22
نوفمبر 2005
ملحنـــون 2
Re: Composers
Thank you very much for your reply, it simply reflects the respect you
hold for your viewers.
I totally agree that Sayed Darwish is a legendary composer that his masterpieces
are by all means timeless. The older they get the younger they sound...he had this ability to simplify to amplify.
A part form the exceptional Darwish, the rest of all Egyptian composers
will yield to the "adaa al 3alani results" which will be the only true judgment to what the audience really listens
to since we do not have a quantifiable findings that says otherwise.
For example I have heard that 2 years ago Baligh Hamdy had the highest
"adaa al 3alani results" yet he was not mentioned in the latest years?
I do not want to sound philosophical, it was just a question.
Thank you once again for your great effort
Best Regards
Tamer
CAM Comment
Dear Tamer
Thanks for your kind comment & for expressing your view
in this topic. Discussion is in fact important as it helps us rightly evaluate art. Invalid evaluation can cause serious confusion
in a subject that can positively or negatively affect public taste & mode.
Your query may be justified when using figures of the Tables
of Paris for as a sole base to rank composers' popularity.
To say it is the only true judgment because it is the only quantitative is not quite valid. Popularity is much wider in concept
than a table showing number of broadcasts. There are other important indices of popularity that can give more realistic impression.
Despite your call for objectiveness, your evaluation of Sayed
Darwish work & your explanation of giving him exceptional state sound quite subjective though qualitative, with expressions
like legendary, masterpieces, younger sound, his ability etc.
However, let us examine the suggested index, Tables of Paris, for objectivity.
Sayed Darwish score according to TOP results amounts to near
zero compared to other figures. Yet he is the most popular composer for almost a century as you have stated. Extracting Sayed
Darwish out of this context is not an objective way out. Because if we are going to be objective we have to apply the same
measures on all.
So quantitatively this man did NOT get a penny from "al-adaa
al-alani". Moreover he certainly wouldn't qualify for it for several reasons, the least is that his works were never broadcasted
in his life.
Adding that Sayed Darwish had the least number of music works
compared to other composers we come to conclude that his art cannot be evaluated on quantitative grounds. The return question
is why should the rest be judged only quantitatively?
Baligh Hamdi is known to have turned to music business rather
than music art for about half of his productive live. He composed songs for tens of singers and made hundreds of substandard
works that no body can even listen to now. His name was the target of every singer, good & poor, just like a brand name for fame and publicity. This phenomenon started by Baligh and extended to his imitators
later. The result was more money, less art.
As you know, art is subjective by definition. We cannot depend
solely on scores & figures. Likewise movies judged by box office returns only rarely represent true success. You can say
that apart from the five big names things may be somewhat leveled, for the rest were rather followers not true pioneers. Their
works could become popular in certain time but couldn't show long survival or strong return.
It is also noted that a number of new singers were granted
the Platinum Disc prize, just like Abdel Wahab, despite the vas difference in true popularity. Abdel Wahab's art lived in
millions of hearts for tens of years. Others' made millions of pounds and died in a few weeks.
It looks like you had this notice in mind when you first
asked your question but preferred to wait.. So please do not hesitate to further discuss any point if you feel so.
Best Regards
Editor, CAM
