John Eliot Gardiner: Bach's Habit of Imperfection | Big Think
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 тра 2024
- John Eliot Gardiner: Bach's Habit of Imperfection
Watch the newest video from Big Think: bigth.ink/NewVideo
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gardiner, author of the new book, Bach: Music in the Castle of Heaven, has a unique perspective on Bach. He is both a historian and a world-renowned conductor who has throughout his career made hundreds of recordings on the prestigious Deutsche Grammophon label. Bach, the orphan rebel, had a suspicion of authority that ran deep throughout his life, and made him an often domineering and unpleasant person to deal with.
Gardiner doesn't see any contradiction here. "The very fact that this music is so profound and so uplifting and the man is clearly not a saint makes it all the more interesting," he says.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN ELIOT GARDINER:
Sir John Eliot Gardiner CBE FKC is an English conductor and the author of Bach: Music in the Castle of Heaven.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
John Eliot Gardiner: I think there’s been a slightly deplorable tendency amongst Bach’s biographers to paint Bach the human being in a very complimentary light. To imply that great music requires a great man and a great human being and a great personality to be behind it. Well, of course great music requires a creator but it doesn’t have to be a paragon - he doesn’t have to be a paragon of virtue. And Bach certainly wasn’t.
The more that one discovers about him, the more one discovers that he was a deeply flawed character. That even though we have very, very few family records and letters to go on there are incidents that keep cropping up in his life at almost a repetitive pattern of antagonistic behavior between him and authority - the authorities for whom he worked. He was very combative. He really took them on.
But I think we can trace it back really to his earliest times. All right he started off in a presumably very happy family situation with both parents living but he didn’t go to school very often. We have a lot of records of truancy. Now, why? Why was he not at school? That’s one big question. Then comes the double shock of both parents dying before he’s ten. And his upheaval rooted as he was in Eisenach. He’s now uprooted and he goes to live with his elder brother, Johann Christoph, a few miles away in Ohrdruf.
And suddenly his grades shoot up, a reaction to his orphanhood - who knows. But the more I’ve been able to delve into the circumstances and the context of his schooling, the worse it becomes. It looks as if the schools - both the first two schools that he was involved in were prone to very modern sounding difficulties of, you know, overcrowding in classrooms, shortage of textbooks, hooliganism in the classroom, lobbing of bricks through windows, chasing of the girls, coming to school with daggers and spears and a good deal of unpleasant bullying and sadistic behavior.
There was one particular schoolmaster of Bach’s when he was in Ohrdruf and he was probably then only about 11 or 12 who was known as the bully and the sadist of the school. And eventually he got handed his cards and he left but not before inflicting God knows what damage on his pupils. And this is a theme that goes all the way through Bach’s schooling and we can’t say with assurance - well, he was damaged. But it does come out in certain ways.
For example, in his very first job that was when he was organist in Arnstadt. He gets into a quarrel with a bassoonist. He writes a piece of music with a rather difficult couple of riffs for the bassoon and the bassoonist obviously makes a complete mess of it, he can’t handle it. So Bach swears at him and calls him something pretty rude and the guy reacts by setting upon him in the market square. He comes up to him with a cudgel and Bach draws his sword and defends himself. And there’s tremendous fisticuffs which is only broken up by the onlookers.
And Bach goes off to his employers and says, “What’s all that? You know, you’ve got to protect me.” And they don’t. That leads to a feeling of suspicion of authority that runs right away through his life. And it comes up again and again and again. And that comes into the foreground when he’s working in Weimar for the two dukes - the Duke Wilhelm Ernest and his nephew who share the authority.
And Bach is unhappy there. He feels he’s been passed over for the succession to become Kapellmeister. He feels aggrieved. He looks for another job. He’s appointed, and he doesn’t get permission from the Dukes to leave. So they throw him into prison and for a month he’s disgraced and imprisoned.
Read the full transcript at bigthink.com/videos/bachs-hab...
"...Bach draws his sword..." In any context this phrase is amazing
This incident appears in any biography, if modern people took the time to read such things.
John Vogt . Well, we knew he drew it at least 20 times.
I believe it was a knife. Indeed, Bach seems to never have been of a station to own a sword. And it isn’t a bad thing to protect yourself from an armed nut who is coming at you just because you said he’s a “nanny goat bassoonist.”
@@josephososkie3029 Bach had 20 sword fights??
Bach was a Teutonic samurai knight by night.
Can you imagine having all that music inside him, the Passions, the Suites, Cantatas, fugues etc and then having to deal with petty bureaucrats? It's enough to drive anyone bonkers.
The greatest creator after God deals with the box-shaped mind of the local officials.
Apparently having to deal with Bureaucrats makes someone immoral and secular so we can all find him more "approachable" according to Gardiner. Lol
Exactly.
'At odds with authority' Bach rises in greatness.
Suspicion of authority is not a flaw, it is a virtue.
And there's a difference between skepticism and cynicism. Skepticism is a good thing. Always.
to the point! well said
you just saved me from typing the same thing. it's a duty of all who have a conscience
Meh
If Bach had experienced the brutal side of authority growing up, its not remarkable to think he may have had a problem with authority in his adult years. The challenge for those of us who have authority is to exercise that authority in a manner that is benevolent and not abusive.
@paul w I don't understand what you are saying. No need to reply though.
Bach is the best thing ever.
Indeed. He is the pinnacle of all music.
I'd put Jesus above him
@@ianclarke1852 How many songs Jesus composed?
aksuli1 jesus had other priorities
Jesus was not a “thing”, no problem 🤷🏻♂️
Sounds like Bach was a fucking legend.
IS a fucking legend now that I viewed this video
He was a real badass.
Indeed. He had a lot of children, by both his wives.
Christoffer Hødal - He was. Yes sir, he was. ( :
GrizzledGeezer somebody else - BAhahahaha
He's not the artist the world wants, but he's the artist the world needs now.
The Bachman!
Authority restricts, Bach creates, Bach wins.
Right on... live it
I'm not surprised that Bach was a real man, and tired of being bullied.... Not sure how suspicion of authority is somehow the mark of a man with lower virtue than one without suspicion of the same... Indeed authorities have a tendency to screw people over constantly... So I don't appreciate that as a point, but I do agree that makes him more human and remarkable.
Particularly, the ultimate authority which was manifested in the church. Every aspect of life was subject to the church's whim. Imagine being a normal person surrounded by clergymen and their self-lauding politics/egos. Any sane person would lose their minds.
Sounds like Bach was fed up and he wanted to... Go for Baroque! hahaha
Suspicion of authority is in the DNA of the superior man.
I don't think anywhere that Gardiner is saying that suspicion of authority implies Bach has less virtue. You are hearing what you want to hear.
1) he WAS a great man, in the realest of sense.
2) How could a TITAN like him NOT undermine authorities
3) OF COURSE the person behind this music was a TOTAL BADASS !!!!
First of all, Gardiner's interpretation of Bach has been one of the go-to standards over the last thirty or more years. I am grateful for his input on Bach's life, and enjoyed his documentary immensely. I have also ordered his book.
As to this video. I would never claim that Bach was a saint. But I feel that his defensiveness, independence and refusal to obey authority at times are for the most part entirely defensible. Musicians in his day were entirely at the mercy of their aristocratic employers and had no copyright over their property. Bach had expectations and ambitions, and he was determined to follow them through with or without the acquiescence of his superiors. That is admirable. He also didn't allow anyone to get in the way of his career, nor did he want anyone to dictate his music to him. Were all his fights justified? Perhaps not. But Bach knew that if he didn't defend himself, then he would be cast away. When you consider the fact that the Duke of Weimar had him thrown into prison for asking to resign, then his suspicion of and antagonism towards authority rather becomes understandable. I dare say that we wouldn't have the quality of music that we have today without some measure of artistic independence on Bach's part. Of course he wasn't a Saint. But there are justifiable reasons for his flaws.
And his take is absolute trash. He gets facts correct, but his conclusions are awful and finite.
We all have flaws. One either likes the music, or not. And I like the music.
it actually makes sense that a profoundly spiritual man would often find himself at odds with earthly authorities...much like Christ was
Leonidas Diamandopoulos Beautifully put! That was lovely!
Except he wasn't a psychotic narcissist raving about his own self-importance like that loon Jesus Christ.
@@nichoudha repent
@paul w christ shmist. the person known as jesus was a total narcissist . he gathered dim witted people to worship him. he didnt try to lure intellectuals because he knew theyd see through his ruse . in some ways, he was a predator; he only targetted certain people and promised them eternal pleasure, and all they had to do was follow him. like a kidnapper luring children with candy. b.n. "jesus" may not have even existed. for someone so influential there is no written account of him outside the bible. well, there is one account written much later however most historians agree it was forged by christians .
Πιάσαν τώρα και οι Άγγλοι στο στόμα τους τον Μπάχ για να μας δώσουν τα φώτα τους τα μπόλικα... 😂 Σωστός αδερφέ...
I just imagine Bach throwing his wig on basoonist and shouting "nicht ganz mein tempo!"(not quite my tempo!).
It seems that Gardiner had never encountered how horrible the distortions of music may sound to its creator...
Funny enough he said he played the bassoon “like a goat”
It's Bach's stubbornness that made him the greatest Western musician ever. Later in life, even his sons were trying to get Bach to start using the "style gallant", with light melodies and simple rococo like harmony, as they felt his music was "old fashioned". Bach not only refused, but was said to be quite angry about it. One does not tell the Gods what to do, or how to do it. lol
"One does not tell the Gods what to do, or how to do it". Perfect quote man! =)
@k2 he's one of the gods of composition definitely
Yes and No. The metaphor of the Holy Trinity is used to describe the pinnacle of western composers, being Bach the equivalent of God the Father, Haendel God the Son, and Mozart God the Holy Spirit. It would be complicated to tell such gigantic figures in music what to do or how to do it. However, here comes the deal: Bach stubbornness played against him all the time. Not only was his music forgotten until Mendelssohn rescued it from being used as wrapping paper at a butcher's, but his own sons found him impossible, along with colleagues and pupils. Beating children, yelling at everybody... that kind of stuff, which means he had problems with the whole world. A pity, because Bach praised himself and his whole music for being devoted "only to the glory of God". Paradoxically, his behavior did not comply with the christian values of tolerance, patience, love, and kindness; which pivotal teaching is that God lives in our neighbors. The quintessence of the universe and life is flexibility. Evolution or extinction. Bach could have gone down in history as the best composer ever had he evolved both his music AND his manners. But he didn't. And, as it was just natural, the world had to wait until 1756 to see the birth of a much kinder and more affectionate, flexible, open musical genius, who eventually conquered the title of the best composer ever. Form is substance.
I prefer "old fashioned", get those light melodies out of my sight!
@@voxveritatis3815 Discounting a composer's musical ability because of his manners is nonsense. Bach's music was studied by many great musicians/composers prior to Mendelssohn bringing it to the broader public's attention. Further, a lot of his music (such as his cantatas) was not written for broader public consumption, unlike Handle and Mozart (operas and oratorios). Further, Handel's operas eventually fell out of fashion in London, while during the ten years both Mozart and Salieri were in Vienna, Salieri was more popular (both in ticket sales and critical reviews). If you prefer Mozart, fine; he had his problems, too. I prefer Bach (and Beethoven) over Mozart, regardless of each one's personal deficiencies.
Bach was a genius, so why would he want to go to boring old school every day? That he had the balls to express impatience with pettiness and incompetence within the overbearingly powerful Church, pull a sword when attacked, and fight for music in the curriculum, speaks for his courage. Right, he wasn't a saint, he had a rebellious streak, and that was reflected in his amazing music, incorporating "impossible" counterpoint. Where's the imperfection Mr Gardiner?
In fact, thanks to such misstatement we need J.S.Bach today to fight with the blunt cognitive dissonance that Gardiner displays
@@rozalinapiano lol in today's world of hip hop and pop music, gardiner is the rebellious one.. lol
There were quite a few saints were were bad asses! Many who were aggressive, even violent. Bach wasn’t a saint? There is nothing in his character that indicates he wasn’t.
simp
Bach's music was also considered old fashioned when he was alive. Newer styles of music were coming out. But something classic never dies. I'm sure he had to defend his work or the very least ignore the critics. But he did his own thing and didn't conform.
Interesting. I read all these stories in one of Bach's biographies, but I didn't come away thinking "what a flawed character." The stories really endeared him to me.
Same. He was a hard-worker who, if rather temperamental, worked his way up from the bottom, overcame repeated obstacles, and didn't put up with bureaucratic nonsense.
Gardiner seems to think that truly spiritual or Christian people have to be perfect or they are not spiritual or Christian at all! The examples he gave of Bach's life are really not that unusual, especially for that time and circumstances. His music good very well have been a spiritual relief (deeply felt) from his day to day life. Also, I know many great musicians who have to buck authority a bit to get their music done, published, appreciated, etc. Gardiner seems to be looking for a reason to make Bach more "human and much more approachable." Well, of course he was human! What was he expecting?
Gardiner displays much self-conflict, indeed
i think he was trying to ‘play’ a less usual, rather eccentric approach on such a prolific figure of a musician - this time, Bach the man. Pointing on his own intimate, scrupulous research on his life.. Nothing funny if not..interpreting negatively so many (more or less) normal things..and (why) giving them such importance ..
It reminds me of how critics were intrigued struggling to make a connection/a parallel between Bruckner’s music and his personal dull life .. Whats the help of all this(?). It anytime may be a thought that comes in anyone’s mind when familiarizing the two, but ..what’s to judge(?)
We're missing way too much context in these scenarios and we will never have it. We should just be satisfied to say that we really don't know much about Bach, the man.
Who are the people "we?"
I disagree and strongly. We do know that J.S.Bach had not invested his time in much more paying opera gigs, but instead, wrote highly spiritual music. And we do know that The All Times Genius had appealed to the square-minded authorities for funding of music education, to try to enlighten those around him in his provincial community, who were so uncivilized to misuse their force against the Genius from whom they could have learned a great deal and evolved, not to mention, would have earned much admiration of the future generations.
I'm thumbs-upping this for the shared anecdotes only, not the conclusion. It sounds to me that Bach was just as divine a being as he was as a composer, the difference being that as a composer he was able to exist in a space where he could express his divinity, but in the world he was surrounded by people restricting him from doing so. The fact that he fought back or even lashed out about this is appropriate, and I'm quite sure that even if the lash-out seems disproportionate in it's expression that it had a real life experience to rationalize it's existence in his perception.
John Eliot Gardiner - your recording of the Rake's Progress stands among the most cherished musical experiences of my life. But here it is not Bach that is not aligned, it's you. He's the same divine being in different contexts, the contradiction only exists in how you are perceiving him; you see him as his clothing, not his spirit, and so when he's dressed in his night clothes you find him offensive, but when he's dressed for school you find him appreciable. He's the same boy - love him!
Also, I'm quite sure that there's more than one genius in our family that found it difficult to get along with authority. Again, the problem occurs that authority in some areas in some ways wants to restrict genius in order to validate it's authority over something which is in reality greater than itself. In the eyes of genius this is a big No-No, because genius always validates the individuals authority over itself and would suffer itself not under the authority of another.
Great story about Bach defending himself with a sword. Thumbs up.
Cheryl Foster exquisitely articulated! I concur with your sentiments!
the story with the sward isn't accurate though. J.S.Bach had to defend his wife with his sward, according to his great-granddaughter Louise Marie Bach
Fantastic comment. Gardiner just aggravates me for calling Bach 'deeply flawed' because he showed a temper. Ridiculous...
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds."-- Albert Einstein
If I have a choice I'd rather be a great spirit fighting to change the world than a saint at peace with its mediocrity.
It would seem that suspicion of authority is a good an logical trait, not an anti-social one.
go to somalia and over-think your theory.
swunt10 Swunt, you are a real original thinker, using a several years old focus group meme as if it came from your inspirational musings.
The authority figures in Somalia are worse than even here. Why would you suggest someone go there?
Steve Kusaba are you not capable of logical thought?
swunt10
A troll that will not identify himself breaks down to conduct a grade school quarrel over concepts he can not understand in a Bach forum? What is this world coming to! At least I don't have to hear your rambling directed at music!
Steve Kusaba it was intended as a rhetorical question but that didn't stop you from answering it.^^ you didn't need to show me that you are stupid in that way, that was perfectly clear from the beginning. I just tried to be nice and hoped for the best. but you just couldn't hide your small intellect and started to insult me.
ok, everything step by step.
someone who is suspicious of authority to the point of smart arse internet rambling and being suspicious for the sake of being suspicious is indistinguishable from a conspiracy theorists. that's one part of being anti-social in case you didn't notice.
if you can't see a connection between a working society where authority does exist, is respected and is not constantly undermined by idiots who think they understood everything, and a clearly not working society, where authority doesn't even exist like in somalia, then you are not capable of logical thought.
that's not a "concept", that's you being stupid.
don't you see where anti-social behavior and negative basic attitude against authority leads? you should read up on the definition of 'society' if you still don't get it. btw everything that is against this definition is by definition anti-social.
well but at least you do like to insult people right away, like every advise resistant idiot. that saves time and you use that time well to accuse people of ridicules things that are completely pulled from the air like
"you are a real original thinker, using a several years old focus group meme as if it came from your inspirational musings."
(I never said that did I? and a good example is a good example. you are the one who tried to change the definition of being anti-social, so it's your job of defending your bullshit and not mine)
or "A troll that will not identify himself"
(wow such an original non-argument you must be a real original thinker, using a several years old focus group meme as if it came from your inspirational musings. see what I did there?)
or "breaks down to conduct a grade school quarrel over concepts he can not understand"
(it seems as if you don't even understand your own concept, I understand concepts quite well, thank you)
or "hear your rambling directed at music".
(wow straw-men argument insight)
some people are just born as arseholes, but you could at least try to hide it. but there is nothing you can do about your stupidness, you clearly can't hide that. now go and be some more suspicious of authority and see how smart that is and how well it will play out socially. you better be a world class musician or have other talents to get away with it..
but please don't lecture to many other people on your twisted logic, I don't want the revolution of the stupid, undereducated people and mediocrity to happen in my lifetime.
mhh maybe you shouldn't have answered the rhetorical question in the first place.
In which we learn that Bach was a "deeply flawed character" because: he was "combative against authority" that treated him badly, was orphaned as a child, stayed away from a bad school, got into the occasional argument, called someone a "dirty ear"....er, that's it.
Bach called that guy "a nanny-goat bassoonist!"
Poor musicians.....forever a toilet paper.....
He probably meant "prick basoonist", but it gets cleaned up a bit...(:
Bach was also walking with his soon to be wife, Cousin Maria Barbara Bach, so he didn't want the "prickster" and his thug friends (which accompanied him) to threaten him and his fiancee..Bach not only looked like a bulld dog, he was feisty like one!
Very true! The great-granddaughter of J.S.Bach is of the same opinion too
An ill wind, that no-one blows any good perhaps ?
this video says much more about gardiner's views on authority than bach's -neither of which is surprising =D
Of course, every body knows Jeg is a pompous ass...
Some people show incredible resilience against the obstacles thrown their way. This biographical sketch provides wonderful insight to the extent of his achievement against the odds.
Alternatively, perhaps his suspicion of authority was perfectly justified.
Exactly. Musicians were often undervalued, underpaid and had little job security. Bach complained to his friend Georg Erdman in a letter that one of his former employers had lost interest in music after taking a new wife. That meant that he had to go and find a new job. Music was a profession, much like it is today, and you had to find solid, reliable patronage.
Stephen Bowey : Of course it was justified! People in authority were no different then from what they are now: Uppity, power-hungry empty heads. Am speaking of politicians, councillors, so-called aristocracy, etc. Not of musicians.
Gardiner is talking is if there have been a lot more incidents then the few he actually mentioned. However, there is very little known from him personally. A few letters he wrote, a few annotated books that he posessed, very few written eye-witnesses, quite a small amount of resources to characterize an entire life with soch bold statements.
and self-conflicting statements of the sensational devil's advocate
bach was living only for his music and god. not for authorities. and he had no "sir" title mr.gardiner! humanity still remembers his name, and will remember forever.
Who hit thumbs down? This guy was extremely diplomatic in his description of Herr Bach! How about him clubbing his students with a cane? His prodigious drinking? Hell, Bach is my musical hero, I love the guy, warts and all!
Exactly. The greatest composers were all deeply flawed (well, isn't everyone?). That's almost the point of art: rising above the drudgery of life in order to give people pleasure.
As a composer im still suprised of bach ive said alot but one thing ive said is bach had every emotion and every musical style written nothing incomplete. Something like that.
I could probably listen to John Eliot (or perhaps countless other commentators) talk about Bach's life all day long. Truly fascinating detais which colour in the picture of the life of one whom many (myself included) consider to be the greatest of them all! And who's to know he was just an ordinary bloke underneath all that genius?
Saints don't question social authority?
Quite!
melancholiac
silent protest
HA-HA! So much of the shameless self-conflict is revealed by Gardiner
In retrospect its now clear that when referring to Bach's vast human flaws and horrific personality "Jiggy" was really talking about himself.
Look at Mozart he was believed to act childish throughout his life. Just because someone is a genius or a prodigy at one thing, doesn't mean they're all knowing and great at everything.
Or can’t we just say that he was a gifted man ?
The best of men are but men at best !!
All of Bach's supposed mistakes that this guy points out make the composer seem way cooler--I'm getting a picture of a principled, skeptical, resilient, and intelligent man who also happened to be a revolutionary composer. Kind of defeating your own argument, Mr. Gardiner.
It is in fact Sir John Eliot Gardiner, CBE and PhD, not Mr.
Jesus this comment is so fucking pretentious.
@@galea27 In fact, according to his Wikipedia entry, his many honours (including the ones you mention) were 'honorary'. Nothing wrong in that, but, for the sake of clarity, they were all given, not 'earned'. Even his degree (a 'masters' in history, from Cambridge) is not what it seems. Many people will not know of the disgraceful practice of awarding *all* degrees from Cambridge as 'masters' degrees, something which I have always thought of as an embarrassment for that institution, and any others which do this.
@@galea27 'Just call me John'.
The more I learn about Bach’s life, the more I seem to connect with him. The notion of his flaws are based on the model of “goodie two shoes” and being virtuous to fellows and peers. But Bach seemed simply: badass. He seemed to hate the world of mediocrity and ordinariness he lived in. Why should hate be a sign of weakness?
I think there are people who spend all their time bringing up UA-cam videos just so they can give them a thumbs down. What a pathetic way to feel empowered.
Some of the other videos on this channel have felt a bit woolly or ill-informed, but this one is much more interesting with a good point. Hats off to you
This is one of the first "Big Think" videos I didn't find ironic.
Ah, Jeggy. My favorite conductor, especially of Bach. Bach is my favorite composer, though I know almost nothing about his life. It doesn't surprise me, though, that he would be eccentric and combative against authority. When you're as good as he was, and you know it, it's hard to take your supposed 'superiors' seriously.
But the point is that he wasn't recognized as "very good" in his days. He was even forgotten for a long time, One of his employers was asked why he hired Bach, replied: "I really wanted the best for this job (Telemann) but he was taken, so I settled for a minor one".
Why do you think he was thought of as a minor composer? To many including Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner etc. he was considered an outright musical genius. Wagner even referred to him as a "Miracle" other people have referred to him as the father of Western classical music. It seems absurd that Telemann would be considered superior to Bach even though he was an able composer.
It's a mystery.
The idea that Bach's music was largely forgotten after his death is a myth. Those composers in "the know" at least, continued to revere him seemlessly from his death onwards. A case in point: it is said that the score of "The Well Tempered Clavier" was rarely far away from Beethoven's piano ..... And there are countless other examples of composer's expressing their admiration for the great man.
Now I think of Wagner with much more regard - MIRACLE, indeed
I think a lot of creative people have dark beasts deep within their psyche, beasts that must be locked up in the basement of the mind. If they can't control their beasts, the beasts will devour them. But if they can channel the beasts' violent energies, they will have opened an endless cache of inspiration and creative impulse.
On the other hand, there is the kind of people who are always easy-going, living in the moment, kind and sincere without effort. These people, I think, don't have to deal with these beasts, which can be a curse or a gift, depending on how you see it.
Very well said.
...He can't "Handel" it... so Bach swears at him... draws his sword. Brilliant words aha
You don't have to sell me on J.S. Bach. I'm already a big fan.
Bach is a fighter of the baseness during his time and so his music of true beauty will last through eternity.
Not a Bach fan myself. But Gardiner's wise, learned approach to Bach sheds light to misconceptions about this composer. 😍
Bach was an Aries....... and that explains a lot. I am so glad that Gardiner makes these points, because all of the films and documentaries on Bach are saccharin. Christians want to make him a paragon of Lutheranism. I am glad that we can now place Bach in the human race.
redbrian3655 Not just an aries but an aries coupled with ox which symbolises amibition and purpose. Astrology would probably be poo-pooed by many of the scholars, not like I care. In addition I'm not too concerned with the outward personality but what goes on on the inside - and that's hidden as it should be. So much of Bach is hidden (like God).
+Wolfgang1782 Cool, I never knew! Haha I'm a Aries also.
Role Model: Bach :D
I think Gardiner makes a mistake to name a character as 'flawed', because he did not show up at school much and was antagonistic to authority. As he sais himself, in those days you were treated as a piece of shit and damaged at school. Would you want to go there? Authority in those days was not based on skill but just birth, and those guys could do pretty much do what they wanted. As a musician, you were just a servant. Would any modern employer in Europe lock you up for a month because you wanted to resign? He did not get the job according to his talents, while he knew he was the best. he was underpayed. He had to work his ass of harder then Gardiner ever will. Nobody here on UA-cam would like to act as a slave for kings, lords and whatever. So I would argue Bach was humanistic and ahead of his time, who stood up against rulers, clergy, stupidity and injustice and did not like to be forced to kiss ass. What a guy!
+René P Hahaha! I couldn't avoid laughing at every word that you have written in your statement. However, I'm totally agree with you, but remember he is a "Sir", so he's going to arguing further "the flaws and his very antagonistic position to authority". Notwithstanding, I think what he's trying to say is; Bach had many struggles to fight throughout his entire life, and that's why he was always opposed to "authority" because nobody gave him a hand and he trusted in "God" through his music. But you're right about monarchies and whatever the hell has come up since then. Cheers!
Bach had a temper for sure. He thought he was right. Is anyone surprised. Brilliance and contentious often go together. Haendal suffered no fools.
Handel got in sword scuffles too (with Johann Mattheson). All the best 18th century musicians could throw down.
Several comments are missing the point. Many view Bach as having lived a spotless life. The imperfection isn’t Bach’s character, it’s the characters that surround him.
Actually, it sounds more like Bach was the victim here. For a schoolmaster to distinguish himself as "the plague of the school, the scandal of the church and the cancer of the city" at that time and place would require more than merely beating his charges bloody. For merely asking to leave employment, the two dukes imprisoned him for a month; the kid who attacked Bach with a cudgel merely had to stay after school for a month. And anybody forced to do too much work with too few resources would have to sympathize with Bach at Leipzig.
finally someone who pronounces Bach correctly!
Sir John Eliot Gardiner’s comments are always excellent!....his description of some of Bach’s unconscious processes, struggles, etc., the man who became the first modern composer and whose romanticism, sensuality and profound humanity will be with us forever!; thank you Sir John.!
He just makes shit up.
You can hear energy filled dialogues in art of fugue. Those tensions and difficulties might have been his fuel, his need for devine voices.
John Eliot Gardiner does a great job dismantling the personality fallacy. One can make great art while simultaneously having a difficult and disagreeable personality. Research into creativity reveals that an unhappy childhood is a spur to creative development. Human beings are messy.
He was a vessel for the most heavenly music that will last forever, but still a human being.
I'm kinda glad Bach had the same school experience as me...😊
"Bach draws his sword and defends himself." My god that is the coolest thing I've ever heard.
Gardiner on Bach? Thank you for this.
Minor quibble: You might want to spell his name correctly in the title.
Bach was a genius and geniuses do not conform.
Just listen to the St Matthew Passion and the last chord is like two fingers up to the authorities in the slight discordance of its notes.
I am preparing some more of the similar content about the unsurpassed Genius of all times with the impeccable sense of humor
He was creating music that was not a traditional sound, the notion that he was passed over may agrieve anyone.
Having lost my own mother at 8 I have some understanding.
That school disruption is a sign of boredom, from gifted children.
Still my hero....Bach.
The error in assuming that someone accomplished or famous is a sort of paragon is more than visible in our time, it’s a kind of disease. I refer of course to the tendency to regard a movie actor or sports figure as qualified to speak with authority on anything whatever.
“It does not follow, that because a particular work of art succeeds in charming us, its creator also deserves our admiration.”
― Plutarch (Lucius Mestrius Plutarchus, c. 46-120 AD)
I really like Gardiner's Bach cantata cycle (but somewhat prefer Harnoncourt's), but these comments really don't make sense. Perhaps only an Englishman would give as his first example that Bach was "DEEPLY FLAWED" a reference to Bach's "repetitive pattern of antagonist behavior…with authority". For me, standing up to authority is not a deep flaw but a deep virtue. And, indeed, a courageous one. The world needs (and always has needed) more such people. Another example Gardiner gives of Bach's apparent delinquency is that the didn't go to school regularly as a child, but then Gardiner goes on to describe the school system as an extremely unappealing and, indeed, rather unsafe environment ("hellhole" might be a more apt adjective). Avoiding such a place is not delinquency, but smarts! The fight in town Gardinder refers to is, in his own rendering of the event, SELF DEFENSE. That's a flaw? And please, is shouting at a bassoonist during rehearsal the sign of a "deeply flawed" character? Gardiner is a wonderful conductor, but he is not a scholar.
Wonderful video! Thanks Gardiner!
I think it takes a kind of intensity to make art. Sometimes that intensity is misguided, but when put toward something productive, that energy can be channelled into beautiful, astounding work.
Now the "successful" composers and musicians and visual artists are so career minded they wouldn't dare offend their corporate sponsors...Well behaved, pedigreed people aren't too exciting for art.
Then again, neither are anonymity or poverty.
Reading Gardinar’s book and listening his CDs of the Cantatas was one of the great experiences of my life... not to mention the chance to finally know Bach!
“Bach: Music in the Castle of Heaven
His behavior probably explains why his piano concertos have such powerful contrast. --Love from Brev Spread Magazine
It's wonderful to understand the being behind the great pieces of music!
Thank you
John Eliot Gardiner ♥ WOW I've never heard an English man speaks that amazing German! Oh and btw Bach is a hero!
What ever this man says J S Bach is great.
I've been wondering about similar things for a long time.
Never found any thoughts about it though, until now.
So thank you for this insight.
Having problems with authority is not necessarily a character flaw.
I object to the notice of Bach being called a "deeply flawed character", even by someone as iconic as Gardiner. From the few actual facts that are documented about Bach we know that he certainly was no saint. He was ambitious, demanding, controversial, strong-willed, pig-headed, and he well knew he was better than anyone else. A troublemaker, yes we might call him that. But deeply flawed ... *no*. Deeply human, I'd say.
Great comment.
Amen to that. We're all deeply flawed but some of us...like me...aren't blessed by the gods to bring untold joy to the people.
Bach was a Lutheran. Luther is known for having defied the Roman Catholic authorities for the sake of truth, justice and the glory of God. Guided by his Lutheran convictions, Bach devoted his life to creating music to the glory of God. “The aim and final end of all music,” he affirmed, “should be none other than the glory of God and the refreshment of the soul.” As he set about composing, he lived out this conviction repeatedly, marking his blank manuscript pages with the initials, “J. J.” (Jesu Juva-“Help me, Jesus”), or “I. N. J.” (In Nomine Jesu-“In the name of Jesus”). At the end of his compositions, Bach regularly inscribed the letters “S. D. G.” (Soli Deo Gloria-“To God alone, the glory”). Bach, like Luther before him, understood that all of life can and should be lived for the glory of God alone. “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (I Corinthians 10:31, ESV).
What? A deeply flawed character? It sounds to me that Bach was justified to fight back in many of those circumstances.
as if Character has anything to do with geometrically sound patterns 😂😅 - Genius !
Exactly my thoughts.
What we have in the last decades is an epidemic of second class men (scholars) living off the legacy of great men while trying their best to shit on their characters.
Nobody said Bach was perfect or a god, but this insistence on calling him names, and also biased Interpretation in a negative light sounds to me like A SICKNESS OF THE MODERN SOUL.
Also, being a physical and aggressive man is really only a negative thing to modern effeminate cowards. Suspicion of authority is 100% justified ANYWHERE, ANYTIME.
These comments are the number 1 reason I decided not to read his stinking book, which I believe starts right off the bat talking shit about Bach.
Biographies 101, if the biographer hates the subject, it's a good sign not to read him.
@@davida.rosales6025Relax, weirdo. The point of the whole video is that Bach’s music is made more beautiful by the fact that he’s just as flawed and human as anyone else and not some untouchable, divine soul.
Also yeah, being a “physical, aggressive man” is negative because I don’t want to be privy to someone’s violence. If that makes me an effeminate coward, so be it. I can’t respect a “””man”” who’ll sooner throw fists than mince words. People like you are why everyone seems crazy in modern times.
As someone with Aspergers I've been wondering if J.S Bach could have had Aspergers. This video reinforces that idea. Also there are many similarities between J.S and Albert Einstein, who is suspected to have had Aspergers
I'm reading "Bach: Music in the Castle of Heaven" currently, looks very promising so far.
Thank you. Interesting, but far from new. And going against authority is a sign of good, rather than bad, character. Shows Bach to have been the great thinker that he was. “Dirty ear” is a fit description of anyone who wants less music in their school. Rather than “very flawed”, I should like to call JS Bach very spirited.
This is a brilliant documentary that gives a different view on the composer's personality. Very enjoyable to watch.
J s Bach always my favourite. Thanks for this mate.
0:42 - Agreed, yes sir, and in the same way You are. sir.
This is a perfect example of a scholar who starts to think about someone, Bach in this case, in a way that differs from the standard paradigm. He soon comes to believe that this new way of looking at Bach’s life is the correct and accurate way. But the fact is that JSB’s life is destined to be more or less of a mystery. Gardiner is simply taking a few incidents from Bach’s life that are speculative at best and blowing them up in a way that, eventually, cause him to believe that he has ‘cracked the code’ of the real nature of Bach’s life. It should be taken for what it is; speculation based upon a few incidents the true nature of which we really know next to nothing.
I think there are some aspects to Bach's character which can be gleaned from his correspondence and the correspondence of those who wrote of him contemporaneously.
I would like this man to talk again to explain what his point is, because we all think the examples he gives of Bach are what one would expect of a genius.
Please define what your word, "great".
What defines great or greatness?
Please define great or great in or not in quotation marks.
Please define what it means when we don't use proper quotation marks or commas or periods or whatever..............
Please live what you said when you defined these things you were asked to define.
I would expect nothing less. You never never find real brilliance among Jackals of Conformity. Only among the driven loners often plagued by their own personal demons. Those who're busily creating personal vocabularies in their respective mediums as soon as they're able. He like Monet, Van Gogh, and Einstein was a hard worker on top of being a genius with a capital G. His mature examples of breath taking chromatic density blow my mind.
I can't believe a film about Bach has never been made.
Bach the rapscallion..I love it because it makes him less of a Greek hero and more of a human
Really??? Because he fought institutions and authorities this means he had a flawed character? And perhaps those who accept the authority of institutions are flawed...
What baloney
Agreed. Connecting the questionning of authority to a flawed character is a very ill-judged conclusion.
Gardiner is immersed into self-conflict and ought to stop bad-mouthing the Genius, making devil-advocacy a sensational reason to get attention and $$$
correct.... they get a bland brit to define the greatest man of all!!!!!
This guy want so badly to portray him as bad and crocked as possible to make his point.
Actually I was bully in school too, end up retrospecting with regret on it too much, trying to write a fugue in penitence for my bad choices... hmm seems valid...
Here here. So "paragons of virtue" are supposed to bow down and lick authority's you know what? In my book it is virtuous to stand up to authority when that authority is flawed. Not be some kind of passive wimp.
Oh lets rather just listen to the music!
It could be said that it’s a prerequisite to be a little explosive of character to produce good creations, in a broad sense, there could certainly be a correlation between both aspects.
He did a great doc. on bach's life
Thanks ❤
"Suspicion of authority" Vvery virtuous as far as I can tell :D
I speak as a musician of 33 years in, been to music school from 7 years old - violin.
All today's music geniuses sound JUST like Bach! Rebellious, young, full of anger towards authority at younger age... That's it - 100% what this gentleman said!
lol, NOT AT ALL.
@@mcd5778 I'm not talking about the biebers and eminems of the industry....
Thats a shame that he thinks so, I would instead say that Bach held such values as those that he thought were worth defending regardless of authorities beliefs. I would instead consider that as saintly as you can get, and that last example of starting a fight with the headmaster down the road i think would be more indicative of his opinion or the importance of education (which i too believe involves the cultural education of music) after such a "damaging" upbringing. On that topic, that seems a bit of leap to make from a tumultuous event as losing his parents, to immediately dubbing him as "damaged", no on the contrary i would argue that this would rather lend itself to being a greater input to his compositions. Everyone is shaped by their experiences, the fact that Bach overcome his in the face of adversity and excelled is only supportive of any claims that he is a worthy and authentic individual.
I am so glad you've mentioned such audacity in the disability to understand the fundamental personality trait of J.S.Bach - his reflection of his high ethics in his deeply humanistic music that he wrote. Yes, indeed, his flourishing productivity is the testament of his successful overcoming of not only his trauma, but it is to envy for by all music therapists of today, by all means. And along with his righteous acts of speaking the truth to the power that is where the conductor self-conflicts himself and demonstrates cognitive dissonance - just the kind that J.S.Bach was so determined to reflect n his music. After all, what does he know of suffering and having to overcome the trauma through music, in order to maintain functionality? The life of privilege and in disconnect with the reality takes away the realistic perception and mutes the empathy capacity. I am very saddened by his odd conclusions from the archival facts. I don't think, J.S.Bach would easily get along with him (-;
I just want to compliment this man's pronunciation of both English and German words. I can't tell if he's German or English, but yes, I realize a Google search would solve this.
Bach not only let the chromatic cat outa the bag but let her live in his study. He is the reason why the whole history of Western Art Music can accurately be described as a composer driven power dive into higher and higher levels of chromatic density both vertical and horizontal eventually bringing about the 20th Century Crisis in tonality. How cool is that?
Why was he not going to school?
Probably because he was learning music.
his ill parents needed his care
He was a trouble maker as a kid.
Yeah. His first album was going double platinum.
If any of these responses had carried any weight Sir John Eliot would have said so - he has written a wonderful biography of J S Bach resulting from many years' careful and diligent research. How long did your research take?
40 hours a day