# Malevolence?



## GGluek (Dec 11, 2011)

Okay, "John Galt" was just trying to get a rise out of us when he described Beethoven's symphonies as "barbaric and malevolent," but it does beg the question: Can a piece of music be malevolent?


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

GGluek said:


> Okay, "John Galt" was just trying to get a rise out of us when he described Beethoven's symphonies as "barbaric and malevolent," but it does beg the question: Can a piece of music be malevolent?


If considered as an extension of the composer's will, sure.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

Music is only malevolent only if the listener makes it so.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

albertfallickwang said:


> Music is only malevolent only if the listener makes it so.


You may be confusing effect with intent. Malevolence is on the intent side of the formula. [malevolence] > [effect].


----------



## Cosmos (Jun 28, 2013)

There are pieces that have been described as malevolent, but that's just the listener's perception on the music. I think it's the same as saying Beethoven's symphonies are heroic. The music itself isn't heroic, but it sounds heroic to people who listen to it. Some may not even know how to describe the music until they hear someone else give out an adjective that sounds right.

That's the trouble with describing music. Sometimes music can convey ideas/emotions better than words can

When it comes to malevolence, there are a few that come to mind
- Scriabin thought his Sixth Piano Sonata had a malicious. He thought it was dark, and shuttered when playing parts of it. With his synthesia, the work may have produced ugly colors
- Schnittke's Concerto for Piano and Strings has some darkness peppered in

Others might not necessarily think these "dark". I remember a few instances where music that I thought was a bit dark or "ugly" in an "evil" way, others thought the piece was joyous and fun. Go figure


----------



## Fagotterdammerung (Jan 15, 2015)

No, malevolence assumes sentience on the part of music _itself_, and as far as I know, concepts don't think.

Music can certainly _sound_ malevolent, though that's a listener's interpretation - just like "sad", "happy", etc.

I suppose music can be written with malicious intent... but it's hard to think of any way of doing that without nasty lyrics. Impossible to play, maybe? Excessively loud or inaudibly soft? Something to trick audiences, like a fake ending? ( The latter seems just playful, really... )


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Malevolence. A good one to propose on the "Abstract Noun" thread. I don't believe it's been done yet.

In any case, a composer could have a malevolent intention when writing a piece of music. Puccini was not being malevolent when he scored the U.S. National Anthem as the theme for his villain in _Madama Butterfly_. But suppose an opera composer actually _did_ select a certain tune to include in his score simply to upset the audience? His intentions could be malevolent. But it is also conceivable that the audience will not react as the composer intended. They might just think the composer is small minded, or a nut.

Still, I suspect that folks like Pierre Boulez would think folks like Samuel Barber and Howard Hanson were writing intentionally malevolent music. After all, didn't these guys ever hear of Schoenberg and atonality or Cage and aleatorism ... or just plain organized noise as music???

Too, if a composer merely wants to assault the ears, the music might be considered malevolent. Some propose that art should challenge, provoke, and be confrontational. But this is not the same as being simply malevolent. Perhaps if a deranged organist takes over the loft during a religious service and begins to play Xenakis-styled organ accompaniments during the sacred hymns it might be construed as malevolence. Then again, if the musician were deranged, intention is questionable.

What if I were to do so, just for the sake of it? Yeah ... that's a plan .... See you in Church on Sunday.

Hey ... take this word over to the "Abstract Noun" thread.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

GGluek said:


> Okay, "John Galt" was just trying to get a rise out of us when he described Beethoven's symphonies as "barbaric and malevolent," but it does beg the question: Can a piece of music be malevolent?


(Worse, that was trying to get people's goats via Ayn Rand's take on aesthetics 

A: No, only if it has an inflecting movie or a lyric with it.

Remember, there is barely a soul alive now who is not infected with the usr of music in movies, so now has associations with a lot of specific musical gestures in a myriad of stylistic vocabularies as 'being malevolent.'


----------



## Headphone Hermit (Jan 8, 2014)

I can't see how any inanimate phenomena such as a piece of music can be malevolent ... it _might_ be possible to use music malevolently but that is different

Similarly, a tree cannot be malevolent but if I take a sharp pointed stick and poke bits off a troll, then I am using the wood malevolently (perhaps!)


----------



## Figleaf (Jun 10, 2014)

Fagotterdammerung said:


> No, malevolence assumes sentience on the part of music _itself_, and as far as I know, concepts don't think.
> 
> Music can certainly _sound_ malevolent, though that's a listener's interpretation - just like "sad", "happy", etc.
> 
> I suppose music can be written with malicious intent... but it's hard to think of any way of doing that without nasty lyrics. Impossible to play, maybe? Excessively loud or inaudibly soft?*/] Something to trick audiences, like a fake ending? ( The latter seems just playful, really... )*


Fake endings are _definitely _ malevolent! I still cringe at the memory of applauding prematurely at a friend of a friend's jazz gig.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Ukko said:


> You may be confusing effect with intent. Malevolence is on the intent side of the formula. [malevolence] > [effect].


Intent, a thread which you started which quickly ran amok, really has little to do with the effect upon the listener unless that specific intent is, one way or another, made known. I happen to think that communicating very little of anything specific is about all any piece, presented without title, program, text, can do.

Countering that, only a bit: some very general semiotic areas can be 'inflected' by music if the composer is also staying within the vocabulary of those general areas which pull the semiotic triggers, and then a general intent, via the music, can be _generally_ communicated. This all must presuppose a body of literature already generally known which refers to or implies the specific quality or emotion.

So much of what has been used as emotional underpinning in film scores where 'malevolent' enters the frame was of course via music the sound of which is already thought of as 'dark,' borrowed or styled after all that was already known as effective from classic literature, say _Night on Bald Mountain,_ while enough of that already known classical really had and needs its story or title to make the intent specific.

Music alone? Can may be perceived as malevolent, near to only, but not 'be' malevolent. Imo.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Sure, I think music can express malevolence. I don't go along with the idea that music can't express anything extra-musical - not because I don't understand the thinking behind that idea, but because I don't understand what it could possibly mean in the real world. Composers have frequently written with the intent of expressing extra-musical emotion, and listeners have frequently responded to music with extra-musical emotion. The intent of the composer and the experience of the listener often overlap significantly. Why ignore these important truths about musical experience?

So sure, plenty of music has been written with the intent of expressing malevolence and is experienced by listeners as malevolent. Lots of music written for evil characters in operas. The witches' sabbath movement in the Symphonie Fantastique. That weird waltz in Mahler's 7th. The music in Survivor from Warsaw representing the Nazis. The music in Bach's passions representing, uh, the Jews (too bad about that). On and on. Maybe even some of the stormier passages of Beethoven!


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Headphone Hermit said:


> I can't see how any inanimate phenomena such as a piece of music can be malevolent ... it _might_ be possible to use music malevolently but that is different
> 
> *Similarly, a tree cannot be malevolent *but if I take a sharp pointed stick and poke bits off a troll, then I am using the wood malevolently (perhaps!)


Obviously you've not read _The Night Gardener _by Jonathan Auxier (ISBN: 978-0-67006-772-5), published in April of last year, featuring among its characters "a magic but deeply malevolent giant tree."

Then there was the oak that fell on my barn about two years ago. Made a mess. Cost a bundle to repair the roof. Don't tell me that was a friendly tree.


----------



## fjf (Nov 4, 2014)

Yes. The 4'33'' is.


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

I'm convinced most pop songs and commercial jingles are indeed malevolent.


----------



## John Galt (Feb 3, 2015)

GGluek said:


> Okay, "John Galt" was just trying to get a rise out of us when he described Beethoven's symphonies as "barbaric and malevolent," but it does beg the question: Can a piece of music be malevolent?


What I meant is that the music seems to be influenced by the malevolent universe premise. This premise says that man is helpless and doomed; that success, happiness, achievement are impossible to him. This is the feeling I get when listening to Beethoven's symphonies.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/malevolent_universe_premise.html


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

John Galt said:


> What I meant is that the music seems to be influenced by the malevolent universe premise. This premise says that man is helpless and doomed; that success, happiness, achievement are impossible to him. This is the feeling I get when listening to Beethoven's symphonies.
> 
> http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/malevolent_universe_premise.html


Beethoven's symphonies generally express the opposite of this, I would think.

Also I recommend you read some real philosophy.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

Definitely some compositional ideas have a malevolent character or quality, or evokes something sinister, IMO.....composers probably intend them to sometimes......

Beethoven does not come to mind, though.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

John Galt said:


> What I meant is that the music seems to be influenced by the malevolent universe premise. This premise says that man is helpless and doomed; that success, happiness, achievement are impossible to him. This is the feeling I get when listening to Beethoven's symphonies.
> 
> http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/malevolent_universe_premise.html


It would be interesting to know what you would have thought of Beethoven had you not read Rand first. It's hard not to get the impression that you aren't really listening to him with your own ears.


----------



## John Galt (Feb 3, 2015)

GreenMamba said:


> It would be interesting to know what you would have thought of Beethoven had you not read Rand first.


Impossible to say. I liked a lot of bad stuff before I read Ayn Rand. It changed my life in many respects.


----------



## John Galt (Feb 3, 2015)

I can't prove that the music is malevolent, but when I listen to it I get the impression that Beethoven portrays a malevolent universe where life for man is a struggle.


----------



## John Galt (Feb 3, 2015)

Dismissive? I've listed tons of pieces that I find absolutely brilliant. Here's one:


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

John Galt said:


> I can't prove that the music is malevolent, but when I listen to it I get the impression that Beethoven portrays a malevolent universe where life for man is a struggle.


No one would expect you to "prove" that the music is malevolent, but could you give us a little more to go on? Is it simply that his music isn't always cheery?

Rand called Beethoven malevolent, didn't she? Surely she wouldn't have you wanted you to simply parrot her opinions. So what do you actually hear in Beethoven that makes you feel it portrays a malevolent universe?


----------



## John Galt (Feb 3, 2015)

It's first of all his symphonies that I find malevolent. I don't know why. 

Rand also admitted that she was no expert, and that the science of music hasn't come far enough to understand what makes music malevolent and not. If you're interested, you can read her book The Romantic Manifesto.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

John Galt said:


> It's first of all his symphonies that I find malevolent. I don't know why.
> 
> Rand also admitted that she was no expert, and that the science of music hasn't come far enough to understand what makes music malevolent and not. If you're interested, you can read her book The Romantic Manifesto.


I've read everything she's ever written- essays, novels, epistolary correspondences, and marginalia. I was a member of the Objectivist Study Group on my campus as an undergraduate.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

John Galt said:


> It's first of all his symphonies that I find malevolent. I don't know why.
> 
> Rand also admitted that she was no expert, and that the science of music hasn't come far enough to understand what makes music malevolent and not. If you're interested, you can read her book The Romantic Manifesto.


Have you ever heard (loaded question) Toscanini's late-thirties NBC Symphony Orchestra's Beethoven's _Second Symphony_?

The first movement, once it takes off, is pure, unadulterated heroism- that is to say, the way Toscanini hard-charges it.






(02:55-06:55 for the heroic section I'm referring to)


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

John Galt said:


> I can't prove that the music is malevolent, but when I listen to it I get the impression that Beethoven portrays a malevolent universe where life for man is a struggle.


Life _is_ a struggle. It's a struggle for "man" - I prefer to say for _human beings,_ who are not philosophical abstractions - and for every living thing since life began. A few of us are fortunate enough to have a fairly easy time of it between the trauma of birth and the debility of old age, and have the luxury of imagining that the "universe" is "benevolent." But the universe is neither benevolent nor malevolent; it is merely, and coldly, indifferent. It goes its way and we go along for a very bumpy and unpredictable ride, frequently running off the road into the ditch, not knowing where the trip is taking us, making wrong turns that may result in lucky accidents or disasters, and finally running out of gas at some inopportune moment which may or may not give us time to say goodbye. The universe grinds up life and spits it out; most living things barely survive birth or even attain it. And we humans assist it in its callous project whenever we can find an excuse, killing each other and any other living beings we think are in our way.

In the midst of this we struggle to survive and find happiness, trying to remember to be grateful when we are spared the worst of it. Against the odds, some of us carry on with great spirit, determination, and courage. That's called heroism. But it's only heroism because the project is difficult and because the universe, neither benevolent nor malevolent, doesn't care whether we win or lose.

Most people find a heroic spirit in the music of Beethoven. Sometimes it manifests as grim determination, sometimes as triumphant joy. But it's only there because struggle, the possibility of defeat, and the reality of death, are also there. That understanding - that "sense of life," of life not only as it "might and ought ('ought'?) to be" but _as it is_ in all its dimensions, contrasts and conflicts - is one reason Beethoven's music, like most truly great and profound art, continues to mean so much to us. I hope you will eventually come to perceive the depth and spiritual power that's in it.


----------



## Celloman (Sep 30, 2006)

GreenMamba said:


> No one would expect you to "prove" that the music is malevolent, but could you give us a little more to go on? Is it simply that his music isn't always cheery?
> 
> Rand called Beethoven malevolent, didn't she? Surely she wouldn't have you wanted you to simply parrot her opinions. So what do you actually hear in Beethoven that makes you feel it portrays a malevolent universe?


I'm pretty sure that Beethoven was a staunch humanist who believed in the brotherhood of mankind.
This doesn't sound malevolent to me.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Life _is_ a struggle. It's a struggle for "man" - I prefer to say for _human beings,_ who are not philosophical abstractions - and for every living thing since life began. A few of us are fortunate enough to have a fairly easy time of it between the trauma of birth and the debility of old age, and have the luxury of imagining that the "universe" is "benevolent." But the universe is neither benevolent nor malevolent; it is merely, and coldly, indifferent. It goes its way and we go along for a very bumpy and unpredictable ride, frequently running off the road into the ditch, not knowing where the trip is taking us, making wrong turns that may result in lucky accidents or disasters, and finally running out of gas at some inopportune moment which may or may not give us time to say goodbye. The universe grinds up life and spits it out; most living things barely survive birth or even attain it. And we humans assist it in its callous project whenever we can find an excuse, killing each other and any other living beings we think are in our way.
> 
> In the midst of this we struggle to survive and find happiness, trying to remember to be grateful when we are spared the worst of it. Against the odds, some of us carry on with great spirit, determination, and courage. That's called heroism. But it's only heroism because the project is difficult and because the universe, neither benevolent nor malevolent, doesn't care whether we win or lose.
> 
> Most people find a heroic spirit in the music of Beethoven. Sometimes it manifests as grim determination, sometimes as triumphant joy. But it's only there because struggle, the possibility of defeat, and the reality of death, are also there. That understanding - that "sense of life," of life not only as it "might and ought ('ought'?) to be" but _as it is_ in all its dimensions, contrasts and conflicts - is one reason Beethoven's music, like most truly great and profound art, continues to mean so much to us. I hope you will eventually come to perceive the depth and spiritual power that's in it.


I (where's my 'love button?') '_HEART'_ this post.

And I couldn't agree more on what it means to be heroic: Win, lose, or draw- you _always_ give it your all; always charging, never bending.

Beethoven's art radiating an irrepressible _elan vital_ and heroic spirit coupled with the unavoidable fact of a largely-indifferent universe makes him truly great, in my view.

His ingenious catholicity of heroic themes- good, bad, and tragic- is not unlike Shakespeare in that capacity.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

John Galt said:


> What I meant is that the music seems to be influenced by the malevolent universe premise. This premise says that man is helpless and doomed; that success, happiness, achievement are impossible to him. This is the feeling I get when listening to Beethoven's symphonies.
> 
> http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/malevolent_universe_premise.html


Contrary to what MacLeod says, it doesn't sound like a perfectly reasonable reading at all. The feeling I get is that you haven't listened past the 1st Mvt of any of the symphonies. If you listened to the final movements of the 5th, or 3rd, or 7th, or 9th, you'd realize why the assessment "_that man is helpless and doomed; that success, happiness, achievement are impossible to him_" doesn't hold any water.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2015)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> Contrary to what MacLeod says, it doesn't sound like a perfectly reasonable reading at all. The feeling I get is that you haven't listened past the 1st Mvt of any of the symphonies. If you listened to the final movements of the 5th, or 3rd, or 7th, or 9th, you'd realize why the assessment "_that man is helpless and doomed; that success, happiness, achievement are impossible to him_" doesn't hold any water.


I don't agree with John Galt's reading, but I can see how others might hear it that way. The fact that you hear it that way either doesn't invalidate John's views.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> I don't agree with John Galt's reading, but I can see how others might hear it that way. The fact that you hear it that way either doesn't invalidate John's views.


If this is the level of relativism we're gonna be discussing, I give up. What's the point, it's all relative anyway. 

P.s. I think Ligeti's _Requiem_ is the most sunshiniest, happiest piece of music I've ever heard.

The humor of that statement lies in its absurdity. I was careful in my selection of the phrase, "_hold water_", the statement doesn't withhold scrutiny or criticism, it doesn't hold water.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2015)

DiesIraeVIX said:


> If this is the level of relativism we're gonna be discussing, I give up. What's the point, it's all relative anyway.
> 
> P.s. I think Ligeti's _Requiem_ is the most sunshiniest, happiest piece of music I've ever heard.
> 
> The humor of that statement lies in its absurdity. I was careful in my selection of the phrase, "_hold water_", the statement doesn't withhold scrutiny or criticism, it doesn't hold water.


Well, we all know one argument is that irrespective of the intention of the composer and the hearing of the listener, the music itself cannot carry or contain anything (malevolent or benevolent), and certainly not with any guarantee of success for a composer who wants to write about heroism, man's struggle against the universe...yada, yada, yada (we've been here before).

If (I stress the 'if') John 'hears' malevolence, who are we to tell him he's wrong?

"No, you don't hear malevolence, John, you hear uplifting joy because that's what LvB meant and that's what everyone else hears."

What _I _hear in Beethoven's music is something akin to what I imagine might be passing through the mind's ears of the typical Byronic Hero. I am therefore sympathetic to the idea that a listener might find the struggle and helplessness more dominant than the triumph.


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Once again, I didn't say "wrong". That's too clear-cut, too black and white. I said and stick by, "_hold water_".

Furthermore, there was no elaboration of the malevolence being more dominant than or outweighing the triumph, there was never anything like that. The thread is still there, it's locked, but still open to see. He also has threads on Bach and Mozart, as well.

Him calling Mozart boring or Beethoven's symphonies horrible is absolutely fine. I have no objections, we're free to our own tastes. However, when we get into musical analysis. That's when debate, scrutiny, criticism, etc. is on the table.

The only realm where I enjoy such total relativism is Science.


----------



## Guest (Feb 9, 2015)

Well, we may be quibbling over small points, but whilst 'wrong' may be too black and white for you, I'm not sure that asserting that your, "Contrary to what MacLeod says, it doesn't sound like a perfectly reasonable reading at all" doesn't mean, "Your reading is wrong", doesn't hold water!


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

We most definitely are quibbling over small points. I agree.

I still don't think his musical analysis sounds reasonable. I wanted to make a distinction between analysis and tastes. His aesthetic tastes do sound reasonable, however. They're his tastes, I have nothing to say about them. Millions of people don't like Classical music. Period. 

How likely is it that a music professor would say that the finales of the 5th and 9th suggest doom and malevolence? Would a music historian, music critic, journalist, musicologist? Have they already, perhaps? In other words, on musical grounds, I find his analysis and statement to not sound reasonable, in the world of music.

Edit: Please note that I'm not asserting that the musicologist, historian, or critic is the only authority, of course not! I'm stating that many of them would also heavily disagree with his musical analysis. There are reasons for why they would disagree. Many of which are the same as why many on this forum would disagree, myself included.


----------



## Guest (Feb 10, 2015)

The problem with describing any piece as malevolent or benevolent is that a piece of music can often tell a story, and if you look at only one portion, you miss the entire point of the whole picture. If one were to stop reading Les Miserables after the arrest and imprisonment of Jean Valjean, for example, one would likely label the work a malevolent one. But then you miss the rest of the story, and the redemption that comes. Or with Beethoven's 5th symphony. The first and fourth movements are such contrasts in emotion. The first movement does convey a sense of doom, of fate, dare I say even malevolence. But then the fourth erupts into exultant victory. To label such a work as "Malevolent" or "Benevolent" is to simplify it far too much.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Members are reminded of the ToS:



> A special forum has been created for Political and/or Religious discussions that are related to Classical Music.If members wish to create topics for discussion regarding political and religious topics not related to Classical Music, such will be strictly limited to Social Groups only.


This thread has veered into areas best reserved for Social Groups. A number of posts have been deleted. If this continues, the thread will be closed.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Taggart said:


> Members are reminded of the ToS:
> 
> This thread has veered into areas best reserved for Social Groups. A number of posts have been deleted. If this continues, the thread will be closed.


The thread probably hasn't veered; it was plowing straight ahead into Social Philosophy, Analysis of Intent, and related unresolvable matters from the get-go. Spirited debate as to whether or not the OP is a nutcase is just around the corner.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

John Galt said:


> It's first of all his symphonies that I find malevolent. I don't know why.
> 
> Rand also admitted that she was no expert, and that the science of music hasn't come far enough to understand what makes music malevolent and not. If you're interested, you can read her book The Romantic Manifesto.


"The Science of Music," -- this shows such a basic misunderstanding of music and the arts in general that I would not believe for one moment to that whomever thought of it that way had much of anything worthwhile to say about music.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

The storm music from Verdi's Rigoletto just before Gilda sacrifices herself in place of the no good Duke is a malevolent masterpiece.

Sorry for posting apropos to the topic.

Please go back to your meandering.


----------

