Sorry if this reads like a Manifesto.

One conception of music that i hope develops in the 21st century is the idea of music constructed without borders, without particular contries or nationalities or traditions defining them. This is inherently opposite from the modernist euro-centric conception of art-music/music art as a western and only western phenomenon and the rest of the worlds music output as a lesser category of "world music". Of course that concept is today known to be absurd, so instead, this is the idea that every music culture on earth had material to contribute to the learning of a musician and that these experiences are inherently valuable, and that judgments of inferiority should not be imposed upon non-European musical traditions.

This is not an argument about equality or inequality of the richness of musical traditions around the world, but the idea that music, as an artistic creation of individuals, is not something that has to be confined to specific traditions and instrumentation, and that learning is cross-cultural. This idea does not encourage some musical pastiche of style, but rather the understandings of the possibility of song forms and singing, instrumental or human.

I can imagine that my school on campus could offer classes on indian raga as well as piano performance, or west african drumming along side introduction courses to Gamelan. Today those wonderful subjects are all sort of grouped together in those "world music" sections, marginalized in a country which has grown less and less culturally Dependant on europe in the 20th century.

On a smaller scale, focusing in on the united states and canada, I suppose my hope for the 21st century is this : cultural dependence on europe will finally end and that a well grown hybrid and mixing will develop that would allow for a new musical environment that is not just older european or older east asian or middle eastern notions of music, but something that has absorbed both, and all, and comes up with something new and fresh.

Here in the US and Canada, we are living in (thank god) an increasingly diverse society with people coming from cultures completely different from those of the europeans that settled these two countries. Asian, African, Polynesian and Middle Eastern cultures are already mixing and enriching the lives of citizens in this country. Our music today should aim to reflect these wonderful changes and not just rely on older instrumentation, dispite its familiarity, and aim to speak a musical language that speaks to people, no matter where they're from.

I guess our problem is that a lot of people cant step out of our own generally white-European culture, into a different view, where musical traditions are not treated as superior or inferior, but just as matters of fact. One of things that bothered me in living in france was its mono-culture. Its one, singular self-absorbed culture that just doesn't invite others to the party. That was unbearable to me , and why i realized that i was glad to be American, and to be able to eat my pad thai one night and my chicken masala the next, to live in a country that doesnt (in principal) treat people with other ethnic and cultural origins as inferior.

27 Shocking revelations for a Conservative Classical musician/composer/critic

Shocking Revelation #1) Classical music isn’t inherently superior to other kinds of music.
2) Just because its written down doesn’t mean its superior to non-notated music
3) The western orchestra has changed less in the last 150 than it has in the entire history of its existence, these last 150 years being the period of the most radical social and technological developments in the history of humanity.
4) The classical musical institutions are swamped by conservatism and a fear of change, and resists adapting to new musical ensembles..
5) Just because its in the form of, or called a symphony/ string quartet/sonata doesn’t mean its a dignified or a quality piece of music.
6) Popular music is not the devil
7) Just because its popular doesn’t mean its not good
8) music which is complicated is not necessarily (and often not) better or superior to other kinds of music
9) Music that is simple, or that uses simple harmony is not innately inferior
10) Minimalism is not evil or necessarily insane
11) What John cage did actually IS music
12) Composers today are just as smart as composers from the 19th century.
13) there are many good composers who are alive today and writing great music.
14) Most of what vivaldi/telemann wrote is not really worth listening to.
16) The musical public today is smarter and better educated than they were in the 17th 18th, 19th and early 20th century.
17) Some of the best music made in the last 80 years has been by non-classical musicians.
18) Amplification is not an evil or heretical practice and the microphone is a legitimate piece of musical equipment
19) acoustic music is not superior to electronically amplified or modified music.
20) pure electronic music is legit, as much so as a string quartet
21) the electric guitar is a good instrument and is safe to play, write for and listen to.
22) its ok to have amplification in an opera, string quartet, or what have you
22) Classical musical institutions are often swamped by disgusting, insane cultural-imperialist ideas and dogmas.
23) Its ok if not everyone loves classical music
24) "classical music" is actually a ridiculous expression and a moronic way of classifying things, (how can Palestrina and Stravinsky sensibly be classified the same way? or Bach and Debussy? Monteverdi and shoenberg? etc)
25) Many classical musicians, critics and composers have tried to isolate classical music from the rest of the world for the last 60 years
26) Many classical musicians, critics and composers are self-pitying.
27) "Classical music" Is Not going to die anytime soon

Unstuffing Classical Music.

Or as I like to call it, reverse-taxidermy. Something clearly needed in the classical music scene, unless we want to preserve the music like a misguided owner preserves their dead dog. Its all so stuffy, no excitement- and the greatest thrill outside of the music is the occasional cough in the audience. Every once in a while you'll get a real hacker, and all you can do is wait in anticipation for them to be ok again. No dancing in the aisles, no boos or hisses, rare are the cheers, just smugness.

But I digress. There’s a real problem with all this, and that is the expectations of the audience. Many who show up for classical music concerts, I don’t doubt, are not there because of some sincere love for the art, but because its so high-class to go. Dress up all fancy and parade around, listen to the old masters in complete silence and seriousness. They like it stuffy, that’s what they're there for, if it didn’t have the reputation, they wouldn’t be there.

So we're a little stuck then, as these misguided fellows probably have some money in their pockets and purses. The orchestra cant change it up, the taxidermists would cry foul and maybe revoke their memberships and all that, so what do orchestras do? they appeal to these people. They accept the image as there remains no financial alternative.

But i propose that we give our orchestras two faces: The old, lifeless face to appeal to our wealthy taxidermists- and a fresh, invigorating concert- maybe with, *gasp*, new music as part of the repertoire: 20th century to contemporary. This is the only pragmatic(?) solution i cant come up with. I wouldn’t mind opinions on this one (and i love opinions).

Maybe I’m wrong, maybe the orchestra leaders really love it stuffy, and obviously these generalities wont apply everywhere.