Clapping Music?

Silence is the perfectest herald of joy: I were but little happy, if I could say how much.

I'm chiming in perhaps a bit belatedly on the "audience behavior" issue that has been discussed on several other blogs.  Alex Ross quotes Emanuel Ax:

"I really hope we can go back to the feeling that applause should be an emotional response to the music, rather than a regulated social duty."

I completely agree with that.

But....

If we begin to allow - and then to expect - clapping between movements of certain works, won't the behavior become equally 'regulated'? 

What will an orchestra think at the end of the first movement of the Emperor Concerto five years down the road when there's only silence after the last note?  Is the audience disinterested (why bother with the other movements...)?  Has the performance been bad (or just not as good as last time...)?  Did the pianist not end with enough 'flourish' (or is he just saving that last amount of expression for the true finale...)?

As Alfred Brendel likes to point out - LISTEN is an anagram of SILENT.

I for one enjoy as much silence as possible at live concerts.  And yes, I enjoy silence between movements.  I seem to be becoming the odd man out. 

I don't see why it's elitist, stuffy, conservative, academic, or pious to want to submerge myself in an atmosphere and take in a work as a whole. I'd rather sacrifice the applause between movements of a work like the Emperor Concerto for the sake of not having to deal with it between movements of everything, which will be the eventual outcome.  I think the preference for applause at the end of the work, for its performance as a whole, is the most appropriate. 

(Even then there should be exceptions. I neither feel like applauding nor listening to applause at the end of Mahler's Symphony No. 9, and the better the performance of a work like that, the greater my desire for silence the rest of the night.)

Norman Lebrecht recently wrote:

"Around me I see people of all ages who sit gripped through four hours of King Lear, Lord of the Rings or a grand-slam tennis final but who, ten minutes into a classical concert, are squirming in their seats and wondering what crime they had committed to be held captive, silent and legroom-restrained, in such Guantanamo conditions..."

Sorry, but Bruckner's Eighth Symphony simply takes much more concentration and mental immersion than watching Lord of the Rings, where the amount of visual and aural stimuli is constantly changing, the colors and sound are mostly bright and obvious, the emotional direction unquestionable.  And, honestly, did he see Return of the Kings in the theater on opening night?  It was impossible to enjoy completely, as both a work of art and a piece of entertainment, due to the inevitable circus that ensued everyone time a favorite hero appeared onscreen or a favorite villain did something deliciously menacing or was sent to the sweet hereafter.  Peter Jackson's penchant for cutting from a very loud moment to an extremely quiet one exacerbated this.  A whole lot of subtlety and beauty was lost due to "an emotional response" to the film. 

The solution?  Well, here's a suggetion that could help.  To all regular concertgoers: the next time you go to a concert of music you love, bring three others unfamiliar with the music and perhaps even with concertgoing.  Dress nicely, but not uncomfortably.  (I fail to see how wearing khakis, a nice shirt, a blazer, and your new Kenneth Cole acquisition is uncomfortable.  Give me a break!)  Have a pre-concert glass of wine at your apartment and tell your friends what they're about to hear.  Have a post-concert event planned.  Everyone can turn their cell phones off because they're with the people they're going to be with all evening.  You're going to an event, it should feel special.  This isn't a screening of Dreamwork's latest at the local Cinemark, it's the friggin' New York Philharmonic!  You're going to hear a group of some of the greatest musicians on the planet create an amazing work of art and everyone involved has put years of work into the production.  This is going to be created in real time, and you won't be able to Netflix the DVD version later to catch the subtleties that you missed while munching your popcorn or opening your cough drop wrapper. Is a modicum of reverence really too much to ask?  It's our job, as seasoned concertgoers, to prepare them for the proper duration of uninterrupted music.

Let's face it - there simply aren't going to be a whole lot of new audience members that just "wander in" to the concert hall, become embarassed, get laughed at and leave when they clap after the first movement they hear.  The new audience is going to come from current concertgoers inviting their friends and coworkers.  It's our job to make the new audience realize just how special the event that's about to take place truly is.  It's going to take work - but it's worth it.

Comments

[Evan Johnson]

amen. I am with you 100%.

[Jessica]

Me too! How nice to read something sensible, realistic and CONSTRUCTIVE on the subject for a change.

[Alex Ross]

Marcus,
I'm disturbed by your use of the term "allow." Do you really have the right (never mind the ability) to "allow" people to behave in a certain way in a concert hall? It's one thing to argue for silence — to say to a friend who's applauded after the first movement of a concert, "To me, it would be nicer if there were no applause." But you seem to be siding in spirit and perhaps in practice with those who shush applauders, who take it upon themselves to police the concert hall according to their principles. It's the arrogant practice of shushing which set off my posts on this topic in the first place. If I want perfect silence, I can stay home and listen on headphones. In the concert hall, I want a communal experience, and that means a certain amount of joyful noise.

[Marcus]

NB: I reread this and apologize for its sporadic nature...

Sorry for sounding like a policeman!

The "allow" wasn't referring to me specifically - my permission isn't going to be solicited for such things at concerts, and I'm not one to "shush" audibly if people do things - that just adds to the racket. I can cast a good enough evil glare to get my point across silently... I guess maybe "tolerate" or "encourage" would have been a better word choice than "allow".

Maybe people will be reminded to think of what they're hearing as a whole entity made of smaller parts. If they realize that the break between movements isn't an appropriate stopping point to suspend the performance atmosphere, I think they might consider the music from a different and, in my opinion, better perspective.

I don't really buy the "Well, you're at a public function, there's going to be noise" argument. There are numerous examples of public events that are considered "special" where the practice of staying silent is expected and respected. Can clapping between movements honestly add anything to the appreciation of the music? I don't think so...

For me, and I think for many concertgoers, the silence between the movements is still part of the music - part of the experience of a live performance. It's time to contemplate what has just been heard. Applause breaks that atmosphere.

I honestly don't think anything would be gained at all by slackening up on a certain amount of reverence at concerts - I don't think it would improve attendance. In fact, I think we would risk irritating and possibly losing some of the most dedicated subscribers. People will undoubtedly start clapping after the thunderous close of the Rondo-burlesque of Mahler 9, where the mood should be one of complete devastation/confusion/catastrophe.

There already exist excellent concerts where a casual atmosphere is maintained - eighth blackbird and Bang on a Can, for example. These are excellent groups playing great music in a more casual atmosphere, and applause between movements is expected/allowed/encouraged/tolerated.

I suppose it all comes down to context - certain concerts certianly lend themselves to applause between movements and other more "casual" behaviors (for lack of a better term), but subscription orchestra concerts generally aren't the ones, in my opinion. I have yet to see a convincing argument that applause after the first movement of the Emperor Concerto in some way makes the experience more satisfying, more attractive to the general public or more musically fulfilling.

P.S. Sorry to keep referencing the Emperor Concerto - there are certainly other pieces with first movements that could lead one to applause (Tchaik 1st piano concerto & violin concerto, Dvorak cello concerto & 8th symphony, many, many others) - I was just staying in the 'realm' of the discussion. I fear that the reasons given for "allowing" applause at then of the such movements could lead one to the conclusion that applause would be appropriate at the end of, say, the first movement of Sibelius 5 - an exuberant, joyous rush of musical momentum. But I *definitely* think this would ruin the mood and meaning of the piece as a whole.

[Alex Ross]

Marcus, I'm glad we agree on the Emperor, or, even more, the Tchaikovsky First Concerto. It's just totally inane for three thousand people to sit there contemplating Tchaikovsky 1 as if it's some immense Buddhist relic, instead of a hugely passionate, rousing entertainment. In a lot of other causes, I don't feel a need to applaud, but I wouldn't mind if people did. I just don't see the point of getting working up about this, especially if new listeners find it confusing and alienating. I agree with Emanuel Ax that no hard-and-fast rule need apply. If people start applauding after 1st movements of concertos again, it doesn't mean they'll applaud after everything. No one has any control over these social trends anyway. What I find interesting is that it's a quite recent development. Playing now is a 1954 Boston Symphony broadcast with applause after the first movement of the Bartok Second Violin Concerto. Were they idiots in Boston then? What we know now that Vienna listeners of 1938 or Boston listeners of 1954 didn't? More evidence and speculation to follow on my blog.

[Marcus]

I've been to a few live concerts of the Tchaikovsky 1st piano concerto and Violin concerto where there indeed was applause after the first movement, and I admit that I wasn't "offended" or casting devious stares in any direction. And of course that 1954 audience wasn't composed of idiots (thought I would be a bit miffed by applause after that particular movement...), but I do think that 'classical' music was more commonly listened to then than now - it hadn't quite been relegated to a niche. I also heard a few random claps at the end of the first movement of Mahler 3 and the third movement of Mahler 5. You're right - this isn't something to get too worked up about...

I wonder if performers can incite applause after a particular movement by performing it a certain way. Can they add just that extra iota of panache to the first movement of the Tchaikovsky and create an excitement that practically demands applause?

I guess my original post might have sounded a bit dogmatic, but I meant it more as a throwing forth of opinions and suggestions. I of course don't expect anyone to rigorously enforce a rule of no applause between movements, but I must admit that I would actually prefer such a rule to a completely laissez-faire concert hall environment.

[Steve Hicken]

The lack of applause at the end of the first movement of the Schwantner Percussion Concerto the other night was conspicuous, and it seemed artificial to me.

[Andrew Hume]

I have certainly heard applause between movements in the UK. In the Barbican, Festival Hall, Albert Hall to name a few - and although it's rare, I don't think it's really frowned upon.

I remember applause after the lone viola solo at the end of the 2nd movement of Vaughan-Williams 2nd Symphony, and I remember being surprised. However, when it happened again the next night in a different venue, I began to think it was rather nice. So did the soloist!

Allowing (or discouraging) applause in certain parts of performances is the least of the classical music industries worries. Let's hope managers and board members realise that, and don't spend as long discussing it as this blogosphere has done.

[Marcus]

Andrew, I completely agree with you that there are much greater worries in the industry.

For instance: Why do orchestras that are already in the red build admittedly fabulous, huge new halls with even more seats to fill and even higher overhead?

[Lisa Hirsch]

I don't think the orchestras generally have financial responsibility for building the halls. Either a non-profit of some kind or a city or civic entity is in charge. I'm sure there is info on the Disney Hall site about how the financial end worked there.

[paul parthun]

Marcus, I enjoy reading your blogs and comments re: audience response. I couldn't help writing one of my own www.sonescontempo.blogspot.com
I'd be glad for your reaction to it. Cheers