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

[Mary Chambers]

Any biography is bound to discuss, or at least mention, how the subject died. What it should not do is present as fact something that is mere guesswork. All known facts (FACTS) should be weighed and considered. I'm not sure, from this extract, that Kildea does this, but I will reserve judgement until I've read the whole book - because I'm certainly going to read it, and Neil Powell's, too.

I think how Britten died is of interest. I don't think it matters. There's a difference. I'm not interested in the moral implications of the syphilis theory, because I don't think there are any. I am fascinated by Britten and by his music, and I want to know all I can.

What LT is on about I'm not sure, but I don't think it should stop the rest of us discussing Britten.

[Serial_Apologist]

Sorry but it doesn't. Not at all. It depends on whether an individual wants to question the nature of his death for whatever reason - did Warlock commit suicide or was he murdered? - and whether history is permitted to be doctored.

What is judged worthy of inclusion is always going to be dependent on the point of view of the chronicler, surely? - what to include, what not, and to what end.

There's always a motive.

[Lateralthinking1]

Thropplenoggin's original question seems to have gone off at a regrettable tangent. Perhaps we need to look back to his final sentence:
"On these works alone, I'd say he merits his reputation as a great British composer."
Exactly - on these works, not on tittle-tattle about his private life.

No. It is not hugely important, not important or tittle tattle. It is what it is, like a place of birth or where the grave is located or the fact that he had a housekeeper and liked food enjoyed by children. The notion of tittle tattle has an angle. It is a censor's judgemental angle. Readers should be treated like adults and permitted to decide for themselves. It's tittle tattle to you simply because you don't like the idea. That's not substantive. If you don't like it, don't read it or don't believe it. It's not a dictatorship.

[Mary Chambers]

Whilst doing the family history I discovered from his records that one of my greatgrandfathers had syphilis when he joined the army at 18. It was treated, he married, end of story. I assume he had been sleeping around, possibly with prostitutes in Bideford rather than with some rent boys on Lundy Island. So the fact that he had a STD is really neither here nor there.

It only takes one, Anna! Like getting pregnant It was and is quite a common disease.

[VodkaDilc]

No. It is not hugely important, not important or tittle tattle. It is what it is, like a place of birth or where the grave is located or the fact that he had a housekeeper and liked food enjoyed by children. The notion of tittle tattle has an angle. It is a censor's judgemental angle. Readers should be treated like adults and permitted to decide for themselves.

Biographical facts are one thing; speculation about something as personal as health-related matters are another. In this case there is the added element of the aspect of health under discussion. Could anyone except his doctors give conclusive evidence? Something which doctors, of course, would never do.

[Sir Velo]

- was (Warlock) murdered?

First I've heard of this. Who's saying this? Has evidence of this come to light? AFAIK his death was accidental or suicide.

[Lateralthinking1]

What is judged worthy of inclusion is always going to be dependent on the point of view of the chronicler, surely? - what to include, what not, and to what end.

There's always a motive.

Yes. The author is the chronicler. The motive is to sell. If an individual were to write a book saying Britten murdered 20 people, it would sell thousands and the trustees would be in the courts. There has been no court action. People can decide for themselves. There is a direct connection between Britten's instinct for dropping people as if they were nothing and the wish of many to erase the author's work. Hard luck. One of the things about death is that people can't be manipulated and controlled. There are parallels.

[Nick Armstrong]

First I've heard of this. Who's saying this? Has evidence of this come to light?

His son Nigel Heseltine made the allegation - to do with a change to PW's will etc.

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/946634?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21101564280083

There seems to be no evidence for it...

[Ferretfancy]

People don't just get syphilis, they have to be given it, as I knew to my cost once a long time ago. The suggestion in this case is that Britten was given it by Pears, so what happened to Pears? It's rather unlikely that he was totally unaware of the fact that he had the disease, and he outlived his partner by some years.

This whole business smacks of poorly researched journalism and unwarranted speculation. Meanwhile the music lives on, and perhaps we should rest and be grateful for that.

[Lateralthinking1]

People don't just get syphilis, they have to be given it, as I knew to my cost once a long time ago. The suggestion in this case is that Britten was given it by Pears, so what happened to Pears? It's rather unlikely that he was totally unaware of the fact that he had the disease, and he outlived his partner by some years.

This whole business smacks of poorly researched journalism and unwarranted speculation. Meanwhile the music lives on, and perhaps we should rest and be grateful for that.

As a matter of fact, I do believe that he had syphilis from what has been provided but I have doubts that it was Pears. From what I have read in recent weeks, I think he was under the influence of Isherwood and briefly became experimental in America.

[MrGongGong]

and briefly became experimental in America.

I wasn't aware that he had met Cage
you certainly can't hear the influence in his music

[Lateralthinking1]

...........I hope people realise that if this were 1963, and the author had suggested Britten was gay, exactly the same weight
of criticism and dismissal would have been penned by his ardent supporters. Kildea doesn't know what he is talking about, it is salacious tittle tattle, etc. The reaction is hardly pleasant towards people who have sadly contracted syphilis, is it?

[Anna]

As a matter of fact, I do believe that he had syphilis from what has been provided but I have doubts that it was Pears. From what I have read in recent weeks, I think he was under the influence of Isherwood and briefly became experimental in America.

Lat, thousands of people, inc. one of my grandfathers (see above) have had syphilis.
I cannot see why you are so focussed on the possibility that BB may have had it. The disease is not just confined to gay men. In Victorian times it was an epidemic in heterosexuals.
Honestly Lat, I am struggling to see what your argument is, is it anti-homosexuals?
For the record, I dislike BB's music and PP's voice but live, and let live, for those who do enjoy.

[Lateralthinking1]

Lat, thousands of people, inc. one of my grandfathers (see above) have had syphilis.
I cannot see why you are so focussed on the possibility that BB may have had it. The disease is not just confined to gay men. In Victorian times it was an epidemic in heterosexuals.
Honestly Lat, I am struggling to see what your argument is, is it anti-homosexuals?
For the record, I dislike BB's music and PP's voice but live, and let live, for those who do enjoy.

Quite clearly Anna you haven't bothered to read my posts. You simply want to turn it into some sort of accusation of homophobia. I find that misrepresentation of me, also put forward by Flosshilde, completely reprehensible. There must be some sort of reason why several people on the forum will turn seemingly every discussion into the idea that people are being anti gay.

[Mary Chambers]

As a matter of fact, I do believe that he had syphilis from what has been provided but I have doubts that it was Pears. From what I have read in recent weeks, I think he was under the influence of Isherwood and briefly became experimental in America.

Now come on, Lats! We simply don't know. Though yes, he was influenced by both Auden and Isherwood.

I don't understand what you mean about Britten's 'supporters'. I suppose I could be counted as one of them in many ways, but I am simply not interested in whether he was 'nice' or 'nasty'. I'm sure that like most people he was a mixture of both. What I am interested in is what made him tick, and resulted in all that wonderful music.

According to Kildea, Pears could have been one of the 'many symptomless' carriers of the disease. It doesn't always progress. But we'll never know.