Beethoven's biographers

[Peter]

I'm opening this thread here for those who wish to post on this subject - I don't want the topic to continue on the 'confession' thread which will be deleted shortly.

Thayer's lengthy 5 vol biography was always considered as definitive , but it is of course rather dated in style.
Am I right in thinking that their is a new edition of the Maynard Solomon due out soon ?



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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:

I'm opening this thread here for those who wish to post on this subject - I don't want the topic to continue on the 'confession' thread which will be deleted shortly.

Thayer's lengthy 5 vol biography was always considered as definitive , but it is of course rather dated in style.
Am I right in thinking that their is a new edition of the Maynard Solomon due out soon ?

In the 'Scolars unite' thread I mention a new biography by Barry Cooper released in hardback. I briefly flicked through it in Borders but that's all, so I can say nothing of its quality relative to the others. I know nothing about the Solomon edition. I would have preferred a Thayer/Forbes unpdate personally.

Rod

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

[Serge]

The revised Solomon is already out! He revised his original two years ago. While Rod thinks otherwise, I believe it is a fascinating book.

[Peter]

Well I'd be interested to hear Rod's reasons for not approving of Solomon - I haven't read it, but most reviews I have come across are favourable - is there much new information in the revised version ?

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

[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 11-29-2000).]

[Serge]

The revised Solomon contains new information on Beethoven's personal life, which has to me always been an overlooked part of B. scholarship. While the musicological detail is not extensive, it is not as if such info is lacking; you can find this stuff anywhere. What you won't find as readily are possible psychological explanations into B.'s personality. All of what Solomon says is not claimed as conclusive and is very thoroughly researched. It makes Beethoven, one the most documentable artists ever, seem much more REAL. I do urge you to read it.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Serge:
The revised Solomon contains new information on Beethoven's personal life, which has to me always been an overlooked part of B. scholarship. While the musicological detail is not extensive, it is not as if such info is lacking; you can find this stuff anywhere. What you won't find as readily are possible psychological explanations into B.'s personality. All of what Solomon says is not claimed as conclusive and is very thoroughly researched. It makes Beethoven, one the most documentable artists ever, seem much more REAL. I do urge you to read it.

You have answered yourself why I am not so keen about Solomon, namely their is far too much conjecture in his writing - far too much Solomon - which is why I described him as an 'enthusiastic amateur'. I am not alone in my opinions regarding S, the most knowledgeable person I ever met regarding Beethoven, who has access to all kinds of the lastest archives on this subject was more scathing of his research than me! When you read the toroughly objective Thayer/Forbes then immediately look at the style of Solomon you will understand, which I why I would have preferred a revision of this book. I have no vested interest either way, it's just the impression I have. If Solomon turned out to be absolutely right, then I would admit to being absolutely wrong (curse the thought!).

Rod

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

[Suzie]

Originally posted by Peter:
Well I'd be interested to hear Rod's reasons for not approving of Solomon - I haven't read it, but most reviews I have come across are favourable - is there much new information in the revised version ?

I read Solomon's book last year and I thought it was so incredibly depressing. A lot of people have commented on the foolishness of trying ,as he does, to psychoanalyze B. He may be correct or he may just have a unique angle to make money with. I rather enjoy the writing style of Thayers and the objectivity. Man, I dig the little smiley guy with the shades!

[Serge]

The thing is, it's not foolishness! It would be foolish to claim something of Beethoven and not back it up, evidence of which we've already seen. Solomon doesn't do that, though. He provides a very firm framework for anything he concludes or theorizes.
Beethoven scholarship should not end with Thayer. It needs to be updated, revised; sometimes, revolutionized. We should keep open minds about potential facets to B.'s life previously unheard of, esp. if there is convincing and corroborating evidence.
I enjoyed Thayer very much. I glanced through Schindler and reminded myself he was a liar, so I paid his account no mind. It is hard to find a bio of Beethoven that does as much service to understand his personal life as others have done to understand his music. I'm glad I read and own a copy of Solomon because of the insights that he brought to light are refreshingly new.

This current debate harks back a little to the melee I spurred once with my assertion thatI enjoyed the film Immortal Beloved. I claimed that despite its many and sometimes unforgiveable flaws, the movie managed to bring a visible "realism" to a figure who we would never meet or see in life. The composer was not draped in purple prose. The movie made, IMHO and only IMHO, a wholehearted attempt to portray a tortured but exalted human, which he was. It did not misrepresent him as an infallible music-writing deity which is how I perceived him many years back. (To those who are seething with rage at the mere thought of the movie, I'm already well-aware of it.)

I know Beethoven's music. I respond to it on a deep level that I am comfortable with. I don't listen to his work with as much concentration as I once did because the essence of any one piece comes to me more easily now and the familiarity of his style continues to serve me as it did years back when I could listen on my CBC Radio 2 to a piece I'd never heard before in my life and know, just KNOW, it was a Beethoven (and then be proven right!). What I AM interested in is learning about the MAN. What made him tick? What did he fear? What did he aspire to? How did he measure his life and did he feel vindicated/venerated/content when it was all said and done? Beethoven's music was just as much about emotion & personality-- HIS emotion & personality-- as it was about writing a good melody or experimenting with the form. How can we really expect to respond on an emotional/spiritual level to Beethoven's music if we aren't willing to consider what his life could have been like?

It is because I want to attach the music to the man that I respond well to thought-out ideas on why Beethoven was who he was. At the end of the day, I get a fuller picture. I get the widescreen version instead of the cropped pan-and-scan home video. It makes the listening that much more valuable to me.

This is just how I am, I suppose. I enjoy understanding how the specific is influenced by the whole. My whole life has been spent in this sort of analytical mode, and I think it's served me well. How do you react to this?

[Chris]

This board is just filled with coolness, Suzie

[Peter]

Originally posted by Serge:
Beethoven scholarship should not end with Thayer. It needs to be updated, revised; sometimes, revolutionized. We should keep open minds about potential facets to B.'s life previously unheard of, esp. if there is convincing and corroborating evidence.

It is because I want to attach the music to the man that I respond well to thought-out ideas on why Beethoven was who he was. At the end of the day, I get a fuller picture. I get the widescreen version instead of the cropped pan-and-scan home video. It makes the listening that much more valuable to me.

I think I shall but a copy of Solomon to see what the fuss is about ! - Provided you are coming from a basis of known facts, I see no harm in considering suggestions and possibilities if they can be substantiated or are plausible - I know that he puts a very logical and factual case for Toni Brentano as the Immortal beloved - I like that approach because it stimulates your mind and gets you thinking - he may be wrong (and that has always to be borne in mind), but at least he presents a case that can be argued.

My main problem with Immortal beloved is that it was neither of those - someone a while back suggested that the Immortal beloved was indeed Johanna Van Beethoven and claimed it had been proven - we asked him to supply the evidence and it was not forthcoming - I know of no evidence for this theory and therefore basing a film on it is pointless - also I simply thought Gary Oldman was dreadful and not at all how I like to think of B !

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

[Rod]

Originally posted by Suzie:
I read Solomon's book last year and I thought it was so incredibly depressing. A lot of people have commented on the foolishness of trying ,as he does, to psychoanalyze B. He may be correct or he may just have a unique angle to make money with. I rather enjoy the writing style of Thayers and the objectivity. Man, I dig the little smiley guy with the shades!

I'm glad someone else sees things that was I do on this issue. Quite frankly it is possible to do your own assassment of B's psyche by reading things such as his letters and contemporary coments and observations about him, all of which has been in the public domain long before Solomon's book. I don't particularly want to pay someone else to conject for me. I regard S as a populist writer more than an academic one.

Rod

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

[Suzie]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rod:
[B] I'm glad someone else sees things that was I do on this issue. Quite frankly it is possible to do your own assassment of B's psyche by reading things such as his letters and contemporary coments and observations about him, all of which has been in the public domain long before Solomon's book. I don't particularly want to pay someone else to conject for me. I regard S as a populist writer more than an academic one.

Rod

That about sums it Rod. I'd rather do the analysis myself.

Suz

[Suzie]

I thought in IB Beethoven was portrayed negatively. Besides the music, where were his good qualities? Gary Oldman was yummy in it. Too bad it stunk.

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

Sorry Suzie - I seem to have edited your message by mistake ! I meant simply to post a reply ! PETER - See below.




[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 12-01-2000).]

[Suzie]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chris:
[b]This board is just filled with coolness, Suzie

I'm in with the in crowd!

[Peter]

Originally posted by Suzie:
I thought in IB Beethoven was portrayed negatively. Besides the music, where were his good qualities? Gary Oldman was yummy in it. Too bad it stunk.

You may have found him Yummy, but he wasn't Beethoven ! I agree he was portrayed in far too negative a manner - where was his abundant humour ? To make B out to have been nothing but a miserable cantankerous old man (Oldman !! - I just couldn't resist it ! ) is absurd.

P.S Apologies once again for accidentally editing your message !!!

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