« How Audiences Use Information to Reduce Risk | Main | Meaning: When the Virtual Becomes Real »
Will Mozart Man Replace Mighty Mouse?
The debate between those who promote valuing the arts for intrinsic reasons versus instrumental reasons (the arts are an instrument for social good) has taken a strange twist. The “instrumentalists� plan to blare Mozart and Beethoven through a sound system in Hartford’s Barnard Park to drive away drug-dealers and prostitutes.
Classical music, once again, is being asked to do some heavy lifting. Mozart, whose music has been called upon to make plants grow faster and children more intelligent, is now expected to rid neighborhood parks of undesirable elements.
As a marketer, I can’t help but wonder when the comic book industry will catch on and create a MozartMan superhero resplendent with lycra bodysuit, brocade cape, and powdered wig.
It seems to me that there is some unfair stereotyping going on here. A taste for pinky rings or flashy clothing does not necessarily indicate a lack of taste when it comes to classical music. I once heard about a hooker who could expound upon Scarlatti’s use of textural counterpoint at some length. Maybe Italian classical music produces slightly seedier outcomes.
Robert Fink, the eminent UCLA musicologist, in a somewhat less-than-optimistic tone remarked that “Beethoven is not going to save you.� He further observed that “Some of the greatest composers in history are now being viewed as some kind of bug spray or disinfectant.�
This is all very confusing. If one is an outreach coordinator working for an orchestra or for a classical music presenting organization, what is one to do?
If you believe – as is the claim – that Mozart or Beethoven will make children smarter, do you dare program it for at-risk youth who are growing up in a drug-infested neighborhood or among prostitutes knowing that it may cause them to flee further into Dickensian depravity?
Will our good intentions to save lives and turbo-charge cognition result in unintended consequences? These are grave questions.
Exactly at what point in a young person’s development does this aversion to classical music kick in? If we listen to arts education specialists, we have to reach people very early in their life. Clearly we need more research before making any further interventions.
Now I’m no musicologist with a social science sub-specialty, nor a social scientist with a musicological sub-specialty (and academe has provided us with plenty of these professionals), but I’d like to offer a suggestion that is based on thirty years of marketing to and observing classical music audiences.
If the good people of Hartford want to rid Barnard Park of undesirable elements, and they want to tap the great power of the arts to effect social change and human transformation, I have one word for them:
Schoenberg.
Homo sapiens’ aversion to serial music is indescribable. I have personally witnessed little old, hunched-over, tweed-clad gentlemen abandon their walkers and oxygen tanks to sprint for the exits when Schoenberg is performed. Schoenberg succeeds where faith-healers have failed when it comes to making the lame walk again.
Perhaps some heart-of-gold drug dealer who was driven to crime by some disabling accident will experience the same miraculous transformation! Perhaps a return to ambulatory life will prompt a move towards a virtuous vocation like music therapy.
I feel no small misgivings about putting Arnold Schoenberg’s music in this position. Personally, I enjoy listening to his works. (Some of my detractors will no doubt exclaim that this admission proves their suspicions of my questionable character.)
I do not feel guilty about characterizing Arnold Schoenberg’s music as less-than-listenable. That is a matter of taste. I do think that I overreach by asking his music to solve society’s ills when the religious, social science, judicial, medical, governmental, and family sectors have so demonstrably failed.
I’m afraid I have to take my place beside Professor Fink. Beethoven won’t save you, but Schoenberg might.
Posted on March 5, 2006 08:41 AM | Permalink
Bookmark with: 
del.icio.us, 
StumbleUpon, 
digg
Comments
Will Schoenberg save lives...
I had the opportunity to teach the senior level music classes at my old high school while I was doing my Bachelor of Music degree at Carleton. My purpose for that week: Teach them how to write music using 20th Century Methods. So yes, there was Serialism (Schoenberg), Minimalism (Riley), Music by Chance (Cage - though anybody writing a piece using nothing but silence got an F for plagarism) and altered modes (Messiaen).
While the listening examples did make some jaws drop, some faces cringe and some attention spans stand in attention, they were very interested in the methods that these gentlemen have to offer. The pieces the students wrote were not bad either...
So, can Schoenberg save lives, yes... but it can also keep 'em busy for about half an hour.
Great blog post!
Love your blog, Neill, and this particular post reminded me of a gift I bought for a friend with a new baby - A Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Action Figure, complete with piano bench, downloadable folding piano, and the following "facts" on the packaging:
Born: January 27, 1756- Salzburg
Died: December 5, 1791- Vienna
Occupation: Composer, Musician
Weapon of Choice: Pure musical genius!
(There was also a Bach figure)