Audiences hate modern classical music because their brains cannot cope

After reading this article, please read on and let me know what you think.

"Audiences hate modern classical music because their brains cannot cope," wow... how to begin? I read that title and a little crinkle emerged between my eyebrows. How can I take anything in the article to follow seriously with a title such as that? First, "their brains cannot cope" implies that the average person is a neanderthal, incapable of adjustment, comprehension, or understanding. Secondly, the word "hate" is uncomfortable, brutish, and down right wrong. Does the average person listen to modern classical music? If so, do they "hate" all the many different compositions that are so loosely encompassed underneath the "modern classical music" umbrella? I cannot believe that is true and here are a few reasons why:

1. Now, more than ever, music is more available and accessible by means of torrents, libraries, iTunes, and all sorts of downloads. Not to mention the countless ways that you can rip and swap playlists with friends. As such, the average listener has had greater exposure to a variety of styles and genres, which almost all have permeated modern classical music in some way or another. For example, electronic tape pieces like Temazcal by Javier Alvarez for maracas and tape is electronica samples infused with monks chanting and maracas. That is modern classical music. Is the human brain incapable of "predicting patterns" in that piece? I do not think so. My 14 year-old little sister, who is obsessed with Glee, would enjoy this dramatic and lively composition.

2. While the science that is support this article's generalization seems valid, it is out of touch with the purpose of music and even further from the purpose of most modern classical music. Modern classical composers strive for furthering the art form. Creating and performing music that elevates our minds and perhaps even alters them. So that when you leave a new music concert, you walk away with a sense of difference and removal from your "comfort zone." If composers based their compositions on brain patterns, well that is exactly what we would have-MUSIC THAT IS PATTERN-BASED, FAMILIAR, AND NOT NEW! How interesting, thought-provoking, or enlightening is that?


However, I do want to stress that I support this kind of scientific research. It teaches us more about ourselves, our conditioning and our natural tendencies. Those findings are informative and can tip us off to pattern-based behavior and expression. And if we understand those patterns, we might be able to remove our expression from the restrictions of our nature. We might be able to discover and invent and re-interpret our creative world separate from expectations. Oh, wait...I think that is a big motivating factor behind modern classical music. That the rules of tonality were limiting and could not always fully express the complexity of the world around us. Also, there comes a point where tonality can loose its effect. We know the patterns and we can predict what will happen in a piece of music before it is played. That is boring and uninspired.

Music is the medium by which we can express the inexpressible, the ethereal, and the unknown. It transcends the boundaries of language, culture, time and space. Thus, it should never be subjected to the microscopic lens of science as litmus test for what is enjoyable and what is not. The scientific research done on audiences is novel at best, it is neither conclusive or usefully informative in practical compositional applications. What this article did for me, was dredge up a lot of reasons why people do not enjoy modern classical music, but is that really helpful?

Modern classical concerts are some of the least attended and yet this article paints this art form as misguided and inaccessible. How does that encourage people to broaden their horizons? How does this help people break free of the patterns by which their whole musical enjoyment and aesthetics are founded?

It does not.