Karl van Beethoven...

[Quijote]

Well I'd question some of your irrefutable facts! The date of Beethoven's birth is hardly certain being either 16th or 17th Dec 1770 and there are certain works which are definitely spurious. Yes I do suggest Solomon has ignored certain facts such as Beethoven's friendship with Franz Brentano, his attitude to adultery and the impossibility of his marrying Antonie - or perhaps you can point to where he deals with those 3 major stumbling blocks to his case?

Why is my view intransigent simply because it questions the status quo? As to your request from Preston concerning scholars who have implied homosexual incestuous desires in Beethoven, look no further than the Sterba's psychoanalytical drivel. Now I have no problem with Beethoven being homosexual (I think no less of Tchaikovsky and indeed feel for his mental torment) provided there is sufficient evidence to prove it - otherwise it belongs in the junk bin of our sexually obsessed age.

Beethoven’s exact birthday is of course unclear, give or take a margin of a day or two. As to Solomon ignoring “facts” such as Beethoven’s friendship with Franz Brentano and his reported attitude to adultery : well, one’s attitude to adultery (as reported) hardly constitutes a fact, I would say. Yes indeed, B was friends with Franz, and in the long history of (wo)mankind what one says and what one does are not necessarily concomitant. Solomon does not then ignore this aspect (or “fact”, as you term it), as his ‘attitude’ cannot be taken prima facie. That B would have been legally unable to marry Antonie would surely not have prevented his love for her, or was his moral rectitude such that he could not admit this? Solomon I feel is quite aware of the objections raised in your position, but nevertheless proceeds to treat them (as an honest scholar) as worthy of consideration.

It is healthy of you to question the status quo; I was not aware that there really was one, just a whole load of differing conjectures. I cannot comment on Sterba’s ‘psychoanalytical drivel’ (unfortunately I have not had the opportunity to read it, and secondly I am not a psychologist / psychiatrist / analyst, Jungian, Freudian or other...), but it is quite possible that it is just that. Rather like the historical drivel we tend to repeat about ‘spirituality’ and ‘higher truths’, wouldn’t you say? For this latter point, I take some succour from the fact (is it one?) that music was first considered as some sort of privileged ‘discursant of subjectivity’ by German Romantic theorists starting with Hoffmann, Wackenroder and Tieck, followed a generation later by Schopenhauer. Such drivel later influenced writers such as Wagner and Nietzsche with their notions of “absolute music”, and this ideology unfortunately has continued to this day, and is alive and kicking in this very forum.

[Quijote]

[...] No I don't know to much about the new musicology, but it sounds like rubbish to me.

My first reaction to Preston's intellectual 'tour de force' was : a splendid comment, and reveals all. On reflection, this is not helpful. Let me rephrase : Preston, please address this lacuna before being so dismissive. Fair comment?

[Quijote]

It is healthy of you to question the status quo; I was not aware that there really was one, just a whole load of differing conjectures.

I was unable to edit my comment before it became "fixed in stone". Yes, there is in fact a status quo (generally accepeted state of affairs). Apologies for the confusion. My other comments stand as they are.


{Edited by Peter}
They are not fixed in stone as you can see! You can edit at anytime.

[Peter]

Beethoven’s exact birthday is of course unclear, give or take a margin of a day or two. As to Solomon ignoring “facts” such as Beethoven’s friendship with Franz Brentano and his reported attitude to adultery : well, one’s attitude to adultery (as reported) hardly constitutes a fact, I would say. Yes indeed, B was friends with Franz, and in the long history of (wo)mankind what one says and what one does are not necessarily concomitant. Solomon does not then ignore this aspect (or “fact”, as you term it), as his ‘attitude’ cannot be taken prima facie. That B would have been legally unable to marry Antonie would surely not have prevented his love for her, or was his moral rectitude such that he could not admit this? Solomon I feel is quite aware of the objections raised in your position, but nevertheless proceeds to treat them (as an honest scholar) as worthy of consideration.

Well I wonder if you've actually read the letters? Beethoven makes it quite clear that he wants to live with her and that he will see to it. How could a man of Beethoven's religious outlook possibly have written "truly founded in heaven - and what is more, as strongly cemented as the firmament of heaven" to describe an adulterous affair also involving deception of a good friend? Had he forgotten his words of 4 years earlier "It is one of my foremost principles never to occupy any other relations than those of friendship with the wife of another man. I should never want to fill my heart with distrust towards those who may chance some day to share my fate with me, and thus destroy the loveliest and purest life for myself."
Would Beethoven have written to Franz in 1817 had he been having an affair with Antonie "I greatly miss your company and that of your wife and your dear children"? The notion that AB was the IB is preposterous unless you dismiss Beethoven's character which I have a little more faith in than you appear to - such a situation would have been impossible for him.

[Quijote]

Well I wonder if you've actually read the letters? Beethoven makes it quite clear that he wants to live with her and that he will see to it. How could a man of Beethoven's religious outlook possibly have written "truly founded in heaven - and what is more, as strongly cemented as the firmament of heaven" to describe an adulterous affair also involving deception of a good friend? Had he forgotten his words of 4 years earlier "It is one of my foremost principles never to occupy any other relations than those of friendship with the wife of another man. I should never want to fill my heart with distrust towards those who may chance some day to share my fate with me, and thus destroy the loveliest and purest life for myself."
Would Beethoven have written to Franz in 1817 had he been having an affair with Antonie "I greatly miss your company and that of your wife and your dear children"? The notion that AB was the IB is preposterous unless you dismiss Beethoven's character which I have a little more faith in than you appear to - such a situation would have been impossible for him.

I have indeed read the letters. In the meantime, further “evidence” perhaps in favour of Antonie Brentano being the IB, and this time not Solomon :
Barry Cooper in his book Beethoven and the Creative Process, (OUP 1990) writes that Beethoven wrote a song for Antonie Brentano entitled "An die Geliebte" (To the Beloved, WoO 140) - his only song with accompaniment for guitar, an instrument on which Antonie was expert. Of course, ‘To the Belovèd’ is not exactly ‘To the Immortal Belovèd’, but still an interesting conjecture.

[Quijote]

I was unable to edit my comment before it became "fixed in stone". Yes, there is in fact a status quo (generally accepeted state of affairs). Apologies for the confusion. My other comments stand as they are.


{Edited by Peter}
They are not fixed in stone as you can see! You can edit at anytime.

My IT skills are notoriously weak. When I have tried to edit some of my comments (when I have signed off and returned to it later) I get a message on screen informing me I am not authorised to do so. As far as I can see, the editing function only applies if I have not logged off. I have just tried on another post, and I can confirm this is the case.

[Peter]

My IT skills are notoriously weak. When I have tried to edit some of my comments (when I have signed off and returned to it later) I get a message on screen informing me I am not authorised to do so. As far as I can see, the editing function only applies if I have not logged off. I have just tried on another post, and I can confirm this is the case.

The soloution to this is to log in again, then edit!

[Peter]

I have indeed read the letters. In the meantime, further “evidence” perhaps in favour of Antonie Brentano being the IB, and this time not Solomon :
Barry Cooper in his book Beethoven and the Creative Process, (OUP 1990) writes that Beethoven wrote a song for Antonie Brentano entitled "An die Geliebte" (To the Beloved, WoO 140) - his only song with accompaniment for guitar, an instrument on which Antonie was expert. Of course, ‘To the Belovèd’ is not exactly ‘To the Immortal Belovèd’, but still an interesting conjecture.

That evidence is well known to me if you look at the Immortal beloved page of this site. The problem with Solomon is that he set out to prove a theory based on assumptions and chose to either ignore or dismiss the arguments I have presented you with. Let me give you an example - Beethoven confessed in 1816 that he had met the love of his life five years before. However, to establish that Antonie met the requirement, Solomon mistranslated part of the source evidence obtained by Thayer and ignored another part. Thayer’s source evidence established that Beethoven knew Antonie through Beethoven’s friendship with her father even before her marriage in 1798.

[Quijote]

The soloution to this is to log in again, then edit!

My God, it works! Can I edit your posts now Peter, too?

You see, you can teach an old dog new tricks...

PS Peter - the passion is getting to you : I see in your spelling of soloution (sic) that you nearly typed Solomon !!! Oh dear, I'm being far to "Sterban" !!!!!!!!!!! And don't you now edit your post above to correct your Freudian slip of the finger!

[Quijote]

May I quote something I found in the archives of the forum :

--------------------------
Peter11-08-2000, 10:22 AM

This is very interesting - I do think that you should provide the evidence to back up your claims - I for one have seen no evidence to suggest this - I agree with Maynard Solomon (who perhaps you should present your evidence to prior to the updated version of his Beethoven biography being released shortly) - the most likely candidate for 'Immortal beloved' is Antonia Brentano.Interesting that your mother came to her conclusion 40 years ago - there has been a lot more research done since then.

-------------------------
'Man know thyself'

I must have taken too much ether at lunchtime today. I shall continue reading the archive pages of this forum, because I want to be sure. To be fair, Peter seems to accept Solomon's conjecture before the updated biography. Is this what we may term a 'Pauline Conversion' I wonder? At this juncture I would like to add one of those little icons (the "smiley" I believe it is) to show Peter that I am gently kidding him, but as I said before, my IT skills are poor.

[Quijote]

Just to continue, whilst I do favour Antonie as the IB, I retain an open mind and would be delighted to be persuaded otherwise. We are off topic though, as this is a thread about Karl van Beethoven. Time to revive the IB thread perhaps?

[Peter]

May I quote something I found in the archives of the forum :

--------------------------

I must have taken too much ether at lunchtime today. I shall continue reading the archive pages of this forum, because I want to be sure. To be fair, Peter seems to accept Solomon's conjecture before the updated biography. Is this what we may term a 'Pauline Conversion' I wonder? At this juncture I would like to add one of those little icons (the "smiley" I believe it is) to show Peter that I am gently kidding him, but as I said before, my IT skills are poor.

Well that should prove to you that I am far from intransigent but open to debate! Yes I was formerly of that opinion (you'll note it was 8 years ago) because like many I blindly accepted the theory without question, but through the wise members of this forum my eyes were opened!

[Quijote]

I do notice, though, that you have not included your original statement (8 years ago) in quoting me above. It does "take the wind"[*] out of my comment somewhat. Though you are happy to include my references to "ether" (and we all know what I am referring to!). You didn't respond to one of my paragraphs concerning "historical ideology". You are not obliged to, but do you want a good punch up, or not? I mean, you did want some "passion" on the general forum, and I'm always happy to oblige. The ether is talking again [Ed : add the damn "smiley" thing. Oh by the way, you're sacked.]
[*] an opportunity for PDG to take a pop at me here, I fear. Smelly onion [add icon thingie, the one with the tongue poking out...]

[Preston]

...our sexually obsessed age.

This is very true, our age has become obsessed with sex. But this has gone on for ages before us. I was watching History Channel not that long ago and it even talked about a great war being fought, due to sex. My point is that, it seems to me, that New Musicology may be some type of a product of "our sexually obsessed age", and yes Philip, I will look into the New Musicology further, that is fair.

As for the IB, I don't know who it is. I would have to study massive amounts of information and would probably still come to no conclusion. Although it seems to me if Beethoven loved someone so much, and thought that he would be with them forever, than marriage vows would not be important to Beethoven because he would have something far more important on his mind, eternity.

[Cetto von Cronstorff]

Reagrding Antonie Brentano as IB, let me quote from Steblin's new article:

However, the letters from the Brentano family that Klaus Martin Kopitz published in 2001, in a valiant effort to add some new documents to the debate, show that Antonie cannot have been the “Immortal Beloved.” <Klaus Martin Kopitz, Antonie Brentano in Wien (1809-1812). Neue Quellen zur Problematik „Unsterbliche Geliebte“, in: BONNER BEETHOVEN-STUDIEN 2 (2001), pp. 115-146, at p. 137.> She was a happily married wife and mother whose brief stay in Prague in July 1812 (less than one day) was spent in searching for an educator for her eleven-year-old son Georg: she had arrived with her husband, five-year-old daughter Fanny, and a maid on 3 July and they all left together for Karlsbad at 6 o’clock the next morning. Where did she have time that night for a tryst with Beethoven? As has been repeatedly argued, her candidacy, which includes the improbable scenario of a “ménage à trois” in Karlsbad,<See the important discussion by Klaus Kropfinger, in: Beethoven, Kassel 2001, p. 125> makes no psychological sense.<See in particular Marie-Elisabeth Tellenbach, Beethoven und seine „Unsterbliche Geliebte“ Josephine Brunswick, Zürich 1983, pp. 33-40 and passim. See also Tellenbach’s two-part article Psychoanalysis and the Historiocritical Method: On Maynard Solomon’s Image of Beethoven, in: THE BEETHOVEN NEWSLETTER 8/3 (Winter 1993), pp. 84-92, and ibid. 9/3 (Winter 1994), pp. 119-127.>