This is a few weeks old so hopefully this isnt a fata but I ran into it on stumbleupon.com. thought it was really interesting.
Quote:
He finished playing and silence took over. No one noticed. No one applauded, nor was there any recognition.
No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the greatest musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, with a violin worth $3.5 million dollars. Two days before Joshua Bell sold out a theater in Boston where the seats averaged $100.
This is a true story. Joshua Bell playing incognito in the metro station was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste and people’s priorities.
Now, if some enraged commuter had smashed his absurdly appraised violin over the skull of some unsuspecting toddler thusly demolishing it to useless chunks of refuse out of sheer intolerance for him and his crap, then this would be NEWS!!
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
The World Ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. - Flames Fans
If you thought this season would have a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.
I notice that the article didn't mention what piece he was playing. That probably had something to do with it. I know I wouldn't stop for a musician, no matter how good, if they were playing some piece of drek that I've heard a million times while on hold with my phone company. I stop to listen to street musicians a lot if they're doing something a little different, and even throw a buck or two in their case.
yeah understandable, but still whatever he was playing had to have sounded pretty impressive
Yes and no.
As a professional musician I can tell you that sometimes the most difficult to play pieces, regardless of instrument, don't necessarily sound the most impressive.
Furthermore, you have to consider the demographics of where he was playing. When you think of a guy playing an instrument in the metro station, what do you assume? Generally a bum looking for his beer money that day. What is the automatic reaction by most for that? To put your head down and ignore him as you walk by (unless you're one of those who stop to tell him to get a job).
You aren't thinking, or stopping to consider the quality of the music. You are blocking it out because that's what you're used to doing.
That's not even to mention that a metro is filled with the lowest common denominator, a far cry away from the generally older if not elderly, somewhat elitist crowd that understands and appreciates classical music.
It's probably safe to assume that a good majority of people today don't and can't distinguish between good classical music and bad classical music.
The Following User Says Thank You to arloiginla For This Useful Post:
Looking at the youtube, I don't really see why anyone would have paid attention. It's a rather slow piece, and people walking by propably catched about 5 seconds in tolerable acoustics, while the rest was propably just incomprehensible background noice.
Not a bad idea, but I don't think this says much anything about anything really. Had they set up something a little more catchy in slightly better conditions, it would make it much more interesting.
ALSO: if you could tell the difference between an average violin and a $3.5M one in a metro station, we wouldn't need concert halls.
if you could tell the difference between an average violin and a $3.5M one in a metro station, we wouldn't need concert halls.
Not trying to be a know-it-all here but I can tell the difference in sound.
This is not the kind of music that people will stop for in the metro station. If he were playing lady gaga and had a baby break dancing in front of him he would have a pretty solid crowd.
As a professional musician I can tell you that sometimes the most difficult to play pieces, regardless of instrument, don't necessarily sound the most impressive.
If you want to listen to the most talented guitarists play some of the most complex pieces there are, head over to your local guitar works/long & mcquade and listen. Some of the best guitar players alive have never played on stage.
Talented and complicated don't necessarily mean good or enjoyable to listen to.
The Following User Says Thank You to CaramonLS For This Useful Post:
If you want to listen to the most talented guitarists play some of the most complex pieces there are, head over to your local guitar works/long & mcquade and listen. Some of the best guitar players alive have never played on stage.
Talented and complicated don't necessarily mean good or enjoyable to listen to.
This.
Yngwie Malmsteen, Joe Satriani, Buckethead etc. etc. etc. are completely unlistenable dreck, despite being ridiculously intense and difficult musically. The problem is, people like this forget what makes music listenable.
Classical music to me is like 'fine' art. I don't get it. One person slaps some paint into some odd forms and it won't sell for $10. Someone else does it and it's worth $3.5 mil, yet I can't tell the difference between the two.
But I suppose that's just a lack of knowledge, and maybe respect, for the two art forms. It's not that I don't respect the music, I just don't really care for it. To everyone at that station, it's just another busker playing his tunes to make a buck. Like someone else said, put him in a different scenario where people are not predisposed to ignore the shady-looking folks playing for money, and it might get a better response. I'm sure most people just completely tuned it out.
32 dollars in 45 minutes. These bums make more money than I do.
__________________
But living an honest life - for that you need the truth. That's the other thing I learned that day, that the truth, however shocking or uncomfortable, leads to liberation and dignity. -Ricky Gervais
Classical music to me is like 'fine' art. I don't get it. One person slaps some paint into some odd forms and it won't sell for $10. Someone else does it and it's worth $3.5 mil, yet I can't tell the difference between the two.
.
Quote:
But I suppose that's just a lack of knowledge, and maybe respect, for the two art forms. It's not that I don't respect the music, I just don't really care for it. To everyone at that station, it's just another busker playing his tunes to make a buck. Like someone else said, put him in a different scenario where people are not predisposed to ignore the shady-looking folks playing for money, and it might get a better response. I'm sure most people just completely tuned it out
It was a snob test.
I'm sure Joshua Bell could have sold a lot of records with that stuff hundreds of years ago but mass appeal for it died out long ago . . . . . really, why would the Washington Post be expecting hordes of people to stop and listen with rapture to music that convenience store owners use to scare kids away from their parking lots?
Plunk Keith Urban down in the same spot with only his guitar and you'd have the riots they said they were worried about.
The Post makes the assumption that Bell is a genius on a stringed instrument, then goes from there. Yet Urban is also a genius on a stringed instrument and would likely have had a singularly different result.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
Perception
