A Comment on a Comment

So Lindsey left an interesting and insightful comment on my post about Zankel Hall, and I'd like to discuss it here. First, here is her comment:

Lindsey said...

Man, modern classical music is so touch-and-go. I had a feeling the concert would be something like this. Most recent works really are an acquired taste that even the artists have to work at achieving. I know that as a genre, I'm not a huge fan of 20th-21st century vocal rep. Sometimes artists forget that the public hasn't had weeks or months to study and fall in love with the pieces like they have. All the audience has is those three or four minutes that it takes to sing the piece, and most of the time, unless you listen to that sort of genre a lot, that's not enough time to "get" it. I'm not saying that the audience is stupid (far from it), it's just that I don't think that modern classical music is not easy to connect with. So much of it is so dissonant and odd to our ears, that listening to more than a few of those sort of pieces at a time becomes very trying. But anyways, I could go on and on and on, modern classical music (or really any form of modern art in general) is one of my "soapbox" issues (Ha! Understatement much?). Though, I definitely still envy you for getting to go! Yay for having him remember you!

I wonder if historically the public has always reacted this way to new music. I mean, think about what Mozart was doing. It was revolutionary - no one had heard anything like it. They didn't know what to make of it, and many people didn't care for it. I don't know that much about music history, but I imagine that he wasn't alone in puzzling the audience. If my aunt were still alive this is something I'd definitely discuss with her. So I ask the readers to share any historical musical knowledge you all have regarding audience reaction to different composers who tried out different things.