Bach: Genius or Not?

[CRCulver]

Also, music was much more than mere entertainment in the Baroque period and earlier (sacred music). 

Bach's music draws on the popular dance tradition, which was pure entertainment, basically aristocratic hoedowns. Music back then wasn't all choirs extolling the glory of God.

[Frumaster]

Bach's music draws on the popular dance tradition, which was pure entertainment, basically aristocratic hoedowns. Music back then wasn't all choirs extolling the glory of God.

Not at all, but Bach's sacred music had a pretty clear purpose, no matter how many secular motifs it contained.  Maybe he brought a little fun to church music...but it still reflects strong Lutheran faith.

[orbital]

Because change is not always for the better, wouldn't you agree?  Some amount of change is inevitable, but we can surely resist cultural degeneracy to some degree. 

The changes that have not been good (perhaps beneficial is a better word) have generally been the disruptive, sudden, and short term ones. I believe that humanity as a whole has always been going forward. Whatever was not beneficial for the species as a whole did not suceed in the long run and it was dropped in lieu of something better. This is the way nature works. I think humans are in a much better place today then they were in the baroque period in every way.

Also, music was much more than mere entertainment in the Baroque period and earlier (sacred music). 

Yes, but it comes as a whole. Religion was much more prevailent and supressive back then (not a good thing IMO), there were very limited civil liberties (not good), most people did not even have the chance to listen to music let alone choose a genre (not good). If I was given the option to choose between listening to only baroque music or every other music that exists today except classical music, I'd go for the second one.

Prior to the 20th century.  Most of the great composers began as children too.

True perhaps, but what percentage of people had the chance to regularly listen to music? And more importantly what choices did they have?

Lets hope so, but I don't like the trajectory we're on.

Be careful what you hope for  There is no guarantee that what will replace rap music will sound any better.

[Josquin des Prez]

Bach's music draws on the popular dance tradition, which was pure entertainment, basically aristocratic hoedowns.

Nonsense. The music of Bach draws from Bach, and had nothing to do with aristocratic hoedowns or anything whatsoever that is outside Bach. 

[knight66]

A quote...

"Johann Sebastian Bach wrote hundreds of pieces of music, about half of them based on popular hymn tunes of the day, called chorales.

Many of these tunes were used several times in his organ music, and in his dramatic music, the passions, oratorios, and cantatas."

Not so sure about half his music being chorales, but you get the idea. Another quote from a different source.

"Today, many of the Lutheran chorales are familiar as hymns still used in Protestant churches, sung in four-voice harmony. Often the harmonizations are taken from the final sections of cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach. The melodies of the chorales were only in a few instances composed by Bach; the large majority of melodies were based on chorales that were already familiar to his congregation."

Here is another quote

"Bach moved to Weimar in 1708 to work for Duke Wilhelm Ernst. In 1709, Wilhelm's nephew, Ernst August, became a second duke that was in charge of the same town. The courts of the two dukes were openly opposed and even hostile to each other, but Bach was friendly with both leaders. Bach even became teacher to Ernst August's younger half brother, through whom he learned of the Italian styles of Antonio Vivaldi. Bach was especially interested in Vivaldi's L'estro armonico concertos. This added influence helped Bach develop a style that he used from now on. The style combined the Italian use of harmonies and themes with touches of German and French influences from his boyhood. Bach wrote his first non-religious cantata using this new style, Was mir behagt, ist nut die muntre Jagd, otherwise known as the " Hunt Cantata" BWV 208."

Then there is this.

" He had the foresight to realize that Frederick might well be an important figure who could be of use to Bach in the future. Bach's works now began to reflect his new galant style (a mix of the new Italian style with the strict counterpoint of Palestrina called stile antico)."

Mike

[greg]

"Arisocratic hoedowns..." I'll have to remember that. It reminds me of the phrase my little brother invented- "Digital hippie." Interesting ones...

[Harry]

Gurn, in the eyes of outsiders we are not just listening to just any music, but we are listening to art.
And the thing is....they are actually right. Only we perceive art (in this case in musical form) as something that is essential and indispensable in our lives, they see it as something they do not understand, and thus "elitist", regrettably.

Q

I second that, entirely!

[alkan]

I think it boils down to a question of comprehension and language.

If someone speaks to me in Russian I hear the sounds but I don't understand anything.     If the same person switches to English, then he/she can communicate with me.

Same with music.        The nurses are hearing sounds, whereas Gurn is hearing music.   

Conclusion :   Although some exceptional people are born speaking music, most of us have to learn the language ......

[Cato]

Well civilization is not something that stopped around 1900's. It, too, is constantly evolving and I have a very difficult time understanding the resistance to change, particularly in something like music which has always (even in the high-art ages) been a vehicle of entertainment 

Are you really sad that not many western youngsters today are listening to classical music? When have they ever...? 

Rap music was born as a contemporary protest music -the anticulture which has become a culture itself, just like Beatles did in the 60s. It will be replaced by what is surely upcoming.

I. Protest against what?  Paying attention in school?  Respecting women?  Using modest language?   

II. Coming soon: an opera based on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged   0:)

[karlhenning]

The music of Bach draws from Bach, and had nothing to do with aristocratic hoedowns or anything whatsoever that is outside Bach. 

Oh, but that is nonsense.  So Bach's music has no source or referents outside of Himself, eh?

Time for you to review the first two commandments  0:)

[karlhenning]

A quote...

"Johann Sebastian Bach wrote hundreds of pieces of music, about half of them based on popular hymn tunes of the day, called chorales.

Many of these tunes were used several times in his organ music, and in his dramatic music, the passions, oratorios, and cantatas."

Not so sure about half his music being chorales, but you get the idea. Another quote from a different source.

"Today, many of the Lutheran chorales are familiar as hymns still used in Protestant churches, sung in four-voice harmony. Often the harmonizations are taken from the final sections of cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach. The melodies of the chorales were only in a few instances composed by Bach; the large majority of melodies were based on chorales that were already familiar to his congregation."

Here is another quote

"Bach moved to Weimar in 1708 to work for Duke Wilhelm Ernst. In 1709, Wilhelm's nephew, Ernst August, became a second duke that was in charge of the same town. The courts of the two dukes were openly opposed and even hostile to each other, but Bach was friendly with both leaders. Bach even became teacher to Ernst August's younger half brother, through whom he learned of the Italian styles of Antonio Vivaldi. Bach was especially interested in Vivaldi's L'estro armonico concertos. This added influence helped Bach develop a style that he used from now on. The style combined the Italian use of harmonies and themes with touches of German and French influences from his boyhood. Bach wrote his first non-religious cantata using this new style, Was mir behagt, ist nut die muntre Jagd, otherwise known as the " Hunt Cantata" BWV 208."

Then there is this.

" He had the foresight to realize that Frederick might well be an important figure who could be of use to Bach in the future. Bach's works now began to reflect his new galant style (a mix of the new Italian style with the strict counterpoint of Palestrina called stile antico)."

Mike

Dude, don't confuse him with the facts: his mind is made up! 

[karlhenning]

And facts are a poor substitute for Truth, bwahahahahaahaahaaaa!

[jwinter]

Nonsense. The music of Bach draws from Bach, and had nothing to do with aristocratic hoedowns or anything whatsoever that is outside Bach. 

Mike and Karl beat me to it, but something so patently wrong-headed bears repeated refutation.  The idea that any great artistic GENIUS, be it Bach, Beethoven, Shakespeare, da Vinci, pick your poison, operates in a vacuum, and does not draw inspiration from anyone or anything other than that artist's inner self, is completely absurd.  Moreover I would say that one of the things that mark them AS Geniuses is their profound talent for using and adapting existing ideas and techniques to new purposes, each generation building upon the next.  This is not to deny the presence of a divine creative spark in the greatest artists; but to fail to grasp how an artist uses his predecessors and the world around him in his art is to fundamentally misunderstand human culture and how it evolves through time -- it's not even debatable, it's just plain wrong, and I can't say it strongly enough. 

You seem like a very clever fellow in many respects, but you are digging yourself into a hole with this argument -- you really ought to take a step back and rethink this.

[Cato]

Mike and Karl beat me to it, but something so patently wrong-headed bears repeated refutation.  The idea that any great artistic GENIUS, be it Bach, Beethoven, Shakespeare, da Vinci, pick your poison, operates in a vacuum, and does not draw inspiration from anyone or anything other than that artist's inner self, is completely absurd.  Moreover I would say that one of the things that mark them AS Geniuses is their profound talent for using and adapting existing ideas and techniques to new purposes, each generation building upon the next.  This is not to deny the presence of a divine creative spark in the greatest artists; but to fail to grasp how an artist uses his predecessors and the world around him in his art is to fundamentally misunderstand human culture and how it evolves through time -- it's not even debatable, it's just plain wrong, and I can't say it strongly enough. 

You seem like a very clever fellow in many respects, but you are digging yourself into a hole with this argument -- you really ought to take a step back and rethink this.

Not to hijack the topic (although maybe someone should  0:)   ), but this argument, along with a good deal of tangible evidence, is precisely why I find the idea that Edward de Vere wrote the Shakespeare plays so convincing.

For the Stratford man, you need too much "but-he-was-a-genius" argumentation to make the case that he could have been the author.

[orbital]

I. Protest against what?  Paying attention in school?  Respecting women?  Using modest language?   

They've had plenty of things to protest against. Going into that will derail the topic immensely, but don't tell me that the American black population did (do) not have reasons to be angry.

II. Coming soon: an opera based on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged   0:)

It would better suit the times we live in than an abduction from Topkapi Palace for sure 

[Sergeant Rock]

I. Protest against what?  Paying attention in school?  Respecting women?  Using modest language?   

That may be what some rap has become now that it's gone mainstream, but orbital is correct: the genre was born of a cultural need to assert and express the black experience, including the negative. One of the first great rap songs was The Message...which still has a message today. It's not wise to stereotype any form of music, including rap and classical 

Sarge

[jwinter]

Not to hijack the topic (although maybe someone should  0:)   ), but this argument, along with a good deal of tangible evidence, is precisely why I find the idea that Edward de Vere wrote the Shakespeare plays so convincing.

For the Stratford man, you need too much "but-he-was-a-genius" argumentation to make the case that he could have been the author.

The primary weakness of the de Vere theories, it seems to me, isn't that de Vere is a bad fit for the facts (he isn't), but that we don't really know enough about the Stratford man's life to know whether or not he could have written the plays, and thereby whether there's sufficient reason to discredit the longstanding tradition.  So much of what fills Shakespeare biographies is pure conjecture or supposition -- there just isn't very much real historical evidence of the man, which isn't that surprising given the records of the period.

I'll grant that de Vere is a much better fit than Bacon or any of the other candidates out there, and there are some interesting connections between his life and some of the plays.  But saying that de Vere could have written the plays is very different from saying that Shakespeare couldn't have, and I'm not seeing anything that convinces me that we need to disregard Occam's Razor here.  Lack of school records, for example, doesn't mean he was uneducated, it just means we don't know.  It's maddening to have such a high level of uncertainty about the greatest writer in English, but that makes it all the more important to resist the urge to fill in the blanks without hard evidence.

OK, thread officially derailed now.  

[Sergeant Rock]

Nonsense. The music of Bach draws from Bach, and had nothing to do with aristocratic hoedowns

  Right...   I suppose he called his movements gigue, menuet, sarabande, gavotte, allemande just for the hell of it? Nothing whatsoever to do with the dance?

I guess you never learned to square dance, Prez. Never heard of an allemande left? 

Sarge

[Cato]

  Right...   I suppose he called his movements gigue, menuet, sarabande, gavotte, allemande just for the hell of it? Nothing whatsoever to do with the dance?

I guess you never learned to square dance, Prez. Never heard of an allemande left? 
Sarge

Is that the same as the SPD?   

[Josquin des Prez]

  Right...   I suppose he called his movements gigue, menuet, sarabande, gavotte, allemande just for the hell of it? Nothing whatsoever to do with the dance?

Notwithstanding the fact that, by the time Bach came around, those musical forms already bore little relation to the original dances from which they inherited their rhythmic scheme (I.E., you can't dance to any of them), those forms were utilized by many other baroque composers as well. Same goes for the use of Lutheran chorales. Yet, none of those composers was Bach. Should i really berate on that?

The idea that any great artistic GENIUS, be it Bach, Beethoven, Shakespeare, da Vinci, pick your poison, operates in a vacuum, and does not draw inspiration from anyone or anything other than that artist's inner self, is completely absurd. 

Is this really that complicated to understand? There are hundreds upon hundreds of artists who inherited the same type of influences as the aforementioned masters, but none of them became a genius. It stands to reason that, of all the things that one can draw from his surroundings, genius isn't among them, and to classify genius according to those arbitrary influences is where absurdity really lies.