[quote]ouroboro_s wrote:
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
The price of the instrument and music played ARE relevant, only because (if you read the article) the guy had very recently put on a concert where tickets were expensive and people flocked to hear the renowned musician. The point was that the lack of attention was disproportionate to the weight of the musician’s name and his music and instrument; it was in direct contract to the attention the man and his music DID receive (where he played on such an instrument in a high profile setting) a short while ago at a concert with him as sell out act.
[/quote]
I understand your point. However, the high priced concert was presumably attended by people with an interest in classical music. People have self selected themselves by paying for the tickets and showing up. Why would we expect the same level of attention amongst a group of people who have done neither nor would they naturally have an interest in classical music? It isn’t just that it’s out of context and people don’t pay attention. The same people are unlikely to pay and attend even when it’s in context.
Some people like classical music and will pay to listen to it. Many people don’t and won’t stop to listen, in context or not. To me the experiment elicits the response of Duh, no kidding. The same can be said of any niche interest. The price of the instrument and the weight of the musicians name would only be relevant to lover’s of classical music. So you are correct, water is wet and the sky is blue.
The fact that that information is included gives me the feeling that because few people took note, we are judged to be philistines and what a shameful state the world is in. It comes off as a bit superior.
[/quote]
See, I didn’t read it that way at all. I didn’t see it as a judgment of others bustling through the subway area.
I do think context is the most critical element, but also that, unless you are FAMILIAR with the musician and that genre of music, you won’t stop to notice. If you LOVE that kind of music and regularly listen to it, don’t you think you’d be more likely to stop for a sec and listen? I think so.
If DJ Tiesto, perhaps the most famous trance DJ in the world, were spinning in the same spot, do you think the classical music fans would stop and say, “Wow, he spins so well!” Or do you think they’d ask themselves what the fuck that “noise” is?
It is context and it is perception.
If I don’t know shit about break dancing, have no knowledge of the technical aspect and the difficulty of certain moves, I won’t notice some incredible breaking going on in such a busy area; I’ll walk by and think they’re some stoned teenagers having fun. But, if I’m a breaker myself OR enjoy watching them break, I might stop and say, “Damn, those guys are good.”
I honestly don’t think the piece was meant to point out the people as “Phillistines,” uncultured and uneducated. This wasn’t a piece to point out who has “taste” and who doesn’t; it was meant to juxtapose extremes–renowned musician playing an insanely expensive instrument in a non-descript area–and show irony. That’s it.
Then point was that, when primed for it, we’ll see what we want to see. When paying for an expensive concert, we’ll expect a good time.
And for the record, there is nothing wrong with such social experiments that simply state the sky is blue, water is wet, Ourboro picks fights ;)…it’s just how you say it that matters. I’m not about to touch a hot stove to prove that it’s hot.
