The Master's Voice: What we know of Bach, and may never comprehend | Hacker News Reader

The Master's Voice: What we know of Bach, and may never comprehend

weeklystandard.com

84 pointstintinnabula24 comments

The article compares Bach to Handel saying "not a single work of Bach’s is more beloved than Handel’s Messiah—and this is owing to that oratorio’s undeniable, ineffable charm," and apparently Bach doesn't have charm.

Handel's Messiah is popular in England because it was written in England, in English, at a time when English municipal choirs were really gaining popularity (choirs competed between towns, and police had to be dispatched to stop brawls, just like footballers today). Bach's work hadn't yet been translated into English yet, and by the time they made it to the islands the age of choirs was dying down (although Britain still has wonderful choirs).

As for the lack of charm in Bach, listen to this melody and tell me it doesn't have charm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5kc5IxtbBk

It definitely has 'charm.'

In today's perspective on how classical music should be played, it's easy to forget that Bach didn't demand his music played as written. He saw written music as a mere suggestion, not a directive. Bach refused to take on any student who didn't show a knack for improvisation and composition.

In the world of Bach's music, if the performer wanted something charming, then he or she would alter the sheet music and play it with charm, but if they wanted that same piece to be sinister, then it was played and expressed as such.

Indeed, look at the English suites, large parts of which are relatively sparse, calling out for improvisation.

> It definitely has 'charm.'

That's actually a good example of what the author is (probably) talking about.

The link you gave takes Bach's originally 3/4 setting of the melody and "decompresses" it by stretching it to fit in 4/4 time. The cover version multiplies the duration of the first note of each measure by two. That gives the melody a more lyrical, singing quality.

Also, the imitative countermelody of the bass is removed and replaced with a more regular guitar accompaniment.

Hence, charm. :)

>The article compares Bach to Handel saying "not a single work of Bach’s is more beloved than Handel’s Messiah

Yeah, that's a very bizarro thing to say. Globally, and pretty much everywhere outside England Bach is 20 times more popular than Handel. Air, Toccata and Fugue in D minor, Goldberg Variations, Brandenburg Concertos, ...

It's like some guy from Romania saying that O-Zone are bigger than the Beatles or something...

Handel's "Messiah" is NOT more beloved. Handel's "Hallelujah Chorus" FROM the Messiah might be.

Handel's "Messiah" will try the patience of even the most avid classical music lover.

That's a ridiculously subjective opinion (redundant?). There's a reason its such a beloved Christmastime piece, and I can say at least for me Hallelujah is not my favorite chorus.

It is quite a ridiculously subjective opinion. No doubt. :)

However, I have yet to go with somebody to see a full performance of the Messiah and have them be happy.

Admittedly, I have a small sample size (7 times with probably 12 people), but it's really not to the taste of most people.

On the other hand, I have been to 3 organ concerts of Bach with other people and they always rave about it afterward.

Shrug. Make of it what you will.

This tune is not, as previously believed, Bach.

Which is not to say that Bach does not have charm. He has plenty.

[Edit: typo]

Charm is also in Bach's works for lute eg. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8QhlrczGOU, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3GsparAiVQ

Wow! TIL: Minuette in G Major was not written by Bach.

I agree there is plenty of charming music written by Bach.

https://youtu.be/TYjqnlc7MRw https://youtu.be/KyWOIKCtjiw

In terms of their overall output, I think Bach tends more toward music that sounds complex, heady, and ornate while Handel's sounds light and lyrical.

For example, listen to the unfinished fugue in C minor, BWV 906[1]. Once all the voices have entered you can hear how there is a kind of game where Bach is trying to cram as many cross-relations into each measure. When he starts sequencing that disjoint tail of the melody it's about as dissonant as music from that period can get. If you heard three people singing this a cappela you'd think they were from Mars.

That's certainly experimental, but there are many other pieces/moments by Bach that are similarly jarring. I'm going to rankly speculate that there is nothing in Handel's output even close to that (in the hopes that it spurs a contrarian to provide me a link).

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrNDV82DVmc (starts about 5:10)

That's ok, the tunes in the Messiah are not original from Handel :D Many of them were lifted from Italian popular songs.

Ha. Well, there goes the upshot of my analysis above.

I'm somewhat convinced by the satirical "Bach Portrait" that makes him out to be pompous and plodding in life and in music. Maybe OT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtW7cu56MRs

Not OT, but low-brow BS. Letters taken out of context, and in the usual form of communication of the times, from a professional musician. Like judging Miles Davis from his communication with his accountants...

And there's nothing pompous about Bach's music. If anything it's too subdued.

What exonerates Bach's music from being assessed by the same modern criteria? What if, what was, back then, known as "composing music" was what we would now, honestly, describe as a laughably narcissistic activity, comparable to Thomas Heatherwick's designs for London buses or the Garden Bridge. The question is not of the status (culturally) of the work, but of its originality. The measure is of invention vs mere elaboration, or concept vs substantial process.

English Conductor Sir. John Eliot Gardiner, who grew up singing and learning Bach cantatas as a child, he has published a lovely book "Bach: Music in the Castle of heaven". I think these lines from the very opening of his book will also enlighten us --

"Bach the musician is an unfathomable genius; Bach the man is all too obviously flawed, disappointingly ordinary and in many ways still invisible to us. In fact we seem to know less about his private life than about that of any other major composer of the last 400 years. Unlike, say, Monteverdi, Bach left behind no intimate family correspondence, and very little beyond the anecdotal has come down to us that can help in painting a more human portrait or to allow a glimpse of him – as son, lover, husband or father. Perhaps there was a fundamental reluctance in him to pull back the curtain and reveal himself; unlike most of his contemporaries, he turned down the opportunity to submit a written account of his life and career when the opportunity arose. The limited, heavily edited version that we have inherited is one he himself spun and handed down to his children. It is not surprising some have concluded that Bach the man is something of a bore."

If you like that, I recommend JS Bach by Albert Schweitzer. A slightly different perspective, but also good.

This is a good time for a shameless plug for All of Bach [1] (Note: I have no affiliation with the site).

[1] http://allofbach.com/en/

Interesting thing not cited in the article: Bach's name is a melody, B-A-C-H, where H is B-flat in german music notation. Various composers used that theme to pay homage like Franz Liszt (Prelude and Fugue on BACH) and Max Reger (Variations and Fugue on a Theme of BACH).

Also it's not cited that most Bach compositions were brought from obscurity by composer Felix Mendelssohn in the 19th century.

> where H is B-flat in german music notation

in german B is called H and B-flat is called B

Sigh. Thanks for the correction.

There's an epic rap battles of history (Bach versus Justin Bieber). When the below comments started talking about Bach's charm I immediately thought of that video. You'll laugh if you have the humor of a teenager.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com