Who Will Stand the Test of Time?

Shostakovich, Ligeti, Penderecki, Part, Adams, maybe even Elliot Carter and Jennifer Higdon will stand the test of time.

People want to perpetuate this myth that Beethoven and Mozart were the "Beatles of their time." In actual fact, much of Beethoven and Mozart's best music was rejected in the court of public opinion. On the other hand, people loved Wellington's victory, which is a trite piece of garbage. Try whistling the opening measures of K465.

Most popular music describes a window in time. Once that time is past, the music becomes a relic that is at best a curiosity. I don't recall the last time I heard Way down upon the Swanee River on the radio. My guess is that Heinrich Schutz gets more playing time than Steven Foster. There is a reason for that. The music of Heinrich Schutz describes aspects of the human condition that do not change with time.

Jmcgrogan2, My worst fear is that the movie Idiocracy is a forward looking documentary, in which case you may very well be right.

Schutz, Bach, Bach, Stamitz, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Bruckner, Mahler, Shostakovich, Madonna, Bieber, Swift--- I guess that sounds about right.

Our culture seems to be on a mission to prove Darwin wrong.

Schubert and all,
Not sure what is going on but I have posted several times and the posts are not appearing.
A couple of points here. First of all Schubert, hearing recorded classical music makes one want to hear more of it. Not necessarily live. In my own case, I listened to classical music for decades before I started attending live concerts on a regular basis. Even now, I am faced with a choice. Sit in my living room and listen to world class performances on a really good rig-- last night was Szell and the Clevelanders in the old Masonic auditorium-- 1957 on SACD-- oh my! Or I can get dressed, drive for 30-40 minutes, park, buy my ticket, and take my chances in an auditorium with poor accoustics. I think Frogmans point is quite apt. Now, if I lived in Cleveland, Vienna, or Dresden, where one is served up world class on a regular basis, the weight swings heavy and hard towards attending and supporting with donations. Otherwise, well, it is a somewhat different calculation.

Frogman,
2 things.
1. Good read
2. How is it possible that none of us put Benjamin Britten on the list? I am rather ashamed of myself for such an egregious oversight.

Schubert, The subject of orchestras failing or in deep trouble has been discussed previously. I am not familiar with the situation in St. Paul. Is the failure due to lack of audience or scaled back donations from deep pocketed patrons? In any case it is sad that so many top notch orchestras are cutting salaries and full time positions to try to survive.

Courant, I think you may have missed my point. There are aspects of the human experience that don't change. There are far more aspects of the human experience that do change. Popular music tends to focus on the ephemeral. I'm not sure what Steven Foster, for instance, may have to say to a 24th century man growing up in Scotland, who has never been to either Kentucky or Florida. I'm not sure what he has to say to a 21st century kid growning up in NYC. Schutz on the other hand, offers plenty for those who will listen. The quality of Foster's work is very high. I did not mean to demean his music in any way.
If you prefer, contrast "Rowan and Martins Laugh in" to "the Honeymooners." Laugh-In was of the highest quality, but the subject matter is severely dated. The subject matter of the Honeymooners, on the other hand, is not.
Many people think much of what I say is odd. Nothing new here.

Courant,
It does not appear that my statement and yours with respect to Foster's music are all that far apart.

"Most popular music describes a window in time. Once that time is past, the music becomes a relic that is at best a curiosity."

"Foster will stand the test of time simply because of his place in musicology from a strictly historical perspective. "

My perception is that the OP was not asking about music that would survive to be of historical or academic interest.