why was everyone so attentive and quite
Answers
Answer:
It wasn't always an environment where people sat quietly, hands folded, listening to the music being played by the orchestra and waiting dutifully for the last notes to be heard before demonstrating anything resembling enthusiasm or appreciation for what was just performed. Once upon a time, audiences were actively and passionately involved in performances. Once upon a time, these performances were exactly what most performances of music are today – not some sort of lesson in appropriate, prudent public behavior or silent, focused listening, but a discourse between composer/performers and audience. It was, in short, a highly engaged, interactive social and public event.
If you think about it for a minute, it really makes perfect sense. Consider any concert you have attended, whether it was an internationally known pop artist at Arrowhead or a jazz combo at a bar in KC. My question is, what was audience involvement like? In what other music performance is the audience basically expected to sit quietly, patiently, uninvolved and seemingly unresponsive to the music being performed? If you go to a rock concert, people are screaming through the whole thing, engaged in the event. Go to a jazz club and people applaud in the middle of a tune, after each solo played. Many times, the musicians themselves are shouting encouragement to other members of the group, during solos and in between. Interactive. Responsive. Engaged.
There was also a precedent for this in "classical music." I really hate that term by the way. It describes nothing and has only served to alienate audiences and falsely canonize the composers who wrote for symphony orchestras (Truth be told, many of these composers led socially deviant, highly questionable lifestyles that would rival any rock, hip hop or jazz icon. In short, sainthood is probably not in the cards for most of them).