John Tavener, can't quite forgive Beethoven

[Quijote]

How on earth would one criticize an unkempt bed. I mean what would be the standard , a kempt or a made bed.
All art has to do with ideal forms, that is an ideal spiritual form of beauty , truth and even perfection. In this world we cannot have true knowledge, except through , ie. music which intimates to us the secrets of another world. The real problem with stuff like Emin, is that it is so utterly of this world that it can only be mired in the transient, and at the furthest remove from everything which points us to the spiritual, the pure, the true, and the beautiful. This is why, ie. we love say, the late Beethoven string quartets, an interior by Vermeer, a Holbein portrait, or a Shakespeare Sonnet.
These works are so completely oriented to spiritual and higher realities that we revealingly say that in contemplating them, we are uplifted and taken out of ourselves.
An unmade bed only points to the thing it signifies, ie. the body that was lying in it and left it in that condition. For anyone to say that is art in any comprehensible meaning of that word , is surely to take complete leave of ones senses. I do not wish to have a go at modern art, but the obsession with Damien Hirst for instance, tells us far more about the society in which we live, than about the extremely odd things he produces. By the way, I have a strong suspicion that the horrible skull with diamonds that was produced for some phenomenal sum, was actually taken from a skeleton.
There was a modern artist recently investigated by the police for this.
'

I really thought such Platonic attitudes to ideal forms, truth and perfection went out with the dinosaurs, quite frankly. What are these secrets of another world intimated by (the) music (of Beethoven), then?

By the way, I admire Emin's work enormously, and, if I may modify one one Beethoven's sayings, nobody loves Beethoven more than I do.

[PDG]

I really thought such Platonic attitudes to ideal forms, truth and perfection went out with the dinosaurs, quite frankly. What are these secrets of another world intimated by (the) music (of Beethoven), then?

By the way, I admire Emin's work enormously, and, if I may modify one one Beethoven's sayings, nobody loves Beethoven more than I do.

I would sincerely doubt that last statement, Philip. I'm amazed that goofy, addle-brained, booze-riddled girl, Tracey, is even known in France, a country less known for embracing populist junk culture than my own beloved UK.

If you need ask the question: "What are these secrets of another world intimated by the music of Beethoven, then?" - I would again sincerely suggest that you don't understand the composer at all.

[Quijote]

I would sincerely doubt that last statement, Philip. I'm amazed that goofy, addle-brained, booze-riddled girl, Tracey, is even known in France, a country less known for embracing populist junk culture than my own beloved UK.

If you need ask the question: "What are these secrets of another world intimated by the music of Beethoven, then?" - I would again sincerely suggest that you don't understand the composer at all.

PDG : You too have not answered the question. And I insist, I am a great admirer of Beethoven's music. Emin is goofy, addle-brained and booze-riddled? No doubt she is. I still admire her art.

[Preston]

I'm amazed that goofy, addle-brained, booze-riddled girl, Tracey, is even known in France, a country less known for embracing populist junk culture than my own beloved UK.

And don't forget apparently very slutty. Seeing as her work from what I understand is based around strong sexual references.

[Peter]

Emin is goofy, addle-brained and booze-riddled? No doubt she is. I still admire her art.

Depends on how you choose to define art. Duchamp's 1917 urinal is the origin of this functionalism, but I see the whole sorry saga as one massive intellectual con. No further proof is needed than the following:



Painted by Congo - a chimpanzee and part of a collection of this artist's work selling for $25000. What have we come to?

[Joy]

'Artwork' done by the animal world has been around for a long time. Here at the Phoenix Zoo they have an elephant who 'paints' pictures by holding the paintbrush in her trunk. It's abstract of course but the paintings sell and the money goes for charity purposes.

[Peter]

'Artwork' done by the animal world has been around for a long time. Here at the Phoenix Zoo they have an elephant who 'paints' pictures by holding the paintbrush in her trunk. It's abstract of course but the paintings sell and the money goes for charity purposes.

Indeed Joy, and the example above was one of the first, painted in the 1950s when Congo was at the height of his powers. Following his death in the 1960s prices rocketed as they always do with great artists!

[Sorrano]

Indeed Joy, and the example above was one of the first, painted in the 1950s when Congo was at the height of his powers. Following his death in the 1960s prices rocketed as they always do with great artists!

Who was the bigger monkey? Congo or the ones rushing in to buy the "artwork"?

[Quijote]

PDG seems to think I do not "understand" Beethoven's music, something which I of course refute. To return to the Emin subject and 19th century bourgeois concepts of "beauty" and "spiritual truths" - an aspect in Beethoven's music that PDG seems singularly unable to clarify - I would like to try to enlighten him (and others on this forum) : the point is the capacity of art to awaken in us complex (not 'Daily Mail' and other populist press knee-jerk) responses that are at once intellectual, emotional and physical. Art (in its broadest sense) in my view should be a challenge that forces us to re-examine the fundamental philosophical principles by which we operate. It simply is ineffectual argumentation to baldly state that Emin does not produce "art". According to which criteria? Of course, it is idiotic to evaluate Emin's oeuvre expecting techniques and approaches practiced by "classic" artists such as Rembrandt, Turner, et al. It would be as pointless to apply ways of appreciating Beethoven's music to the music of, say, Boulez. Do you really 'listen' to Cage in the same way as you 'listen' to Bach? Do you really 'read' Dickens in the same way as you 'read' Joyce? Do you really apply the same so-called 'values' to the music of Palestrina as you do to the music of Bruckner?

So, I would indeed prefer to leave the Emin question out of this forum, but would appreciate more reasoned debate and less hysteria. I shudder to think what the opinion of certain forum members is concerning, inter alia, electro-acoustic, serial, and other 'modernist' forms of music.

And I'm still waiting for luminaries such as Megan, PDG et al to explain to us lesser mortals what these 'higher truths' are supposed to be.

[Peter]

It simply is ineffectual argumentation to baldly state that Emin does not produce "art". According to which criteria? Of course, it is idiotic to evaluate Emin's oeuvre expecting techniques and approaches practiced by "classic" artists such as Rembrandt, Turner, et al. It would be as pointless to apply ways of appreciating Beethoven's music to the music of, say, Boulez. Do you really 'listen' to Cage in the same way as you 'listen' to Bach? Do you really 'read' Dickens in the same way as you 'read' Joyce? Do you really apply the same so-called 'values' to the music of Palestrina as you do to the music of Bruckner?

According to your argument all is valid, simply because we are not allowed to apply our own criteria or use our own flawed critical faculties, we must look at things the way you do. Can you say that my garden shed is less valid than Emin's bed or that the music of Cage more valid than the sound of a grand piano being dropped from a cliff? Is it not true that looking at an insect or a flower (or anything) produces intellectually complex responses?

[Quijote]

According to your argument all is valid, simply because we are not allowed to apply our own criteria or use our own flawed critical faculties, we must look at things the way you do. Can you say that my garden shed is less valid than Emin's bed or that the music of Cage more valid than the sound of a grand piano being dropped from a cliff? Is it not true that looking at an insect or a flower (or anything) produces intellectually complex responses?

Your posting baffles me, as your use of the term "valid" seems to be floating in semantic obfuscation. Before I reply in detail to your comments I must ask you to elaborate a little how you are employing this word. For instance, it is unclear to me if you are trying to say your garden shed (compared to Emin's 'bed') :

a) has some foundation based on truth;
b) has force or cogency;
c) has a related premise and conclusion,

and that Emin's bed is NOT any of the above?

The refusal of cultural interpretation exhibited by certain forum members is a case of attitude, not of insight or maturity. And to say (I paraphrase, slightly) "Emin is crap" hardly opens up an intelligent debate.

[PDG]

PDG seems to think I do not "understand" Beethoven's music, something which I of course refute. To return to the Emin subject and 19th century bourgeois concepts of "beauty" and "spiritual truths" - an aspect in Beethoven's music that PDG seems singularly unable to clarify - I would like to try to enlighten him (and others on this forum) : the point is the capacity of art to awaken in us complex (not 'Daily Mail' and other populist press knee-jerk) responses that are at once intellectual, emotional and physical. Art (in its broadest sense) in my view should be a challenge that forces us to re-examine the fundamental philosophical principles by which we operate. It simply is ineffectual argumentation to baldly state that Emin does not produce "art". According to which criteria? Of course, it is idiotic to evaluate Emin's oeuvre expecting techniques and approaches practiced by "classic" artists such as Rembrandt, Turner, et al. It would be as pointless to apply ways of appreciating Beethoven's music to the music of, say, Boulez. Do you really 'listen' to Cage in the same way as you 'listen' to Bach? Do you really 'read' Dickens in the same way as you 'read' Joyce? Do you really apply the same so-called 'values' to the music of Palestrina as you do to the music of Bruckner?

So, I would indeed prefer to leave the Emin question out of this forum, but would appreciate more reasoned debate and less hysteria. I shudder to think what the opinion of certain forum members is concerning, inter alia, electro-acoustic, serial, and other 'modernist' forms of music.

And I'm still waiting for luminaries such as Megan, PDG et al to explain to us lesser mortals what these 'higher truths' are supposed to be.

Hmmm....I must say that comparing the great genius with the ordinary woman in terms of their worthwhile contributions to the world of artistic endeavour, rather shows hysteria on your part, rather than on mine. If you enjoy the "art" of Emin, I'd truly like to know how? Why is her unmade bed any more artistic than mine? What are these "complex responses that are at once intellectual, emotional and physical" when applied to Emin? I'm sure that she herself would be baffled by that one.

I do not consider myself to be a "luminary". Perhaps you could explain to us the "higher truths" in Emin's "art"? I wait with mind open...

[Peter]

Your posting baffles me, as your use of the term "valid" seems to be floating in semantic obfuscation. Before I reply in detail to your comments I must ask you to elaborate a little how you are employing this word. For instance, it is unclear to me if you are trying to say your garden shed (compared to Emin's 'bed') :

a) has some foundation based on truth;
b) has force or cogency;
c) has a related premise and conclusion,

and that Emin's bed is NOT any of the above?

The refusal of cultural interpretation exhibited by certain forum members is a case of attitude, not of insight or maturity. And to say (I paraphrase, slightly) "Emin is crap" hardly opens up an intelligent debate.

I simply mean valid as art. If I look at say a Michelangelo or Cellini scuplture I can appreciate the skill, the vision and the sheer creative genius that produced something I could never aspire to in a million years. That moves me to the core and it is precisely because it does produce the emotional responses you refer to that I regard it as great art. Emin's bed produces the same response in me as stepping in something rather unpleasant, so I'm afraid she clearly doesn't work for me. I accept and respect the fact that you respond differently.

Sticking more to musical matters perhaps we are better dealing with my suggestion of dropping a grand piano off a cliff - is that not as thought provoking as Cage's 4'33? You say no one loves Beethoven more than you so I wonder are you more enlightened by 4'33 or by the 9th symphony? - which of these two works produces the greatest emotional and intellectual response? You'll probably answer both in different ways, well I'd like to know exactly what a work such as 4'33 does for you and why?

[Preston]

Philip, I do not think PDG meant what he stated in a rude way but as a suggestion. Beethoven did seek the ultimate spirituality, in my opinion, and would expect people who love him to live a moral, responsible, creative, caring, spiritual, etc., life. Emin certainly has not done these things, whether she thinks she has or not. So I think that what PDG was stating is that in order to understand Beethoven you must rise above to the higher levels of goodness and morality then you will understand Beethoven.

For instance, I feel you can't love Metallica, AC/DC, etc., and then say that you love Beethoven. Because they are the opposite. It is similar in the way of saying I love Beethoven and Emin. It just doesn't make sense, at least that is what I think. I am not saying that I am entirely correct, though.

I do wonder, why do you admire Emin enormously? What piece of her art has touched you? How does it touch you? I would recommend listening to something like the Missa Solemnis or the last movement of the ninth (and reading and understanding the chorale) and then imagine Emin's work, .

Personally, I find Emin to be trashy, that is one reason why I don't feel moved by her art. For me to like Emin would be like me liking rap music. It wouldn't be exactly like that because I do not put Emin to be a criminal. You mentioned other types of music. I do not like rock and things of that nature. I do enjoy positive music, some new age, positive jazz and blues, Christian, etc.

These are just my opinions, no offense intended, at all. Although it does seem like you are bashing me and other people on the forum just because we criticized Emin.

[Quijote]

Philip, I do not think PDG meant what he stated in a rude way but as a suggestion. Beethoven did seek the ultimate spirituality, in my opinion, and would expect people who love him to live a moral, responsible, creative, caring, spiritual, etc., life. Emin certainly has not done these things, whether she thinks she has or not. So I think that what PDG was stating is that in order to understand Beethoven you must rise above to the higher levels of goodness and morality then you will understand Beethoven.

For instance, I feel you can't love Metallica, AC/DC, etc., and then say that you love Beethoven. Because they are the opposite. It is similar in the way of saying I love Beethoven and Emin. It just doesn't make sense, at least that is what I think. I am not saying that I am entirely correct, though.

I do wonder, why do you admire Emin enormously? What piece of her art has touched you? How does it touch you? I would recommend listening to something like the Missa Solemnis or the last movement of the ninth (and reading and understanding the chorale) and then imagine Emin's work, .

Personally, I find Emin to be trashy, that is one reason why I don't feel moved by her art. For me to like Emin would be like me liking rap music. It wouldn't be exactly like that because I do not put Emin to be a criminal. You mentioned other types of music. I do not like rock and things of that nature. I do enjoy positive music, some new age, positive jazz and blues, Christian, etc.

These are just my opinions, no offense intended, at all. Although it does seem like you are bashing me and other people on the forum just because we criticized Emin.

I appreciate your dimplomatic and bridge-building posting, Preston.

I have never objected to anyone NOT liking Emin's work; my initial reaction was the way her work was dismissed out of hand and without any serious attempt at interpretation.

I also was dismayed at how quickly the discussion degenerated into pettiness - calling Emin a drunkard, a slut, addle-brained and so on - and not focus on the work. This sort of response does not reflect well on the forum in general. Curious how nobody would mount such personal attacks on Satie (alcoholic), Wagner (anti-semetic, unfaithful, lecherous, possibly a cross-dresser), et al.

You ask me why I admire Emin's oeuvre. Before I answer that, I would like to say that the problem for certain forum members is that they bring one set of artistic values to Emin's work and of course find her work lacking (a bit like going to a concert featuring the music of Stockhausen and being outraged that there are no singable "melodies"). Emin is not interested in "technique", in art forms that convey 19th century artisitc values. In fact she is somewhat "old hat" in terms of 'Readymades' when one considers (as Peter mentioned) Duchamps' "Fountain" (the urinal).

Of course, I do not respond to Emin as I respond to Beethoven, and not with the same intensity. What I personally appreciate in Emin's "Bed" is its iconoclastic approach, its challenge to received ideas about art in general, its personal - and I find very sad - autobiographical aspect, the strange context of its setting (an unmade bed in an art gallery / exhibition? What?), and a host of other responses. And finally, I appreciate the works ability to generate apoplectic responses (though I assure you this is not the first reason I like the work, but I may be beginning to change my mind). Yes, it is "trash" art, a genre in itself, by the way. I also rather like the work of the other YBAs (young British artists) including Hirst (he of the shark and dissected cow and sheep fame).

As to her work "moving" you or not - a good point. Yes, Beethoven moves me enormously. Emin's work does not, but it does engage me on other levels (intellectual). Schoenberg's music moves me a lot less than LvB, but it does engage me on other levels. That art "moves" is only one aspect therefore of a whole host of complex responses (including, inter alia, intellectual, emotional and physical).

You say I'm bashing forum members for criticising Emin. I'm sorry Preston to give this impression. I have seen very little "criticism" in the meaningful sense of the word, this is my reproach. As to the "higher spiritual truths" referred to by others : I really doubt that anyone can say what these are, and I suspect consequently that it is just empty rhetoric. I do respond to Beethoven of course (do not think me cold and feelingless) : emotionally (perhaps people confuse this word with "spiritual"?), intellectually (to analyse the sheer craftmanship, its formal structural elements, its Schenkerian ramifications etc) AND physically - LvB's music really does make me "move" in the literal sense.

I'm not an art expert, by the way, just an ordinary "punter" (consumer) like you, I imagine.

As this is a Beethoven forum I really would like to get off the Emin topic now, but I hope I have made my position clearer. And thank you for sharing your musical preferences.

Best regards,
Philip