EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

This thread was nice and informative while it lasted.
'Old stuff is shit' ended that.

Can I play?

Classically trained musician who took that training and is making something pretty interesting / not classical, but clearly has roots in her education

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYrcXX4nWOA

stubbed my toe the other day and I am mightily pissed off.

Strangely enough, I was hoping that Katie Hopkins had experienced just this.

All pre 1960s architecture is shit too. And what some people call 'art' prior to 1966 as well. In fact, what did the renaissance ever do for us anyway?

I think you'll find Culture started in 1966 with Eng-er-land winning the World Cup.
(there, have I managed to drag us back on topic)

Me too! (by the way, that's Vivaldi in the lead-in)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT3SBzmDxGk

So on this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-uk-cannot-have-single-market-a-la-carte-say-eu-leaders-a7109141.html#commentsDiv

looks like we're going to leave the EU but end up in the same place we are regarding immigration as we are now. So the righty leavers won't even get what they voted out for in the first place. what a huge farce.

Next Tory leader not to be settled until 9th of September.

And it'll be Jeremy Hunt

So, your argument for ignoring a linear progression of art and culture through history and focusing only on what you perceive as having 'emerged' of it's own volition in the last 30 years is that it's created for and by 'elites' and that it comes at the expense of those children who could otherwise explore the newer art forms, performed on a more local scale than grand opera houses and theatres in London?

This is a horrendously reductive argument and I suspect you know that, suffice to say that there's plenty of common folk capable of appreciating Ovid, Brahms or Bruegel and that this love of classic art goes on to inspire much new cultural production taking advantage of new technologies and opportunities.

Creating an artificial distinction between modern and classic is just a really divisive and unhelpful way of lowering standards and making one cultural group somehow incompatible with the other. I really don't see how kids getting taught Shakespeare in school is some kind of elitist brainwashing; the real problem is giving those talented enough to create or perform an equal stab at it and that's more due to nepotism and economic access.

To bring it back to Brexit, you're basically spinning out the same tactic as Leave in blaming an unidentified elite for all of society's woes when the real problem is immediately political and identifiable: Chronic underinvestment and underfunding of all art forms, everywhere in the UK that only the already-wealthy are able to bypass.

You appear really confused, you want people to only read proper English and seem to loathe any modern idiom, but have the opposite view on music.

The important thing is that people read, and read 'proper english' not simply tweets.

Your viewpoint is about as coherent as Johnson and Farage.

you are a fucking idiot.
go. away.

I'm sorry, I don't understand where I make your point? I fundamentally disproved your point - I said that I personally know of/have worked with hundreds of theatres in the UK, ranging from small to huge, that use stuff like Shakespeare and symphony orchestras as a means of helping disadvantaged people gain important life skills. Your argument that it is inaccessible and useless to all but the rich is utterly wrong.

Is Jeez back?

Skipped to the last page, now I have no clue where I am.

Is this still the Brexit thread?

Classical music is even more boring than politics

I think a #cexit (culture exit) may be needed to stop this thread become confusing 😃

Comedy oversized violin chat thread >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You could always start it yourself. I suspect it would be a lonely thread, since by now most forumengers have understood that your contributions to this thread do nothing more than say 'I don't like something therefore it's rubbish' over and over again in a variety of different ways.

Not to worry, we'll be on to skiffle next.

You are being naive if you think rock bands don't sink significant time and money into equipment, learning and practicing.
Where I grew up there was a county music service, part funded by 'taxpayers money' and part by donations (and the more competent/older players subsidising beginners through more commercially viable concerts).
The music service a) provided instruments at little to no cost to beginners b) subsidised lessons for all students to a nominal fee and removed the fee entirely for families on the dole/tax credits/etc c) taught all instruments there was demand to be taught (this is pre viable home studios but I understand they have since branched out to music tech/etc) d) put on concerts in all sorts of venues, from local schools to the Albert Hall.
You're right more money needs to go into schools but this doesn't need to come at the expense of concert halls and teaching people the instruments they want to learn. I've played in the same venues in orchestras and rock bands - one purpose doesn't rule out another.

Stahp.

jazz... the only music where the band is having a better time than the audience.

Oof, may as well burn down those museums, torch the libraries and stop teaching anything related to the classics too. Cultural revolution indeedy.

The classical gig requires dozens of expensive instruments...

bitch, do u evn @TS ?