"Benjamin Britten at 100 - time for a new appraisal?"

[Mary Chambers]

LT - I thought your comment about killing in battle was referring to their conscientious objector status later, not to school days - but an objection to training for military life, whatever form that training took, would apply at any age.

The idea of rheumatic fever (I don't think it was 'invented') was an attempt to explain why he developed heart disease, but his Aldeburgh doctor could find no clear history of it so assumed the heart weakness to be congenital. According to his sister, as a child he was considered to have a weak heart, a 'murmur' as the doctor called it.

Of course BB and PP had separate rooms when they became well known. The police could have descended at any time to check on their sleeping arrangements. It doesn't mean they always stayed in them.

I'm not sure what statement by Pears you are referring to.

I apologise if I sounded cross. I admit I was getting a little impatient. I thought I detected certain prejudices, about both his pacifism and his homosexuality. I see others think the same.

[amateur51]

That's how I feel. Others may disagree. I know I'm right.

If you mean that's you're right about your own feelings, I'm not going to disagree Lats.

However if you mean that you're right about most of the foregoing, I must disagree. To paraphrase Dr Johnson, solipsism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

[ahinton]

Others may disagree. I know I'm right.

Well, that just about wraps it all up, does it not? So, come on Mary and other contributors to this thread, let us all abandon our thoughts about and knowledge of Benjamin Britten and think laterally. You know it makes sense.

[Mary Chambers]

Well, that just about wraps it all up, does it not? So, come on Mary and other contributors to this thread, let us all abandon our thoughts about and knowledge of Benjamin Britten and think laterally. You know it makes sense.

[Lateralthinking1]

LT - I thought your comment about killing in battle was referring to their conscientious objector status later, not to school days - but an objection to training for military life, whatever form that training took, would apply at any age.

The idea of rheumatic fever (I don't think it was 'invented') was an attempt to explain why he developed heart disease, but his Aldeburgh doctor could find no clear history of it so assumed the heart weakness to be congenital. According to his sister, as a child he was considered to have a weak heart, a 'murmur' as the doctor called it.

Of course BB and PP had separate rooms when they became well known. The police could have descended at any time to check on their sleeping arrangements. It doesn't mean they always stayed in them.

I'm not sure what statement by Pears you are referring to.

I apologise if I sounded cross. I admit I was getting a little impatient. I thought I detected certain prejudices, about both his pacifism and his homosexuality. I see others think the same.

No, Mary, that is quite alright. I apologise for sounding cross too. I will reply - and to Flosshilde's - but I am sorry. I have to go to the shops now to get some food. The one thing I did see in Flosshilde's was that he suggested the shadowy word I mentioned alluded to homosexuality. It absolutely didn't - it alluded to the themes in some of their music which they probably would have accepted themselves - it was rarely Seaside Special; the sound of some of the music which in itself is not at all a bad thing; but mainly the questions many have raised in connection with Britten's focus. That was the key point. In their relationship, they weren't at all shadowy except on occasions with each other. Pears had his moments elsewhere but even then Britten knew about them so it probably doesn't apply there either. And he wasn't forced into it presumably. It was purely his own choice. Now Tescos!

[vinteuil]

. That's how I feel. Others may disagree. I know I'm right.

Lats, I'm sorry to see you so reduced.

Many of your recent innuendos concerning Britten and Pears have been distasteful.

But - leaving all that aside. You seem to require composers to comply with your own view as to what is "right and proper". But one of the oddest things about human beings is that there seems to be no relationship at all between the "goodness" of a particular human being and the ability of that person to create the most wonderful art. Many composers have been difficult, deeply unpleasant, in some ways 'wicked', people. Rosenmüller, Gombert for example. Or of course Wagner. And writers, painters too - Céline, Picasso. There seems to be little connection between the 'goodness' of a person and his/her ability to produce great art. This may be seen to be sad - but, sadly, it is true.

[Serial_Apologist]

Lats, I'm sorry to see you so reduced.

Many of your recent innuendos concerning Britten and Pears have been distasteful.

But - leaving all that aside. You seem to require composers to comply with your own view as to what is "right and proper". But one of the oddest things about human beings is that there seems to be no relationship at all between the "goodness" of a particular human being and the ability of that person to create the most wonderful art. Many composers have been difficult, deeply unpleasant, in some ways 'wicked', people. Rosenmüller, Gombert for example. Or of course Wagner. And writers, painters too - Céline, Picasso. There seems to be little connection between the 'goodness' of a person and his/her ability to produce great art. This may be seen to be sad - but, sadly, it is true.

In this connection I'm thinking too of RD Laing - no angel, but whose writings on schizophrenia in the late 50s/60s helped enormously in working through serious issues in my own case, and, I know, quite a few others.

[amateur51]

In this connection I'm thinking too of RD Laing - no angel, but whose writings on schizophrenia in the late 50s/60s helped enormously in working through serious issues in my own case, and, I know, quite a few others.

[amateur51]

Lats, I'm sorry to see you so reduced.

Many of your recent innuendos concerning Britten and Pears have been distasteful.

But - leaving all that aside. You seem to require composers to comply with your own view as to what is "right and proper". But one of the oddest things about human beings is that there seems to be no relationship at all between the "goodness" of a particular human being and the ability of that person to create the most wonderful art. Many composers have been difficult, deeply unpleasant, in some ways 'wicked', people. Rosenmüller, Gombert for example. Or of course Wagner. And writers, painters too - Céline, Picasso. There seems to be little connection between the 'goodness' of a person and his/her ability to produce great art. This may be seen to be sad - but, sadly, it is true.

Very well put, vints

We also live in a time when it almost seems vitally necessary for all such cultural idols to be be brought revelation and discussion of this darker side. This, the need to reduce, is human nature of course, but then so is the darker side of us all.

To clarify, in the above I'm referring more to Kildea's need to sell his book than to you, Lats

[Flosshilde]

The one thing I did see in Flosshilde's was that he suggested the shadowy word I mentioned alluded to homosexuality. It absolutely didn't - it alluded to the themes in some of their music which they probably would have accepted themselves -

Lat - that's either complete evasive nonsense, or your post was extremely sloppily written and/or edited. - I quote the full paragraph below; nowhere in it do you mention Britten's work.

Well, they would not have been in battle at age 14. They would have marched up and down a playground with a rifle with no greater military obligation than those who never did so. Orienteering for two days every 18 months at Crowborough as the scouts might do somewhere. A bit of car mechanics in a shed and that would be about their lot. Regrettably, you bow out on a sour note. You have not substantiated some of your comments which are echoed by ahinton. I believe only one of my comments on PP was inaccurate unless you can advise otherwise. That was because I listened to what he said himself. I quoted him but then that very clearly indicates a key problem. If you can't believe what one of them said, what can you believe? They were distinctly shadowy.

If you don't like Britten's music, or find it difficult, I don't think anyone would think the worse of you. Trying to come up with spurious, deeply unpleasant reasons for not liking it creates more doubt about you than about Britten.

[Lateralthinking1]

To all who almost responded:

At least the last dozen posts apart from mine make no reference to children. Seeing that was my main concern, that oversight must have considerable meaning. You tell me what it might be. Several suggest that I am being critical of homosexuality. Please state how and where precisely or retract. Given my positive comments about Ireland, Tippett, Cooke and sympathy for many others in the 1950s, what is your rationale if any? I was accused of making several errors about Pears. What are they please? Can you name one where I didn't quote him directly? If Pears felt oppressed, why did he say to Plomley he had had a lovely life?

Some evidently have problems with the description of life in a school CCF. The entire paragraph has been quoted. What is the worry exactly? Is it that the kinds of activities mentioned are not to be undertaken by a sensitive 14 year old, that is one who enjoys tennis, swimming in the sea and similar robust pastimes? If not, what is the concern? How far should rebellion be tolerated in schools? Is it more tolerable in the precociously talented than it is in the ignorant thug? Innuendo has been alleged. Please provide evidence. Should we as a rule give in to every demand of an individual when he would be very unlikely to do the same for another person? How is it fair that a sense of compromise should all be one way? Which boy accused Britten? Harry Morris, 13.

High art can be a defensive wall to a lot of things but not everything in law or the practical day-to-day. If Britten were alive now and suggested presenting a series with children on television, would TV executives agree? No chance, whatever its content. Perhaps his acute, inappropriate, interest in children was a counter-balance to the indifference of many about their welfare? Not him obviously. He continues to be indulged from the cradle to the grave. In a few hours, I've dismissed him completely. It is like the Osmonds fan club but then I guess it would be. Obviously disappointed but not surprised. One sympathises a little with the BBC.

[Serial_Apologist]

How far should rebellion be tolerated in schools?

It was all explained as character-building to me at the time. I wished I'd rebelled.... Lindsay Anderson's "If..." utterly blew me away when it came out 4 years later, and, vicariously, still does.

[Flosshilde]

You seem to be wallowing in innuendo & an odd sense of grievance, which says more about your psyche than Britten's. I think you have quoted Pears once, on one specific point. As far as inuendo is concerned my last post provided plenty of evidence. "In a few hours, I've dismissed him completely."? No, you've dismissed yourself as having anything coherent to say about Britten, & possibly anything else.

[doversoul1]

Lat
Please, leave this thread or the Forum itself for, say 48 hours. You are going down the same way as before. We don’t want to lose you again.

[Thropplenoggin]

You seem to be wallowing in innuendo & an odd sense of grievance, which says more about your psyche than Britten's. I think you have quoted Pears once, on one specific point. As far as inuendo is concerned my last post provided plenty of evidence. "In a few hours, I've dismissed him completely."? No, you've dismissed yourself as having anything coherent to say about Britten, & possibly anything else.

Illateralthinking?