I. THE ART FORM OF THE FUTURE

Some time ago, at the Archives Forum, I posted a call to my fellow amateur Beethovens to devise appropriate visuals to accompany classical music. I was motivated by my dissatisfaction with the Classical Archives video pages, at which there are a number of fine performances, but the visuals seem restricted to a dull master-shot of the ensemble varied with a few close-ups of the individual performers.

The classical music videos fail for the same reason that watching classical music performed on television is dull. Classical musicians, in general, are scarcely photogenic, and one's musical experience is not enhanced by watching the player's movements. I, for one, would just as soon stare at a blank screen as watching Kurt Masur make faces at the orchestra while conducting or Glenn Ghoul wave his arms about gratuitously.

The New York Times on August 17, 2003 had a couple of articles of interest on the subject of the visual aspect of classical music. An article by Anne Midgette confirmed my opinion about watching classical music.

"Visually, classical music is a hard sell....On film there are such options as to leap from one camera angle to another, pursuing the music as it flows from instrument to instrument, so that the listener can't help registering that yes, this is a trumpet playing....To most of the television-watching public, it's time to change the channel."

The article also mentions the Musical Journey series from Naxos (who, while they don't always have an outstanding product, make a sincere effort) in which "pretty European lakes shrouded in mist" are shown while music plays. However, merely showing landscapes seems a thin soup to serve with such rich music. Ever since the introduction of broadcast television after W.W.II, the camera directors have done the same things over and over in broadcasts of concerts. There is a tight shot of the conductor bobbing and weaving; if any of the winds have a solo, there is a close-up of the soloist; and there is the obligatory close-up of the sticks beating on the tympani at the finale. The cinematography (camera work) used for symphony concerts has not changed at all in the last half century, and it remains at the artistic level of a 1940s newsreel.

That's it? That's the best that classical music can do? If so, I'll close my eyes rather than watch. But as pop-music videos become more sophisticated—and it was recently reported in the Times that pop videos now seldom show any music being performed—surely videos of classical music can do better and likewise feature imaginative and artistic visuals.

Not surprisingly, my posting at the Forum was greeted with indifference, except for one articulate young fellow who objected to the very idea of classical music videos. His argument, if I can state it correctly, is that Less Is More, that visuals can only detract from the music, and his reply was so cogent that, after a moment's reflection, I concluded he was right, and that classical music videos are fundamentally a bad idea. After all, listening to a complex piece of music such as Bach's Mass in B-Minor is challenging enough, what with all the different voices and the relationship between them, and adding a visual element can only serve to distract one and cause a sensory overload that results in missing more of the elements that the music offers.

But after giving so much consideration to the work of Richard Wagner for my recent rants on (against) him, I began to waver. Surely it can't be that there is absolutely no place in music for the visual arts. Despite that the amalgam of various arts in Wagner's operas (music dramas) was handled badly, does this mean that the entire concept should be abandoned?

The idea of a video to accompany the B-Minor Mass is certainly a bad one, but what about the other end of the classical spectrum? As effective as they are, pieces like The Pines of Rome and the Carmina Botana are basically mickey-mouse music, closer in nature to rock & roll. They've got a beat and simple melodies with not much else happening, and anyone can appreciate them—even the hearing impaired, considering their loudness. Visuals would certainly not detract from an appreciation of those pieces and might even compensate for their lack of complexity.

Also related to this topic is the question of pandering to popular taste. Classical purists would, typically, argue vehemently against any concession to the popular will, but classical purists are sick people who are invariably wrong. It would surely be a good thing if the general public, which is always fascinated with bright lights and videos, was enticed into an appreciation, albeit a superficial one, of classical music by means of a cleverly-done visual accompaniment to music. I have no desire to see it, but wasn't Walt Disney's Fantasia a good thing in that it at least exposed a large segment of the population to classical music? Now that computer technology has advanced to the point of making such a production easier and cheaper, why isn't it being done?

Videos, or even staged visuals, are not appropriate for all music, but that does not mean that they would not enhance or compliment any music, and if classical music is to be presented in any visual medium such as television or film, I merely suggest that it be done in as artistic and creative a manner as possible. Certainly we can do better than pop music, but thus far this has not been the case.

As a footnote, I'd add that Katedra, the 2002 animated short film from Poland, has set the standard as to what is possible in creating modern visual art. The music, by Adam Rosiak, borders on the minimalist and new age genres, but is quite effective. Alas, because it does not deal with sex and violence, the film has not been widely distributed in North America. For more information, go to http://www.platige.com/katedra/