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

[Flay]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/b...-syphilis.html

Tertiary syphilis can affect the aorta, making it stretch (form an aneurysm). However there is little evidence in that article to confirm the diagnosis of syphilis (and what happened to "patient confidentiality continues beyond the grave"?)

Britten clearly had heart failure secondary to his valvular disease. Of major significance is this from the article:

“His [valve] didn’t fit perfectly from day one,” Petch [who was the Senior Registrar in Cardiology who investigated his heart prior to surgery] later said. “And it leaked – it leaked more than it should have done, and so there was this continuing extra burden on the heart.” (Petch was never told of the syphilis and today is sceptical of the diagnosis, believing the tests for endocarditis Britten had in 1968 should have revealed any infection.)

The article also implies that it would not have been the done thing to do syphilis serology on a "gentleman." This is nonsense. There could be no doubt that the Wassermann Reaction test would have been done at some time, and to have tertiary syphillis he would have been carrying the infection for some years.

[amateur51]

Tertiary syphilis can affect the aorta, making it stretch (form an aneurysm). However there is little evidence in that article to confirm the diagnosis of syphilis (and what happened to "patient confidentiality continues beyond the grave"?)

Britten clearly had heart failure secondary to his valvular disease. Of major significance is this from the article:



The article also implies that it would not have been the done thing to do syphilis serology on a "gentleman." This is nonsense. There could be no doubt that the Wassermann Reaction test would have been done at some time, and to have tertiary syphillis he would have been carrying the infection for some years.

Many thanks, Flay

But a Wassermann Reaction test merely requires a sample of blood from the patient, so nothing would have alerted Britten or his friends. Am I right in saying that establishing the presence of syphilis would be important both for doctor/nurse safety but also would would have implications for patient healing and aftercare?

[Flay]

Many thanks, Flay

But a Wassermann Reaction test merely requires a sample of blood from the patient, so nothing would have alerted Britten or his friends. Am I right in saying that establishing the presence of syphilis would be important both for doctor/nurse safety but also would would have implications for patient healing and aftercare?

Primarily for the actual diagnosis

[Nick Armstrong]

I find the general style of this extract from Kildea's biography rather disappointing. I'd been hoping for something more scholarly and less journalistic. I never quite trust writers who tell us what someone was thinking or feeling, when nobody knows.

I hope the rest of the biography is more factual than this extract, and certainly more accurate than the minor point about Britten's 'garish Paisley shirt'! It was a discreet design of what looks to me like wheatsheaves in white on a brown background (plenty of photo evidence) - not Paisley, and certainly not garish by 1970s standards!

The line that makes me sceptical about this particular oeuvre is:

"and [Britten] was initially aghast at the idea of wearing checked trousers."

[amateur51]

The line that makes me sceptical about this particular oeuvre is:

"and [Britten] was initially aghast at the idea of wearing checked trousers."

“There are moments, Jeeves, when one asks oneself, 'Do trousers matter?'"
"The mood will pass, sir.”

[Nick Armstrong]

“There are moments, Jeeves, when one asks oneself, 'Do trousers matter?'"
"The mood will pass, sir.”

[Lateralthinking1]

Why did he apply for recognition as a conscientious objector when I can confirm that rheumatic fever in childhood was a guarantee that the army medical wouldn't be passed? I realise that there are at least two answers to this question - one which does him some credit and the other not. Actually I can think of three answers. Two probably wouldn't do him credit. I see from my extensive reading about composers in the past two months that Arnold Cooke fought against the Nazis and did not have royal patronage.

I believe that Britten was similar to Auden in that given the choice between Britain and Weimar Germany, he would have chosen the latter because of British repression. Auden spent time in Berlin. The arrival of the Nazis placed them in a dilemma - they were still not for Britain and could no longer be for Germany. While understandable, he seems to have been placed in a privileged position after the war. That might have been connected with similar pro-German sentiment in the Royal Family, albeit for different reasons.

That his talent was arguably exceptional might also be a reason why he was favoured over other British composers. But the need for a new British confidence was timely. Britain needed a composer it could claim was truly great. I don't sense that Britten was sufficiently political to hold to his early antipathy towards the British system. While it had worked against him, he was happy to be embraced by it later, with grudges. He was in a no-win situation - but he wasn't a particularly British composer as some claim.

[Flosshilde]

The line that makes me sceptical about this particular oeuvre is:

"and [Britten] was initially aghast at the idea of wearing checked trousers."

Oh,I don't know - I was told as a sixth-former in the late 60s that brown suede shoes with grey trousers were definitly not the thing.

[Barbirollians]

Oh,I don't know - I was told as a sixth-former in the late 60s that brown suede shoes with grey trousers were definitly not the thing.

They were right !

As for Britten - that is the thing that strikes me as odd the fact that it was not spotted when he was treated for endocarditis in 1968.

[Flosshilde]

The line that makes me sceptical about this particular oeuvre is:

"and [Britten] was initially aghast at the idea of wearing checked trousers."

Just check out this - look out for the black & white stove-pipe trousers - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VIq4oDAfPw

[Barbirollians]

Don't give that link to scottycelt!

It was like a 1951 version of the Chippendales - the dachshund was evidently not impressed !

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Why did he apply for recognition as a conscientious objector when I can confirm that rheumatic fever in childhood was a guarantee that the army medical wouldn't be passed? I realise that there are at least two answers to this question - one which does him some credit and the other not. Actually I can think of three answers. Two probably wouldn't do him credit. I see from my extensive reading about composers in the past two months that Arnold Cooke fought against the Nazis and did not have royal patronage
I believe that Britten was similar to Auden in that given the choice between Britain and Weimar Germany, he would have chosen the latter because of British repression. Auden spent time in Berlin. The arrival of the Nazis placed them in a dilemma - they were still not for Britain and could no longer be for Germany. While understandable, he seems to have been placed in a privileged position after the war. That might have been connected with similar pro-German sentiment in the Royal Family, albeit for different reasons.

That his talent was arguably exceptional might also be a reason why he was favoured over other British composers. But the need for a new British confidence was timely. Britain needed a composer it could claim was truly great. I don't sense that Britten was sufficiently political to hold to his early antipathy towards the British system. While it had worked against him, he was happy to be embraced by it later, with grudges. He was in a no-win situation - but he wasn't a particularly British composer as some claim.

Being a conscientious objector was not an easy option, and it rarely meant you supported the other side. I have met WW2 CO's, and they were given a rough ride. It would have been easier for them simply to cave in to the pressure and sign on.

[Flay]

They were right !

As for Britten - that is the thing that strikes me as odd the fact that it was not spotted when he was treated for endocarditis in 1968.

Possibly because he did not have syphilis? Endocarditis causes valvular heart disease. He had a history of rheumatic fever. That's all we need to know. What is the point of this grubby searching for other possible diseases for others to titter at?

[Lateralthinking1]

On the last two posts, I still ask why he applied to be a conscientious objector - in 1942, having originally left for America in 1939 - when having had rheumatic fever in childhood would have meant, without question, that he would not have been conscripted on health grounds? It doesn't make sense unless he had no reason to believe that he had ever had rheumatic fever and he would therefore have passed the army medical. I don't believe that he ever had rheumatic fever. The facts just don't support that case.

[Barbirollians]

Possibly because he did not have syphilis? Endocarditis causes valvular heart disease. He had a history of rheumatic fever. That's all we need to know. What is the point of this grubby searching for other possible diseases for others to titter at?

Flay - erm that was my point . I found Petch's point on this compelling and Kildea failed to give any answer as to how it could have missed then .