100 years from now, John Williams will be...

[Hlao-roo 389]

Does this man belong in a museum?

[Faleel 5,346]

...Painted?

[pete 907]

All I know is I sure won't be listening to his music.

[Wojo 2,453]

... Decomposing.

[Ludwig 1,120]

As far as historical writings go, Williams will be remembered most for his score to Star Wars. Without exaggeration, it is to the history of film music what Beethoven's Eroica Symphony is to the history of classical music - it presented a style of music that was clearly based on old traditions but re-formulated in a way that was, for the most part, quite novel. And, like the Eroica, its influence on subsequent music in its genre is so great as to be immeasurable.

For Star Wars alone, Williams will not be forgotten, at least in film circles. In classical music circles, film music concerts have become quite common, so there has obviously been a significant overlap between the two audiences. It's in academic circles that Williams' stock has the most potential to rise because it's been suppressed for so long. Only now is that beginning to change. So in all, I foresee a positive reception from most, something like:

"Embraced by academics and classical music audiences alike, but still revered by many film music afficionados as the greatest composer in the history of film."

That's where I'd place my vote.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

The second option for me. I don't think even now his household status is the same as Bach or Mozart. He's obviously widely known but I don't think to quite that degree. Maybe by then it will have changed.

I dunno, do any of you interact with people who wouldn't necessarily know who he is? I don't so I can't really tell.

[scallenger 483]

I do, but once I say he is the guy who did the music from Star Wars, they are ALWAYS able to hum out the main theme on their own. So even if his name isn't remembered, his music sure will be.

[Red 75]

Immortalized in bronze.

[Mr. Brown 91]

Hailed as a great composer, ranking up there with Herrmann, Steiner, Newman, Korngold, and the other masters.

[mrbellamy 6,282]

As far as historical writings go, Williams will be remembered most for his score to Star Wars. Without exaggeration, it is to the history of film music what Beethoven's Eroica Symphony is to the history of classical music - it presented a style of music that was clearly based on old traditions but re-formulated in a way that was, for the most part, quite novel. And, like the Eroica, its influence on subsequent music in its genre is so great as to be immeasurable.

For Star Wars alone, Williams will not be forgotten, at least in film circles. In classical music circles, film music concerts have become quite common, so there has obviously been a significant overlap between the two audiences. It's in academic circles that Williams' stock has the most potential to rise because it's been suppressed for so long. Only now is that beginning to change. So in all, I foresee a positive reception from most, something like:

"Embraced by academics and classical music audiences alike, but still revered by many film music afficionados as the greatest composer in the history of film."

That's where I'd place my vote.

Yeah, I think it'll depend on how many movies in his filmography continue to stick out in the public consciousness. If only Star Wars remains, then perhaps the general public at large will eventually forget who composed it. But if Jaws, ET, Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, and/or Harry Potter stick around and the music continues to be remembered, then there's a chance that his name will stick in people's minds. I think that the fact that people still hum the Jaws theme will help a lot. Much like Bach, Mozart, or Beethoven's most famous motifs, it's already seeped into our musical vernacular, to the point where even people who have never seen Jaws know that the tune means "impending doom or danger." It's truly gotten to where it actually transcends the movie, which is so incredibly rare and special and I don't think that'll ever go away.

I know I'm speaking from personal bias, but I do think that there's something rather unique about Williams's filmography that will certainly keep his music alive, if not his name. There's just something about how the combination of his music and the movies touched on very primal or universal topics that captured people's imaginations on a massive worldwide scale, over and over again. I think it's telling that Williams retrospectives often won't even list the films, but rather those standalone ideas: "Outer space, sharks, aliens, dinosaurs, magic." His music is incredibly accessible and identifiable in that way. Even if those broad associations fade away, though, I really have no doubt that Star Wars, for sure, will join The Wizard of Oz as the kind of cinematic phenomenon that never really loses its power and whose iconography remains ubiquitous. People still know the songs from The Wizard of Oz, and likewise I agree with you that they'll still know the Star Wars themes. And I think there's a good chance that Williams's name will continue to be associated with the music more than Harold Arlen's, since composer names tend to get thrown around more than songwriters (unless they're also singers.) For some reason, "Over the Rainbow" can get by on its own esteem, but any mention of the Star Wars score typically comes with a "by John Williams" credit.

Aside from all that, it really doesn't hurt that his name couldn't be easier to remember or pronounce

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Only Monsignor will be remembered.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

... Decomposing.

Are you saying that he'll be destructuring everything he composed?

[Thor 7,495]

I voted for the 'first'.

Great photoshop job, by the way. Well done, Hlao-Roo! I may have to steal that at some point.

[A24 4,331]

Completely forgotten. Heck, according to yesterday's episode of Star Trek TNG, humanity will no longer watch TV or movies after the year 2040 so how will Williams' name stay alive?!

Alex

[crocodile 8,006]

Only Monsignor will be remembered.

And Heartbeeps.

Karol

[karelm 2,913]

He will be mostly remembered for the Star Wars saga and occasionally some enterprising person will investigate his other works too but it won't reach the consciousness like SW. I think he'll be seen somewhat like Holst. Extremely popular for one major work (granted in JW's case a series) but when was the last time anyone heard one of holst's eight operas? Or perhaps he will be overshadowed by a successor who uses him as a springboard to even greater things. That is slightly unlikely as JW might very well be the last in a long line. So in that case it might be that he will forever be known as the guy who inspired that great tbd composer. I would not equate JW with Beethoven, who some will argue was the pinnacle of western art music. I think JW is more like the successor of herrmann than the equal to Beethoven.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Completely forgotten. Heck, according to yesterday's episode of Star Trek TNG, humanity will no longer watch TV or movies after the year 2040 so how will Williams' name stay alive?!

Alex

Are they still showing it on Belgian TV?

[Score 770]

I do not think that he can possibly be forgotten. We are in the age of internet! Almost everything that he has done can be reached with a few clicks, being saved in this sort of collective memory that the net provides.

As far as his reputation is concerned, I think he will be considered as a great composer. From this point of view, I think Herrmann is more in danger.

[A24 4,331]

Completely forgotten. Heck, according to yesterday's episode of Star Trek TNG, humanity will no longer watch TV or movies after the year 2040 so how will Williams' name stay alive?!

Alex

Are they still showing it on Belgian TV?

Yes, and on Canvas, if you can believe it.

[Ludwig 1,120]

I would not equate JW with Beethoven, who some will argue was the pinnacle of western art music. I think JW is more like the successor of herrmann than the equal to Beethoven.

Well, the claim isn't that Williams = Beethoven, but that Williams' contribution to film music via Star Wars = Beethoven's contribution to western art music via the Eroica.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

As far as his reputation is concerned, I think he will be considered as a great composer. From this point of view, I think Herrmann is more in danger.

That's why good re-recordings are vital for keeping alive Herrmann's music. As he said himself, music should never be a dead art, preserved in a vitrine forever.

[indy4 155]

I think he'll be like Tchaikovsky. Remembered for a few popular works and generally respected by classical circles, but ranked below more inventive composers.

In film circles however I think he'll always be a superstar

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Listened to Pete's 4th today on Radio 3 conducted by James MacMillan while I was doing some carpentry. Like Williams, he's known for his big tunes (and blimey could he write them), but there's a wit, clarity, and a constant ability to surprise in their music, no matter how familiar you are with a piece. They're nowhere near as predictable as their detractors claim.

[Mr. Brown 91]

From this point of view, I think Herrmann is more in danger.

Starting to seem that way. Outside of film and music circles, I doubt you'd hear much of Herrmann. At my school, I'd guess that, of the entire film program, 3-5 people know of him. Two, if you're lucky, could name more than one of his works. Granted, most of the people studying film here are f**kwits, I wouldn't be surprised if this is common at other universities.

I've never understood why film students aren't given a mandatory film music class. It'd be invaluable. You need to know film music in order to utilize it properly in a film. Half of the independent films I see have shit music. Nearly every student film I've seen has shit music.

True shame...

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

From this point of view, I think Herrmann is more in danger.

Starting to seem that way. Outside of film and music circles, I doubt you'd hear much of Herrmann. At my school, I'd guess that, of the entire film program, 3-5 people know of him. Two, if you're lucky, could name more than one of his works. Granted, most of the people studying film here are f**kwits, I wouldn't be surprised if this is common at other universities.

I've never understood why film students aren't given a mandatory film music class. It'd be invaluable. You need to know film music in order to utilize it properly in a film. Half of the independent films I see have shit music. Nearly every student film I've seen has shit music.

True shame...

YES.

[Score 770]

Listened to Pete's 4th today on Radio 3 conducted by James MacMillan while I was doing some carpentry. Like Williams, he's known for his big tunes (and blimey could he write them), but there's a wit, clarity, and a constant ability to surprise in their music, no matter how familiar you are with a piece. They're nowhere near as predictable as their detractors claim.

Agreed. There's much much more than nice melodies. Let's not forget that Tchaikovsky was also an incredible inventor of brilliant orchestral colours... the whole Nutcracker, the Scherzo from Symphony 4 (or the Andantino, with is just the exact "sound of Russia"), the symphonic poem Francesca da Rimini (although quite "Wagnerian"), and virtually everything from his symphonic repertoire displays an unfailing gift for orchestration, in addition to melodic invention. Perhaps I am a bit partial (Tchaikovsky is in the top three of my favourite composers!), but his 6th symphony, from the first note to the last, is to me an experience as precious as that of Beethoven's 9th, or Mahler's 5th.

I too think he has a lot in common with John Williams. Maybe it is correct to say that John Williams is to some extent the "Tchaikovsky" of our time, and perhaps this is how he will be remembered.

[King Mark 3,631]

Williams pieces are crowd pleasers, so he'll be played alongside classical music

[A24 4,331]

Classical music? What's that?!

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2014/01/classical_music_sales_decline_is_classical_on_death_s_door.html

Alex

[karelm 2,913]

Classical music? What's that?!

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2014/01/classical_music_sales_decline_is_classical_on_death_s_door.html

Alex

And a counter view:

http://properdiscord.com/2014/01/24/mark-vanhoenacker-i-have-a-bone-to-pick-with-you/

Your Slate article Requiem: Classical music in America is dead is poorly-researched, badly argued, and, well, wrong. Theres so much crap in it, the only way I can think to deal with it is line-by-line, so here we go:

Also read this chart:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/killing-classical-music-large.jpg

[A24 4,331]

In that case,

http://sites.duke.edu/fightsongs/2010/04/20/culture-clash-the-decline-of-classical-music-in-modern-america/

It's time to stop hiding your head in the sand!

Cultural decline is everywhere, not only in the theaters.

Alex

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

"In fact, the number of bullshit articles proclaiming the death of classical music is greater than the number of stars in the observable universe." - Carl Sagan

[nightscape94 965]

Orchestras definitely need to do a better job of getting themselves out there and competing with other forms of popular music.

Speaking from experience, my orchestra (Philadelphia) filed for bankruptcy protection in 2008 (first major US orchestra to do this, much to our embarrassment). They were having a difficult time. In 2010 they hired a young, talented and energetic music director (Yannick Nézet-Séguin), who completely revitalized everything. He's casual, yet professional, and engaging. He uses social media. We had a free "Pop-Up" concert which was spur of the moment thing and because of Twitter the news spread like wildfire. It ended up being a big hit. We signed to Deutsche Grammaphon and put out our first major label CD in over a decade. Yannick stayed after every concert for 2 weeks to sign CDs and meet everyone. It can't always be about private breakfasts and lunches with high-paying patrons.

It's hard, but not impossible. Orchestral music is too good to disappear completely.

[karelm 2,913]

In that case,

http://sites.duke.edu/fightsongs/2010/04/20/culture-clash-the-decline-of-classical-music-in-modern-america/

It's time to stop hiding your head in the sand!

Cultural decline is everywhere, not only in the theaters.

Alex

To summarize the Duke University article:

"Perhaps even more responsible is the American school system, which has placed little importance on music education. Nationwide, music programs have been faced with budget cuts; Fowler explains, “Although there are funds to support other subjects, music education is simply not sufficiently valued…in regard to budgets, curricular considerations, staffing, and scheduling, music doesn’t command much priority."

The result being: "Classical music’s lack or representation in popular culture has created a generation of young people who do not appreciate or understand classical music."

So yes, I agree that without music being valued and taught in schools, young people grow up without valuing it hence the average age of audiences goes up. But what is the cause and the effect?

Otherwise, the article is extremely simplistic and since it was written in 2010, it was written during the height of the Recession. It even equates classical music to soundtracks: "Classical music remains in wide use as background music for movies, television, and advertising".

I have trouble with the position that because concert orchestras are not profitable, they are not viable. Many orchestras went bankrupt because there was across the board drop in donations which makes up 41% of orchestra revenues. NEA & Grants from government are only 10% so anything depending on public funding was in a dire situation in 2010. Add to that, most of the donations come from a handful of philanthropic people who are quite old. For instance about 90% of the donations going to the Philadelphia Orchestra came from seven billionaires. When one dies, that is a big hit on orchestra finances. That is what happened in 2010 to Philadelphia Orchestra.

Also, note that Los Angeles Philharmonics budget has skyrocketed. In 2000, they were losing 10-15% per year and now they are the most profitable orchestra. Gustavo Dudamel and various programming changes (casual concerts, etc.) have brought it a new wave of youthful audiences resulting in balanced sheets and 125,000,000 annual budget. Do note these are non-profit organizations and the article you linked basically says that art for profit is dying. This I will agree with because it is very hard to quantify a profit margin for something that few people need. That is really what the Joshua Bell/Washington DC experiment showed.

So what are your thoughts on my article and the chart? Do spend the time to read them as I have done with your linked articles.