October 18th, 2006

Trees are not known by their leaves, nor even by their blossoms, but by their fruits.
-Eleanor of Aquitaine (1122-1204)

OK think about that for a moment in the context of, say, the composer Wagner: Not a nice man, Wagner. Petulant, self-centred, vicious sometimes, childish always ... and some folks think he was one of the greatest composers that ever lived. People say similar things about Mozart, both his personality and his historical significance. And since they are both dead—Wagner for more than 120 years and Mozart for more than 200—and we talk about them casually without having to run to a reference book (or website), I guess they are being remembered by the fruits of their labours and not by the stench of their personalities.

Heck, my favourite composer of all time who, by the way, happens to be the greatest composer of all time, J.S. Bach (we use his initials only because there were a lot of other Bachs) was probably a bit tiresome to be around. As wonderful and musically prodigious as he was, I suspect his solid Lutheran work ethic would have obtunded the senses of all lesser men (myself included) so that one would be left doing little more than drooling and trudging after him. As much as his music moves and shapes the world, even now, I think he might well be better left silent so that his music can do the talking for him.

You see, I have a problem here: I personally have huge aversion to certain behaviours and attitudes. I am of the opinion that if someone hasn't got the interpersonal skills to be a real human being (and gawd-amighty the software industry is saturated with people like that), then fuck 'em: fire their unsociable asses the first real opportunity you get and hire people who Get It (at least as far as humans go).

But it's good for us that there were people who thought differently from me, and who still bothered to give Mozart work, despite such brilliant perversions of his talent (there were many) like the canon "Leck mich im Arsch recht fein schön sauber" ("Lick my arse nice and clean")—I kid you not. He may have been a boor and a crude ass, but lots of people admire his music even today with almost religious reverence. I would've had nothing to do with him, and let him have his crudity all to his little self.

(And what do I think of his music? Well, I can see that his work—especially his later darker work—was brilliant, but there's something in Mozart's music that makes it unlistenable for me. Just my own little quirk. Nothing to see here, move along.)

Okay, well my point is not that obnoxious people the world over should be sought out and offered high-paying positions where they are allowed to do whatever they want. Being obnoxious does not mean that one is talented and is writing history with every assholish move. Oh, and there were a lot of nice congenial happy laid-back and polite famous composers, too: Schumann, Bartok, even the somewhat weepy Tchaikovsky, not to mention the prankster but genuinely joyful Vivaldi ... and I'm sure at least some of the Palestrinas.

I guess where I would be a bane on history are in those cases where there was a person capable of achieving greatness, but was a tiresome moron about all else ... I would not have time for that person, and if it were my decision, that person would be marginalised into obscurity. It means that I would not be a friend to history ... well, at least artistic history. It means that I may have inadvertently squashed ill-mannered talent given the opportunity.

I don't feel good about this, but I cannot escape that my intolerance of crappy people blinds me to their accomplishments, no matter how great. I wonder if that means that I also coddle mediocrity in those who are Good Honest People ...

Hmm ...

Top Blogs - Rate my blog - Sign my guestbook - Email me - Go back to index