One of the biggest allies most classical musicians have in the professional sphere is the
New York Times Magazine. That publication, run by the newspaper from which it gets its name, regularly discusses events going on in the classical music and opera communities in New York and around the world. Its focus on these genres has allowed them to remain in the mainstream, even as pop music has become the world's genre of choice over the course of the past 70 years.
One area where the New York Times Magazine does utterly fail, however, is in its yearly roundup of musicians who have passed away. At the end of each year, the magazine publishes a thorough list and tribute to those who have written or performed music, but will no longer be around to contribute their passion in the future. This list regularly shuns classical musicians, however, raising eyebrows among those in the profession.
A Tendency to Laud Pop Music Stars and ComposersThere's no doubt that the most popular and lucrative genre of music today is the aptly named "pop music" genre. With stars that range from the
Beatles to
Lady Gaga and beyond, this genre has made a ton of money for composers and performers throughout the 20th and 21st century. It makes sense, then, that the vast majority of those artists who do pass on are associated with pop music or its offshoots, like country music and other genres.
The New York Times Magazine regularly enumerates the accomplishment of pop artists, as well as the field's composers and writers and lyricists, without so much as a nod to the classical music community. In 2012 alone, two major Western classical music composers passed away, leaving behind a transformative legacy that was responsible for carrying the genre into modern times. The New York Times Magazine's "The Music They Made" section this year, however, was silent on the matter.
A Matter of Respect and Recognition in the Music CommunitySome have argued that the failure to include Western classical music composers and performers is actually deliberate on the part of the New York Times Magazine, largely because the publication considers classical music composers to be of a higher order, not easily lumped in with pop music performers who command an entirely different form of interest and respect. That might be true. It makes sense. But if that were the case, it would behoove the publication to create a special feature solely for the classical music community to honor those who have contributed, transformed, and left behind a thriving community of artists.
In the future, let's hope that the New York Times recognizes its lapse of judgment in honoring the large and thriving community of classical music composers and performers in the 21st century. Whether or not they deserve to be included with pop musicians in the magazine's annual review, they do deserve recognition when they pass away. Their contributions are no less significant, and no less intriguing, than the pop musicians who get a great deal more attention throughout the year.