☺
Musica
Dear Sirs/Madams,
I’m a user of the forum Talkclassical. My nickname is HansZimmer.
I describe myself as a “content creator” and not simply as a user. Let me explain the distinction.
In my personal vocabulary, a user is someone who write posts, so every active user of a forum is a user.
A “content creator”, on the other hand, is someone who tries to create a meaningful and useful content for the forum.
My activity in the forum as a content creator can be divided in two parts:
- Inserting pieces of classical music in the forum: this is an example https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/paul-mccartn...
- My game about film soundtracks: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/bulletin-of-...
Both activities allow users to discrover new pieces of music, which I think it might be one of the fundamental reason for which someone can have an interest for communities of classical music.
In the last weeks I was also creating an index with links to all the pieces that I’ve posted in the forum, which would very useful for the users to discover new pieces, but I’m noticing right now that the moderators have deleted it and I don’t know why. I haven’t received any note from them.
Although my activity is mostly oriented to the insertion of music in the forum, I’ve also created one of the most succesful polemical discussions: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
The discussion, titled “Why do many people think that classical music composed for film scores is not classical music?”, has been active from April 2022 to April 2023 and the users have generated 218 pages.
Despite the fact that I’m a proactive user, a “content creator”, in the last days I received a permanent ban from the forum.
Of course someone might think that if I’ve receieved a permanent ban it’s because I was creating serious damages to the community, that I was seriously molesting other users or something like that.
The reality is that I'm a polite user who doesn't deserve a permanent ban, and this is the reason for which I’m writing this email to you.
Here below I’ll show you that I’ve been the victim of abuses of the moderators.
The story is divided in three main espisodes:
- First ban: a temporary ban of 8 days at the end of March 2023
- Second ban: a temporary ban of 40 days after a short period
and finally
- Last ban: the permanent ban of the last days
First ban: a temporary ban of 8 days
My nightmares with the moderators have begun in the current year with the discussion “Why do many people think that classical music composed for film scores is not classical music?”.
Let me explain what is the discussion about.
The biggiest classical music radio station of the world, Classic FM, promotes determined soundtracks as a part of its repertoire of classical music.
Many stores and websites classify determined soundtracks as “classical music”.
Since I’ve noticed that in the world of classical music there are some persons who reject this trend, I created the discussion in order to create a debate between the people who are in favour of the trend and the people who reject it.
In regards to me, I belong to the category of people who think that classical music, as every other genre, is defined by its musical content (the instruments, the notes, the harmony, and so on… the practices of composition and execution) and that the musical content of many soundtracks is so similar to the one of classical music that it’s correct to classify them as a form of classical music.
From now, I’ll use the word “opponents” to indicate the users of Talkclassical who don’t agree with me and with the opening post of my discussion.
As you can read here: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
the moderator ArtRock temporarily closed the discussion on March 29 and after a clean-up he reopened it.
The clean-up consisted in the deletion of some posts written by me and by my opponent mikeh375.
Right after the clean-up, not only I receieved a temporary ban of 8 days, but I was also permanently banned from the discussion (I was no more able to insert posts in the discussion).
Furthermore, the moderators told me that I couldn't start or join an other debate about the subject even outside of the discussion.
Since the messages have been deleted we can not read them, but I can tell you what we wrote there.
The position of mikeh375 is basically that soundtracks are not classical music because, while the classical music composers in their symphonies are free to write whatever they want because the music is standalone and absolute, in the soundtracks of films the music is subservient to the images and the story of the film, so the composers of film music have not the same freedom in the musical expression that the composers of classical music usually have when composing their works.
The problem of his position is that in classical music there are many works of incidental music, namely music written for plays. Beethoven for example composed a famous suite for the play Egmont and no one says that his work is not classical music because the music is subservient to non-musical elements.
Since the position of mikeh375 is that the incidental music of Beethoven is classical music but the soundtracks in classical style are not, in one of the deleted messages I wrote that he was applying double standards.
For some reasons that I still don’t understand, he was heavily offended of my consideration: he told me that it was a slander and that he reported my post to the moderators.
In an other deleted message I wrote that the content of the discussion showed very well the elitism and the snobbery that there is in the world of classical music and that the real reason for which many people want to expel classical-style soundtracks from classical music is the snobbery.
So, in few words, I receieved a ban of 8 days from the forum and a permanent ban from the discussion because I wrote that mikeh375 was using double standards and because I wrote that in the world of classical music there is snobbery/elitism, which is probably the real reason for which some people want to discriminate soundtracks.
I’m reading the rules of Talkclassical right now: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/talk-classic...
The rule number two says: “Ideas and opinions may be challenged, but name-calling, personal attacks, or other inappropriate behavior will not be allowed. Harassment will not be tolerated in this community. “
The rule clearily makes a distinction between chellenging opinions and insulting other people: while the second thing is not allowed, the first thing is allowed (of course it’s allowed, otherwise the debates would be inexistent).
I really don’t understand how someone can interpret the contents of my deleted posts as insults: in my texts there were only simple opinions.
Just because mikeh375 felt offended for an opinion, it doesn’t mean that my considerations were insults.
“You are an idiot” is an insult, “You use double standards” is an opinion.
You might say that my consideration about the elitism/snobbery inside the world of classical music is a collective insult, but a part from the fact that the users of Talkclassical continously speak about it (so, the observation is tolerated), why don’t we look at the page in which the incident occured?
It’s the page 199!
This means that before I wrote my consideration, there were other 197 pages of discussion, and if someone want to really understand the reason for which I wrote what I wrote in the page 198, he should read the previous 197 pages.
Of course I won’t tell you to read 197 pages: I’ve created a detailed report for you.
What do we find in the previous 197 pages? A long list of arrogant and offensive posts written by my opponents towards me and people with my same ideas and musical tastes.
Before to read what my opponents have written, however, we should read this post written by me:
«The reactions of the classical music institutions are not relevant for me. They used to reject Mendelssohn only because he was a jew. I hope that "racial" discriminations don't exist today in the institutions of classical music, but it's perfectly possible there are other forms of snobbery.
We should think with our head which film scores are rooted in classical music and which ones are not.»
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
In this post I was responding to the theory of the user jojoju2000, who wrote that the only composer of soundtracks who has been blessed by the institutions of classical music is John Williams and that, therefore, he is the only composer of film music whose music can be considered classical.
What I wrote in my post is that since the music of Mendelssohn used to be discirminated by the classical music institutions only because the composer was a jew, it’s correct to say that the discriminations made by the classical music institutions are not necessarily based on the genre or on the quality of the music and that, although I hope that racism and antisemitism don’t exist anymore in the world of classical music, it’s perfectly possible that they apply other kind of non-musical discriminations.
Throghout the thread I have repeated this concept different times, and while in some posts I have used the word “snobbery” to indicate the possibile non-musical discriminations that even today might exist inside of the classical music institutions, in other posts I used the word “musical racism” (a word which recalls the actual case of racism towards Mendelssohn).
Why is this an important detail?
Because before my ban at the page 198, I received some private warnings from moderators who told me that I was accusing my opponents of being racist and that it was inappropriate.
They clearily didn’t understand what I was writing.
Infact I was not accusing my opponents of being racists, but I was writing that the classical music institutions were racists in the past (and this is a historical fact) and that we can not exclude the option that today other forms of “racism” exist in the world of classical music.
In this post I explain very well what I wanted to say: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
The admin mmsbls has also accused this last post of mine of being offensive because of the part: “A classification based on non-musical elements not only would damage classical music IMO, but it would question the intelligence of the classical music world. I can't help thinking about the music of Mendelssohn refused by some institutions of the world of classical music only because he was a jew. It's a disgrace!”
Now, we can return to the rule number two of Talklclassical: is this an insult, or is this an opinion? It’s clearily an opinion: it’s not that I wrote to a user “you are an idiot” or something like that.
However, even if someone supported the idea that this is an insult, we must note that it's a post of the page 156, which means that we still have to read what my opponents have written in the previous 155 pages full of unmoderated and offensive posts written by my opponents.
We will start now!
--------------------------------
«Further, hz [Hans Zimmer] is a brand and a name that people pay for now, which is a ridiculous concept created by this idiotic industry and has helped create this mess.
[…]
Or like saying we can conclude hitler had good ideas because he had millions of supporters so he couldn’t have been that wrong.»
Basically, the user Torkelburger (one of my opponents) in this post comparates the film music composer Hans Zimmer and his fans to Hitler and his followers. It’s a post of the page 32.
The posts in which I started to speak about the musical racism come much later in the discussion, which means that even if my intention was to compare my opponents to racists, it would be still true that the ones who have polluted the air of the discussion with the harmful gases are my opponents.
However, as my text above explains, while my intention was not to compare my opponents to racists, the post of Torkelburger doesn’t leave so much space to interpretation.
Note that this post has not been moderated in any way.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«We can all call our music whatever we want and other people can laugh at us.»
A post of the user Luchesi, one of my opponents.
The moderators have accused me of having a closed mind/attitude towards my opponents, but if my opponents say that the people should laugh at me because I consider determined soundtracks as “classical music” apparently it’s perfectly acceptable: they don’t show a closed mind/attitude towards me.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«The question for me is always, why would I categorize it as classical? Why would we teach young people that it's a classical work? What will happen if we do?[...]Young people can easily be turned off by the dumbing down and relativism all around them.»
Luchesi, an other time. The expression “dumbing down” has a very negative connotation, and if you tell me that my idea that some soundtracks are classical music is “dumbing down” you are basically calling me “ignorant”. Do you see how much open was the mind/attitude of my opponents?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«This conversation is silly, with you and others acting like there is no difference between the market and audience expectations that all composers from Bach to John Adams write within and the work-for-hire that film composers are working under.»
A post of San Antoine, one of my opponents. To call the conversation “silly” is the equivalent of calling “silly” the idea of your interlocutor. It’s like to say that the idea of your interlocutor souldn’t be discussed because they are silly. My opponents had really an open mind/attitude: how can your close your mind when you speak with these wise men?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I'm surprised that as an educator you're not concerned about the natural laziness of students and the dumbing down of categories»
Luchesi, “dumbing down”, an other time.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Think about the consequences when any technical subject is dumbed down.»
Luchesi, “dumbing down”, an other time.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I find Gladiator unwatchable because of the crudity of the soundtrack.[...]Films have been 'downgraded' to a certain extent because the audience is younger [and more stupid? or at least less educated]»
I like very much the music of The Gladiator, so this user has basically written that I’m stupid and uneducated. How can you close your mind when you talk with so wise and respectful people?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“I have a keen ear. I am a musician.[...]The music to Pearl Harbor is trite output. I have to say now that I don't really care if someone says 'Oh but it moved me so much!' Big deal. That's not a critical appreciation. And with a carefully-crafted get-out clause of claimng to love the music for its own sake completely disassociated from the film. I don't even believe the get-out clause, I think it's just a made-up lie for the sake of argument.[...]I really don't care what awards are mentioned or what ratings of Classic FM say. Classic FM is not a serious classical music radio station, it is a 'classic pops' station. One that also has broadened out to include popular film scores for the sake of its middling listenership. It is largely concerned with revenue, not 'art'.
Hans Zimmer is a rock musician-turned-hack film composer. I know some people think his music is godly. I don't.»
A post of Chat Noir, my favourite opponent.
Basically, the idea of Chat Noir (repeated many different times) is that the listeners of classical music can be divided between “dumb listeners” and “wise listeners”.
The classical radio station Classic FM, according to him, is for the “dumb listeners”, and this would be the reason for which Classic FM promotes soundtracks.
Of course Chat Noir belongs to the category of “wise listeners”, while I am in the category of the “dumb listeners”. This user has produced an industrial quantity of posts in which he tries to show me that my musical tastes are bad, that I’m dumb, that I don’t understand art.
How can someone close his mind when he speaks with so wise and respectful people?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«That you think they are "the best soundtracks of the last decades" is laughable really and says more about the rapid decline of film music.»
Chat Noir in response to my post in which I wrote that the soundtrack of “The Beauty and The Beast” is one of my favourite soundtrack. My tastes are laughable, I must be corrected. The people like me are responsible of the decline of film music (What does it mean “decline”? We can not understand it: the “wise listener” like Chat Noir will decide what is the good music for us all!
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I'm unfollowing this thread. It's completely idiotic. Please don't quote me so I don't get re-connected to it.»
Chat Noir. It’s like the “silly conversation” of San Antoine. To call “idiot” the thread is the equivalent of calling “idiot” the ideas of the person who has opened the discussion. I’m the opener of the discussion.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Anyway, I'm not attacking your taste, I'm attacking your silly assertion that film music can stand with the best of what classical music has to offer. It can't and never will.»
An other one of my opponents: Neo Romanza. My opponents seem to like very much the word “silly”.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«You can argue for a myopic dumbing down of music and a return to a different age as much as you want though, fortunately it'll have zero impact on the profession.»
Luchesi, “dumbing down”, an other time.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Right, so it's still running then. Best send in the clowns to divert everything.»
Chat Noir. I think that the word “clowns” is an alias for “composers of film music”. The alternative interpretation is that the word is used to describe me and persons with similar ideas, which is even worse.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Until you learn that the trajectory of music where it isn't all the way you personally want it to be, isn't a sign of its 'death', you'll keep on with this ill-fated silliness.»
Chat Noir. He still had to use the word “silly”.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«You "quote" me saying something I don't remember saying in this thread and something I certainly wouldn't have said because the music that accompanied the first Star Wars film gets played in concerts. I would have said "so what?" and "what has that got to do with its merit?" 22 years is nothing and there will always be a big audience for the trashy.
Personally, I think we can tell quite a lot about how well a piece will survive over centuries. Some will be popular as well while other pieces may - like much of Mozart and Beethoven - be for more refined tastes.»
A post of the user Enthusiast, an other one of my opponents. The idea expressed here is similar to the one of Chat Noir: the listeners of classical music can be divided between people with “refined tastes” and “people who like the trashy”.
Of course he belongs to the category of “listeners with refined tastes”. The people like me, who like the music of John Williams (and Star Wars), are the ones who like the trashy.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«This is madness of the sort that might be expected in a thread of more than 100 pages on whether or not film music stands up as classical.»
Enthusiast here brings the debate to a new level. The people who like soundtracks are nor more simply “people who like trashy” or “dumb listeners”. We are MAD.
How can you have a closed mind/attitude when you talk with these wise people who say that you are mad because you like soundtracks?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I'm pretty sure the music you referenced (Avalon suite) will be deemed trash by most experienced classical listeners. If you don't believe me, do a poll.»
A post of the user TwoFlutesOneTrumpet, an other one of my opponents. I wrote that I like the soundtrack of the film “Avalon”. Apparently I’m not entitled to like it: the supposed majority of people of Talkclassical which, according to him, would consider it as «trash» can decide for us all what is the good music.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I am out of this madhouse. People are really deeply confused here.»
A post of an other one of my opponents, Kreisler jr. Apparently, after the post of Enthusiast it has been established that we are mad and no more simply «dumb listeners».
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«There we have it. The greats are at best as good as today's Hollywood hacks and are often less good. Does this confirm that some film music buffs who compare film music with classical music are actually not that in sympathy with classical music? Belittling Mozart and Bach to big up hacks is all I needed to read to have my suspicions about this never ending argument confirmed.»
Enthusiast has established for all of us that the music he likes isart and that the music he doesn’t like is made by hacks.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I see ChatGPT is as unreliable as the OP.»
A post of Forster, an other one of my opponents. I am the OP, so this a personal attack towards me.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“Nate Miller is taking the right tack. There's no point feeding this view from children who are in love with and get excited over film music jingles and then want to bring them into the classical music fold on some personal mission.”
The return of Chat Noir, my favourite opponent. In this post he calls me “a child”, and since I’m not a child, the translation of child in this context is something like “dumb”, “underdeveloped”, “childish person with bad taste”.
This is the only post that I reported to the moderators and I know that they have received my report. As you can see, the post is still there, so there hasn’t been any action towards this post.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“if you are trying to say that video game music and TV spots are art music you have one more screw loose than I thought
I actually play, so you aren't going to be able to convince me that film music is on the same level as the Beethoven Sonata I was working on this weekend“
How many other times I’ll be labeled as a “mad”?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“I am a great fan of film music, but do not find your thread very interesting (to put it in a polite way and not to get banned).”
A post of justekaia, an other opponent. This is a rhethorical and subtle way to insult you without insulting you: the person tells you that you would deserve an insult, something for which he would be banned. Basically, in reality the person has insulted you.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“I bet he is referring to his classical/concert works, you know the pieces you don't like, the violin and cello concertos for example. He's not so stupid as to think his film work is written in totally the same manner and comes from the same place as his classical work.”
mikeh375, the most important opponent. The one who was offended because I told him that he uses double standards.
I posted an interview in which John Williams compares his soundtracks to the music of the masters of classical music and he says that he feels that his music is not as good as their one.
Since my opponents wrote repeatedly that composers of film music don’t consider their works as classical music, this interview of John Williams was a nice counterargument.
Mikeh375 responded that John Williams is not so stupid as to think that his soundtracks are classical music. Indirectly, he has also insulted me and all the people with my position: “if you think that soundtracks are classical music, you are stupid”.
According to the moderators of Talkclassical, to indirectly call you "idiot" is not a insult, while to tell someone "you use double standards" it's a serious insult, for which you deserve to be banned for 8 days from the forum and permanently banned from the discussion.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“If you find this an example of the best film music, then something about your musical compass is off.”
In this post San Antoine is speaking about the soundtrack of Schindler’s List. Apparently he doesn’t accept that other people can have different tastes than him. If you like a musical composition that he doesn’t like it means that your musical compass is off.
The same recurrent scheme: the division of people between “wise listeners” and “dumb listeners”. My opponents see themselves as wise and they see me as a dumb.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“It's so hilarious that some posters think film music is as good as, or better, than the music of Bach or Beethoven. Sorry but just because you don't understand the depths of Bach's or Beethoven's music, it does not mean that it is comparable to film music. I'm reminded of a blind person trying to convince those who can see that stick men is better art than Monet (or pick your favorite painter).”
If you thought that the list of labels was terminated, you were wrong. “Dumb listener”, “mad”,… what else? The creativity of my opponents is high, they won’t let you down. At this point of the discussion I’ve become a blind person who doesn’t see the difference between stick men and the paintings of Monet.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
This is not the exhaustive list of offensive/arrogant posts written by my opponents. I could go on, but it would be pointless to report other material.
I want to be clear about this: I’m not saying that the posts of my opponents are against the rules of Talkclassical. I don’t see them as real insults (infact I reported to moderators only one of the posts reported above), because a real insult is something like “you are an idiot”.
These posts are more like opinions that I consider arrogant and offensive, but still opinions, not real insults.
The point is that you can not interpret “you use double standards” as an insult and at the same time tell me that the lists of statement reported here above are only harmless opinions.
I also used negative words in some discussions when talking about the music that I don’t like, but I didn’t ask the moderators to protect me from the reactions of the people who like the music that I attack.
It’s perfectly normal: if you criticize a thing, the people who like that thing are entitled in responding to your critics.
If someone writes the kind of things that I’ve reported here above (namely that the public of classical music is divided between dumb listeners and serious/wise listeners and that the radio Classic FM is for the dumb ones) to say that the discussion has showed very well the elitism/snobbery of the classical music world is a logical conclusion, and the truth shouldn't be censored.
Finally, it's easy to explain why the moderators have applied double standards.
The list of links here below clearily shows that the admin mmslbs was one of my opponents:
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
I have to say that unlike many of my opponents, mmslbs was very polite, but since he is a scientist he should also be aware of the cognitive biases and be careful of being impartial when using his special powers.
It also seems that there are friendly relations between him and mikeh375.
The terms of use of Talkclassical clearily says that moderators must be impartial: https://www.talkclassical.com/help/terms/
**Modificato dall'autore il 30.06.2023 18:37**
I’m a user of the forum Talkclassical. My nickname is HansZimmer.
I describe myself as a “content creator” and not simply as a user. Let me explain the distinction.
In my personal vocabulary, a user is someone who write posts, so every active user of a forum is a user.
A “content creator”, on the other hand, is someone who tries to create a meaningful and useful content for the forum.
My activity in the forum as a content creator can be divided in two parts:
- Inserting pieces of classical music in the forum: this is an example https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/paul-mccartn...
- My game about film soundtracks: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/bulletin-of-...
Both activities allow users to discrover new pieces of music, which I think it might be one of the fundamental reason for which someone can have an interest for communities of classical music.
In the last weeks I was also creating an index with links to all the pieces that I’ve posted in the forum, which would very useful for the users to discover new pieces, but I’m noticing right now that the moderators have deleted it and I don’t know why. I haven’t received any note from them.
Although my activity is mostly oriented to the insertion of music in the forum, I’ve also created one of the most succesful polemical discussions: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
The discussion, titled “Why do many people think that classical music composed for film scores is not classical music?”, has been active from April 2022 to April 2023 and the users have generated 218 pages.
Despite the fact that I’m a proactive user, a “content creator”, in the last days I received a permanent ban from the forum.
Of course someone might think that if I’ve receieved a permanent ban it’s because I was creating serious damages to the community, that I was seriously molesting other users or something like that.
The reality is that I'm a polite user who doesn't deserve a permanent ban, and this is the reason for which I’m writing this email to you.
Here below I’ll show you that I’ve been the victim of abuses of the moderators.
The story is divided in three main espisodes:
- First ban: a temporary ban of 8 days at the end of March 2023
- Second ban: a temporary ban of 40 days after a short period
and finally
- Last ban: the permanent ban of the last days
First ban: a temporary ban of 8 days
My nightmares with the moderators have begun in the current year with the discussion “Why do many people think that classical music composed for film scores is not classical music?”.
Let me explain what is the discussion about.
The biggiest classical music radio station of the world, Classic FM, promotes determined soundtracks as a part of its repertoire of classical music.
Many stores and websites classify determined soundtracks as “classical music”.
Since I’ve noticed that in the world of classical music there are some persons who reject this trend, I created the discussion in order to create a debate between the people who are in favour of the trend and the people who reject it.
In regards to me, I belong to the category of people who think that classical music, as every other genre, is defined by its musical content (the instruments, the notes, the harmony, and so on… the practices of composition and execution) and that the musical content of many soundtracks is so similar to the one of classical music that it’s correct to classify them as a form of classical music.
From now, I’ll use the word “opponents” to indicate the users of Talkclassical who don’t agree with me and with the opening post of my discussion.
As you can read here: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
the moderator ArtRock temporarily closed the discussion on March 29 and after a clean-up he reopened it.
The clean-up consisted in the deletion of some posts written by me and by my opponent mikeh375.
Right after the clean-up, not only I receieved a temporary ban of 8 days, but I was also permanently banned from the discussion (I was no more able to insert posts in the discussion).
Furthermore, the moderators told me that I couldn't start or join an other debate about the subject even outside of the discussion.
Since the messages have been deleted we can not read them, but I can tell you what we wrote there.
The position of mikeh375 is basically that soundtracks are not classical music because, while the classical music composers in their symphonies are free to write whatever they want because the music is standalone and absolute, in the soundtracks of films the music is subservient to the images and the story of the film, so the composers of film music have not the same freedom in the musical expression that the composers of classical music usually have when composing their works.
The problem of his position is that in classical music there are many works of incidental music, namely music written for plays. Beethoven for example composed a famous suite for the play Egmont and no one says that his work is not classical music because the music is subservient to non-musical elements.
Since the position of mikeh375 is that the incidental music of Beethoven is classical music but the soundtracks in classical style are not, in one of the deleted messages I wrote that he was applying double standards.
For some reasons that I still don’t understand, he was heavily offended of my consideration: he told me that it was a slander and that he reported my post to the moderators.
In an other deleted message I wrote that the content of the discussion showed very well the elitism and the snobbery that there is in the world of classical music and that the real reason for which many people want to expel classical-style soundtracks from classical music is the snobbery.
So, in few words, I receieved a ban of 8 days from the forum and a permanent ban from the discussion because I wrote that mikeh375 was using double standards and because I wrote that in the world of classical music there is snobbery/elitism, which is probably the real reason for which some people want to discriminate soundtracks.
I’m reading the rules of Talkclassical right now: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/talk-classic...
The rule number two says: “Ideas and opinions may be challenged, but name-calling, personal attacks, or other inappropriate behavior will not be allowed. Harassment will not be tolerated in this community. “
The rule clearily makes a distinction between chellenging opinions and insulting other people: while the second thing is not allowed, the first thing is allowed (of course it’s allowed, otherwise the debates would be inexistent).
I really don’t understand how someone can interpret the contents of my deleted posts as insults: in my texts there were only simple opinions.
Just because mikeh375 felt offended for an opinion, it doesn’t mean that my considerations were insults.
“You are an idiot” is an insult, “You use double standards” is an opinion.
You might say that my consideration about the elitism/snobbery inside the world of classical music is a collective insult, but a part from the fact that the users of Talkclassical continously speak about it (so, the observation is tolerated), why don’t we look at the page in which the incident occured?
It’s the page 199!
This means that before I wrote my consideration, there were other 197 pages of discussion, and if someone want to really understand the reason for which I wrote what I wrote in the page 198, he should read the previous 197 pages.
Of course I won’t tell you to read 197 pages: I’ve created a detailed report for you.
What do we find in the previous 197 pages? A long list of arrogant and offensive posts written by my opponents towards me and people with my same ideas and musical tastes.
Before to read what my opponents have written, however, we should read this post written by me:
«The reactions of the classical music institutions are not relevant for me. They used to reject Mendelssohn only because he was a jew. I hope that "racial" discriminations don't exist today in the institutions of classical music, but it's perfectly possible there are other forms of snobbery.
We should think with our head which film scores are rooted in classical music and which ones are not.»
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
In this post I was responding to the theory of the user jojoju2000, who wrote that the only composer of soundtracks who has been blessed by the institutions of classical music is John Williams and that, therefore, he is the only composer of film music whose music can be considered classical.
What I wrote in my post is that since the music of Mendelssohn used to be discirminated by the classical music institutions only because the composer was a jew, it’s correct to say that the discriminations made by the classical music institutions are not necessarily based on the genre or on the quality of the music and that, although I hope that racism and antisemitism don’t exist anymore in the world of classical music, it’s perfectly possible that they apply other kind of non-musical discriminations.
Throghout the thread I have repeated this concept different times, and while in some posts I have used the word “snobbery” to indicate the possibile non-musical discriminations that even today might exist inside of the classical music institutions, in other posts I used the word “musical racism” (a word which recalls the actual case of racism towards Mendelssohn).
Why is this an important detail?
Because before my ban at the page 198, I received some private warnings from moderators who told me that I was accusing my opponents of being racist and that it was inappropriate.
They clearily didn’t understand what I was writing.
Infact I was not accusing my opponents of being racists, but I was writing that the classical music institutions were racists in the past (and this is a historical fact) and that we can not exclude the option that today other forms of “racism” exist in the world of classical music.
In this post I explain very well what I wanted to say: https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
The admin mmsbls has also accused this last post of mine of being offensive because of the part: “A classification based on non-musical elements not only would damage classical music IMO, but it would question the intelligence of the classical music world. I can't help thinking about the music of Mendelssohn refused by some institutions of the world of classical music only because he was a jew. It's a disgrace!”
Now, we can return to the rule number two of Talklclassical: is this an insult, or is this an opinion? It’s clearily an opinion: it’s not that I wrote to a user “you are an idiot” or something like that.
However, even if someone supported the idea that this is an insult, we must note that it's a post of the page 156, which means that we still have to read what my opponents have written in the previous 155 pages full of unmoderated and offensive posts written by my opponents.
We will start now!
--------------------------------
«Further, hz [Hans Zimmer] is a brand and a name that people pay for now, which is a ridiculous concept created by this idiotic industry and has helped create this mess.
[…]
Or like saying we can conclude hitler had good ideas because he had millions of supporters so he couldn’t have been that wrong.»
Basically, the user Torkelburger (one of my opponents) in this post comparates the film music composer Hans Zimmer and his fans to Hitler and his followers. It’s a post of the page 32.
The posts in which I started to speak about the musical racism come much later in the discussion, which means that even if my intention was to compare my opponents to racists, it would be still true that the ones who have polluted the air of the discussion with the harmful gases are my opponents.
However, as my text above explains, while my intention was not to compare my opponents to racists, the post of Torkelburger doesn’t leave so much space to interpretation.
Note that this post has not been moderated in any way.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«We can all call our music whatever we want and other people can laugh at us.»
A post of the user Luchesi, one of my opponents.
The moderators have accused me of having a closed mind/attitude towards my opponents, but if my opponents say that the people should laugh at me because I consider determined soundtracks as “classical music” apparently it’s perfectly acceptable: they don’t show a closed mind/attitude towards me.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«The question for me is always, why would I categorize it as classical? Why would we teach young people that it's a classical work? What will happen if we do?[...]Young people can easily be turned off by the dumbing down and relativism all around them.»
Luchesi, an other time. The expression “dumbing down” has a very negative connotation, and if you tell me that my idea that some soundtracks are classical music is “dumbing down” you are basically calling me “ignorant”. Do you see how much open was the mind/attitude of my opponents?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«This conversation is silly, with you and others acting like there is no difference between the market and audience expectations that all composers from Bach to John Adams write within and the work-for-hire that film composers are working under.»
A post of San Antoine, one of my opponents. To call the conversation “silly” is the equivalent of calling “silly” the idea of your interlocutor. It’s like to say that the idea of your interlocutor souldn’t be discussed because they are silly. My opponents had really an open mind/attitude: how can your close your mind when you speak with these wise men?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I'm surprised that as an educator you're not concerned about the natural laziness of students and the dumbing down of categories»
Luchesi, “dumbing down”, an other time.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Think about the consequences when any technical subject is dumbed down.»
Luchesi, “dumbing down”, an other time.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I find Gladiator unwatchable because of the crudity of the soundtrack.[...]Films have been 'downgraded' to a certain extent because the audience is younger [and more stupid? or at least less educated]»
I like very much the music of The Gladiator, so this user has basically written that I’m stupid and uneducated. How can you close your mind when you talk with so wise and respectful people?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“I have a keen ear. I am a musician.[...]The music to Pearl Harbor is trite output. I have to say now that I don't really care if someone says 'Oh but it moved me so much!' Big deal. That's not a critical appreciation. And with a carefully-crafted get-out clause of claimng to love the music for its own sake completely disassociated from the film. I don't even believe the get-out clause, I think it's just a made-up lie for the sake of argument.[...]I really don't care what awards are mentioned or what ratings of Classic FM say. Classic FM is not a serious classical music radio station, it is a 'classic pops' station. One that also has broadened out to include popular film scores for the sake of its middling listenership. It is largely concerned with revenue, not 'art'.
Hans Zimmer is a rock musician-turned-hack film composer. I know some people think his music is godly. I don't.»
A post of Chat Noir, my favourite opponent.
Basically, the idea of Chat Noir (repeated many different times) is that the listeners of classical music can be divided between “dumb listeners” and “wise listeners”.
The classical radio station Classic FM, according to him, is for the “dumb listeners”, and this would be the reason for which Classic FM promotes soundtracks.
Of course Chat Noir belongs to the category of “wise listeners”, while I am in the category of the “dumb listeners”. This user has produced an industrial quantity of posts in which he tries to show me that my musical tastes are bad, that I’m dumb, that I don’t understand art.
How can someone close his mind when he speaks with so wise and respectful people?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«That you think they are "the best soundtracks of the last decades" is laughable really and says more about the rapid decline of film music.»
Chat Noir in response to my post in which I wrote that the soundtrack of “The Beauty and The Beast” is one of my favourite soundtrack. My tastes are laughable, I must be corrected. The people like me are responsible of the decline of film music (What does it mean “decline”? We can not understand it: the “wise listener” like Chat Noir will decide what is the good music for us all!
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I'm unfollowing this thread. It's completely idiotic. Please don't quote me so I don't get re-connected to it.»
Chat Noir. It’s like the “silly conversation” of San Antoine. To call “idiot” the thread is the equivalent of calling “idiot” the ideas of the person who has opened the discussion. I’m the opener of the discussion.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Anyway, I'm not attacking your taste, I'm attacking your silly assertion that film music can stand with the best of what classical music has to offer. It can't and never will.»
An other one of my opponents: Neo Romanza. My opponents seem to like very much the word “silly”.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«You can argue for a myopic dumbing down of music and a return to a different age as much as you want though, fortunately it'll have zero impact on the profession.»
Luchesi, “dumbing down”, an other time.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Right, so it's still running then. Best send in the clowns to divert everything.»
Chat Noir. I think that the word “clowns” is an alias for “composers of film music”. The alternative interpretation is that the word is used to describe me and persons with similar ideas, which is even worse.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«Until you learn that the trajectory of music where it isn't all the way you personally want it to be, isn't a sign of its 'death', you'll keep on with this ill-fated silliness.»
Chat Noir. He still had to use the word “silly”.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«You "quote" me saying something I don't remember saying in this thread and something I certainly wouldn't have said because the music that accompanied the first Star Wars film gets played in concerts. I would have said "so what?" and "what has that got to do with its merit?" 22 years is nothing and there will always be a big audience for the trashy.
Personally, I think we can tell quite a lot about how well a piece will survive over centuries. Some will be popular as well while other pieces may - like much of Mozart and Beethoven - be for more refined tastes.»
A post of the user Enthusiast, an other one of my opponents. The idea expressed here is similar to the one of Chat Noir: the listeners of classical music can be divided between people with “refined tastes” and “people who like the trashy”.
Of course he belongs to the category of “listeners with refined tastes”. The people like me, who like the music of John Williams (and Star Wars), are the ones who like the trashy.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«This is madness of the sort that might be expected in a thread of more than 100 pages on whether or not film music stands up as classical.»
Enthusiast here brings the debate to a new level. The people who like soundtracks are nor more simply “people who like trashy” or “dumb listeners”. We are MAD.
How can you have a closed mind/attitude when you talk with these wise people who say that you are mad because you like soundtracks?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I'm pretty sure the music you referenced (Avalon suite) will be deemed trash by most experienced classical listeners. If you don't believe me, do a poll.»
A post of the user TwoFlutesOneTrumpet, an other one of my opponents. I wrote that I like the soundtrack of the film “Avalon”. Apparently I’m not entitled to like it: the supposed majority of people of Talkclassical which, according to him, would consider it as «trash» can decide for us all what is the good music.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I am out of this madhouse. People are really deeply confused here.»
A post of an other one of my opponents, Kreisler jr. Apparently, after the post of Enthusiast it has been established that we are mad and no more simply «dumb listeners».
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«There we have it. The greats are at best as good as today's Hollywood hacks and are often less good. Does this confirm that some film music buffs who compare film music with classical music are actually not that in sympathy with classical music? Belittling Mozart and Bach to big up hacks is all I needed to read to have my suspicions about this never ending argument confirmed.»
Enthusiast has established for all of us that the music he likes isart and that the music he doesn’t like is made by hacks.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
«I see ChatGPT is as unreliable as the OP.»
A post of Forster, an other one of my opponents. I am the OP, so this a personal attack towards me.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“Nate Miller is taking the right tack. There's no point feeding this view from children who are in love with and get excited over film music jingles and then want to bring them into the classical music fold on some personal mission.”
The return of Chat Noir, my favourite opponent. In this post he calls me “a child”, and since I’m not a child, the translation of child in this context is something like “dumb”, “underdeveloped”, “childish person with bad taste”.
This is the only post that I reported to the moderators and I know that they have received my report. As you can see, the post is still there, so there hasn’t been any action towards this post.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“if you are trying to say that video game music and TV spots are art music you have one more screw loose than I thought
I actually play, so you aren't going to be able to convince me that film music is on the same level as the Beethoven Sonata I was working on this weekend“
How many other times I’ll be labeled as a “mad”?
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“I am a great fan of film music, but do not find your thread very interesting (to put it in a polite way and not to get banned).”
A post of justekaia, an other opponent. This is a rhethorical and subtle way to insult you without insulting you: the person tells you that you would deserve an insult, something for which he would be banned. Basically, in reality the person has insulted you.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“I bet he is referring to his classical/concert works, you know the pieces you don't like, the violin and cello concertos for example. He's not so stupid as to think his film work is written in totally the same manner and comes from the same place as his classical work.”
mikeh375, the most important opponent. The one who was offended because I told him that he uses double standards.
I posted an interview in which John Williams compares his soundtracks to the music of the masters of classical music and he says that he feels that his music is not as good as their one.
Since my opponents wrote repeatedly that composers of film music don’t consider their works as classical music, this interview of John Williams was a nice counterargument.
Mikeh375 responded that John Williams is not so stupid as to think that his soundtracks are classical music. Indirectly, he has also insulted me and all the people with my position: “if you think that soundtracks are classical music, you are stupid”.
According to the moderators of Talkclassical, to indirectly call you "idiot" is not a insult, while to tell someone "you use double standards" it's a serious insult, for which you deserve to be banned for 8 days from the forum and permanently banned from the discussion.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“If you find this an example of the best film music, then something about your musical compass is off.”
In this post San Antoine is speaking about the soundtrack of Schindler’s List. Apparently he doesn’t accept that other people can have different tastes than him. If you like a musical composition that he doesn’t like it means that your musical compass is off.
The same recurrent scheme: the division of people between “wise listeners” and “dumb listeners”. My opponents see themselves as wise and they see me as a dumb.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
“It's so hilarious that some posters think film music is as good as, or better, than the music of Bach or Beethoven. Sorry but just because you don't understand the depths of Bach's or Beethoven's music, it does not mean that it is comparable to film music. I'm reminded of a blind person trying to convince those who can see that stick men is better art than Monet (or pick your favorite painter).”
If you thought that the list of labels was terminated, you were wrong. “Dumb listener”, “mad”,… what else? The creativity of my opponents is high, they won’t let you down. At this point of the discussion I’ve become a blind person who doesn’t see the difference between stick men and the paintings of Monet.
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
This is not the exhaustive list of offensive/arrogant posts written by my opponents. I could go on, but it would be pointless to report other material.
I want to be clear about this: I’m not saying that the posts of my opponents are against the rules of Talkclassical. I don’t see them as real insults (infact I reported to moderators only one of the posts reported above), because a real insult is something like “you are an idiot”.
These posts are more like opinions that I consider arrogant and offensive, but still opinions, not real insults.
The point is that you can not interpret “you use double standards” as an insult and at the same time tell me that the lists of statement reported here above are only harmless opinions.
I also used negative words in some discussions when talking about the music that I don’t like, but I didn’t ask the moderators to protect me from the reactions of the people who like the music that I attack.
It’s perfectly normal: if you criticize a thing, the people who like that thing are entitled in responding to your critics.
If someone writes the kind of things that I’ve reported here above (namely that the public of classical music is divided between dumb listeners and serious/wise listeners and that the radio Classic FM is for the dumb ones) to say that the discussion has showed very well the elitism/snobbery of the classical music world is a logical conclusion, and the truth shouldn't be censored.
Finally, it's easy to explain why the moderators have applied double standards.
The list of links here below clearily shows that the admin mmslbs was one of my opponents:
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
https://www.talkclassical.com/threads/why-do-many-...
I have to say that unlike many of my opponents, mmslbs was very polite, but since he is a scientist he should also be aware of the cognitive biases and be careful of being impartial when using his special powers.
It also seems that there are friendly relations between him and mikeh375.
The terms of use of Talkclassical clearily says that moderators must be impartial: https://www.talkclassical.com/help/terms/
**Modificato dall'autore il 30.06.2023 18:37**
-
-
■ @ 2023-06-30 18:32:30.0 di Mattia
-
■ @ 2023-06-30 23:47:38.0 di Non Autenticato
-
■ @ 2023-07-01 00:14:07.0 di Mattia
-
■ @ 2023-07-01 00:53:08.0 di Non Autenticato
-
■ @ 2023-07-01 11:18:34.0 di Mattia
-
■ @ 2023-07-01 16:53:16.0 di Non Autenticato
-
■ @ 2023-07-01 17:53:44.0 di Mattia
-
■ @ 2023-07-02 11:34:59.0 di Alessandrox
-
■ @ 2023-07-02 02:05:27.0 di Non Autenticato
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-