5 Worst Composers Ever!!

[Florestan]

there is no acceptable reason for disliking an entire group of people.

Am I not allowed to dislike the entire group of Communist gang which took over my country and enslaved it for almost 50 years?

[jlaurson]

Oh, Bravo. First Mozart is incompetent. Then it's the fucking Jews ("well, if they had been completely innocent, why did the Holocaust happen?"), and now we stand aghast before the 'discovery' of the complexity of the human character?

Is our time really well spent drudging through the transparent antisemitism of "Josquin des Prez", the feigned ignorance of the "Anna?" [whatever her/his pseudonym is], or now with this inane discussion of how "greatness in art" (which we're not even able to define) can or cannot coincide with "rottenness in character (which we're not even able to define)?  Verena's cogent effort to actually engage one of these trolls on the substance is laudable only in principle, but a frustrating venture in futility.

Please everyone who does not want to be tainted by this thread and its distasteful overtones, heed this advice (via Robert Reich):

"Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it."

[karlhenning]

I propose that, whatever may motivate his personal need to pontificate on the matter, that 'Joosquin' knows very little about great art or genius. And that the very little he does knw, he's managed to muddle irreparably.

[abidoful]

Any meaningful discussion of Chopin's alleged anti-semitism should begin with what he wrote about Jews and why he wrote it. So, could you please let us know what he actually wrote in those private letters and enlighten us as to the reasons that prompted him to do so? TIA.

Well, I was making a point that is there any reason "banning" someones music though that person may have made for example racist remarks. Little similar as the question of "is Tchaikovskys homosexuality significant in connection with he's works". With Wagner the matter is slightly different for he may have caricatured  a Jew in the character of Becmesser. But even in Wagner I can't find any deeper themes about the subject.
Whatever the reasons were, Chopin DID write nastily about Jews- I know it for I have read those letters-but I don't find it meaningful going in to those letters.. I don't have those in hand now anyway. But an antisemitist remark IS an antisemitist remark whatever the resons  may have been that provoced it.

[karlhenning]

Thread duty: we're never actually going to know the "5 worst composers — and that's a mercy

[jlaurson]

... But an antisemitistc remark IS an antisemitistc remark whatever the reasons there may have been that provocked it.

You're intuitive response to antisemitic remarks of any kind is certainly much appreciated in light of the insensitivity displayed elsewhere. But it is also a little too simplistic. For one: The term "antisemitism" is younger than Chopin, who was already well dead by the time that concept was expounded on (H.v.Treitschke et al.) in the second half of the 19th Century. ("Anti-Judaism", prior to that.) And while injustices of deed or thought don't have a 'reverse expiration date' (bigotry is truly timeless), you can't lose sight of the historical context, either. (Just like it would be churlish to really lay into the 'bigoted Athenians' for not allowing women or the landless the vote in their polis some 2500 years ago.) Especially the anti-semitic / anti-judaic variant of bigotry is, even when it occurred well before the 20th Century, seen through the prism of the Holocaust. While it is the very least we must expect of our sensibility that the Holocaust does inform and further sensitize us to that topic, we can't or shouldn't read Chopin's or Luther's or even Wagner's remarks in that light, only. That'd be like treating every opera, no matter how trivial or old, with the hushed reverence like we do Parsifal. (Sadly, that's actually the case, but that's not to say that it is ideal.)

[Sergeant Rock]

Thread duty: we're never actually going to know the "5 worst composers — and that's a mercy

Or perhaps not. I have a volume of poetry entitled Very Bad Poetry and it's given me hours of comical pleasure. The deadly serious but wholly incompetent William McGonagall (1830-1902) surely qualifies as one of the 5 Worst Poets of all time    Hearing the music of one of the worst composers might be even better than listening to P.D.Q. Bach. Oh, I can already do that!!! Invite Teresa over, put on K.550, and we could roll around on the floor, laughing our asses off.

Sarge

[Verena]

Well, but how is it evident in he's music? I don't think it is...

True, fortunately..

[Florestan]

Well, I was making a point that is there any reason "banning" someones music though that person may have made for example racist remarks.

Of course there's no reason.

Little similar as the question of "is Tchaikovskys homosexuality significant in connection with he's works".

Of course it isn't.

With Wagner the matter is slightly different for he may have caricatured  a Jew in the character of Becmesser.

This is highly debatable. Is Beckmesser a caricature of Hanslick as a Jew or of Hanslick as a perceived musical reactionary?

Besides, if caricaturing a Jew in a work of art is in itself a sign of anti-semitism, then Mussorgsky, Dickens, Jaroslav Hasek and a host of others were also anti-semitic.

Wagner's anti-semitism had much more to do with the fact that his music never made it outside a circle of initiated and devotees while the "Jewish" music of Mendelssohn and Meyerbeer received worldwide popular appraisal (interestingly enough, the situation is unchanged today) than with his racism and bigotry. Incidentally, his anti-semitism never concerned women and some of the most enthusiastic promoters of his music were Jews.

But even in Wagner I can't find any deeper themes about the subject.

Unless one takes seriously his illegible and megalomaniac literary output.

Whatever the reasons were, Chopin DID write nastily about Jews- I know it for I have read those letters-but I don't find it meaningful going in to those letters.

I beg to differ. I find it meaningful in the highest degree. Chopin was no ideologue, no politician, nor did he envy the musical successes of Jewish composers. On the contrary, he was a delicate, sensitive and sincere man --- quite unlike Wagner. For whatever he wrote about Jews --- and absent his own words, we can only speculate; was he critical of Jews as a whole group, or did he grumble about this or that Jew? --- he must have had a motif that resonated within his heart.

an antisemitist remark IS an antisemitist remark whatever the resons  may have been that provoced it.

Granted, but an anti-semitic remark now and then in private letters or conversations do not an anti-semite make, otherwise most people on Earth were, are and will be anrti-semites.

[karlhenning]

Florestan's remark that we need to know the documents and the context, is a point which stands.  Especially since, if abidoful do not see any difference between personal correspondence and pamphleteering, he cannot be considered reliable as a 'sole witness' of the documents under advisement.

[jowcol]

I know you were just funning us, but just to clear things up, Mesmer was NOT Mozart's godfather.

That's exactly what the Illuminati would WANT you to say.

[Gurn Blanston]

That's exactly what the Illuminati would WANT you to say.

No one uses Gurn Blanston as a meat puppet!  *hey, get your frickin' arm outta there! *

[karlhenning]

(* chortle *)

[jlaurson]

That's exactly what the Illuminati would WANT you to say.

Ingenious! The proof is the very lack of any evidence whatsoever.

(Although the true coup of the Illuminati is that they have pulled off the feat of giving sentient feelings to a piece of turd without it ever being aware of being just a little piece of turd. The fact that it is fully convinced to be a functional human being only goes to show their power--and serves as proof he's just a shit.)

[karlhenning]

It is nice to visit Planet Newman from time to time!

[jowcol]

I propose that great artists cannot be scoundrels, and thus my job is to exonerate their sins. That's how my little venture started in the first place, btw.

This is the crux of the biscuit.   I understand the proposition, but isn't it easy enough to come up with counter-examples?    Some have been cited already.

The whole idea behind Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment was that no one was above the law, even if they thought they could better society.  If Dostoevsky was a "genius", why was he show this thesis was wrong in the course of the novel?

History is replete with great artists that had major character flaws-- this is often part and parcel of what they draw from in the act of creation, but also can drastically limit their lives in other ways.  How much good did alcoholism do for Mussorgsky or Poe?  How much good did Berlioz do for Harriet Smithson when he wrote the Symphony Fantastique, and then quickly lose interest in her after getting her to stop her career and get married?

There are some artists where I have to draw a line between the works and the person.  (Miles Davis is one of the biggest cases for me, but YMMV).

One can certainly defend that proposition, but, in order to fit real data points, it  becomes necessary to redefine each term in such a specialized way it has little meaning-- or in the words of William Jefferson Clinton:

"It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is."

[jowcol]

Ingenious! The proof is the very lack of any evidence whatsoever.

Indeed.  This  is  the kind of sophistry needed to maintain conspiracy theories.

[karlhenning]

I propose that great artists cannot be scoundrels

Well, that's rubbish right off.

[abidoful]

if abidoful do not see any difference between personal correspondence and pamphleteering, he cannot be considered reliable as a 'sole witness' of the documents under advisement.

Hey, wait a minute; what gave you that idea??? I do see the diffence. It is to what extent a person acts on those vibs. I did'nt go to that..  actually I did'nt go much to anything on the subject of anti-semitism!   (Only that also Chopin wrote "some nasty" things of Jews and to some extent succumbed to those feelings.) My point was to  make  a favor to R.W. whose anti- semitism may have kept some people away from he's amazing art which is arguably the greatist and emotionally profound legacy of the 19th century.

if caricaturing a Jew in a work of art is in itself a sign of anti-semitism, then Mussorgsky, Dickens, Jaroslav Hasek and a host of others were also anti-semitic.

Indeed, at least they produced works that articulated anti- semitism.

Unless one takes seriously his illegible and megalomaniac literary output.

One may, but I was referring solely to his musical works

Chopin was a delicate, sensitive and sincere man ---

Or highly jealuos and posessive, withdrawn and irritative- sort of passive/agressive- if we believe the portraid by George Sand in LUCREZIA FLORIANI.

an anti-semitic remark now and then in private letters or conversations do not an anti-semite make, otherwise most people on Earth were, are and will be anrti-semites.

I don't think so... I would never succumb to racist feelings personally- so that makes at least one Maybe this comes now too complicated, but I have heard that racism is a spirit. I kind of believe that...

[Josquin des Prez]

I understand the proposition, but isn't it easy enough to come up with counter-examples?

Is it?

Indeed, at least they produced works that articulated anti- semitism.One may, but I was referring solely to his musical works

Yes, which is why it is impossible for me to believe anybody with so much beauty within himself could possibly be a real villain. As human beings, we are all in danger of falling to our passions. We all make mistakes, but our actions do not always represent who we are as individuals.

Of course, i'm not surprised that most people here would reject my proposition. After all, the fact you cannot prove the existence of God is a clear sign that he does not exist. Its obvious.