The Marriage of Heaven and Hell by William Blake (with introduction)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2013
- The following dramatisation of the Marriage of Heaven and Hell and the introductory talk were originally broadcast on BBC Radio 3. The Blake Society is grateful to the dramatiser for making this available. As with all the recordings they are available for mp3 download on the Blake Society web site at www.blakesociety.org.uk/voice.
As always, we ask that those who have performed Blake's work to share with us a little of the experience. Below are the thoughts of the dramatiser Claire Peyton Jones.
'The Marriage of Heaven and Hell lent itself perfectly to dramatization - I largely dramatized it as I heard it in my head; I could hear Blake's voice narrate, and the voices he used to drop in the proverbs and fancies - so all I had to do was appropriate these voices, and get a good audio balance between them. I also tried to gently tease out themes by giving them to a particular 'devil' so that threads of thought were easier to follow. Piers Plowright, the producer, first commissioned some jazz to accompany the whole piece, and after finishing the production, decided it fought Blake rather than added to it, so we completely remixed it with less temporal sound-effects which, while less unusual, we felt honoured Blake more. He needs no supplement. While Blake is curiously modern, thus his wide and persistent appeal, he doesn't lend himself well to being viewed though a distinctly temporal window which was the effect of the jazz.
Dr Marilyn Butler offers an illuminating introduction that puts 'The Marriage of Heaven and Hell' in the context of its time.
Looking at Blake from the perspective of our times - just as jazz was an inappropriate way to elucidate Blake, the philosopher and theologian Francis Schaeffer suggests how difficult this is. Shaeffer describes a paradigm shift of thinking that occurred in the early part of the twentieth century (that had its origins as far back as the late Middle Ages) from which a modern secular sensibility emerged. We lost the supernatural to the natural -- and we became wholly incapable of understanding the world view of faith that preceded it unless we were people of faith ourselves. I suggest that reading Blake from the outside looking in has the same warping effect as the jazz.
Blake reviled the rule-bound, tamed and neatly digestible Christ presented by the church of his day, as annihilating the passionate grace-filled and energetic God I suspect he knew as Jesus Christ. I believe it was this Jesus that Blake wanted to give back to the world - and does so to my mind in a beautifully upside down way in this piece.
Nicky Henson plays Blake - a deliberate choice for his earthy and un-rarified voice. He and the other voices bring out beautifully the playfulness of this delightful piece. You can really sense the pleasure Blake had in creating it -- for us to hear, read and enjoy.'
Claire Peyton Jones
Portraits in Sound
September 2013 - Розваги
The story starts at 15:20
You're welcome ;)
+MendingJessica Thanks!
Vincent Philip Haha! No problem dude! Glad I could help :D
Yeah nice one mate
I needed that
MendingJessica ya... I'm trying to hear the introduction
Some references I would think
In the universe, there are things that are known and things that are unknown, and in between there are doors.
what do you think about this
ua-cam.com/video/Ixyuvdo_Sjg/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/8MSyxwpUOAk/v-deo.html
Doors of Perception… Huxley
Thank you, and for the great introduction
Thank you for this glorious 40+ minutes-lovely from start to finish.
Thank you for this.
Thank you 🙏🏼
Thank you! I really appreciate you're choice to use different voices. Forr me, it keeps the reading clear, and adds to the audio what blake was able to do visually. Great production!
❤
In the begining darkness still exists with lights in the overpowering darkness what is light and darkness in an electrical equivalent of fire
For some reason this reminds me of Clive Barker's great and secret show/Mr. BE gone.
Radical? His mind was pure, to be correct
Wow!
"The Claaahss Waw stell to come" - I always love it when plummy people talk dirty. This woman makes the Queen sound like a prole.
The narrator is very 1950's BBC.
This one is excellent ua-cam.com/video/KaPsOFpbYuo/v-deo.html
I feel like one of the voice actor was in hellblade: senua sacrifice...
I’m here because of the abc TV series “Revenge “🤣
...and you stayed because it's magnificence 💜
🌈❤️🔥🌹🔥❤️🌈
What is the meaning of Jesus Christ
🌈❤️💜🔥❤️❤️🔥💜❤️🌈
The randomly swapping voices really take me out of this
20:10 holy aphorism download
15:22 - content starts
such useless comments to an excellent production
welcome to youtube video comment sections
Either Blake was delusional or the rest of us have never truly been alive.
A bit of both - he was a radical, most are not. The very definition of self published. Drove himself mad no doubt, still waiting on world revolution.
such a great poem too bad it was ruined by some British guy eating a baloney sandwich just as it was getting good. thanks a lot dude you blew it. is there one person who can read one of these poems and sound fucking normal?
I kinda of prefer St June version of this poem
ua-cam.com/video/P-9j0jmCH6o/v-deo.html
Young Lady.. well spoken sure am I better than James Joyce 👍🏼 certain NOT as good as William Shakespeare 👍🏼 now you know very well 👍🏼 King Arthur his court related 👍🏼 Joseph of Aramethia
Meh. Thanks for the upload though.
the feces of the author were a greater product then the crap he created for his printing press
OH you're a hater, you must be Christian. lol
Cuts rose scents Fundamentalist Alert!!!
errrr...you don't like Blake then ?
john miller lol to hell lmao
@@ishmaelforester9825 When considering this, one shouldn't think of "moral order" as some sort of vague, abstract force that ensnares and suffocates living beings, or "persons." Rather, think of it as THE Person, with a capital P. If the thought of serving a person's will disgusts you, why should your own body obey you, if it IS you? And yet, "you" clearly want and need it to.
You are simultaneously a colony of living organisms and a cohesive, living soul with one single identity, and I think most of us would prefer that our bodies serve us, and not the other way round.
Also, it's a little juvenile to throw rocks at someone for being a Christian. If you cherish freedom, everyone is welcome to their belief and opinion, no matter what you personally think. This gets tangled up rather quickly, though, because "open-mindedness" never, ever is.
Please don't miss Blake's point in all of this. Relativism and freedom of thought and expression mean that when you try to squelch another's way, you have broken the very law you're standing on. And the very fact that this is true means that even lawlessness is a law unto itself. Paul says this in one of his epistles, Romans I believe.
Christian theology is a deep, rich well, and it's a lot more than just a bunch of beggars and kings penning fables and wise sayings throughout the ages, compiled into something that was never meant to be taken as a whole. If you believe that, you haven't dug deep enough -- keep digging.