>>18482991>the great cultural heritage they turned their noses up at after the cultural revolution of the 60sMy dude, it's one of these traditions that completely shot itself in the foot on purpose by remaining highly elitistic and price-gating everything because "we can't have anyone other than the top 0.5% partake, it would be a betrayal to allow plebs in".
That worked when the noble classes were around but these have been disappearing long before the 60s and now the last few enthusiasts lament the decline of their pet tradition that they still refuse to open up. Well that's too bad but you can't complain about the disappearance of ballrooms if you still refuse access to anyone who doesn't have a generational estate.
The exact same thing happened with opera when purists started turning against performers who would record, calling them sellouts or lesser performers who were only "technically" good but could not stand on the stage. I'm not sure why that whole controversy was memoryholed, the only somewhat documented trace of it are the comments on Glenn Gould "wasting" his potential by focusing on recording and that's not even in opera. Some places now make a clear effort to open the discipline wider, lower prices, educate the general public but the damage is probably done and was done a long time ago.
It's very easy to blame the trendy boogeyman of "muh modernist cultural erosion" but these cultural artefacts of the european aristocracy died long before the 60s, and they killed themselves for the most part.
