In the case of Sorabji, almost all the positive material I've ever read on him invokes his cranky and dangerous ideas
That fact wouldn't be down to selective reading, would it? And what, in any case, are these "cranky and dangerous ideas" (for the benefit of readers here)...
Those have been discussed in several other threads previously; I don't particularly want to run over the same territory again.
when I invoke those when arguing a rather more negative interpretation, I don't see why it is any different. But I don't think one needs to know those ideas to arrive at some notion of the world-view presented from the music alone.
I'm afraid that I don't really get this. Anyone who has read and heard nothing of Wagner's anti-Semitic (I nearly wrote anti-semiotic by mistake!) writings is unlikely to tune into this as part of a Wagnerian world-view when at a production of
Tristan und Isolde;
Maybe not in that opera, but in
Die Meistersinger or
Siegfried audiences in Wagner's own time, at least, may well have picked up the anti-semitic cliches, well-known as such, that at least arguably informed the characterisations of Beckmesser and Mime.
likewise, I do not see why anyone would pick up the kinds of resonance to which you refer in the Sorabjian context (without naming any of them as such) just by listening to Sorabji's Gulistan, his settings of Verlaine, Mallarmé and Baudelaire or his Fourth Piano Sonata.
Again, I have been through that before (and I picked up on those elements before I'd read any of the writings - the writings confirmed what I heard in the music, rather than vice versa); very quickly, to do with the contrived mysticism, the elimination of the individualised subject and all forms of personalised emotion; essentially the eschewal of all human elements from music. In terms of settings of Verlaine, Mallarmé and Baudelaire, you might want to consider some of the ideologies at play in
their work as well.
But at this point I need to ask you something I've meant to for a while: in one of your essays in Rapoport's book, you say something about Sorabji's adhering to racial theories (I don't have the exact quote in front of me) but then have nothing critical to say about this. Don't you find such things at all disturbing?
You'll need to be more specific here if I am to answer your question more directly[/quote]
I'll have to find the exact quote again when I'm next in a library. I will do so.
in the meantime, what I will say is that, whatever his racial theories may or may not have been, he never paraded them in his music, so they are not present in his scores to be identified by listeners or musicologists
Whether or not it is possible to parade racial theories in music (and, come on, you know exactly what I'm referring to here in terms of his ideas) is an interesting question; certainly I can't imagine one could thoroughly deny that nationalistic ideologies can be expressed in musical terms, nor that much music is often heard in such a way.
- so I return to your own argument that, just as in the case of Shostakovich, the music is more important than the man.
Well, you and other Sorabji-ites seem extremely interested in the man, and in his ideas. Are we going to see those left alone in subsequent writings on Sorabji's work?
Now I do think that further discussion of this ought to be transferred to the Sorabji thread, otherwise some of those who rightly wish to discuss Shostakovich here might get abit annoyed!
Indeed; I will copy this message there.