Beethoven v Shakespeare

[margaret hopkins]

ARE YOU READY FOR THIS ?

Holidays over now lets get our minds focused again.

My major interests in Life are ofcourse Beethoven and Shakespeare - though I have studied shakespeare , read and saw all his plays, but I am no Bod. Perhaps to a lesser degree I have studied Beethoven , who has also had a profound effect on me, and continue to study him and am fascinated in comparing these to giant intellectuals.

Help, I am getting out of my depth here, so I hope you can help. I wish i could live my life again to have more time.

Beethoven is said to be the greatest constructive Genius of any musician who ever live and will never be surpassed, exept for our well loved shakespeare.
Both highly perceptive and intellectual, yet both nurtured in different environments, and seemingly have different visions on the destiny of Humankind.

Like Beethoven, Shakespeare was profoundly interested in intellectual issues, which he did not choose to codify, reconcile, or resolve, but rather to dramatize in such a way that his audience or listeners became thrillingly aware of an extra dimension in daily life.
Shakespeare reveals mankind as being imprisoned by fate:-

as CLAUDIO IN MEASURE FOR MEASURE

Aye, but to die, and go we know not where, to lie in cold obstuction and to rot!
This sensible warm motion to become a kneaded clod, and the delighted spirits to bathe in fiery floods, or to reside in thrilling regions of thick-ribbed ice,
To be imprisoned in the viewless winds and blown in restless violence round about the pendant world;
Or to be worse than worst, of these that lawless and uncertain thought imagine Howling, tis too horrible .

The weariest and most loathed worldly life that age, ache, penury and imprisonment can lay on nature is a paradise to what we fear of death.

(This is Shakespeares imagination of Hell! )


Then we have the great soliloquy in Macbeth.- I have quoted the last part;-
Out! Out! brief candle, Life is but a walking shadow; a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more;
It is a tale told by and idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying Nothing.

Does Shakespeare really think that Life signifies NOTHING ?

Stirring stuff isnt it!
I have learned quite a few soliloquys of by heart.

Back to Beethovens vision of humankind.

Beethoven had a Utopian view of society, of brotherhood, freedom, Elisium etc. which is what the 9th symphony is all about, I think, of peace, hope and a new world order.
Beethoven embraced the Kantian philosophy which is evident in his works.

Shakespeare is a profound chronicler of the human experience , his genius endlessly
meditates paradoxes of reality and Illusion.

Your thougthts and comments will be most welcome.
margaret.

[Rod]

Of course we know Beethoven was most impressed by Shakespeare. But this latter man is something of a mystery to me. Do we know how he was motivated to write such works, or even who really wrote them? I recall some time ago watching a programme on TV that quite convincingly argued that alot of S's output was the work of some nobleman. I'm no expert on this topic, but perhaps you could offer an opinion.

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited December 28, 2002).]

[Chris]

And then there's the story that all Shakespeare's works were in fact written by other writers of the time, and all simply published under that name. A course I once had in Brit Lit pretty much killed my interest in Shakespeare, so I don't know much about it, but that theory sounds a little fishy to me!

[spaceray]

Originally posted by Chris:
A course I once had in Brit Lit pretty much killed my interest in Shakespeare,

I went to high school when I was forty,man I was the OLDEST kid in the class.We all had to do a project on Shakespeare and I chose to tell the story of salt(life has no flavor with out it)and King Lear! I began with handing out oranges,a Moll Flanders reference,then I gave them roast chicken and rosemary bread.My mark was 100 out of 100 and my teacher left his greasy thumb prints all over my written report.

[margaret hopkins]

IN BRIEF

TO BE OR NOT TO BE
THAT IS THE QUESTION (of authorship)


Friends,nobles and country men, lend me your ears.

Shakespeare may not have been of noble birth , but his family were certainly from the gentry. We need to access Shakespeares
mind to know what motivated him to write plays.
Let us begin with his education which included "Rhetoric", no doubt animated and with feeling, speaking openly and distinctly. In Upper Schools, such recitals would have been of benefit for future acting.

He would have memorized Latin daily.
Experience with preciseness of Latin would help him to express himself with point, Logic and Lucid continuity.

Amongst other books he was introduced to Ovids Metamorphosis for which he developed a life long fondness and stirred his imagination and fascination with reality and Illusion which permeates his plays.
We know Shakespeare first as a Poet. and at around the age of 20 he went to London to study his art and seek employment, where he would have been introduced to other playwrights - such as, Kit Marlowe, Ben Jonson, and Thomas Kydd.
It is believed that Shakespeare was employed at court - but there is no room to expand on that here.
Courtiers indeed wrote poetry and sonnets
but I am not so sure about dramaturgy.

Not all Shakespeares contemporaries who wrote plays were of University status with exeption of Kit Marlowe.
The authorship exploration for me has become a monotonous excercise in mere speculation. None of the facts prove convincing.

The only way to get to know Shakespeare is by reading his plays and studying his individual style. Marlowe, Kydd, Jonson, etc all have there own individuality.

The same applies when listening to Beethoven, Mozart, Wagner or Sebalius.

We recognize the difference between a Beethoven or Mozart. Dont we?

The same applies when reading authors of great works. Shakespeares originality, wit, intellect, and linguistic faculty is far superior to his contemporaries.

Just believe that a man named Shakespeare did in fact write those plays which are duly ascribed to him in the First Folio 1623. with the exception of perhaps about three later plays which were collaborated. they are, Henry V111, Two noble Kinsmen, and probably Pericles. It is most interesting to read the co-written plays as you know when you are reading the shakespeare bits. Although Fletcher tried to imitate him. Then who wouldnt.

My fascination is comparing shakespeare and Beethovens views on the destiny of Mankind.

Ofcourse we can engage with Beethoven
when we read and listen to him , but shakespeare seems more elusive and mysteriuos.

Done. From Margaret.

[Chaszz]

Originally posted by margaret hopkins:


...My fascination is comparing shakespeare and Beethovens views on the destiny of Mankind.

Ofcourse we can engage with Beethoven
when we read and listen to him , but shakespeare seems more elusive and mysteriuos.

Done. From Margaret.

Shakespeare dramatized a large variety of different personality types. Self-expression was not the major goal of art in his time that it has become since the Romantics. So to me there is a good possibility that he was not necessarily expressing his own views in the fatalistic, nihlistic passages you have quoted above, or in any particular speech. He painted humanity in all its guises and moods. He may have simply been more interested in selling tickets, by making his characters as interesting and human as possible, than in expressing his own philosophy.

[Peter]

Originally posted by margaret hopkins:


My fascination is comparing shakespeare and Beethovens views on the destiny of Mankind.

Ofcourse we can engage with Beethoven
when we read and listen to him , but shakespeare seems more elusive and mysteriuos.

.

Very little is known about Shakespeare's life which is why he seems so 'elusive and mysterious', in contrast to Beethoven where we know a great deal. Under these circumstances I don't see how we can compare their views - we know Beethoven's but can only guess at Shakespeare's. Even if we did know more about Shakespeare we would have to take into account the different eras they lived in, after all Beethoven was a product of the Age of Enlightenment and Revolution.

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by margaret hopkins:

We recognize the difference between a Beethoven or Mozart. Dont we?

Well, listeners do, but not always scholars - I've got a few pieces on CD that were attributed to Beethoven by the most learned of men but are clearly not Beethoven's at all when you hear them. I'm sure the same goes for Mozart. It is true that these two have such a destinctive personal 'stamp' that it is quite easy to identify a piece of music as theirs even if you have not heard this piece before. I would presume the same goes for Shakespeare. I confess I'm almost totally ignorant of his output, but presuming you are a seasoned reader it wouold be relatively easy to detect differences in style and thus if there was more than one author. I can't remember the line of argument of the documentary I saw, but if there is some kind of stylistic continuity then there is a single author. Even though Beethoven's early and late works are in many ways quite different, there is enough of the same personal stamp in both to identify the author. I suppose ultimately the face of the author is less important than the output, but in the case of Beethoven and Mozart at least we know what their faces were like - with Shakespeare even this is an uncertain, if not unknown, quantity!

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[margaret hopkins]

ENLIGHTENMENT ?


Hey Ho! Hey Ho! Alack! Alack!


I do not profess to be an expert on Beethoven and Shakespeare, Though I would love to take up more studies. I suppose I could be classified, - notice I did not mean certified- as a serious mature student, when I am not at work. Wouldnt it be a luxury to be a full time student.

I do a fair bit of delving into books and research when i can.

In reply to all who kindly submitted their interesting comments on the subject of Beethoven and Shakespeare. I thought it might get you going....

We must not fall into the trap of the Ant-Stratfordians who question every aspect of the so called authorship controversy. In fact quite a lot is known about William Shakespeares life and career not only in the recorded statement of colourfull contemparory Ben Jonson. There is also the testimony of diarist, J. Aubrey, who relates some well attested facts.
The problem with William Shakespeare is not one of historical Epoc. Shakespeare was the product of the late renaissance, and similar to Beethoven lived in exciting and changing times.

Shakespeare was in truth the master magician who does not let us see his hand and forever withdraws his unknowable self from us. He creates everything, but it is true to say that despite all we know about his life because his art is hermetic.
No glimpses of the masters personality, views, or opinion.. I think we can get close to Shakespeare if we read his sonnets.

Dear Beethoven , thankfully, quite obviously intrudes his personality into his art.

Both their art trancends time.

Watch out Shakespeare does not come back and tell us that enlightenment is all and Illusion.......He was obviously a very knowledgable and enlightened person himself!

OK. I shall log off now, and conjure up something else to say.

Margaret.

[Gurn Blanston]

I am also no expert on Shakespeare, but have read many of the plays and none of the sonnets. I agree with Rod that readers, like listeners, are perhaps more adept at knowing who authored a work than so-called experts are. I delighted in seeing myself advance in listening to music when I got to the point where I could hear a new piece on the radio and say to myself "That's Mozart" or whoever, and turn out to be right most of the time. I read a piece not long ago by a person who had gone way beyond analysing style, per se, and instead did statisical analyses on all Shapespeare's works' word usages which proved to my satisfaction that they were at least all written by the same person, and that it was not any other published author. So whatever he called himself, S was S and no one else. As for his situation as part of his times, yes Margaret, I agree, the late Renaissance was very much like the late 'classical' period, social and cultural upheaval were rampant. As I suggested elsewhere, B was a product of his time, and would not have been the B we know and love if he had lived in a different era. The concept of Elysium was a shared ideal by the intellegentsia of the day, and a major influence on B's outlook on life, which was indubitably more optimistic than circumstances would dictate. He and they believed that man was a higher being and would overcome our baser instincts in favor of a higher ideal. Whether he was actually correct is hard to say, but that didn't stop him from expressing that ideal in his inimitable way. And thanks for it, too!
Regards, Gurn

[ann hathaway]

Thankyou Gurn, you obviously have a very searching intelligent judgemental and well informed mind. See my Beethoven quote of the day.

[ann hathaway]

"I love most the realm of the mind which, to me, is the highest of all spiritual and temporal monarchies".

[Gurn Blanston]

Originally posted by ann hathaway:
Thankyou Gurn, you obviously have a very searching intelligent judgemental and well informed mind. See my Beethoven quote of the day.

Ann(e?)
I thank you, madam, for your kind words. The only one I would leave out is judgemental, I hope I'm not that! In any case, I have found the arts to be like so many other fine things in life; the more one savors the best of them, the richer and fuller his/her life becomes. Given the short time allotted to us, it has always been my intent to make mine as rich and full as possible. I only hope that some will be inspired to refrain from dogmatic insistence on the worth of one or two facets of art, and open up to the full bounty that awaits those with an open and questing mind.
Regards, Gurn

"What a piece of work is man..."

[ann hathaway]

Ok, Gurn! Well spotted, I thought the omission would go unoticed. The correct spelling is with an (e). Just testing.