The variations concluding Op.109 embody two cycles of transformation: the first 5 variations recast the theme and develop its structures and character in a variety of expressive contexts, while the sixth variation initiates a new series of changes, compressed into a single continuous process that is guided by the logical unfolding of rhythmic development. In the final variation an urgent will to overcome the inevitable passing of time and sound seems to fill up the spaces of the slow theme with an unprecedented density of material. This idea was in turn to be expanded by Beethoven into the controlling framework of the variations on the Arietta that conclude Op. 111, the last movement of his sonata."
An unattributed commentary on Beethoven Sonata No. 30 in E major, attended on July13th
It’s time this pseudo-intellectual stuff was consigned to the trashcan of history.
If one were able to talk to Beethoven and show him this interpretation of what he had written, I bet his reaction would be “Excuse me!” It is a truism that the artist will write something, probably spontaneously, and then the commentator will come along (unable to write four bars of listenable music himself) and tell us what the poor guy intended. The arrogance of it!
Excellent post. Pretentious yammerings like the one you quoted provoke a gagging reflex. If you saw “Copying Beethoven,” you can imagine an even more graphic response from the composer than “Excuse me!”
Such meaningless language about music mimics the nonsensical writing of art critics who praise incoherent canvasses and tut-tut us poor philistines who dare call them charlatans. We must label their vacuousness for what it is: “tripe,” as my Canadian father used to label such blatherings.