Bernstein: The Twentieth Century Crisis · Ives: "The Unanswered Question"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 жов 2015
- From "The Unanswered Question", Six Talks at Harvard by Leonard Bernstein. In the fifth lecture, entitled "The Twentieth Century Crisis", Bernstein discusses Charles Ives' "The Unanswered Question".
Written by Leonard Bernstein
Executive Producer: Harry Kraut
Consulting Producer: Humphrey Burton
Producer: Douglas Smith
Available on Amazon: www.amazon.com/Unanswered-Ques...
Originally Produced by Amberson Video in
cooperation with WGBH-TV Boston, 1973.
© 1992 Video Music Education, Inc.
Sometimes this piece reminds me of that interviewer asking Richard Feynman why magnets attract and repell each other. Though I think Feynman's response was longer, it certainly had the same effect of repeating "why?" ad absurdum and then he eventually just told him there was no way to answer the question in a way the questioner could understand. Art immitating Life immitating Art.
I don't understand why Bernstein sought to characterize Ives' descriptive explanation for the piece as "naïve." It isn't as if the perrennial question, "Why should there be something, rather than nothing," has been answered. And that the question is forever askable is nearly the demonstrable definition of human dignity.
But then again, this WAS 30 years ago!
I wonder if he thought Nietzsche's poem "O Mensch" as set to music in Mahler's 3rd symphony was...'naïve'...(?)
50 years ago, not 30.
I don't know if naivety is an inherently bad characteristic? Perhaps the "naïve" characterization of Ive's description of the song is what make it all the more human. There are so many different perspectives on the "unanswered question" that range from academic, to pessimistic, to absurdist, to theistic, to etc...
Naivety is a very human thing. Our intuition and curiosity is a fundamental factor in our humanity. I personally wouldn't think of naivety as a negative descriptor.
However, I am not going to act like I know how Bernstein specifically interprets the word "naïve". He certainly could have used it a way to express a negative bent to his opinion on the music.
All the words aside, great comment! I appreciate the opinion! It is always nice to have a little philosophical brain exercise in the morning while sipping my coffee! :)
Bernstein somehow got it into his head that Ives was a ‘musical primitive,’ which Bernstein equated Ives’ clashing, dissonant harmonic language as being like ‘outsider art.’ Yet Ives went to Yale where he studied music composition. His 1st Symphony is the product of that time, and serves to show the world that he COULD write like Dvorak if he wanted. Bernstein helped push Ives into the musical mainstream, but he saddled Ives with a reputation of being an instinctual , amateurish ‘Sunday composer’ which Ives‘ legacy is still trying to shake off.
@@JS-ln4ns Ives blows them all out of the water---as a man as well as an artist, he was too clever for the composer clique of his time, and too busy to bother with things like merit; he had insurance to sell. The guy is America's true colossus, in my opinion, far outshone Aaron Copeland.