I think this dead horse has been beaten enough, my friend.

 

This topic cannot be a dead horse. People who consider music as a medium of entertainment would smell the stench of a dead horse and consider flogging it!

 

Whether or not somebody thought their composing was guided by something supernatural, it's still not true. Or at least, there is no evidence to support their claim. And therefore such a claim is outrageous.

 

"no evidence to support their claim" does not equal "not true." I would argue that there is no evidence to disprove the claim. If these quotes are indeed real, then what these people felt was on a personal level, and while that may not be convincing to you, it would be the height of arrogance to claim them untrue and outrageous.

 

I'm still frustrated that you paid no attention to my comments on the Brahms quotation! He may have been condemning his antiquated notion of what an 'atheist' is, but this certainly did not mean that he was endorsing theism!

 

I get my inspiration from the devil. He comes to me in dreams and plays me awesome melodies on a guitar made from Hitler's skeleton. I don't know where I'd be as a composer without the devil. I owe everything to him. Thank you. Thank you.

 

The bible is so mundane.

The Lord Of The Rings is much better!

 

Um, to quote the great Inigo Montoya (The Princess Bride): I do not think it [mundane] means what you think it means.

Do you know the definition of mundane? Here are a few, just culled from www.dictionary.com:
1. of or pertaining to this world or earth as contrasted with heaven; worldly; earthly: mundane affairs.
2. common; ordinary; banal; unimaginative.
3. of or pertaining to the world, universe, or earth.

The bible is mundane? Really? It pertains only to this earth, and gives no though to heaven? It is common, ordinary, banal, and unimaginative? I would submit that people who don't in fact accept it as a divinely inspired book would call it the height of imagination.
Whether or not you accept it as a divinely inspired book, it is widely regarded that much of it, if not all, is very skillfully written, rife with beautiful imagery, symbolism, and poetry.

Tolkien himself would take issue with your comparison of his work with the bible. He was a devout Roman Catholic, and was instrumental in C. S. Lewis' conversion from atheism to Christianity.

 

It's only an article, already doing the world media. The boards editor did ask for articles and I obliged. As long as it makes people think; it evidently does so. It certainly aroused some pretty strong emotions.

 

And while I am not unsympathetic to this notion, some of these anecdotes, particularly on the deaths of Beethoven and Mozart, seem a bit to melodramatic, and I would not be surprised in the least to find that they have been greatly embellished. For some strange reason, we don't consider the great people throughout history to be able to stand on their own merits, so we tend to mythologize them, as if fantastical stories somehow increase their stature. To me, there is greater evidence for divine inspiration in Beethoven in his 9th symphony than in whatever meteorological phenomena were present at his passing. I don't need an incredible story to tell me more than what his own creations tell me.

 

As long as it makes people think;

Come on, does it? There is nothing to think about - if one belives in God then he belives that everything that exists is his creation. If one doesn't belive in God then he doesn't belive that he created music or anything.

 

The greatest classical Spanish guitarist of all time, Andres Segovia had said of (John) Williams:

"A Prince of the Guitar has arrived in the musical world. God has laid a finger on his brow, and it will not be long before his name becomes a byword in England and abroad, thus contributing to the spiritual domain of his race."

 

AMALIA RODRIGUEZ, Iconic Portuguese Fado Singer.

"Even if he doesn't exist, I believe in Him."

 

Says it all really.

I was expecting the "you can't disprove it!" defence! Awesome! And the accusation of being arrogant for thinking it ludicrous somebody believes in some mythology! Somebody is going to play the "getting offended" card. I have a gut feeling of it!

This is almost certainly a waste of time, but what the hell. You cannot possibly think the fact there is no way of disproving the existence of god, as a good reason for believing him to exist. First of all, you can say that about ALL religions that have ever been made up. Ancient ones that people have grown out of, and modern ones. They cannot all be true. Also, you can not disprove the claim that my left shoe is the reincarnation of Elvis. - Hardly a convincing reason to take the idea seriously.

I'll probably leave it at that, because I struggle to think of anything more futile than trying to reason with people who choose to ignore reason.

 

In a broadly Christian society, it's not surprising that a substantial proportion of its members would have Christian beliefs. You could have produced another list, citing all the famous bricklayers in Europe who also held religious views. In neither case does the fact that a lot of people believe something make it true.

Time was, most people believed the earth is flat. Now, vanishingly few people do. What happened? If the earth really was flat in the old days when - and because - most people believed it was, did it suddenly change form a two dimensional object to a three dimensional one between then and now?

Was a simple majority of people believing the world is round sufficient for it suddenly to pop into its new shape, or was a two thirds majority needed? Or maybe it gradually changed from two to three dimensions as the numbers of believers in roundness grew.

Or perhaps it really was two dimensional when it was being perceived by someone who believed it was, but simultaneously three dimensional when perceived by someone else of the opposite faith - sorry, belief.

 

....the word is 'inspiration' for a reason... it comes from 'spirit'... and anyone that has ever been struck all at once by sudden understanding, a new perspective - an unlooked for solution, I suspect can understand it. Someone who has been in, for lack of a better term... a trance like state while absorbed in the creation of - well anything really, and then looked at it with wonder after the fact can understand. Solving a problem, sculpting something that has a trace of beauty in it, there are million examples I suppose. Its only happened to me a couple of times... when I used to draw... and again later on when I was doing something fairly technical.

anyway... I digress...

I think to belittle the notion is near sighted and silly. To ridicule it is juvenile. It doesnt matter in the slightest if you do or do not believe in a divine being. I certainly do not. However, I believe that humans (universally) have the capacity to experience - or perceive (real or imagined, again it matters little) considerable awe at being transported to a place where inspiration and solutions strike with otherworldly impact. Life changing impact. religious impact.

And as far as the rest of the world perceiving it? Who here has not been awestruck by a piece of music (since this is a music forum) and thought that there is something more going on than mere craftsmanship.... I would say more than not. Ever seen the sistine chapel? Ever seen some of Leonardos pencil sketches?

and yes... the lord of the rings is simply pregnant with christian symbolism... sam and frodos trudge up mt doom with Frodo bearing the ring (cross), gandalf as wielder of the 'secret fire'.. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Fire ) etc... there is too much to go into... but I find it hilarious that story is being held up as it was in this thread.

In short - I wouldnt be too hasty to discount (or indeed validate) artists beliefs - what matters are the gifts that they give us. Enjoy them, and perhaps spend more time doing so than calculating the validity of divine inspiration or lack thereof.

 

I don't believe in atheists ... therefore they do not exist!

 

Is Music the Creation of Divinity?

HERBERT VON KARAJAN [/B]

...the Creator chooses people as His instruments to produce some beauty in a world that is all too ugly. "

[

Maybe then instead of Beethoven and Brahms, Gods idea of "beautiful" is something more like this:

,,,or is it just the tiny populated genre of Classical music where he "speaks?" I notice Backstreet boys are also on that list...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_albums_in_the_United_States

 

Is Music the Creation of Divinity?

who cares?

btw, please don't say bible is mundane, as well as atheist is devil. it is not GOOD, boy!

 

Is Music the Creation of Divinity?

who cares?...

Exactly.........

 

I've never been much of a fan of the 'argument from personal incredulity', but when I sit with a score in my hand and examine it closely, it staggers me that it could have come from the mind of a man. I feel this less with art, or literature, or architecture, but somehow with music it seems to pass all understanding. I wrote programme notes for a performance of Bruckner 6 two years ago, and spent many a bus ride making notes with Bruckner's score in my hand. How a man can hold that in his head and then get it onto paper leaves me bewildered and amazed.
It wouldn't surprise me if occasionally the composer himself (even one with the ego of Wagner) stood back and thought 'Bugger me, how did I do that?'
cheers,
Graeme

 

I've never been much of a fan of the 'argument from personal incredulity', but when I sit with a score in my hand and examine it closely, it staggers me that it could have come from the mind of a man. I feel this less with art, or literature, or architecture, but somehow with music it seems to pass all understanding. I wrote programme notes for a performance of Bruckner 6 two years ago, and spent many a bus ride making notes with Bruckner's score in my hand. How a man can hold that in his head and then get it onto paper leaves me bewildered and amazed.
It wouldn't surprise me if occasionally the composer himself (even one with the ego of Wagner) stood back and thought 'Bugger me, how did I do that?'
cheers,
Graeme

Best line of this entire thread! It got an instant grin from me.

 

The only thing we can say for certain is that much sublime music by the masters were inspired by their God, composed to glorify their religion. It's interesting, that's all I can say, but if one composer wrote something great becasue he was inspired by a block of wood instead or by simply breathing in oxygen, then so be it.

 

Many great musicians truly believed that their pens, as they composed, were guided by a divine spirit.

Why then were the pens of many lesser composers who may have been just as (or more) religious as the greats not guided by that same divine spirit?

 

the assumption that we believe in God in this thread is something... not just God but someone's idea of what God should be

 

I just want to say how jarringly arrogant it sounds (especially for contemporary artists) to claim the hand of divinity in anything. On the one hand, it may seem like a humble thing to say - 'such creations transcend the human capacity and so must be given to us by a higher being' - but it simultaneously suggests that these creations by mortals are so wonderful, so mind-bogglingly glorious, that they simply must be divine!

Besides, if God does exist, surely every attribute ever dished out to any human being that has ever walked the earth - be it Mozart or Hitler - has been given his lot by God, so surely it doesn't matter in the least if a composer is touched by Him. Is that not just stating the obvious? No, of course not, it's the reiteration of something illogical to boost the ego...

 

No - and here I don't want to get into a religious debate, so I hope you don't misconstrue what I am about to say - but most people who claim a belief in some higher power - be it the Judeo-Christian God, or whatever - will tell you that various people are given diverse talents, and those we characterize as geniuses in their fields are typically those who very successfully identified, and fully utilized, the talents instilled in them. I, for one, do not believe that I was granted any special musical or artistic talents, and so while I might try my hand in these areas, while technically you could say that if I am truly one of God's creations, his hand directed me in my actions for good, that doesn't give my output greater bearing than someone with true talent in that area.

I acknowledge that those who do not believe in the existence of a higher power will not accept such explanations - I'm not trying to persuade one way or another. I am just presenting my perspective, as one who does. Some people have been given greater talents in certain areas, and if they fully utilize them, accomplish amazing things, above and beyond the ordinary.

I don't think it is arrogance. It is akin to a child taking immense pride in accomplishing something with the help of a parent - something the child alone was not capable of producing, but with the help of another, was amazed at what they had done.

 

This is the third time this same topic has come up, each time by the same person. The two previous threads are:

http://www.talkclassical.com/6543-great-musicians-gods-voice.html

and

http://www.talkclassical.com/7851-pen-hand-divine-spirit.html

What, therefore, is the point of this one, other than to stir up anti-religious controversy all over again?

 

Ah, I actually hadn't made that connection.
Although, as anybody who has read my posts in these threads knows, I am a person who does have deep-set religious beliefs, I think that this constantly poking this beast with a stick is starting to look like trolling.

I am divided on this issue. Certainly it is a valid topic, given the vast catalog of religious-themed music in the all-encompassing pantheon of "classical" music. And certainly many of the composers we revere were self-identified men of faith. On the one hand, I think it somewhat petty for non-believers to jump into a discussion for no reason other than to ridicule those beliefs, or to insert extraneous comments that contribute nothing positive to the discussion. Far too many people have lost the ability to disagree without being disagreeable. It is a valid argument to make in saying that you don't in fact believe that any higher power influenced the creation of these musical works. It seems like a ridiculous point, though, to then say that these people had no divine influence, and furthermore such notions are . . . . . (fill in whatever derogatory statement you wish). It seems equally foolish to deny religious influence on the creations of people that were devoutly religious, and credited their faith for their accomplishments. Whether or not there is a higher power, there is significant evidence that having faith in something, whether real or not, can have beneficial results.

At the same time, if we have already discussed a point, debated it to death, gotten into heated arguments over it, and finally walked away, to then repost the exact same thing, in a slightly different manner, seems more like a childish desire to stir up a hornets' nest and watch the reaction. If you have a new idea to post, great. If it is dragging the same dead horse from its grave, over and over, for one more kick, as this thread seems to be, that does nothing to strengthen your argument, and appears childish.

 

I repeat: After giving it a worldwide airing, in which it was favourably received, I noticed that CMF was inviting articles and thought, why not post it? It was not intended to wind anyone up. May I suggest, agreeably, that if you react badly to it then it is you who have the problem; not me. Why on earth can't you respect the opinions and beliefs of others without this juvenile bickering over the articles merits or otherwise.

 

It just seems kind of pointless to post it again, if it has already been posted here. If your intentions were innocent, I apologize for my comments, but it still seems to not be necessary to create 3 threads on the same article.

 

Well, if the mods wish to remove the two other threads I think he or she should feel at liberty to do so. I couldn't agree more; I am surprised at the level of polarised opinions; the anti-Christian comments; the intolerance, the flaming, offensive insults. We have all heard of Islamaphobia but many of the comments could best be described as Christaphobia.

 

Don't worry, I'm sure they hate all religion equally.

 

Even if it was proven that subscribing to some religion was a somehow a good thing. It's still not true. They're still all a bunch of primitive made up stories with literally no evidence to support them.

 

Subscribing to a (monotheistic) religion is to say; "I submit to total obedience and I have no problem with being watched and judged my whole life".

Sounds a bit like 1984.

 

Thinking that any religion is true also gives up the main thing which seperates us from other animals. Our capability for reasoning. At least, more advanced reasoning than any other animals. Yet people still believe in things like religions/astrology/homeopathy/etc. There are just no words that I know of that adequately describe how absurd they all are. And we are supposedly the smart species!

Would people not feel uneasy, for example, if you go to a doctor, (someone you are trusting with your health. You are trusting they have listened to your story, read the research, and come to reasonable recommendations based in reason and evidence), and then find out they believe in the Easter Bunny? Would it not shake your trust that this person is reliable?

 

Thinking that any religion is true also gives up the main thing which seperates us from other animals. Our capability for reasoning. At least, more advanced reasoning than any other animals. Yet people still believe in things like religions/astrology/homeopathy/etc. There are just no words that I know of that adequately describe how absurd they all are. And we are supposedly the smart species!

Would people not feel uneasy, for example, if you go to a doctor, (someone you are trusting with your health. You are trusting they have listened to your story, read the research, and come to reasonable recommendations based in reason and evidence), and then find out they believe in the Easter Bunny? Would it not shake your trust that this person is reliable?

Ugh, not another Easter Bunny example! Better than that lame flying spaghetti monster, at least.

Surely someone who excels at reason must realize God and the Easter Bunny are two very different entities. The only comparisons are superficial and completely miss the point.

Even if it was proven that subscribing to some religion was a somehow a good thing. It's still not true. They're still all a bunch of primitive made up stories with literally no evidence to support them.

You're not understanding that faith is not about having evidence! Also, you're adding insults into the mix which is totally unnecessary.

Here's a question for you - what good do Atheists do to help the people within their community? How about in comparison to a church? When was the last Atheist "build a house in Mexico" project?