this, not christianity, is the foundation of western religion.
http://piereligion.org/
Monday, May 22, 2017
my main interest this weekend is actually not in any of the all night dance parties happening in detroit, but in this rachmaninov symphony.
i'm mostly familiar with his piano concertos, which are actually arguably the pinnacle of the western classical tradition. i'm willing to argue with a straight face that everything before beethoven was shit. but, more importantly, i'm willing to argue that it wasn't really western music, so much as it was church music - and because it was church music it was not truly western. western culture has always been about fighting against the colonizing forces of the eastern church, from the time of the celtic rebellions up until the reformation and the renaissance and beyond. the west has never been defined by christianity, but always by it's struggle against it. so, what beethoven's rebellion against the church' music theory really means is that he was the first truly western composer. if you follow this line of reasoning, western music hit it's pinnacle in the total deconstruction of church music in the first half of the twentieth century, and the greatest composers in the western tradition are not mozart and handel but debussy and rachmaninov. unfortunately, this narrative ends with the second world war. musicians perhaps understood something that other artists and historians did not: western culture was permanently destroyed by hitler & stalin, and there was truly nothing left to do but start over again.
rachmaninov's piano concertos are just pure expression. there's really nothing else like them. but, i've never heard one of his symphonies before.
if i wander to detroit next weekend, i'll no doubt end up dancing somewhere by the end of a long night. but, i won't be going at all unless i can convince myself that this symphony is worth attending.
what do you think? does this live up to the expectations one would have, being solely familiar with the piano work? or does it lose itself in the sterility of a composer writing for instruments he does not play?
i'm mostly familiar with his piano concertos, which are actually arguably the pinnacle of the western classical tradition. i'm willing to argue with a straight face that everything before beethoven was shit. but, more importantly, i'm willing to argue that it wasn't really western music, so much as it was church music - and because it was church music it was not truly western. western culture has always been about fighting against the colonizing forces of the eastern church, from the time of the celtic rebellions up until the reformation and the renaissance and beyond. the west has never been defined by christianity, but always by it's struggle against it. so, what beethoven's rebellion against the church' music theory really means is that he was the first truly western composer. if you follow this line of reasoning, western music hit it's pinnacle in the total deconstruction of church music in the first half of the twentieth century, and the greatest composers in the western tradition are not mozart and handel but debussy and rachmaninov. unfortunately, this narrative ends with the second world war. musicians perhaps understood something that other artists and historians did not: western culture was permanently destroyed by hitler & stalin, and there was truly nothing left to do but start over again.
rachmaninov's piano concertos are just pure expression. there's really nothing else like them. but, i've never heard one of his symphonies before.
if i wander to detroit next weekend, i'll no doubt end up dancing somewhere by the end of a long night. but, i won't be going at all unless i can convince myself that this symphony is worth attending.
what do you think? does this live up to the expectations one would have, being solely familiar with the piano work? or does it lose itself in the sterility of a composer writing for instruments he does not play?
at
20:25
is the demographic bulge into retirement harming the social system because it is "unsustainable" or because it is potentially a lucrative market?
at
16:38
and, if that stupid song offends you, our existences diametrically oppose each either.
...and i think you're an idiot.
...and i think you're an idiot.
at
15:23
nobody in canada cares about the long dead queen's birthday; don't be tricked into thinking that we do.
i have no memories of ever celebrating this day, or at least not in any way that was different than any other weekend, when i was younger.
contrary to the public mythology, i have in fact never been to a cottage on the "2-4" weekend, and don't know anybody that has been. i have never attended a fireworks celebration, or marched in a parade or done anything else to acknowledge the dead empress.
and i actually thought it was next week.
i have no memories of ever celebrating this day, or at least not in any way that was different than any other weekend, when i was younger.
contrary to the public mythology, i have in fact never been to a cottage on the "2-4" weekend, and don't know anybody that has been. i have never attended a fireworks celebration, or marched in a parade or done anything else to acknowledge the dead empress.
and i actually thought it was next week.
at
15:05
i'm not surprised that trudeau isn't talking about it. and, the media wants to talk more about chapter 19 than chapter 11.
why isn't the ndp bringing it up?
http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/op-ed-trudeau-needs-to-renegotiate-nafta-to-protect-canadian-water/article/491935
why isn't the ndp bringing it up?
http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/op-ed-trudeau-needs-to-renegotiate-nafta-to-protect-canadian-water/article/491935
at
13:20
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)