to stop and appreciate it as well. But life is so worth the effort. Some thing are considered great for a reason. Learn to "read".