# Is Richard Bratby 'wrong' in his criticism of Bach's Chaconne?



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

I will ask this again as I don't believe anyone responded to it previously - what does an objectivist say to someone like Richard Bratby (Classical music writer, critic and consultant) who penned the following:

_Playing Bach, we're told, requires profound selflessness - though if you've ever witnessed a solo violinist hijacking an orchestral concert to saw through all 15 tortured minutes of the D minor Chaconne, you might call it something else entirely._
(The Spectator 16th June, 2018)

Clearly he is an experienced listener, so we can't glibly say he is 'wrong', yet if we don't then what of the supposed superiority of the work? Of it Brahms enthused:

_...a whole world of the deepest thoughts and most powerful feelings. If I imagined that I could have created, even conceived the piece, I am quite certain that the excess of excitement and earth-shattering experience would have driven me out of my mind._

The logical fallacy of the ad populum is in assuming that Bratby will eventually change his mind.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

*Let's not turn this into yet another subjectivists versus objectivists debate. Please ignore the use of the term objectivist in the OP, and only reply addressing the statement of Bratby and any consequences thereof.*


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

I don't know.

His only claim seems to be about whether a listener might use a word other than "selfless" for a performance of the chaconne at an orchestral concert. He may be correct there, as it is well down the list of words that probably spring to mind.

I suspect all he is really saying is that he thinks the piece doesn't belong in an orchestral concert.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Art Rock said:


> *Let's not turn this into yet another subjectivists versus objectivists debate. Please ignore the use of the term objectivist in the OP, and only reply addressing the statement of Bratby and any consequences thereof.*


Though I would rather the thread not be closed, it will, I assume, turn into the very thing you are proscribing...so you may as well close it AR. I don't consider the matter fully fleshed out so I am confused why you needed to post as you did....respectfully said of course.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

Eclectic Al said:


> I don't know.
> 
> His only claim seems to be about whether a listener might use a word other than "selfless" for a performance of the chaconne at an orchestral concert. He may be correct there, as it is well down the list of words that probably spring to mind.
> 
> I suspect all he is really saying is that he thinks the piece doesn't belong in an orchestral concert.


If you read more of the article then Bratby's:

_Well, you can say it, but what if you don't feel it? I'm not alone: the pianist Stephen Hough admitted a few years ago, to gasps of horrified disbelief, that he didn't feel a deep connection with Bach's music._

makes the context clear.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

janxharris said:


> Though I would rather the thread not be closed, it will, I assume, turn into the very thing you are proscribing...so you may as well close it AR. I don't consider the matter fully fleshed out so I am confused why you needed to post as you did....respectfully said of course.


If you think that after an estimated 4000 posts on this subject without changes in position "the matter is not fully fleshed out" we have to agree to disagree. Respectfully of course. I've taken your suggestion to close it.


----------

