Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

laphamsquarterly.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 85 posts

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#41

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

mikorym wrote: post #16

Maybe he was a dissident, but his music is still boring to me. Or maybe his predecessors were just so boring that he was the first step away? I usually don't understand from his music why he is celebrated. Is it that he is just historically important? Like the discovery of logarithmic tuning of sqrt_12(2)? It could also be that I am just moved more by the romantic era. Mozart generally gets relegated lower in my list…

> It should also be mentioned that the organ is not a very versatile instrument when compared to a piano.

I wouldn't say that at all. It's versatile in a different way. Listen to some 20th century organ music - maybe start with Howells, Duruflé, Cochereau and explore from there.

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#42

Post by braythwayt »

psilocipher wrote: post #36
mikorym wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvoting opinions just because you disagree is specifically discouraged in the HN guidelines.

HN guidelines are an absolute joke. "Anything that would satisfy intellectual curiosity" basically means "whatever we decide it is at the moment".

That is everything beyond fundamental physics, not just HN.

You can argue that laws are an absolute joke, morality is an absolute joke, society is an absolute joke, nations are an absolute joke, company cultures are an absolute joke (to be sure!), relationships are an absolute joke (evnen an absurd joke) and so on.

Nothing of interest to humans has immutable laws that are so objective to never require judgement.

I stress the word “immutable” because if you give me a law that intends to produce a certain outcome, I’ll give you a game, and once it becomes a game, we’ll need to adjust the laws to preserve the intended outcome.

That’s why we have moderators. And that’s why HN evolves over time. Old timers like me may shake their fist at the way it has changed, but we cannot expect it to remain preserved in crystal like a mosquito in amber.

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#43

Post by braythwayt »

mikorym wrote: post #33
jacquesm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bach boring? No arguing about taste I guess. As for the organ not being very versatile compared to a piano: think of an organ not as a piano, but as a very early version of a synthesizer without 'touch sensitivity'.

Yes, exactly. So Bach was limited by his era and this is my suspicion about why I am not that interested in his music.

All composers are limited by their era.

Technology is part of it. What would Bach have produced if he had sampling?

But equally importantly, all composers are limited by only having heard their contemporaries and predecessors. Bach was exposed to a certain set of music. You are exposed to a superset of the music he was exposed to.

People heard his music juxtaposed with everything else they had heard. Some of it sounded fresh, some too different to be enjoyed.

We hear his music juxtaposed with all the music composed after him, including music composed be people who heard his music and innovated further.

That’s the nature of progression. His music, like Mozarts, has timeless beauty. But it will always be “less” in a certain way than the music we hear today.

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#44

Post by psilocipher »

braythwayt wrote: post #42
psilocipher wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN guidelines are an absolute joke. "Anything that would satisfy intellectual curiosity" basically means "whatever we decide it is at the moment".

That is everything beyond fundamental physics, not just HN. You can argue that laws are an absolute joke, morality is an absolute joke, society is an absolute joke, nations are an absolute joke, company cultures are an absolute joke (to be sure!), relationships are an absolute joke (evnen an absurd joke) and so on. Nothing of interest to humans has immutable laws that are so objective to never require judgement. I st…

Utter BS. Bach would be flagged, first because he's a white male, and second because he was a "rebel". Of course that wig would win him points, he's clearly cross-dressing.

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#45

Post by QuesnayJr »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #27
Meerax wrote: post #2

Yes, Bach was a dynamic and interesting person/composer. That being said, this reads less like a biography of a musical rebel and more like a sensationalist media retelling of his life as a way to sell a new book.

Except that his life was actually fairly unusual. There's quite a gap between Bach the Person and Bach the Composer, and it's not obvious that it's possible to really appreciate the music without appreciating the person. Classical music relies on standardised narratives that cluster around ideals of hard work, repetitive action, restraint, intellectual prowess, powerful but tightly controlled emotional expression, tr…

I know literally nothing about Bach except he had a lot of children (I think?), and yet I think his music is easy to appreciate.

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#47

Post by QuesnayJr »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #40
john61 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad example, because Bach's authorship of this piece is questionable

Weeeell. It's questionable in the sense that "Shakespeare"'s authorship of his plays is questionable. But just as no one has come up with a fully convincing alternative to William Shakespeare of Stratford, no one has come up with a fully convincing alternative to JSB writing 565. It has stylistic quirks, yes - but should that be surprising for "J.S. Bach the Rebel"?

There's a big gap between questioning the attribution of one piece to Bach and attributing all of Shakespeare's plays to someone else. For someone with a big body of work, there's always some debate around the edges. (For example, people now think Shakespeare was the co-author of a play about Edward III.)

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#48

Post by nosianu »

mikorym wrote: post #16

Maybe he was a dissident, but his music is still boring to me. Or maybe his predecessors were just so boring that he was the first step away? I usually don't understand from his music why he is celebrated. Is it that he is just historically important? Like the discovery of logarithmic tuning of sqrt_12(2)? It could also be that I am just moved more by the romantic era. Mozart generally gets relegated lower in my list…

Then why do you even bother (and us too) by clicking on a story explicitly about Bach according to the headline?

Imagine doing that in real life. Every time you witness a conversation about something that doesn't interest you you go over there and tell them.

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#49

Post by QuesnayJr »

mikorym wrote: post #16

Maybe he was a dissident, but his music is still boring to me. Or maybe his predecessors were just so boring that he was the first step away? I usually don't understand from his music why he is celebrated. Is it that he is just historically important? Like the discovery of logarithmic tuning of sqrt_12(2)? It could also be that I am just moved more by the romantic era. Mozart generally gets relegated lower in my list…

Bach is celebrated for himself, not his historical importance. He reached his current status as one of the most celebrated classical composers in the Romantic era, well after his Baroque style had become old-fashioned.

Bach is so celebrated because it has a precision to it, and because all of the musical quality is right there on the page. It's the exact opposite of modern pop music, for example, which is production-driven, and relies much more on dramatic musical gestures.

Re: J.S. Bach the Rebel: The subversive practice of a canonical composer

#50

Post by bloak »

mikorym wrote: post #16

Maybe he was a dissident, but his music is still boring to me. Or maybe his predecessors were just so boring that he was the first step away? I usually don't understand from his music why he is celebrated. Is it that he is just historically important? Like the discovery of logarithmic tuning of sqrt_12(2)? It could also be that I am just moved more by the romantic era. Mozart generally gets relegated lower in my list…

As I understand it, we don't know how Bach tuned his keyboard instruments. We know he cared about tuning and tuned his own instruments, but apparently there are reasons to believe that he didn't use equal temperament.

Bradley Lehman has a bizarre theory, which you could look up if you're interested. I am not qualified to have an opinion on whether it's a good theory.

Post reply on HN