I'm not at all surprised, actually, by the reaction of the Metro riders. Yes, Bell is undoubtedly one of the best classical musicians in the world, he was playing some wonderful music (and I've heard, analyzed and/or played a large portion of the music he played that day in one form or another) but the problem with an experiment like this is - as I see it, anyway - that, as a nation, this country doesn't "get" classical music anymore - for the inaccessibility problem as well as a practical one:

In the 18th and 19th centuries, the music Bell played that day was the music people listened to. It was the "popular" music. They had gatherings where they'd play and/or sing this type of music for each other. They identified with it. But in the 21st century, pop, rock, hip hop, rap, country, folk and 40 bazillion other styles are the music people Tidentify with. Classical music is no longer part of our broad consciousness. Many people learn about it, study it as children but it's not what they identify with. It's the stuff on the radio, the music they heard growing up, the songs played at the high school dance, that they remember and identify with.

Does this say something about our national sense of art? Maybe. The bigger queston, as I see it, is the extent to which our artistic, musical and aesthetic ideals have changed over time. I wouldn't call this a travesty; it's a natural progression as people explore and expand their understanding of the world around them and the media available. It's happened throughout the centuries. When Haydn and Mozart burst on the scene in the mid 1700s, no doubt the Baroque composers of the day were horrified by the new combinations of harmonies and styles they were coming up with. It's a natural progression and, in my view, it's a good thing. How dull would it be if people stopped creating music after The Beatles became famous because, "wow, they're good. We couldn't ever do anything better than that!"

The fact that someone doesn't appreciate classical music doesn't make them stupid or inartistic or unappreciative of music in general. It simply means they're not interested in it. And while I happen to find this sad (because I do find beauty in these styles) I don't think it's a national crisis. Excellent musicianship, composition, and/or the ability to move people with aural combinations of sound are not the exclusive domain of classical music no matter how much some people would have you think so.

I have found just as many poignant or beautiful or heartwrenching or humorous moments listening to The Doors, Pink Floyd, EmmyLou Harris, Peter Gabriel and many, many others as I have listening to Bach's Goldberg Variations, Smetana's Die Moldau and Brahms' German Requiem. There are excellent musicians and excellent music written in every genre: Paul McCartney, whose skill with multiple instruments is widely known, is one who comes immediately to mind. Steve Goodman was an exquisite guitarist and a master of humor - go listen to his song "Vegematic" and tell me that's not great.

I guess my point is, things change. Art changes. People change. I thought the story and the experiment itself simply proved that this is happening. I also think the dialogue it's spurring is interesting. Anyway, I think it was great that Bell did this. (I do wonder, though, whether the reaction might have been different if it'd been a pianist in the middle of the Metro station. :)