I would’ve stopped to listen for a second, but most likely would’ve moved along after a minute or so.
sorry, that might be true, but it is all about what is on display. Like said in one post “if it was girls playing…”. I am sure if it was dont in a more sexual way it might have caught the eye’s of a lot more.
Just my thought if you have something beautiful and you ignore it because of responsiblity… was it worth it?
old thing like old things…:sario:
Oh, well, yeah, I mean if he was pounding out something beautiful like Devil Went Down To Georgia on his fiddle I would stop and listen. lol
You are missing the concept that people are willing to pay $150+ a ticket because it is the ‘it’ thing to do, but in reality the majority of these people that do it just to be seen have no idea who he really is.
I look at it a different way, if you’re on your way to work without a chick by your side to impress then you’re obviously not going to give a shit about listening to some violin music. Stopping to listen will not increase your chances with your wife when you get home.
No, it’s not about “what’s on display,” it’s about what your priorities are. The experiment obviously set out to prove that people are too busy to stop and enjoy something beautiful. What it instead proved, to me, is that people have a priority during rush hour - to get home or get to work - instead of stop and listen to music, no matter how good it is, what the quality of the instrument is, or what the complexity of the piece being preformed in.
Getting to work on time > music in a metro station.
Half naked girls playing music in a metro station > getting to work on time.
That’s not a statement that people don’t appreciate good music. It’s a statement that they prioritize music lower than getting to work during rush hour, which seems self evident to me even without an experiment.
I think it’s a wee bit cynical to say that people who go to expensive concerts are only doing so to be cool. I would say it’s the opposite. Those who aren’t interested in the music probably aren’t going to be willing to shell out that kind of money to sit in the dark and listen to sleepy music.
sorry, so you think. if you race to work to make the $$ for the concert you are ok…think of how many people are late b/c of rush hour…
the key thing here is they created the opportunity and they gave the people to make the opportunity cost Evaluation.
agreed.
what i would like to know is details about the people that stopped, and for that matter how many of the concert goers passed through the subway as he played ?
the same experiment could be repeated with any other type of professional musician in any other situation with the same response for passer by’s.
hell, for that matter ive been to concerts where a member of the MAIN ACT was standing in the designated smoking area, with the general population, and because noone recognized him he didnt get any more credit for his skills then any other layman there that was talking about music
Not at all, if people who enjoyed his music (or the music in general) and where honestly fans they would have stopped and listened. The majority of things like this are about being seen there, not about actually being there for the music. Especially the concert he is putting on. Remember people this is America, where your image is everything.
I have personally stopped and listened to good subway acts before.
I’m not really a fan of the violin… If it was a cello I would have rocked the fuck out and listened all day long… maybe try to fornicate with the bow…
actually it would probably depend on what he was playing … I enjoy stuff in the minor key. major key crap is to fucking cheery for me… and i Allegros make me sick
I would have thought, oh look another hobo whose trying to impress the crowd so he can buy himself crack or alcohol. I wouldv’e kept moving without tipping. If he was in a full suit, I would have stopped and admired the talent.
That’s exactly the point I’m trying to make. In my personal opinion, this experiment failed at testing peoples enjoyment of beauty. They purposefully chose a place and time in which people would have much higher, different priorities than stopping to listen to music.
I’m a huge fan of classical music, considering I have played in orchestras since I was 6 years old. However, if there was a musician, no matter how good, in a subway as I was on my way to work… guess what? I wouldn’t stop either. I have different priorities at that very specifically chosen (by the experimenters) time.
As a random side note, there was a string quartet playing in lounge area of my gym today. I stopped and enjoyed them for several minutes, and because of this thread watched other people. There were about 20 people sitting and actively listening, and about 5/8 people that walked by stopped for a minute or more before continuing on. The results are dramatically different than the experiment because the lounge isn’t a transit area, during a time in which people are the most actively transiting. I posit that if the quartet had been playing in the middle of the weights area, people would probably still stop, but not as often or as as long because they would have been occupied with their current activity, that being working out.
if he was playing moonlight sonata i wouldve stopped
You didn’t grow up in a city with a major public transportation system, and it is obvious the way you say everyone is in such a hurry. I have seen many times people stop and watch/listen to the musician. Its not that hard to do especially waiting for the train to come. You are forgetting that aspect of it, no matter how much of a hurry you are in YOU STILL HAVE TO WAIT FOR A TRAIN IN A TRAIN STATION. Its not that hard to walk 5 feet one way or another when your train comes, and many people do.
Most people have played orchestra since early child hood, when was the last time you picked up an instrument though. That statement had nothing to do with this study or any statements said.
I don’t know how much of a hurry people were in, and being in a HURRY really has nothing to do with it. It’s having something to do (ie, travel), while at a location that exists for that same something (ie, a transit station), and the experimenters expecting you to stop what you are doing and do something completely different. They choose rush hour, which says to me they obviously wanted to test it when people were under a time deadline to get to work, or were eager to get home after work. This implies to me that they wanted people to be in a rush, but then wanted to judge people for being in that rush.
I didn’t grow up in an area with mass transit, but I did spend 4 years in the San Francisco area, using nothing but public transit (bus and BART), so I know how waiting for a train can be. The experimenters did not include how many people were listening without actively standing in front of the musician staring at them (nor would they be able to). They only wanted to count those who stopped and actively looked at the musician (the way I understand it). I, for one, know I can appreciate music without staring at the source of that music. But the experimenters are basing their “findings” purely on how many people engaged the musician by site or proximity. I find the experiment process, the logic behind that process, and thusly the findings unsubstantiated.
And the last time I picked up my instrument was two nights ago. The statement was made to make the point that I probably appreciate the work of a musician more than the average joe, and even I would probably not stop to listen if it was rush hour in a transit station. The experiment, from the way I perceive it, is trying to make the implication that people are too self-involved, or too busy, to appreciate something beautiful in an unexpected place or at an unexpected time. I don’t see it as being a worthwhile or a fruitful experiment, to say the least.
I am in Manhattan about once a month. For some reason i always stop and listen/watch to the subway acts. Most are pretty entertaining. Be it amazement or hilarity they are enjoyable.
He did this about a year about in the L’enfant Plaza in DC. The article said that a couple people stopped to listen to him but they mainly just went about their business. There was one woman that stopped and listened for a while and they asked her why she did. She replied “Because that’s Joshua Bell!”
I think that the average person would appreciate his music but think nothing of it. He’s not a very famous face unless you know of him or pay a little more attention to classical music. I probably would have stopped to listen because I know what he looks like and know what his playing sounds like. I’ve been a fan of his for years and have seen him live a few times. I would have LOVED to have been in that subway 
I love london. Not surprised as the artists I saw in the tube were very good. I need to go back asap.
If I was going to work I may have stopped for a moment, if I was coming home from work I may have stopped longer.
If I was on vacation and was going to the museum I would have stopped and listened to one complete song.
I would not have took his violin as I would assume he was a homeless man whom plays very good violin.