08-12-2012, 20:24
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2012, 20:25 by Nick Dilley.)
So, I've got a bunch of friends who teach music at the college level and, like most colleges, they only teach classical and jazz. Which is great. BUT, there is always this recurring discussion about what composers get taught, and how sick they are of teaching Mozart and Beethoven over and over, every year, without being able to inject newer composers into the curriculum. And by "newer," they aren't necessarily talking about composer from last year, the last decade, or even the last 30 years.
So, my question for you is, what classical "Masters" do you think deserve the immortal reverence they receive in academia, and who do you think should be respected as any other decent composer, but not placed on a pedestal and taught over and over again?
I believe that one of the masters that should be taught FOREVER is Debussy. I go back and forth on others, but I am clear on him. His music is so brilliant and innovative. Even now!
To provide some perspective, some of the people I have these discussions with often refer to Mozart and Rachmaninoff as overrated composers, and not deserving of being part of school curriculum for as long as they have and to the extent that they have.
Thoughts?!
So, my question for you is, what classical "Masters" do you think deserve the immortal reverence they receive in academia, and who do you think should be respected as any other decent composer, but not placed on a pedestal and taught over and over again?
I believe that one of the masters that should be taught FOREVER is Debussy. I go back and forth on others, but I am clear on him. His music is so brilliant and innovative. Even now!
To provide some perspective, some of the people I have these discussions with often refer to Mozart and Rachmaninoff as overrated composers, and not deserving of being part of school curriculum for as long as they have and to the extent that they have.
Thoughts?!
