>	Why don't regular people like classical music? This is the
>question that was posed to me recently in a letter from Timothy W.
>Muffitt, the music director of the University of Texas Symphony
>Orchestra, which has gained international acclaim for its
>rendition of "Achy Breaky Heart."
>	No, I'm sure it's a fine orchestra that plays a serious
>program of classical music featuring numerous notes, sharps,
>flats, clefs, bassoons, deceased audience members, etc.
>	Anyway, Mr. Muffitt states that he has been asked to
>conduct a series of concerts for the Louisiana Philharmonic
>Orchestra next fall; the goal is "to get people into the concert
>hall other than those who usually come." He asks:  "What would
>get the average Joe into the concert hall? Do you go to classical
>music concerts? Why or why not?"
>	Mr. Muffitt, those are important questions, and before I
>answer them, let me state that I really like saying "Mr.
>Muffitt." I think "Mr. Muffitt" would be a great title for a
>Saturday-morning children's cartoon show, wherein Mr. Muffitt is a
>superhero who, accompanied by sidekicks representing every major
>minority group and gender, goes around kicking villain butt. I
>have not worked out the details of the plot, although it would
>definitely involve a Magic Turret.
>	But getting back to Mr. Muffitt's questions: Our first
>task is to define exactly what we mean by "classical music."
>When we look in volume "M" of our son's World Book Encyclopedia,
>we find, on pages 838-9, the following statement:  "Mosses grow
>and reproduce in two phases -- 'sexual' and 'asexual.'" Not only
>that, but during the "sexual" phase, the moss develops "special
>organs," and when the time is ripe,  "they burst and release
>hundreds of sperm cells."
>	Do you believe it? MOSS! Growing organs! Having sex!
>Probably smoking little one-celled cigarettes afterward! Parents,
>this could be going on in YOUR COMMUNITY. I think we should alert
>the Rev. Pat Robertson.
>	But we also need to define "classical music." A little
>farther on in the World Book, we come to the section on music,
>which states:  "There are two chief kinds of Western music,
>classical and popular." Thus we see that "classical music" is
>defined, technically, as "music that is not popular." This could
>be one reason why the "average Joe" does not care for it.
>	I myself am not a big fan. I will go to a classical
>concert only under very special circumstances, such as that I have
>been told to make a ransom payment there. But until I got this
>letter from Mr. Muffitt, I never knew why I felt this way. I've
>been thinking about it, and I have come up with what I believe are
>the three main problems with classical music:
>	1. IT'S CONFUSING. With "popular" music, you understand
>what's happening. For example, in the song "Long Tall Sally,"
>when Little Richard sings,  "Long Tall Sally, she's built for
>speed," you can be certain that the next line is going to follow
>logically ("She got everything that Uncle John need"), and then
>there will be the chorus, or, as it is known technically,  "the
>'ooh baby' part." Whereas in classical music, you never know WHAT
>will happen next. Sometimes the musicians stop completely in the
>middle of the song, thereby causing the average Joe, who is hoping
>that the song is over, to start clapping, whereupon the deceased
>audience members come back to life and give him dirty looks, and
>he feels like a big dope. It would help if there were an
>electronic basketball-style clock hanging from the conductor's
>back, indicating how much time is left in the song. Speaking of
>which:
>	2. IT TAKES TOO LONG. The Shangri-Las, performing "Leader
>of the Pack," take only about four minutes to tell a dramatic and
>moving story  including a motorcycle crash. A classical orchestra
>can take five times that long just to sit down. There needs to be
>more of an emphasis on speed. There could be Symphony Sprints,
>wherein two orchestras would compete head-to-head to see who could
>get through a given piece of music the fastest. There could even
>be defense, wherein for example the trombone players would void
>their spit valves at the opposing violin section. This would be
>good, because:
>	3. IT NEEDS MORE ACTION. When I was in college, I saw the
>great blues harmonica player James Cotton give a performance of
>"Rockin' Robin" wherein he stuck his harmonica into his mouth,
>held his arms out sideways like an airplane, and toppled headfirst
>off of an eight-foot stage into the crowd, where he landed safely
>on a cushion of college students and completed the song in the
>prone position.
>	That same year -- I did not see this personally, but I
>have friends who did -- the great blues guitarist Buddy Guy gave a
>club performance wherein, while taking a solo, he went into the
>men's room (he had a long guitar cord), closed the door,
>apparently relieved himself, flushed, reopened the door and came
>back out and never stopped playing.
>	You do not forget musical experiences such as those.
>	I am not saying that classical musicians should do these
>things. It would be difficult to get, say, a harp into a restroom
>stall. I am just saying, Mr. Muffitt, that until the average Joe
>can expect this level of entertainment from classical music, he is
>probably going to stay home watching TV, stuck to his sofa like
>moss on a rock. But with less of a sex life.
>
>(C) 1994 THE MIAMI HERALD
>DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.


