/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19494360]

>who is the literary bach?

I want to know what you guys think about what some Anon posted about Bach some days ago, his answear on the question above:

Anon:

The simple answer is there is none [literary Bach]. Imagine a writer with the ingenuity and mastery of language/drama like Shakespeare with the output capability of a nuanced but prolific novelist like Stephen King, with the playful complexity of Pynchon but at once the essentialist-minimalist style of Hemingway, and Tolstoy's complete understanding of the human spirit and his ability to imbue that into the written form in there form of epic dramas, and then to top it off, such a writer would have to be writing all of his works with perfect success from a multi-narrative point of view that converge into a coherent conclusion, in a niche style devoted solely to the glory of God like Christian Fiction, and be unrecognized for their absolute genius for hundreds of years. Lasty, such a writer would have to have produced some works of art that continue to challenge even the greatest readers today, as Bach wrote technical-and-interpretative-mastery-level-only triple-black-diamond experts-only pieces for a variety of instruments.

Bach has no equal. He could write highly ordered and well constructed complex polyphonic works with the (apparent) ease of a child sitting scribbling chaotically on a sheet of paper. Clip below is a Bach organ fugue arranged by Respighi for a full orchestra, simply breathtaking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXwHORPeOsg

(...)

There is no smooth equivalent, there's too many a areas where Bach is superlative.

That have mastered literary elements that can loosely be translated to the musical form.

Tolstoy is the closest we have to Bach in literature, if you really want the answer, but even Tolstoy falls far short of what Bach accomplished and the depth of Bach's work. If Tolstoy was alive today and had the prolific output of Stephen King and was writing post-modern multi-narrative novels that formed coherent conclusions and his works were all at least as good as War and Peace, then you might have a close comparison to Bach.

Can you imagine an author like that?

Neither can I.

That's what Bach is to music.

[Anonymous No.19494393]

>>19494360
I'm not even mad that there's only one Bach in all the arts combined. You only need one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qo6VfM0PSlQ

[Anonymous No.19494415]

>>19494393
>Gould
Kys retard.

[Anonymous No.19494419]

>>19494415
It's not my fault if he's a Jew!

[Anonymous No.19494432]

>>19494419

Actually he is not a jew

[Anonymous No.19494437]

>>19494360
>Whoso would seize the wondrous individuality, the strength and meaning of the German spirit in one incomparably speaking image, let him cast a searching glance upon the else so puzzling, wellnigh unaccountable figure of Music's wonder-man Sebastian Bach. He is the history of the German spirit's inmost life throughout the gruesome century of the German Folk's complete extinction. See there that head, insanely muffled in the French full-bottomed wig; behold that master, a wretched organist and cantor, slinking from one Thuringian parish to another, puny places scarcely known to us by name; see him so unheeded, that it required a whole century to drag his works from oblivion; finding even Music pinioned in an art-form the very effigy of his age, dry, stiff, pedantic, like wig and pigtail set to notes: then see what a world the unfathomably great Sebastian built from out these elements! I merely point to that Creation; for it is impossible to denote its wealth, its sublimity, its all-embracing import, through any manner of comparison.
>Bach’s masterpieces became the Bible of his belief; he read them and in them forgot the world of sound of which he ceased to be aware and no longer heard. There it was written down, the puzzle of his innermost dream that the poor Leipzig Cantor had once written down as an eternal symbol of a new and different world. They were the same mysteriously entwined lines and wonderfully intricate signs by which the great Albrecht Dürer had first understood the secret of his luminous world and its forms: the magic book of the necromancer who lets the light of the macrocosm illuminate the microcosm. What only the eye of the German spirit could perceive and what only his ear could hear; what, out of inner awareness, drove him to irresistible protest against anything externally imposed on him: Beethoven now read that clearly and unambiguously in his most sacred book, and – himself became a saint.
>Bach and Dürer, they are two of a kind, both possess in the same degree a quality of inner sadness and also the same taste for mysteriously imaginative ornamentation. Only in Bach there is unfortunately still too much of what was then fashionable, the marks of a bad period.

[Anonymous No.19494441]

>>19494360

Shakespeare alone is as impressive as Bach. There is no need to combine him with other artists. Anyone who tried to write poetry seriously and to wrestle beauty out of language will understand.

[Anonymous No.19494444]

>>19494432
Oh. Then why is anon telling me to kill myself? I'm not a Jew either.

[Anonymous No.19494446]

>>19494437
>Emanuel Bach, Haydn and Mozart had established the structural laws of sonata form for all time. It was the outcome of a compromise which the spirit of German music reached with that of Italian music. It acquired its external character from the way it was used: the pianist used the sonata to present himself to the public in order to delight them with his dexterity and to entertain them agreeably as a musician. We are no longer speaking of Sebastian Bach assembling his congregation in front of the organ in church, or summoning a connoisseur or colleague to a competition; a wide gap separated the wonderful master of fugue from those who cultivated the sonata. They learned the art of fugue as a means of consolidating their musical studies but applied it to the sonata only as a learned device. The raw consequences of pure counterpoint gave place to pleasure in stable eurhythmics: only the completion of its pattern in the sense of Italian euphony appeared to meet the demands of the music.

[Anonymous No.19494461]

>>19494360
The greatest joy I ever had was picking up a book about classical music in high school, opening to the Bach chapter, and seeing the quote "The most stupendous miracle in all of music" by Richard Wagner on the first page. I felt vindicated; no one ever listened to me when I said Bach was unparalleled in the music world, and now here was a great modernish composer most normies would recognize lauding my favorite composer.

[Anonymous No.19494464]

>>19494441
he gets btfo by the greek dramatists any day... so no

[Anonymous No.19494467]

>>19494393
Kill yourself with your reddit pseud taste. Gould bastardized Bach, a crime which is unforgivable and merits death. The variance in playing speed, the half-pressed notes, the piano itself are all intolerable. Funny enough, earlets who "listen" to Gould are almost always idiots playing compressed files off youtube or spotify or whatever and are too deaf and mentally dumb to process his incessant humming, durrrrrring and mumbling when playing the Piano. If I could go back in the past and strangle the frail son of a bitch, I would. He RUINED the greatest music of all time.

[Anonymous No.19494479]

>>19494444
Because Gould is for for normies who want to massacre Bach's music.

His playing sounds horrible and his humming is gay.

[Anonymous No.19494486]

>>19494360
It's Murakami.
Next question.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19494489]

The easy way of overcoming this is understanding that at a literary-aesthetic appreciation level, it is neither prose fiction nor verse which is the most ornate and satisfying literary constructions, but rather philosophical and religious texts, if you want the complexity and appreciation and Christianity of Bach for example, he is easily available in Hegel, in fichte and Leibniz, for whether we accept or deny their ontological models, we must admit as an artifice these are the most complex and beautiful creations which harmonize the most diverse strands of ideas, sensations and logics, and what narrative is more grand than that of first principles producing the entirety of history? Thus the great philosophers like Abhinavagupta are more than the equal of Bach, and why when we reach the height of non-philosophical literature they likewise tend towards the philosophical fused with the sensual, see Goethe and Dante, or the many religious epics such as the Mahabharata or the more extreme literary works of Magha and Bhairavi and Kalidasa which all blend human psychology, long and diverse plot narratives, extreme writing styles which make Joyce look like a joke, humor and are all excessively religious, I will post some feats of Magha and then of the Jain text siribhoovalaya both from Wikipedia to show you what is out there.

Cantos where the stanzas can have opposite meanings.

Example

kṛta-gopa-vadhū-rater ghnato
vṛṣam ugre narake 'pi saṃprati
pratipattir adhaḥkṛtainaso
janatābhis tava sādhu varṇyate

which can mean either:

You delighted the cowherds and their wives by killing Demon Buffalo and cracking down on crime. Now your action against the formidable demon Naraka is winning the enthusiastic approval of the people.

OR

By having sex with the wives of the cowherds you acted criminally and slaughtered justice. Now that your career has hit rock bottom, the people say you got what you deserved.

Extreme letter repetition

jajaujojājijijjājī
taṃ tato'titatātatut
bhābho'bhībhābhibhūbhābhū-
rārārirarirīraraḥ

"Then the warrior, winner of war, with his heroic valour, the subduer of the extremely arrogant beings, he who has the brilliance of stars, he who has the brilliance of the vanquisher of fearless elephants, the enemy seated on a chariot, began to fight."

dādado duddaduddādī dādado dūdadīdadoḥ
duddādaṃ dadade dudde dādādadadado'dadaḥ

"Sri Krishna, the giver of every boon, the scourge of the evil-minded, the purifier, the one whose arms can annihilate the wicked who cause suffering to others, shot his pain-causing arrow at the enemy."

Extreme palindrome

Cont

[Anonymous No.19494494]

>>19494489
In non-nerd speak?

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19494520]

>>19494489
sa kā ra nā nā ra kā sa
kā ya sā da da sā ya kā
ra sā ha vā vā ha sā ra
nā da vā da da vā da nā
(and the lines reversed)
nā da vā da da vā da nā
ra sā ha vā vā ha sā ra
kā ya sā da da sā ya kā
sa kā ra nā nā ra kā sa
"[That army], which relished battle (rasāhavā) contained allies who brought low the bodes and gaits of their various striving enemies (sakāranānārakāsakāyasādadasāyakā), and in it the cries of the best of mounts contended with musical instruments (vāhasāranādavādadavādanā)."

And we see in him and his predecessor Bhairavi extreme homophonic-rhyme of stanzas such as this.

vikāśamīyurjagatīśamārgaṇā vikāśamīyurjagatīśamārgaṇāḥ |
vikāśamīyurjagatīśamārgaṇā vikāśamīyurjagatīśamārgaṇāḥ ॥

Translation: "The arrows (mārgaṇāḥ), of the king (jagatīśa) Arjuna spread out (vikāśam īyuḥ). The arrows (mārgaṇāḥ), of the lord of the earth (jagatīśa) [i.e. Śiva], spread out (vikāśam īyuḥ). The Gaṇas (gaṇāḥ) who are the slayers of demons (jagatīśamār) rejoiced (vikāśam īyuḥ). The seekers (mārgaṇāḥ) of Śiva (jagatīśa) [i.e. the deities and sages], reached (īyuḥ) the sky (vikāśam) [to watch the battle]. "

And this poetic line has never seized as Indians never had a period of loss of meaning or decline of art, meaning they still have poets working and praised, here is a bit from Jagadguru Ramanandacharya Swami Rambhadracharya who has written multiple epic poems all with similar complexities, he is living still and he is blind, he tells his assistants what to write.

Consider the play of homophone

lalāmamādhuryasudhābhirāmakaṃ lalāmamādhuryasudhābhirāmakam ।
lalāmamādhuryasudhābhirāmakaṃ lalāmamādhuryasudhābhirāmakam ॥


Means

“Him, who was with the charm of the Tripuṇḍra and whose favourite deity was Rāma; him, who was bearing the axle of the lustre of the ornament [in the form of the nascent moon] and who was agreeable by this joy; him, who was the protector of the bearer of the onus of Dharma with the power of his eminence; and him, who was endowed with the refuge of Rāma owing to the pleasantness of the resplendence of the bull-sign which stands for righteousness.”

Watch this play of consonance.

kaḥ kau ke kekakekākaḥ kākakākākakaḥ kakaḥ ।
kākaḥ kākaḥ kakaḥ kākaḥ kukākaḥ kākakaḥ kukaḥ ॥
kākakāka kakākāka kukākāka kakāka ka ।
kukakākāka kākāka kaukākāka kukākaka ॥
lolālālīlalālola līlālālālalālala ।
lelelela lalālīla lāla lolīla lālala ॥

Which means

Cont

[Anonymous No.19494526]

>>19494464
>he gets btfo by the greek dramatists any day

Why do you think so?

[Anonymous No.19494536]

>>19494415
How did Gould bastardize bach?

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19494539]

>>19494520
The Supreme God (kaḥ) (Rāma) [is resplendent] on [both] the earth (kau) and in Sāketaloka (ke); from him there is pleasure in the universe and in the sound of the peacock (kekakekākaḥ); he takes pleasure and bliss in the caw of the [Kākabhuśuṇḍi] crow (kākakākākakaḥ); from him there is pleasure for all the worlds (kakaḥ); for him the pain [of exile] is a pleasure (kākaḥ); his crow ([Kākabhuśuṇḍi]) is praiseworthy (kākaḥ); from him there is pleasure for Brahmā (kakaḥ); he calls out [to the devotees] (kākaḥ); from him there is pleasure for Kukā or Sītā (kukākaḥ); he calls out to the [Kākabhuśuṇḍi] crow (kākakaḥ); and from him there are worldly fruits and the bliss of liberation (kukaḥ). ॥ 20.92 ॥

O the one who from whom there was pain on the head of the [Jayanta] crow (kākakāka); O the one from whom there is pleasure in [all] beings (kaka); please come, please come (āka āka); O the one from whom there is pleasure for Sītā (kukāka); please come (āka); O the one from whom there is pleasure for the universe (kaka); please come (āka); O Lord (ka); O one who invites to himself those who find pleasure in the [mortal] world (kukaka); please come, please come (āka āka); O the one from whom there is pleasure for both Brahmā and Viṣṇu (kāka); please come (āka); O the one from whom there is pleasure on the earth (kauka); please come, please come (āka āka); O the one who is called out to [for protection] by the evil crow [Jayanta] (kukākaka), [please come]. ॥ 20.93 ॥
O the one who is playful with a row of locks of wavering hair (lolālālīlala); O the one who never changes (alola); O the one whose mouth is full of saliva in the pastimes [as a child] (līlālālālalālala); O the one who accepts the wealth of earth (Sītā) in the sport [of breaking the bow of Śiva] (lelelela); O the one who destroys the multitude of worldly desires of mortals (lalālīla); O the child [form of Rāma] (lāla); O the one who destroys the fickle-minded nature of the being (lolīla); [may you ever] delight [in my mind] (lālala). ॥ 20.94 ॥

And all of this, mind you, is with a mastery of broader poetics, Hindu philosophy, drama and so forth. All of these extreme poetic feats are logical and relevant within the narrative.

Now I will show you aspects from the Siribhoovalaya which is the greatest Jain poem.

I will quote from Wikipedia showing that this is all commonly accepted fact.

> The Siribhoovalaya (Kannada: ಸಿರಿಭೂವಲಯ) is a work of multi-lingual literature written by Kumudendu Muni, a Jain monk. The work is unique in that it employs not alphabets, but is composed entirely in Kannada numerals.[1] The Saangathya metre of Kannada poetry is employed in the work. It uses numerals 1 through 64 and employs various patterns or bandhas in a frame of 729 (27×27) squares to represent alphabets in nearly 18 scripts and over 700 languages

(pic related is a page)
Cont

[Anonymous No.19494542]

>>19494479
I think that Glenn saved Bach from transcendental kitsch, somehow, inherent to him. Bach without him is gay normie shit.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19494546]

>>19494539
(Pic related, the code-poem itself)

> The work is said to have around 600,000 verses, nearly 6 times as big as the ancient Indian epic Mahabharata. Totally there are 26 chapters constituting it a big volume of which only three have been decoded.

That anon, means it runs over 70k pages.

I will post the various decoding methods.

>>19494494
In non-nerd speak, they exist they’re just either philosophy itself or such extreme works that normies don’t end up learning about them in English.

[Anonymous No.19494547]

>>19494467
Slit your throat frendo.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19494548]

>>19494546

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19494551]

>>19494548

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19494561]

>>19494551
>contain valuable information about various sciences including mathematics, chemistry, physics, astronomy, medicine, history,

[Anonymous No.19494568]

>>19494536
The idea that Bach can be bastardise is just pseudo-ramblings. It is the virtue of Bach's music that it can so easily lend itself to diminution and augmentation while retaining its musical coherence. Bach himself didn't leave many instructions on his manuscript for performance. The 14 Goldberg Ground are not even written at length but in shorthand:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6h6AabkLvEE

The cadenzas of his fantasias and toccatas are rarely ever written out. He writes them in chord-form so that the performer can arpeggiate them as they fancy.

Finally, unlike the stale, academic and unimaginative practices that lay pseuds often seem to ascribe to Bach or classical music as such, Bach and for that matter, all the canonical masters, placed a heavy emphasis on improvisation and capturing the spontaneity of the creative activity that is musical composition.

Bach was not some kind of petrified intelligence. He was Spirit

[Anonymous No.19494617]

>>19494360

This is one of those supreme moments of art:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsgklCZA1bI

Like this:

For Orpheus' lute was strung with poets' sinews,
Whose golden touch could soften steel and stones,
Make tigers tame and huge leviathans
Forsake unsounded deeps to dance on sands.

(...)

Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

(...)

No matter where; of comfort no man speak:
Let’s talk of graves, of worms, and epitaphs;
Make dust our paper and with rainy eyes
Write sorrow on the bosom of the earth,
Let’s choose executors and talk of wills:
And yet not so, for what can we bequeath
Save our deposed bodies to the ground?
Our lands, our lives and all are Bolingbroke’s,
And nothing can we call our own but death
And that small model of the barren earth
Which serves as paste and cover to our bones.
For God’s sake, let us sit upon the ground
And tell sad stories of the death of kings;
How some have been deposed; some slain in war,
Some haunted by the ghosts they have deposed;
Some poison’d by their wives: some sleeping kill’d;
All murder’d: for within the hollow crown
That rounds the mortal temples of a king
Keeps Death his court and there the antic sits,
Scoffing his state and grinning at his pomp,
Allowing him a breath, a little scene,
To monarchize, be fear’d and kill with looks,
Infusing him with self and vain conceit,
As if this flesh which walls about our life,
Were brass impregnable, and humor’d thus
Comes at the last and with a little pin
Bores through his castle wall, and farewell king!
Cover your heads and mock not flesh and blood
With solemn reverence: throw away respect,
Tradition, form and ceremonious duty,
For you have but mistook me all this while:
I live with bread like you, feel want,
Taste grief, need friends: subjected thus,
How can you say to me, I am a king?

[Anonymous No.19494821]

>>19494542
The Gouldfag exposes himself as not really caring about Bach.

>>19494568
The freedom inherent in performing Bach does not mean all performances are equally valid or uncriticisable you moron. My favourite performers of Bach are Richter and Fischer, neither of which belong to the so-called conservative school of performing Bach in frozen tempi. The fact that you assume I must be such a conservative (believing in no emotion or freedom whatsoever in performing Bach) simply because I dislike Gould shows you don't know anyone beyond Gould (which is generally the rule for Gouldfags). Furthermore, it's ridiculous to claim that the importance of improvisation in the traditional performance of classical refutes any cry for authenticity to the original work. Gould likes rhythm better than Bach's figures, in this he was not authentic to Bach.

Gould makes Bach 'fun', he's for people that don't actually like classical, who don't know the emotional depth of Bach, which is why Zappa said he only liked Bach played by Gould. Gould is the biggest 'lay pseud' performer imaginable, even more so than the dead conservatives. Gould is just an eccentric and talented autist who shouldn't be taken too seriously.

[Anonymous No.19494865]

For me, it's Mieko Miyazaki's "Koto Sebastian Bach 2000".

[Anonymous No.19494892]

>>19494821
Please control your illiteracy. First, I didn't call you a conservative. I called you a lay pseud. Secondly, I didn't say all Bach performances are equal. I said the idea that Bach can be bastardised is pseud ramblings. Doesn't mean that there aren't tasteful and distasteful takes on Bach, e.g., performing a lament on a fundamental bass at breakneck speed. Thirdly, no where do I claim that the importance of improvisation refutes 'authenticity'. I suggest that the idea that 'authenticity' is even necessarily something that the canonical masters prioritised in performance is lay pseud wishful thinking. Mozart's reorchestrations of Haendel are well known, as are Wagner's augmentations of Beethoven symphonies, even going so far to add new notes. Bach cared little for authenticity in his various adaptions of other composers works. 'Traditional', i.e., historically informed performances are a very recent phenomenon.
I don't know if you're talking about Karl Richter or Sviatoslav Richter, but the former is well known for his romanticisations of Bach.
I myself am indifferent to Gould and also prefer Sokolov and Fischer to him. Your childish vitriol, however, betrays the pool-like depth of your understanding

[Anonymous No.19494978]

>>19494892
>First, I didn't call you a conservative.
Reply to my post when you learn to read. There is not a single response here which is not the result of misunderstanding what I said. The oh so dry performances of Bach (and everyone else) today which you spoke of are the result of a reaction against the perceived Romantic styles of performance which dominated the twentieth century, so that means supposedly historically accurate instruments and tempo and so on. You assumed I followed the 'academic' interpretations of Bach. Now do you want me to spoonfeed you everything? Delete your post and try again.

[Anonymous No.19495007]

>>19494978
Stop pretending to be glib when you know you're dense.

>Finally, unlike the stale, academic and unimaginative practices that lay pseuds often seem to ascribe to Bach or classical music as such, Bach and for that matter, all the canonical masters, placed a heavy emphasis on improvisation and capturing the spontaneity of the creative activity that is musical composition.

Is a general statement about lay pseuds. You took issue with my claim on improvisation and I refuted you for clarity. If you felt attacked by my dismissal of those who insist on ascribing stale, academic interpretations to Bach or classical music as such, then you deserve to be attacked.

[Anonymous No.19495141]

>>19495007
>Is a general statement about lay pseuds.
No, it was a statement about anyone who doesn't worship Gould-awful playing (haha).

Now you can't seriously expect to me to reply to your post which so continuously misunderstands what I said, and refuses to be precise. One only needs to look at how you take offence at the possibility of Bach being bastardised, yet you accept there can be 'distasteful takes'. That's a ridiculous technical offence. And all your spouting about authenticity is under the assumption that, again, I am a conservative in performance. Or that I believe to be authentic to a piece means strict formalism. Or that performing a piece is at all the same as creatively using a piece or parts of it for one's own intentions. That's an important distinction. It's ironic that you mention Wagner, since he believed his formal 'augmentations' of classical works were more authentic to the original emotion, he made no alterations just on the whim of creating something unique.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.19495909]

Bumping for the possibility of learning about high quality lit, and I’ll throw in something controversial, to me this is as good and at times better than Bach’s best. This specific song with this specific singer. I say this as a person who will call Bach the best as a whole.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrjnelUsbZI

Translation;

Shining in the rosy light of morning,
the air heavy
with blossom and scent,
full of every
unthought-of-joy,
a garden invited me

and, beneath a wondrous tree there,
richly hung with fruit,
to behold in blessed dream of love,
boldly promising fulfilment
to the highest of joy's desires,
the most beautiful woman:
Eva in Paradise.

In the evening twilight, night enfolded me;
on a steep path
I had approached
a spring
of pure water,
which laughed enticingly to me:
there beneath a laurel-tree,
with stars shining brightly through its leaves,
in a poet's waking dream I beheld,
holy and fair of countenance,
and sprinkling me with the precious water,
the most wonderful woman,
the Muse of Parnassus!

Most gracious day,
to which I awoke from a poet's dream!
The Paradise of which I had dreamed
in heavenly, new-transfigured splendour
lay bright before me,
to which the spring laughingly now showed me the path;
she, born there,
my heart's elect,
earth's loveliest picture,
destined to be my Muse,
as holy and grave as she is mild,
was boldly wooed by me;
in the sun's bright daylight,
through victory in song, I had won
Parnassus and Paradise

[Anonymous No.19495948]

>>19494542
Literally the worst post I have ever seen on the internet

[Anonymous No.19496166]

I fucking love Bach, but why are you spamming him here all the time? This is probably the most counter-productive thing you could do if you want to make people love Bach you fucking spazz.
Also, how come this thread so fucking autistic? I mean even without the OP this thread is fucking autastic. Strange.
> https://youtu.be/zMf9XDQBAaI (St. John Passion, BWV 245)
> https://youtu.be/ZwVW1ttVhuQ (St. Matthew Passion, BWV 244)
> https://youtu.be/LJts7bpW2VE (The Christmas Oratorio, BWV 248)

[Anonymous No.19496538]

>>19495948
this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bL2qhrGeJA
this surpasses all other bach pieces or interpretations.

[Anonymous No.19496597]

>>19494441
Shakespeare is not one tenth as good as Bach.

[Anonymous No.19496663]

>>19494441
shake that pear e is nothing compared to any old composer

[Anonymous No.19496677]

>>19495909
>this specific singer.
Why though? It's been sung, conducted and performed better by others on tape (even if it's not exactly the same scene):

https://youtu.be/PsHtqVTJ_6k?t=1944

[Anonymous No.19496701]

>>19494360
Tolkien

[Anonymous No.19496714]

>>19496701
He could be the Bach of his own made-up world, but definitely not literature overall.

[Anonymous No.19496753]

>>19494821
>The Gouldfag exposes himself as not really caring about Bach.
Actually I just made that joke where I said I'm not a Jew, everyone else is not me. I just like performances where things are played more slowly because apparently 99.9% of the best pianists are hacks who do not understand that it sounds better if you play it more slowly.

[Anonymous No.19496779]

>>19496753
gould was abled to play how we wanted because he dropped out of public performances and just focused on studio recordings, so he didnt had to be a super virtuoso to catch the masses attention

[Anonymous No.19496835]

>>19496779
Yeah I do not really care, I just like it when they play the piano piece slowly. There are probably many better pianists, whose name I don't know, but they all play faster. Obviously they care about music less than Gould, who may be a shitty pianist but apparently insisted that the execute the piece at half the tempo. That automatically makes him better than any of the better pianists in my book. One time I've seen I think a Ravel piece, played by one of these mega-prodigies, and he went over a section that I found so beatiful in such a short time that it made no sense anymore. It absolutely sucked, I do not understand how someone can be so skilled on the piano and not understand that what he played was obviously played wrong, and not feel ashamed that he played it so wrong.

[Anonymous No.19496850]

I love Bach, but the Brandenberg Concertos are boring and the Air on the G String is a fucking snore.

[Anonymous No.19496879]

>>19496597

You never tried writing before.

[Anonymous No.19496880]

>>19496835
I've noticed this with a specific Handel segment that people usually just call "passacaglia". This is among my favorite pieces of music ever but every single recording of it I can find plays it too quickly. Years ago there was this one video on YouTube that I found that played it at the speed I like, it had been arranged for an orchestra, but I haven't been able to find that video in a long time.

I have to assume that the way I like it played is the "wrong" way based on almost nobody plays it at that speed. The relative prominence of the different voices is also dramatically different in that one orchestra recording

[Anonymous No.19496915]

>>19494617
>For Orpheus' lute was strung with poets' sinews,
>Whose golden touch could soften steel and stones,
>Make tigers tame and huge leviathans
>Forsake unsounded deeps to dance on sands

Two nice surrealistic images (sinews... / leviathans...) strung together by easy alliterations and Petrarchist clichés ("whose golden touch could soften steel and stones / make tigers tame...") and he's already a genius writing one of the supreme moments of art...
And of course, the whole depiction of Orpheus a cliché too. Nothing new added to the myth, just another, the 99339282838818th to be more precise, description of Orpheus taming beasts written in that century or thereabouts. At least Monteverdi added some music to it, no?
Shakespeare is so overrated.

[Anonymous No.19496987]

>>19496835
you may like this channel then https://www.youtube.com/c/AuthenticSound

its some dude who talks about why music should be played on half the tempo and has this whole historical theory. Beyond that whole thing its the performances he makes, i feel like you would like them https://youtu.be/aZZMuX6-1Sw?list=PLackZ_5a6IWVXw7KJqLvt4v2nPMa76O9S

[Anonymous No.19497004]

>>19496987
https://youtu.be/ne_zm92IDAA?list=PLackZ_5a6IWVXw7KJqLvt4v2nPMa76O9S
this piece specificaly you can actually see how much it improves, compared to a standard performance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v17BIT7-3Mw

[Anonymous No.19497182]

>>19494467
t. Wertheimer

[Anonymous No.19497234]

>>19496987
>>19497004
Can't see right now but thank you so much anon. A kindred soul!

[Anonymous No.19497960]

>>19494360
/lit/bros...we lost

[Anonymous No.19497974]

>>19494360
This just describes Shakespeare. He was all those things.

[Anonymous No.19498004]

>>19496915

If you can’t see the brilliance of the savage image of the sinews of poets being ripped out to be used as strings and the Job-Poet-tier vision of the capacity of enchanting leviathans, the beasts of chaos itself, the cattle of doomsday, and making them surface to dance like little girls on the sands of the beach, if you can’t see just how beautiful this is and how different from the works of any other poet (try to see the same bold imagery in Petrarch’s love poetry, or even in Marlowe, Spencer, Milton, the Greek lyric poets, hell, even in the sonnets of Dante) you aren’t very sensitive to language.

[Anonymous No.19498010]

>>19494536
It's not Gould alone, all performers trained before the 1970s or so thought it a virtue to put a lot of themselves into their liberal and modern interpretations of Baroque and Renaissance music. Since then a movement called Historically Informed Performance (HIP) has become more popular amongst the cognoscenti, HIP musicians work closely with historians and other scholars in an attempt to recreate the music as it originally sounded, often on period or replica period instruments. For good examples of HIP, look to Ton Koopman, Jordi Savall, or the Netherlands Bach Society.

[Anonymous No.19498255]

>>19497960
Losing to Bach is kinda like losing to Vincent van Gogh. Sure you lost, but you were up against fucking Gogh.

[Anonymous No.19498392]

>>19498004
They're nice surrealist images. I like them, and even memorized them, but it's nothing particularly "supreme", so much so that you're left with an ad hominem as your only response. Other poets have done similarly, including 20th century surrealist ones.

>the savage image
Loads of it in ancient Greek literature, even poets being tortured, including Orpheus himself.
Shakespeare's is in fact derivative of it, a mere variation.

>dancing Leviathans
Even Death itself was made to dance back then, and play chess and whatnot. Such contrasts and extravagant conceptions were common in that age. You see a lot of it in painting too.

[Anonymous No.19499183]

>>19498255
I'm sorry anon, but this post sounds kind like it would merit a soiboy post.

The Op description is over the top and though while it's correct Bach has a broadness in music which is rarely to be found in music or literature, it's missing a more essential understanding of the musical form he worked with in his day and of his unique melodies. More essential because it's a more important description than having 'the playful complexity of Pynchon', which is a second rate comparison.

[Anonymous No.19499271]

>>19498255
>van Gogh
How to tell someone you're a phillistine without telling them you're a phillistine

[Anonymous No.19499459]

>>19498255
Anon... Van Gogh? Really?

[Anonymous No.19499491]

>>19494536
timid presses of the keys and his humming and noise making and sudden ad hoc changes in tempo. it is unlistenable.

[Anonymous No.19499497]

>>19496879
You never tried composing before.

[Anonymous No.19499611]

>>19499459
I couldn't think of another comparison outside of music, sue me.

[Anonymous No.19499641]

>>19499611
Sagent, Velazquez, Bouguereau, Repin, Serov, Gerome...

[Anonymous No.19500577]

>christcuck
>genius
Does not compute

[Anonymous No.19500770]

>>19499497

Did you tried to do both on a high level?

[Anonymous No.19501219]

>>19494865
For me, it's Death Metal Bach.
https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=XnJKhrEWnng&feature=share

[Anonymous No.19502266]

>>19500577
You will never be a genius.