Genre Vocabulary v. 1.0

[fjjulien]

Justification

Artsdata has undertaken a second phase of integration with the Arts Touring Connector (see artsdata-planet-atc). This integration involves the Extraction-Transformation-Load of atc:Show entities, which are equivalent to the ado:LivePerformanceWork and datascene:Spectacle concepts (see this discussion). atc:Show entities have six attributes including "genres" (read more).

This placed the Artsdata team before a few options:

1. Do a direct mapping with Wikidata concepts.

• Pro: Quick and simple.
• Con: Custom mapping just for one system; not reusable with other systems.

2. Map with the Datascène/Scène Pro genre vocabulary.

• Pro: The initial version of the Scène Pro genre vocabulary was serialized in RDF by Culture Creates.
• Con: The vocabulary is undergoing a major revision, which will not be completed quickly enough for this project.

3. Develop an Artsdata controlled vocabulary.

• Pro: An Artsdata vocabulary can be mapped with several information systems and with other knowledge bases.
• Pro: Mapping relationships can be qualified with skos:broader, skos:narrower, etc.
• Pro: The vocabulary can have English and French labels.
• Pro: With an Artsdata vocabulary, we can use the Artsdata reconciliation services to perform batch reconciliations and automated reconcilations.
• Con: It's a lot more work.

We decided it was time to put efforts into developing an Artsdata vocabulary.

Inaugural version the Artsdata Genre vocabulary

Version 1.0 of the vocabulary can be consulted in this spreadsheet or here: http://kg.artsdata.ca/ontology/Genre.

Namespace: http://kg.artsdata.ca/resource/

Compact URI prefix: adr

Concepts in this controlled vocabulary are expected values (i.e. "range") for the schema:genre property, for which the domain is schema:CreativeWork.

Genre concepts will be associated to Event entities via the ado:LivePerformanceWork class:

Event > workPerformed > LivePerformanceWork > genre > [genre concept]

Key features of the vocabulary

• Il s'agit donc d'un vocabulaire contrôlé qui peut être employé tant pour décrire des œuvres faisant parti du continuum OEMI/WEMI (par exemple, une pièce de théâtre en tant que texte dramatique), que des œuvres-spectacles qui intègrent des expressions d'œuvres OEMI (par exemple, une production théâtrale). Cela peut donner lieu à de la confusion dans des cas où une œuvre-spectacle associée à un genre intègre une œuvre ou est dérivée d'une œuvre associée à un autre genre (par exemple, un spectacle de cirque dérivé de Roméo et Juliette). Il convient alors d'associer à chaque entité œuvre la déclaration de genre qui lui revient. Cela peut aussi occasionner de la confusion dans le cas de récitals d'opéra : même si les airs d'opéras proviennent d'œuvres musico-dramatiques, la facette principale mise de l'avant lors du récital est la musique plutôt que l'intrigue dramatique associée à chaque air (d'où le fait que l'opéra est parfois, et à juste titre, considéré comme un genre musical). Dans Artsdata, la relation entre l'œuvre-spectacle et un texte dramatique qui y est intégré, sera articulée avec la propriété lrmoo:R74 uses expression of (has expression used in).
• Il s'agit d'un vocabulaire avec plusieurs niveaux de hiérarchie (le vocabulaire initial comporte deux niveaux mais il serait possible d'ajouter d'autres niveaux). Les relations skos:narrower/skos:broader entre les concepts ont une cardinalité « plusieurs à plusieurs » : un concept peut avoir aucun, un seul ou plusieurs parents.
• Les identifiants des concepts sont opaques. Cela permet d'assurer la stabilité des URI tout en offrant la flexibilité de changer libellés aussi souvent que nécessaire.
• Les concepts de premier niveau suivent la convention de nommage adr:K6-[d]. Les identifiants des concepts de second niveau ont le même premier chiffre que leur concept parent.
  • Note: Le fait d'associer un seul chiffre aux concepts de premier niveau limite à 9 le nombre de parents. C'est une contrainte importante.
• Nous avons attribué au théâtre, à la danse et à la musique le même chiffre que dans la classification du Système de classiffication des industries de l'Amérique du Nord (SCIAN/NAICS): 1, 2 et 3.
• Nous avons utilisé les facettes suivantes pour distinguer et regrouper les concepts :
  • intrigue / plot
  • personnages / characters
  • mise en scène (obligatoire ou optionelle ) / staging (required or optional)
  • musique (composition ou improvisation) / music (scored or improvised)
  • texte mis en musique / text set to music
  • texte parlé / spoken text
  • mouvements rythmiques/chorégrahiés (avec ou sans musique) / rhytmic/choregraphed movements (with or without music)
  • mouvements requérant des habilités physiques spécialisées apparentées au sport / movements requiring sports-based specialized physical habilities/skills
• Nous avons aussi regroupé les concepts en tenant compte des catégories de droits d'auteur qui s'appliquent aux œuvres :
  • Small Rights
  • Grand Rights
• Nous avons regroupé l'opéra et la comédie musicale sous un concept de premier niveau appelé « genre musico-dramatique ». Ce genre parent n'est pas destiné à être utilisé dans des données structurées d'œuvres : il ne sert seulement qu'à regrouper des genres selon leurs facettes communes, dans ce cas-ci le fait qu'il s'agisse de genres associés à des grands droits.
• Nous avons regroupé le cirque, l'humour et les variétés sous le parent "other performing art". Il nous apparaissait risqué de leur attribuer un identifiant de premier niveau à un chiffre. Dans la mesure où nous n'avons que 9 chiffres à attribuer à des genres de premier niveau, nous aurions rapidement pu nous retrouver avec plus de candidats que de chiffres disponibles. Dans la version inaugurale, il reste les chiffres 6, 7 et 8 pour définir de nouveaux regroupements de premier niveau.

Questions à discuter

Quelques questions sont survenues pendant l'élaboration du vocabulaire contrôlé. D'autres questions surviendront assurément.

Afin de résoudre ces questions et de faire en sorte que le vocabulaire réponde bien au plus grand nombre de scénarios d'utilisation, nous invitons la communauté des arts de la scène à commenter cette discussion.

You may comment this discussion in English, French or any other language.

[fjjulien]

Ballet

La plupart des ballets sont basés sur un livret ou mettent en scène des personnages.

En ce sens, lorsque le genre « ballet » est associé à une œuvre-spectacle (par exemple, le Casse-Noisette du Royal Winnipeg Ballet), il constitue à la fois un sous-genre de « danse » ou un sous-genre « musico-dramatique ». Il faudrait donc qu'on lui attribue aussi skos:broader adr:K6-4 (Musico-dramatic genre).

Cependant, lorsque le genre « ballet » est associé à une œuvre OEMI (par exemple, Casse-Noisette de Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky), il ne désigne qu'un genre « musico-dramatique » (puisque l'œuvre de Tchaikovsky ne spécifie pas les mouvements chorégraphiés devant être exécuté sur la musique).

Question

1. Pouvons-nous avoir un seul concept « ballet » avec deux parents (« genre musico-dramatique » et « danse ») ?
2. Ou devons-nous plutôt définir deux concepts « ballet », l'un étant un sous-genre de « danse », l'autre étant un sous-genre « musico-dramatique » ?

[dlh28]

To keep things simple, I think it makes more sense to have a single ballet concept with two parents.

[GaryMan1968]

I agree with Dessa. I think a single ballet concept with two parents is preferable.

[fjjulien]

« Autre art de la scène » / "Other performing art"

Nous regroupé le cirque, l'humour et les variétés sous le parent "other performing art". Il m'apparaissait risqué de leur attribuer un identifiant de premier niveau à un chiffre. Dans la mesure où nous n'avons que 9 chiffres à attribuer à des genres de premier niveau, nous aurions rapidement pu nous retrouver avec plus de candidats que de chiffres disponibles.

Cependant, je crains que la communauté des arts du cirque ne perçoive négativement de voir leur genre relégué au second niveau du vocabulaire.

Question

3. Sommes-nous à l'aise à grouper tous les genres n'appartenant pas au « théâtre », à la « danse » ou à la « musique » sous un même genre de premier niveau?
4. Par soucis de cohérence, devrions-nous aussi y mettre les genres basés sur l'oralité (« art de la parole » et ses sous-genres)?

[MorganPann]

I want to build on what Dessa said about taxonomy, and also acknowledge Frédéric’s concern about the optics for the circus community, all very good points.

• I agree with Dessa that “Other performing art” is behaving like a catch-all:
  From a SKOS perspective, that’s usually a sign that the parent category isn’t defined by a positive characteristic, but by the absence of one (not dance / not music / not theatre). It basically becomes a bucket for things that don’t fit anywhere else. This is part of why the placement of Circus feels off. As Frédéric mentioned, the circus sector is highly organized in Québec and Canada, and I think many practitioners will read “Other” as a form of relegation, even if that’s not our intent.

• (Just to note, I’m using “Spoken” here, since “Spoken Word” was renamed in the latest version):
  Everything I said about cohesion applies to the new Spoken parent category. I agree with Dessa that Spoken has more internal cohesion than the broader “Other” bucket. Storytelling, poetry readings, slam. These all share language as the primary performance medium. I think Comedy is trickier, and Dessa’s back-and-forth on this reflects the issue well: some comedy is spoken-based (stand-up), but other forms (physical comedy, clown, improv) are not. It feels strange to call this "Other performing art" for the same reason as my first point.

• On the question of whether to keep Comedy grouped with Circus and Variety:
  If we stick to a single “Other performing art” parent, then yes, Comedy probably needs to live there for now, not because of funding categories, but because it doesn’t map cleanly to Theatre, Dance, Music, or Spoken. But this does bring us back to conceptual issues of the “Other” label.

A possible middle-ground that avoids creating more top-level IDs:
Instead of “Other performing art,” we could consider a more descriptive first-level label that combines these forms because of what they are, not what they are not, OR we could fill in 6, 7, 8 first level concepts that help eliminate the need for "other."

For example:

• Non-narrative Performing Arts
• Hybrid and/or Variety Arts (variety shows, cabaret, magic, sketch comedy, drag)
• Physical Performance Arts (circus, mime, clown, physical comedy – less sure about this)

This might also give Circus a parent that feels more intentional and less marginal. Not perfect, but they avoid the miscellaneous bucket issue. Thoughts?

Guiding principle (2nd to Dessa’s point):
If we find ourselves needing third-level concepts under a second-level category inside “Other,” that’s a strong signal that the parent concept deserves to be promoted or reframed at the first level.

[fjjulien]

Thanks for your thoughts, @MorganPann.

You are quite right that "Other performing arts" feels like a catch all and groups together genres that have relatively little in common (except perhaps those genres where the LivePerformanceWork is a series of loosely-related numbers, along the lines of the variety genre).

Do we even need a parent for genres under what is currently called "Other performing arts"? If these genres do not have a clear unifying primary facet, could they not simply exist in the controlled vocabulary without a parent?

If we removed their parent, they could keep their current 3-digit URI name, and we would just have to remove their skos:broader relationship. It's a fairly simple change to implement.

[GenFab28]

À titre personnel et à la suite de plusieurs échanges par courriel avec Frédéric, je suis d'accord concernant le retrait de "Other performing arts" et ce, pour toutes les raisons mentionnés plus haut. Je me suis questionnée sur les alternatives et la discussion ainsi que les échanges courriels m'amènent à statuer qu'il est probablement trop tôt (à mon humble avis) pour établir et créer davantage d'identifiants de niveau supérieur.

Malgré tout, après m'être questionnée sur plusieurs aspects, je reviens avec Arts de la parole qui de mon point de vue servirait l'humour, la poésie, les lectures publiques, le slam voir même les conférences.

[fjjulien]

Done.

• I removed all skos:broader relationships to adr:K6-9, thus making "Circus", "Comedy" and "Variety" first-level concepts.
• I deleted adr:K6-9 - "Other performing art".

[fjjulien]

I decided to introduce a new first-level concept for any "Performing art". I included it in the vocabulary for the purpose of enabling automated reconciliation of keyword strings in data sources. That way, if a source uses this string under either the schema:keyword or schema:genre property, Artsdata would be able to match the string to this SKOS concept. Then, Artsdata could infer that the Event has the type adr:PerformingArtsEvent.

[fjjulien]

Sports-based genre

Choregraphed, performative sports such as wrestling and figure skating are considered performing arts according to most industry classifications.

Question

5. Should sports-based genres be grouped under the same top-level genre (see the proposal below)?
   • Is this even a clearly-defined facet worthy of grouping genres under a common concept?
6. Should circus be grouped under the same top-level genre?
   • If so, how could we define its primary facet(s)?

Proposed concept

Acrobatic and sports-based genre: Genre based on movements that require specialized physical skills and that may or may not be choregraphed.

[dlh28]

Competitions aren't live performance (adr:Performance). They therefore do not have live performance works as schema:workPerformed values. They consequently fall outside of the domain of this controlled vocabulary.

Dance competitions most definitely are live performances, as much as wrestling or figure skating. I cannot speak for all dance genres, but Irish dance competitions most definitely feature live performance works, representing an ensemble of choreography specific to a particular school (or in the case of traditional sets, set choreography shared across all schools, which are intended to be performed to a specific tune), live music supplied by a musician, and costuming (Highland dance competitions even take this a step further by assigning particular costumes to particular dances, which share set choreography across all schools). They are essentially live performances that just so happen to be judged, with the potential to earn medals and trophies.

Some feiseanna also feature additional performance-based competitions, including "pantos" (short, commedia dell'arte-esque theatrical performances, usually based on a folk or fairy tale).

I doubt that many venues currently in Artsdata feature Irish or Highland dance competitions (or would want to describe specific performance works in a high level of granularity), but again, if our goal to be as inclusive as possible, we cannot exclude competitive dance forms as "unworthy" of being described in this vocabulary simply because there is a competitive element.

[dlh28]

Competitions aren't live performance (adr:Performance). They therefore do not have live performance works as schema:workPerformed values. They consequently fall outside of the domain of this controlled vocabulary.

If competitions cannot be live performances, then we would also have to exclude Fringe shows from this vocabulary, because prizes are awarded at the end of each festival.

[GaryMan1968]

I know that we discussed adding the "sports-based special skills" facet to our list of facets, but I think that this genre could also be justified by the specific staging of sports-based performing arts. The Ice Capades can't perform at Southam Hall; they specifically need a rink.

[MorganPann]

I agree with Gary here. The staging needs of sports-based performing arts make this more than just a “special skills” facet. These shows aren’t just athletic, they depend on sports infrastructure in a way that sets them apart from dance, circus, or theatre.

• Ice Capades needing a rink is a great example, and the same is true for other forms.
• Harlem Globetrotters–style shows need a basketball court (Gary told me about this! Did not know it existed.)
• Professional Cheer/Dance Spectaculars (requiring a sports arena) are apparently also a thing.
• WWE / Lucha Libre–style events need a wrestling ring.
• Medieval Times and other jousting dinner-theatre shows need a dirt arena to ride on.
• Rodeos or equestrian theatre shows also need a dirt arena.
• Gymnastics exhibitions and stunt showcases (non-competitive) require mats, beams, bars.
• Skateboarding showcases would require a skateboarding arena.
• Synchronized Swimming and High-Dive / Aerial Splash Shows require a pool.
• Underwater ballet / mermaid shows require a tank.
• Trick Bowling Shows require a bowling arena.
• Monster Truck or demolition derby shows (not competitive; choreographed stunts, pyrotechnics) need a large dirt arena.
• Motocross freestyle stunt tours need a track arena with ramps.
• Martial Arts shows would require matted floors.

These aren’t competitions, but they can’t exist without their sport-based environments. That gives them a clear structural identity as a group, which (to me) justifies treating “sports-based performing arts” as its own genre family.

This doesn’t necessarily mean Circus belongs in that same group, circus often aligns more with theatrical staging, but the sports-based cluster feels coherent on its own.

Happy to keep talking through naming, but conceptually, I think Gary’s right. This isn’t just a skill set, it’s a distinct performance genre rooted in venue and staging requirements.

[fjjulien]

I think we are on to something, but I'm still hesitant about how to name and or define of this top-level concept. I suggest we do not create a first-level concept just yet, and that we use adr:600 names (starting with adr:601) for sports-based genres, as needed.

[dlh28]

For ease of access, here are the additional sub-genre proposals I have already added as comments to the spreadsheet:

Under Theatre:

• Puppetry
  Rationale: puppetry is a well-represented theatrical genre amongst many venues and presenters already in Artsdata.

Under Dance:

• Folk Dance
  Rationale: although folk dance is quite a broad term, encompassing lots of dance traditions around the world (including, arguably, ballet), including it in the controlled vocabulary would signal at least a recognition of genres outside the classic "high-brow" Western dance genres.

Under Music:

• Rock
  Rationale: the proliferation of tribute bands to Fleetwood Mac, The Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Queen and the like hosted at many venues and presented by many organizations already in Artsdata would merit including this second-level genre. It would also be more inclusive to add this high-level genre if we eventually expand to load music presenters and venues that present rock subgenres that are a deliberate reaction against "popular music", such as metal and punk.

• Hip-Hop
  Rationale: ^ditto for inclusivity, if we eventually expand to load music presenters and venues that host this genre of show.

• Electronic Music
  Rationale: ^ditto

• (Contemporary) R&B
  Rationale: although R&B is a very diverse genre and encompasses "Blues" (which we already have in the vocabulary), I would argue that "Contemporary R&B" has a different sound, fanbase, and perceived overall "status" in the music world. Most presenters and venues who present and host Blues respectively don't present and host Contemporary R&B and vice versa. I also think most people would hesitate to group Shawn Desman and Colin James under the same genre.

[fjjulien]

Puppetry
Rationale: puppetry is a well-represented theatrical genre amongst many venues and presenters already in Artsdata.

Added to version 1.1 with the URI adr:K6-904. In keeping with AAT and considering that puppetry is a genre also used at times in modern circus and in other genres, I did not make it a narrower concept to "theatre".

[fjjulien]

@dlh28

Folk Dance
Rationale: although folk dance is quite a broad term, encompassing lots of dance traditions around the world (including, arguably, ballet), including it in the controlled vocabulary would signal at least a recognition of genres outside the classic "high-brow" Western dance genres.

I looked in the Dance Map, Scène Pro, and AAT for a matching concept. None of them adopted a concept denoting any folk dance. Rather, they defined culturally-specific concepts for dozens of folk dances. I suggest we wait until the release of the next version of Scène Pro, and that we import concepts from either Scène Pro and/or the Dance Map.

[fjjulien]

@dlh28

Under Music:

J'ai consulté les catégories de genre du Gala de l'ADISQ et des Juno Awards et j'ai pu confirmer que les genres que tu proposes y apparaissent. À partir de ces deux listes, j'ai aussi identifié d'autres genres qu'il serait pertinent d'ajouter. Voici la liste que je propose d'intégrer à la version 1.1 du vocabulaire. Les termes suivant la barre oblique seront les altLabels.

• Alternative
• Electronic
• Metal / Hard
• Rap / Hip hop
• Rock
• Rhythm and blues / R&B

Il y a deux catégories que je n'ai pas inclus d'emblée parce que leur libellés pourraient donner lieu à des faux positifs lors de la réconciliation de chaînes de caractères. Cependant, ces genres sont bien définis par CARAS (l'organisme qui gère les Junos):

• Adult contemporary: "tracks which feature light instrumentation, easygoing melodies and casual tempos that can include elements of soul, rhythm and blues, smooth jazz, classic style crooning and soft-rock influence in addition to softer non aggressive rock and pop".
• Dance: "All forms of dance/electronic music and all its sub-genres, including but limited to: House, Trance, Electro House, Dance- Pop (but not Pop), Dubstep, Deep House, Techno, Drum n Bass, Garage, etc. are eligible for this category."

1. Should we include "Adult contemporary" as a music genre?
2. "Dance" is quite problematic because it shares the same label as a first-level genre. Adding "Dance" as a music genre would make reconciliation of dance as a movement genre impossible. Even if we included it as "Dance music", it may affect the reconciliation score for "Dance" strings. Since "dance" is defined as "dance/electronic music" and, could we simply add "dance music" as an altLabel or "hiddenLabel"? If no one else deems this a valid option, we could integrate "Dance music" as a stand-alone concept, but we should ask Gregory about the impact for reconciliation purposes.

[dlh28]

@dlh28

Under Music:

J'ai consulté les catégories de genre du Gala de l'ADISQ et des Juno Awards et j'ai pu confirmer que les genres que tu proposes y apparaissent. À partir de ces deux listes, j'ai aussi identifié d'autres genres qu'il serait pertinent d'ajouter. Voici la liste que je propose d'intégrer à la version 1.1 du vocabulaire. Les termes suivant la barre oblique seront les altLabels.

• Alternative
• Electronic
• Metal / Hard
• Rap / Hip hop
• Rock
• Rhythm and blues / R&B

Il y a deux catégories que je n'ai pas inclus d'emblée parce que leur libellés pourraient donner lieu à des faux positifs lors de la réconciliation de chaînes de caractères. Cependant, ces genres sont bien définis par CARAS (l'organisme qui gère les Junos):

• Adult contemporary: "tracks which feature light instrumentation, easygoing melodies and casual tempos that can include elements of soul, rhythm and blues, smooth jazz, classic style crooning and soft-rock influence in addition to softer non aggressive rock and pop".
• Dance: "All forms of dance/electronic music and all its sub-genres, including but limited to: House, Trance, Electro House, Dance- Pop (but not Pop), Dubstep, Deep House, Techno, Drum n Bass, Garage, etc. are eligible for this category."

1. Should we include "Adult contemporary" as a music genre?
2. "Dance" is quite problematic because it shares the same label as a first-level genre. Adding "Dance" as a music genre would make reconciliation of dance as a movement genre impossible. Even if we included it as "Dance music", it may affect the reconciliation score for "Dance" strings. Since "dance" is defined as "dance/electronic music" and, could we simply add "dance music" as an altLabel or "hiddenLabel"? If no one else deems this a valid option, we could integrate "Dance music" as a stand-alone concept, but we should ask Gregory about the impact for reconciliation purposes.

@fjjulien

1. I see "Adult contemporary" as more of Billboard chart/radio genre than a distinct musical genre per se (since, as you say, it can encapsulate many different genres like pop, soul and soft rock). From a data steward point of view, I also don't see an easy way to identify "adult contemporary" works without manual review from a steward who already has prior knowledge of what artists would fit under this label.

2. I agree – I think it would make more sense to include "Dance" as an alt label under Electronic Music (or whatever we decide to call the upper level genre). Personally, I also prefer "Electronic" as the main label, because it makes space for music made with computers and other electronic instruments that isn't necessarily intended as dance music (e.g. ambient music, video game music, any works where a theremin is the main instrument).

[GenFab28]

@fjjulien
Interrogation fort pertinente.
je suis du même avis que Dessa concernant l'inclusion du mot "Dance" comme sous-catégorie et du côté des usages populaires, "Electronic" est aussi ma préférence plutôt que "Electronic Music"

En ce qui concerne "Adult contempory", tout porte à croire que nous sommes ici dans un contexte d'identification pour la Radio ou les billboards à une autre époque et non réellement dans une sémantique de catégorisation pérenne. Je peux entrevoir l'enjeu d'une revue manuelle nécessaire comme le mentionne Dessa et nous pourrions nous tourner vers l'identification des publics pour ajouter le terme "Adult". Bien que là encore, ce serait subjectif ou intégré sur un sous-entendu que c'est du contenu mature, mais le genre "adult contempory" pourrait aussi être perçu avec le sous-entendu "mature - indécente - contenu explicite"

[fjjulien]

Here is the genre hierarchy in the Art and Architecture Thesaurus.

It's not exhaustive, but it's food for thought.

[GaryMan1968]

Here is also a collection of controlled vocabularies used by the IAML and Radio France (scroll down to the "Genres" heading).

[fjjulien]

Autres facettes / Other facets

Question

7. Y a-t-il d'autres facettes ou caractéristiques qui pourraient nous être utile pour différencier ou regrouper des genres ? / Are there other facets or characteristics that would be useful to distinguish or group genres?

[MorganPann]

As Gary pointed out under "Sports-based genre" I think we should look at venue and staging requirements.

[fjjulien]

Suggestions de concepts à ajouter / Suggested additional concepts

Please list any suggestions below. You may point to a GitHub issue describing the concept and sources where it is used.

[fjjulien]

Chanson et musique instrumentale #196

[fjjulien]

"Non-specified" performing arts genre #198

[GaryMan1968]

New Music & Classical Music

I am suspicious of this "New Music" concept because I don't know exactly what it means. I'm assuming that it refers to music with an orchestral instrumentation that was composed in the 20th and 21st centuries, something like a Philip Glass piece, and not just any new music, as that would seem like it would be too broad a category to be useful (the possibility of it referring to that very amorphous genre "adult contemporary" also seems unlikely). This is what the skos:closeMatch with Wikidata also seems to imply. We have however not added periods of history as a facet that we are considering for inclusion in defining genres.

If we are using "New Music" to mean any new music, I would suggest getting rid of it, as it seems unnecessary. Why would someone use "new music" to describe a performanceWork if the new music was new Jazz music? They would use our Jazz concept, no?

If we are using "New Music" to refer to modern music - as in the series: Renaissance > Baroque > Classical > Romantic > Modern - I'm not sure why we would only create concepts for two out of 5-6 potential concepts in that series.

Do we mean by our concept "Classical" any of the music that is most commonly understood when someone uses the term classical music (orchestral instrumental music from any of these periods), or do we mean that music that was composed in the Classical Period proper, between 1750 and 1820?

I've done a cursory check of the controlled vocabulary used by the International Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres, and couldn't find a concept for New Music or Contemporary Music.

[fjjulien]

Je partage ton inquiétude. Si le concept de "new music" est trop mal défini, mieux vaut ne pas l'intégrer au vocabulaire. De toute façon, les oeuvres dites de « musique contemporaine » sont souvent mises sur les mêmes programmes de concert que les oeuvres dites de « musique classique ».

[fjjulien]

« musique classique » apparaît dans plusieurs vocabulaires contrôlés chargés dans Artsdata. Même si le terme est ambigu, j'aurais tendance à le conserver dans le vocabulaire d'Artsdata.

[GaryMan1968]

Just to be clear, I think we should include a classical music concept. It's the "New Music" concept I think we should probably avoid.

[MorganPann]

I agree with Gary here

[fjjulien]

Marie-Pier Pilote m'a communiqué la solution retenue pour le vocabulaire de Datascène. Leur concept générique s'appelle « avant-garde » et il comporte trois sous-concepts :

Cette typologie a été définie en collaboration avec le Conseil québécois de la musique.

@GaryMan1968 @MorganPann Can we adopt "avant-garde" / «avant-garde» as the label for adr:K6-306, and make "new music" an altLabel (in order to enable automatic reconciliation with the ATC vocabulary)?

[fjjulien]

The inaugural version of this controlled vocabulary is now published.

• Concept scheme
• Documentation page