Review of Maynard Solomon's "Taboo and Biographical Innovation: Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert"**
An interesting look into the minds of the musical favourites of many, Solomon's article gives unusual insight into the process of biographical writing and its process. Not actually addressing music at all, Solomon dwells into the person and psyche.
Leopold Mozart is deemed a liar: his father's death, his schooling, his marriage. The city of Salzburg is none the wiser, but later leaves the Mozart family abandoned. Leopold's motives are left to psychoanalysis and the multiple symbolical explanations for the reality to fantasy. Solomon wonders why these have only recently been brought to the biographers' attention. Beethoven's lineage is in question--not by everyone else, but by the Beethoven family--and his possible lovers are living double lives. Schubert's friends and colleagues wrote of his disinterest in the the women-folk and his effeminate demeanour; Solomon was one of the first to connect anecdotes to Schubert's potential homosexuality in an article from 1981.
Solomon, invested in the music business and in music history, writes of the hidden sources and the implications of their release. This article, geared mainly towards psychologists, could easily catch the attention of musicians and gossipers, although not for the same reasons. The psychology behind the music is not discussed, hardly even mentioned. Only Schubert's music is mentioned-"an effeminate tenderness [exists] in Schubert's music." Given the potential for an audience outside the psychological community, Solomon should have included more about the affects of the psyche on the composers, even if it were not discussed in direct relation to the music. Upon concluding all of the narratives, Solomon arrives at his main point of the article: social taboos have hindered the spreading of personal information for biographers. Solomon never makes a definite verdict if this is good or bad-or if he as a biographer thinks it is important. Solomon relied heavily on past publications of his own and primary sources; the primary sources cited support his claims and conclusions.
Understanding the ability of sources to be hidden for extended periods of time and how the inaccessibility of those sources influence the impressions and understandings of people throughout history is applicable to more than Mozart, Beethoven, and Schubert. What is the value of the importance of personal sources to the stories behind the people? Do we even need to know the stories? The only reason that Solomon mentions is the taboo affect--whatever the poison touches becomes poison itself.
Solomon mentions how some have elected to burn all of their correspondences to avoid subjecting themselves to the personal invasions upon their passing. Solomon should have started exploring the new technological age. With the ease to create so much and delete everything created, how are biographers going to dig into the personal, hidden lives of today's celebrities? Or maybe, we already know everything we want to know with the tabloids and the internet thriving. With all of the interest in today's celebrities, and having many of those knowledge cravings filled by the wide variety of sources now, where will the digging into the lives of the past celebrities end?
**you will likely need a subscription to the journal, but it is findable online
An interesting look into the minds of the musical favourites of many, Solomon's article gives unusual insight into the process of biographical writing and its process. Not actually addressing music at all, Solomon dwells into the person and psyche.
Leopold Mozart is deemed a liar: his father's death, his schooling, his marriage. The city of Salzburg is none the wiser, but later leaves the Mozart family abandoned. Leopold's motives are left to psychoanalysis and the multiple symbolical explanations for the reality to fantasy. Solomon wonders why these have only recently been brought to the biographers' attention. Beethoven's lineage is in question--not by everyone else, but by the Beethoven family--and his possible lovers are living double lives. Schubert's friends and colleagues wrote of his disinterest in the the women-folk and his effeminate demeanour; Solomon was one of the first to connect anecdotes to Schubert's potential homosexuality in an article from 1981.
Solomon, invested in the music business and in music history, writes of the hidden sources and the implications of their release. This article, geared mainly towards psychologists, could easily catch the attention of musicians and gossipers, although not for the same reasons. The psychology behind the music is not discussed, hardly even mentioned. Only Schubert's music is mentioned-"an effeminate tenderness [exists] in Schubert's music." Given the potential for an audience outside the psychological community, Solomon should have included more about the affects of the psyche on the composers, even if it were not discussed in direct relation to the music. Upon concluding all of the narratives, Solomon arrives at his main point of the article: social taboos have hindered the spreading of personal information for biographers. Solomon never makes a definite verdict if this is good or bad-or if he as a biographer thinks it is important. Solomon relied heavily on past publications of his own and primary sources; the primary sources cited support his claims and conclusions.
Understanding the ability of sources to be hidden for extended periods of time and how the inaccessibility of those sources influence the impressions and understandings of people throughout history is applicable to more than Mozart, Beethoven, and Schubert. What is the value of the importance of personal sources to the stories behind the people? Do we even need to know the stories? The only reason that Solomon mentions is the taboo affect--whatever the poison touches becomes poison itself.
Solomon mentions how some have elected to burn all of their correspondences to avoid subjecting themselves to the personal invasions upon their passing. Solomon should have started exploring the new technological age. With the ease to create so much and delete everything created, how are biographers going to dig into the personal, hidden lives of today's celebrities? Or maybe, we already know everything we want to know with the tabloids and the internet thriving. With all of the interest in today's celebrities, and having many of those knowledge cravings filled by the wide variety of sources now, where will the digging into the lives of the past celebrities end?
**you will likely need a subscription to the journal, but it is findable online
No comments:
Post a Comment
i am always interested in what you have to say! thanks for leaving your thoughts!