# JS Bach: The Most Assertive Composer?



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I know, I've been making lots of Bach threads here, but, there is such a perfect blend of emotion and logic in his music which leaves me feeling quite assertive. Anyone else get that feeling from him?


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Sometimes, yes. For me it has a lot to do with the essential rhythmic vitality of his music as well.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

What is meant by assertive, here? Presumably it is about confidence rather than aggression?


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Enthusiast said:


> What is meant by assertive, here? Presumably it is about confidence rather than aggression?


In terms of "confidence" I'd say Bach. In terms of putting one's own stamp on everything I'd say Beethoven or Wagner.


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

I like what John Eliot Gardiner said about Bach when he said (and I'm paraphrasing from memory) that Bach represented the balance between what is divine and what is human. In almost every religion, if not all of them, there the idea of the ideal plane of no suffering, no wanting, no fear of death; and in Bach's music he brings us to the ideal plane at once also maintains a feeling of humanity or existential angst.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Coach G said:


> I like what John Eliot Gardiner said about Bach when he said (and I'm paraphrasing from memory) that Bach r_epresented the balance between what is divine and what is human_. In almost every religion, if not all of them, there the idea of the ideal plane of no suffering, no wanting, no fear of death; and in Bach's music he brings us to the ideal plane at once also maintains a feeling of humanity or existential angst.


So Bach is not merely the fifth evangelist but actually the Second Coming of Christ....

I think most of his music is too "grounded" or earthy or rather closely expressive of angst-filled states, so that "place of no suffering" would not be an association for me. Even a powerfully triumphant piece like E flat major P&F from Clavierübung 3, BWV 552? feels quite "material" to me. I am not denying that there are a few transportingly beautiful pieces but it is not at all my first association.Which piece would you describe in that way? Air from the D major suite?


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

Kreisler jr said:


> So Bach is not merely the fifth evangelist but actually the Second Coming of Christ....
> 
> I think most of his music is too "grounded" or earthy or rather closely expressive of angst-filled states, so that "place of no suffering" would not be an association for me. Even a powerfully triumphant piece like E flat major P&F from Clavierübung 3, BWV 552? feels quite "material" to me. I am not denying that there are a few transportingly beautiful pieces but it is not at all my first association.Which piece would you describe in that way? Air from the D major suite?


I think a fine example would be the following aria from the _St. Matthew Passion_. In the English translation: while the singer is grounded in this world of sin and strife; he at once expresses the soul's desire to live upon the ideal plane.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I know, I've been making lots of Bach threads here, but, there is such a perfect blend of emotion and logic in his music which leaves me feeling quite assertive. Anyone else get that feeling from him?


I don't think of adjective labels when listening to any music. Bach's music is, as are all examples of any music, sui generis, IMO. Each composer, each jazz musician, each hip-hop rapper, creates music in a unique style of one, themselves.

To the degree that we perceive music periods and genres monolithically, i.e. "types" of artists performing "styles" of music, we hang an abstract curtain between our ears and the music.

Bach is Bach - nothing more; nothing less.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

> Each composer, each jazz musician, each hip-hop rapper, creates music in a unique style of one, themselves.


To an extent. There are still similarities and grounds for comparison in all of those, otherwise there wouldn't be the different categories. Every composer would be his/her own genre.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Maybe not limited to JS, but Baroque in general perhaps. Classical too, moreso Haydn I'd say than Mozart.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

consuono said:


> In terms of "confidence" I'd say Bach.


Remember, Captainnumber36 had created the thread <Does Bach = Clarity and Pride Compared to Mozart and Beethoven?> some time ago


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

hammeredklavier said:


> Remember, Captainnumber36 had created the thread <Does Bach = Clarity and Pride Compared to Mozart and Beethoven?> some time ago


For once, some consistency in my threads! :lol:


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

I don't know. I mean, I hate to give composers such precise definitive labels. It's like: Mozart, the happiest composer. Then you listen to his piano concerto n. 20. Or Beethoven, the deepest composer. Then you listen to "Rage over a lost penny". I mean, you can't use labels that way in my opinion, putting everything in a cathegory. You'll end up seeing composers in a stereotypical narrow way.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Amadea said:


> I don't know. I mean, I hate to give composers such precise definitive labels. It's like: Mozart, the happiest composer. Then you listen to his piano concerto n. 20. Or Beethoven, the deepest composer. Then you listen to "Rage over a lost penny". I mean, you can't use labels that way in my opinion, putting everything in a cathegory. You'll end up seeing composers in a stereotypical narrow way.


Quite true, but is there significance in generalities?


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Quite true, but is there significance in generalities?


I'm not getting your question. I mean, what I'm saying is that putting everything in a cover doesn't make you look behind it. That's how people ended up thinking Mozart is superficial, Beethoven is deep and tormented, etc. when in reality they have variety in their works and in the moods they display in a piece.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Right, is there significance in the cover though? The overall impression.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Amadea said:


> I'm not getting your question. I mean, what I'm saying is that putting everything in a cover doesn't make you look behind it. That's how people ended up thinking Mozart is superficial, Beethoven is deep and tormented, etc. when in reality they have variety in their works and in the moods they display in a piece.


I agree, which was the point of my previous post. It is reductive to think of all Baroque composers having a "style". IMO, the Baroque period is a time span with a number of composers writing in a loosely related style. But as is often said the devil is in the details, or maybe God is in the details is more appropriate. Vivaldi doesn't sound much like Bach, and Zelenka sounds like neither. Superficially, Handel might be said to sound like Bach - but the key word is superficially. Scarlatti could never be confused with Bach, or Handel, or Vivaldi.

Duke Ellington once said when asked if his music was jazz, he responded something to the effect that he never uses that word. He said he wrote "our music" - a form of Black American Music. The "our" was his band - not a general style, his style, his voice actualized through his band with specific musicians. He didn't write for alto sax he wrote for Johnny Hodges.

Everything in art is specific.


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Right, is there significance in the cover though? The overall impression.


No, the cover doesn't mean anything. That's my point, you shouldn't use it. That's why you shouldn't use labels, unless you're studying them, putting them in a historical and stylistic context. But even those are quite fluid labels. Beethoven is both a late classic and a romantic.


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> I agree, which was the point of my previous post. It is reductive to think of all Baroque composers having a "style". IMO, the Baroque period is a time span with a number of composers writing in a loosely related style. But as is often said the devil is in the details, or maybe God is in the details is more appropriate. Vivaldi doesn't sound much like Bach, and Zelenka sounds like neither. Superficially, Handel might be said to sound like Bach - but the key word is superficially. Scarlatti could never be confused with Bach, or Handel, or Vivaldi.
> 
> Duke Ellington once said when asked if his music was jazz, he responded something to the effect that he never uses that word. He said he wrote "our music" - a form of Black American Music. The "our" was his band - not a general style, his style, his voice actualized through his band with specific musicians. He didn't write for alto sax he wrote for Johnny Hodges.
> 
> Everything in art is specific.


Labels are very useful when studying. But the labels "romantic", "classic", "baroque" are used quite in a fluid way by historians today (eg. Beethoven) and they are different labels than the specific emotional/conceptual ones Captainnumber36 uses. The same goes in painting etc and arts in general.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Amadea said:


> No, the cover doesn't mean anything. That's my point, you shouldn't use it. That's why you shouldn't use labels, unless you're studying them, putting them in a historical and stylistic context. But even those are quite fluid labels. Beethoven is both a late classic and a romantic.


I disagree. I think general impressions are important in finding out what a composer means to you, but it's just as important to keep in mind the details.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Amadea said:


> Labels are very useful when studying. But the labels "romantic", "classic", "baroque" are used quite in a fluid way by historians today (eg. Beethoven) and they are different labels than the specific emotional/conceptual ones Captainnumber36 uses. The same goes in painting etc and arts in general.


Captainnumber36's descriptors are his subjective response, which are completely valid for him, but probably few others. Maybe it is a way to talk about the music among a group of people, one thinks Bach is cerebral, another sees him as religious, someone else finds him something else.

As I said the labels Baroque, Classical, Romantic, etc., describe time spans, not styles. They are most beneficial for looking at a period that has many variables which manifest differently with different composers. IMO a style is a personal expression of an artist's unique point of view and his response to the world around him. A singular voice - but it is the most important trait for any artist to possess.

To let this unique aspect get lumped into a broad category of a period obscures what the artist has to offer.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

SanAntone said:


> I agree, which was the point of my previous post. It is reductive to think of all Baroque composers having a "style". IMO, the Baroque period is a time span with a number of composers writing in a loosely related style. But as is often said the devil is in the details, or maybe God is in the details is more appropriate. Vivaldi doesn't sound much like Bach, and Zelenka sounds like neither. Superficially, Handel might be said to sound like Bach - but the key word is superficially. Scarlatti could never be confused with Bach, or Handel, or Vivaldi.


accompaniment figures in Zelenka sound very peculiar;


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I know, I've been making lots of Bach threads here, but, there is such a perfect blend of emotion and logic in his music which leaves me feeling quite assertive. Anyone else get that feeling from him?


Yes, in fact it is one of the qualities of Baroque music (the logic part). Bach is also much more in other qualities, no wonder he is one of mankind's top composers of all times.


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I disagree. I think general impressions are important in finding out what a composer means to you, but it's just as important to keep in mind the details.


Yes, I get it. But in my opinion you risk of falling into stereotypical views about a compsoer which you yourself created. That will limit you in the comprehension of the composer. Also, the same piece by the same author can mean something completely different to you in different moments of your life, played by a different performer, adapted for a different instrument, etc. etc.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Amadea said:


> Yes, I get it. But in my opinion you risk of falling into stereotypical views about a compsoer which you yourself created. That will limit you in the comprehension of the composer. Also, the same piece by the same author can mean something completely different to you in different moments of your life, played by a different performer, adapted for a different instrument, etc. etc.


Not everyone is looking to go into a deep analysis of the music they like and the more general view is helpful to them, and just fine imo.

I agree with your last part that it can mean something different in those varying contexts.


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Not everyone is looking to go into a deep analysis of the music they like and the more general view is helpful to them, and just fine imo.


I wasn't talking about deep analysis of the music. You're interested in the emotions. I'll give you examples. Now, tell me how do you view Mozart as example.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Amadea said:


> I wasn't talking about deep analysis of the music. You're interested in the emotions. I'll give you examples. Now, tell me how do you view Mozart as example.


I know it's hard to state a composer is reflective of one emotion throughout their entire catalogue because there is always diversity, however, I think there are trends which leave us with general impressions. Leave it to the more dedicated listener to get into the details.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

Captainnumber36 said:


> I know, I've been making lots of Bach threads here, but, there is such a perfect blend of emotion and logic in his music which leaves me feeling quite assertive. Anyone else get that feeling from him?


The art of writing counterpoint and fugue make it sound "assertive". It like having a dialogue with logically developed arguments.


----------

