# Tchaikovsky: Gay or Straight?



## peterb

I thought this was a settled issue, but it came up on another thread, so I wanted to explore it here.

My understanding is that Tchaikovsky's own letters, as well as his brother's, are quite open about his homosexuality. From what i've read, no serious historian disagrees. Tchaikovsky wasn't just gay, he was openly gay.

Sources: 
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...e-1818839.html
http://www.thewire.com/entertainment...ely-gay/68679/

Are there any sources that make a credible case that Tchaikovsky was _not_ gay? Please share those sources here. Thanks!

PS: Whether Tchaikovsky was gay or not obviously has no bearing on the quality of his music. I hope we can all at least agree on that. But it's an interesting topic, nonetheless.


----------



## Ravndal

Let me spoil the fun for you: Most people here will claim the he was gay. Then sharik (from moscow) will come and explain that the western world has been brainwashed, and therefore tchaikovsky was not gay. Then the discussion will digress, and become all about "gay" topic. Therefore i will start rolling the ball with this: Gay/Straight, whatever. It's all natural.

Oh, i forgot to say what i was supposed to. This thread will not lead to anything good, I'm afraid..


----------



## ptr

If his sexuality does not pertain to his music, why all this interest?

I don't find it at all obvious that ones sexuality has nothing to do with the quality of the craft and actions of anyone, I'd rather say that our sexuality governs and is the drive of much more then most societies give it credit for!

/ptr


----------



## SiegendesLicht

So, what exactly in Tchaikovsky's music sounds gay?


----------



## Morimur

Ravndal said:


> This thread will not lead to anything good, I'm afraid..


We can definitely agree on that.


----------



## Guest

Gay or straight? Yes, I expect he was!


----------



## Manxfeeder

Sometimes I wonder, and sometimes I just throw up my hands and scream


----------



## amfortas

I think it makes no more or less difference than many other topics discussed here. If you have a biographical interest in Tchaikovsky, of course you'll want to know about his sexuality. If you don't, you won't. 

Hopefully, those who wish to consider the issue can do so without it leading to an angry (and fruitless) political discussion.


----------



## peterb

Mostly I just created this thread in an attempt to get the Klinghoffer thread on the opera forum back on track by sending the argument over here.


----------



## Ukko

It appears from the data available that PIT was homosexual. The same data indicates that he was seldom if ever gay.


----------



## mamascarlatti

Whether a musician is gay or straight can be important depending on the society they grow up in. For instance, did the fact that Britten was gay (we don't need to debate that one) make him feel like an outsider, a theme that appears in his operas?


----------



## Mister Man

Did Neil Armstrong sneeze before stepping out of the lunar lander?


----------



## Blancrocher

I'm somewhat surprised and disappointed by the disinterest in the sex-life of a major composer that I'm observing in this thread.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

Who cares?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## Guest

mamascarlatti said:


> Whether a musician is gay or straight can be important depending on the society they grow up in. For instance, did the fact that Britten was gay (we don't need to debate that one) make him feel like an outsider, a theme that appears in his operas?


I agree. But if such themes _don't _appear in the music - I don't know enough of PIT's music to say - is it important for him?


----------



## worov

Was he gay or not ? Who cares ? Why do you want to know ? Do you have a crush on him ?


----------



## Cosmos

He might have been gay or bi. But as everyone else has mentioned, it doesn't really matter


----------



## mtmailey

I think he was undercover gay because back then being openly gay caused problems.But most mortals are more concerned about his music though.


----------



## sharik

he was of *asexual* view on relation between persons, he was so pure in his soul and heart and mind he could do without sex whatsoever when liking someone.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

sharik said:


> he was of *asexual* view on relation between persons, he was so pure in his soul and heart and mind he could do without sex whatsoever when liking someone.


Because, obviously, sexual intercourse is a filthy, filthy sin.


----------



## amfortas

sharik said:


> he was of *asexual* view on relation between persons, he was so pure in his soul and heart and mind he could do without sex whatsoever when liking someone.


Oh I get it!

Just like Michael Jackson.


----------



## amfortas

mamascarlatti said:


> Whether a musician is gay or straight can be important depending on the society they grow up in. For instance, did the fact that Britten was gay (we don't need to debate that one) make him feel like an outsider, a theme that appears in his operas?


Britten may have felt like even more of an outsider because of his liking for young boys--a theme that also seems to have had a bearing on his choice of operatic subjects.


----------



## Piwikiwi

amfortas said:


> Britten may have felt like even more of an outsider because of his liking for young boys--a theme that also seems to have had a bearing on his choice of operatic subjects.


That always creeps me out


----------



## sharik

Majed Al Shamsi said:


> Because, obviously, sexual intercourse is a filthy, filthy sin.


its filth of course. not sure about sin.


----------



## mmsbls

The thread is about Tchaikovsky's sexual orientation. It morphed into a discussion of present day political views. Please return the focus back to Tchaikovsky, sexual orientation, and music. Several potentially disruptive off topic posts were removed.


----------



## sharik

amfortas said:


> Just like Michael Jackson.


not quite so. Jackson was persecuted by the US authorities for changing skin colour. Tchaikovsky did not change skin colour, thus no persecution of him.


----------



## amfortas

sharik said:


> not quite so. Jackson was persecuted by the US authorities for changing skin colour. Tchaikovsky did not change skin colour, thus no persecution of him.


I was being facetious. Many people questioned Jackson's "purity"; I would do the same for Tchaikovsky.

I suspect that truly asexual people do exist, but are much rarer than either homosexuals or heterosexuals. Also, I can't help but wonder why it's so important to believe in a Tchaikovsky who was transcendently "pure in his soul and heart and mind."


----------



## Wood

Whilst relevant to some degree, I find the fascination in famous people's sexual urges, both in this thread regarding Tchai and Brit, and in the world at large, somewhat disturbing and disproportionate.

I'm sure many members wouldn't like to be discussed in the same way themselves. 

It was much more healthy when we concentrated on their relationship with their mothers.


----------



## Chronochromie

sharik said:


> he was of *asexual* view on relation between persons, he was so pure in his soul and heart and mind he could do without sex whatsoever when liking someone.


Oh come on. There is clear evidence that he was not heterosexual and had homosexual relations. Don't even try to deify him. It would be interesting to know your stance with regards to homosexuality, but this may lead to the closing of this thread.


----------



## amfortas

Wood said:


> Whilst relevant to some degree, I find the fascination in famous people's sexual urges, both in this thread regarding Tchai and Brit, and in the world at large, somewhat disturbing and disproportionate.
> 
> I'm sure many members wouldn't like to be discussed in the same way themselves.
> 
> It was much more healthy when we concentrated on their relationship with their mothers.


I suppose it depends on what you consider "proportionate."

This is one thread among many (though for all I know, not the first on this topic). And for better or worse, there has been a biographical interest in the Lives of the Great Artists at least since the Renaissance. Couple that with our post-Freudian perspective on the significance of sexuality, it's not surprising such issues will be broached.

It certainly would go too far to suggest that sexuality can somehow explain the mystery of a composer's creative genius. But it can shed interesting light (particularly in Britten's case) on the choice of subject matter.


----------



## SONNET CLV

Perhaps it does matter.

The controversy surrounding Tchaikovsky's death, by cholera(?), still rages. Did the composer instead commit suicide, and if so, why?

Some of you may recall the _New York Times _"Arts" section article from July 26, 1981: "DID TCHAIKOVSKY REALLY COMMIT SUICIDE?" The argument hinges on the composer's homosexuality.

Article is here: http://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/26/arts/did-tchaikovsky-really-commit-suicide.html

I draw your attention to this section, quoted below:


...even if all of Russia were to have embraced homosexuality, it is clear from letter after letter that Tchaikovsky himself never did accept it. He regarded it as a terrible weakness and a shameful disease that ought to be curable. As for exile, his love for Russia was so powerful that even a few days away from home could send him into deep depression: read, for instance, his letters from New York in 1891 when he came to conduct at the inaugural concerts of Carnegie Hall.

Tchaikovsky spent a lifetime covering up his homosexuality, and why not? Whatever the climate of acceptance may have been in certain clandestine circles, it is indisputably so that homosexuality in his time was a criminal offense. One of Mr. Spiegelman's documents gives the actual wording of the criminal code of the Russian Empire, as published in 1842, 1866 and 1885. The punishment for homosexuality was lashing with birch rods, deportation to Siberia and loss of all civil rights. No wonder Tchaikovsky, at age 37, tried marriage (he left his bride after nine days), and in letters to Modeste urged his brother to take a similar step in hopes of shielding the family name. It does not take a tremendous leap of imagination to conceive of such a tortured man committing suicide to keep the truth from coming out. 

I have long been leery of the official story of Tchaikovsky's death (from cholera) on the basis of my personal experience of listening to the Sixth Symphony, the _Pathetique_. My experience may be unique, but it convinces me that Tchaikovsky, while writing the symphony, had a program in mind, but he would not reveal it.

Here is a bit of pertinent text from Wikipedia:


Tchaikovsky dedicated the Pathétique to his nephew, Vladimir "Bob" Davydov, with whom he was in love.[13]

The Pathétique has been the subject of a number of theories as to a hidden program. This goes back to the first performance of the work, when fellow composer Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov asked Tchaikovsky whether there was a program to the new symphony, and Tchaikovsky asserted that there was, but would not divulge it.[14]

A suggested program has been what Taruskin disparagingly termed "symphony as suicide note."[15] This idea began to assert itself as early as the second performance of the symphony in Saint Petersburg, not long after the composer had died. People at that performance "listened hard for portents. As always, they found what they were looking for: a brief but conspicuous quotation from the Russian Orthodox requiem at the stormy climax of the first movement, and of course the unconventional Adagio finale with its tense harmonies at the onset and its touching depiction of the dying of the light in conclusion".[15]

The questions remain: Is the cause of Tchaikovsky's death from cholera, as officially reported, or is there something more to the story? Does the composer's final symphony (Tchaikovsky died less than a week after premiering the work) offer a key to his fate?

Here is my experience. It begins with the Beethoven Fifth.

When I was young and first encountered the Beethoven Fifth Symphony, I was greatly disturbed by the notion that the second movement didn't seem to feature the famous theme (da da da DUM) which was so prevalent in the other three movements. In fact, to my ears, the second movement made no sense at all and didn't fit the symphony. I didn't understand why such a competent composer as Beethoven would write a movement so foreign to the rest of the work, so I stopped playing the second movement whenever I cued up the Fifth on my old turntable. I would skip the second movement and move to side 2 of my Beethoven Fifth disc, playing the third and fourth movements. I did this for years.

This odd behavior was unique to the Beethoven Fifth, and one other work in my early classical record collection: the Tchaikovsky Sixth Symphony. Again, it was the second movement that disturbed me. A beautiful piece of music in its own right, a lilting 5/4 dance-like piece, the movement struck me as not belonging to the symphony at all. So I would play the Sixth and skip over that second movement. Again, I did this for years.

In graduate school, one of the first books assigned me in a Psychology course was a title called _First You Cry _by Betty Rollin. Rollin was an NBC news correspondent who was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1975 and wrote about it in her book _First You Cry_. It was a groundbreaking book in its day. But what struck me was that Rollin talked about the stages of grieving, a concept that was new to me at the time, at least as a formal presentation. First you cry, when you get "bad news". Then you go through a series of stages: anger, denial, confrontation, and eventually either acceptance or failure to accept. The failure to accept can devastate one.

And it was while reading about those stages of grief that I was struck by the meaning of Beethoven's Fifth, and the significance of that odd second movement, so unrelated to what else was going on. I actually remember rushing home to play the symphony, the entire work for the first time in years. That first movement is, as Beethoven described it, "fate knocking at the door". Fate, bringing Beethoven his problem -- impending deafness. The date of the symphony's composition corresponds to that time when the composer was facing his affliction and actually contemplating suicide. (See _The Heiligenstadt Testament_.) In any case, the composer gives us the news of fate (da da da DUM), and his "anger" in that remarkable first movement. And if the first theme is Fate, the second theme, the lyrical theme of the sonata form, seems to me to be Beethoven's theme. In fact, each time I hear it I imagine hearing the composer humming to himself the words "Ich bin Ludwig van Beethoven, Ich bin Ludwig van Beethoven" (I am Ludwig van Beethoven). That seems egoistic enough to suit my opinion about the composer. (I had long wondered, too, about that solo oboe line that appears right after the development section of the symphony. But now it made sense. I recalled reading somewhere that Beethoven had studied manuscripts by John Dowland, the English lutenist. Dowland is known for his "_Lachrimae_", music depicting "tears". The music swells and drops, like a tear dropping from the eye. I remember examining some of Dowland's "_Lachrimae_" and noting the similarity to that oboe solo in Beethoven's Fifth. It's a tear drop. It's Beethoven crying. And it is in keeping with the stages of grieving that Rollin wrote about.)

So what about that second movement? Of course, it is denial. That is why the famous theme doesn't appear. Beethoven is in denial. How better to deny the impending deafness than to ignore the warning of Fate. No da da da DUM.

The third movement comes back at you with the Fate theme, but now played with "struggle", the action of those scale passages. This leads directly into the conclusion, that glorious finale in which the Beethoven theme (theme 2 of the opening movement) asserts itself in triumph over the Fate theme, which dwindles to a mere weakened whisper by the end of the movement.

Beethoven triumphs over his Fate, over his deafness. He does not take his life. Rather, he goes on to create a body of work unlike any other. Beethoven has won. And the Fifth Symphony is his document of the victory. (No wonder we associate it so much with triumph, as when Bernstein performed it at the falling of the Berlin wall.)

So what about the Tchaikovsky Sixth?

I saw in that the same pattern. In fact, I believe that Tchaikovsky's secretive program is that his symphony is a rewriting of Beethoven's Fifth. Even though psychology hadn't yet formulated its methodology of grieving stages, the great genius composers intuited them, even as Shakespeare does in _Hamlet_.

Note the opening of Tchaikovsky's symphony. It is the "da da da DUM" of Beethoven's opening, only now the notes are more like Fate sliding under the crack under the door, with that slimy sounding bassoon proclaiming the news. Tchaikovsky has an affliction, too: his homosexuality, which disturbed him his whole life. (Note the second theme of the symphony, the great lyrical theme, one of the most powerfully beautiful themes in all of music. Line that theme up, note for note, with the solo oboe theme of Beethoven's Fifth. I believe you'll find the notes match. Tchaikovsky is giving us Beethoven's momentary teardrop as a full blown outcry of weeping -- quite fitting for a high Romantic composer with the overwhelming emotions of Tchaikovsky.)

So what is that second movement? The movement I for so long refused to play on my turntable? I propose it is Russian wedding music. Recall that Tchaikovsky actually married once, but that the marriage did not work out and the composer actually attempted suicide by throwing himself into a river, from which he was fished out before he could drown. What better sense of denial for a homosexual man than to marry and present it as wedding music?

The third movement, that shattering struggle of intense scale passages, presents a return to Fate. One can again sense the return of anger (as one does in the Beethoven third movement) as Fate is once again confronted.

But it is that final movement where Tchaikovsky makes a turn away from Beethoven's offering. Where the German gives us triumph, the Russian can only find despair. He cannot accept, and he composes one of the darkest, most devastating passages in music. A movement which ends in complete collapse, with the dying out of the heartbeat itself.

Six days after the premier of the symphony, Tchaikovsky was dead. Cholera? Perhaps. But perhaps it was something else. Perhaps the Sixth Symphony, and its secret program, bears witness to the truth.

In any case, I'm merely proposing that Tchaikovsky's personal feelings do matter, and that they possible propel his music. At least I believe so.

As I look back to those years when I refused to play the second movements of the Beethoven Fifth and the Tchaikovsky Sixth, I chastise myself for my ignorance. But it makes me marvel even more so at the nature of genius. The intuitive nature of the greatest of minds -- minds such as those of Beethoven and Tchaikovsky.


----------



## sharik

amfortas said:


> I can't help but wonder why it's so important to believe in a Tchaikovsky who was transcendently "pure in his soul and heart and mind."


it's not that which is important really but keeping the name of Tchaikovsky out of today's politics & policies as well as anyone else.


----------



## sharik

Der Leiermann said:


> There is clear evidence that he was not heterosexual and had homosexual relations


then provide us that evidence.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

sharik said:


> it's not that which is important really but keeping the name of Tchaikovsky out of today's politics & policies as well as anyone else.


If Tchaikovsky came back to life, he would most likely avoid today's politics and today's policymakers, including gay ones, like the plague, no matter if he was gay or straight himself.

He would also avoid like the plague those who would reduce his person and his life to his sexuality alone. We may live nowadays in a Freudian, over-sexed world, but back then people understood that one's life and one's relationships are much more multifaceted than only sex. I think Tchaikovsky with his genius understood that too.


----------



## sharik

SONNET CLV said:


> One of Mr. Spiegelman's documents gives the actual wording of the criminal code of the Russian Empire, as published in 1842, 1866 and 1885. The punishment for homosexuality was lashing with birch rods, deportation to Siberia and loss of all civil rights


no such code ever existed in Russia, they didn't even know how to deal with homosexuality, at the time.


----------



## Majed Al Shamsi

sharik said:


> its filth of course. not sure about sin.


I need to work on my sarcasm skills...


----------



## peterb

"Nowadays, when I read and hear that Tchaikovsky's homosexuality was a fiction invented by unpatriotic researchers, I can only laugh," said Polida Veydman, director of the Tchaikovsky Museum in Klin, outside of Moscow. "Denying his homosexuality is absurd." One only has to read the composer's letters or journal entries, in which he openly reported about his intimate life, his passions and disappointments.

The notion that his homosexuality had nothing to do with his creativity is also wrong, said Veydman. "His creative work is strongly autobiographical. Of course such a decisive part of his personality would play an important role," she said."

Mostly the reason I think it's important to discuss is that I think it's sort of shameful to try to erase such an integral part of the guy's personality. It would be like trying to write a biography of Giuseppi Verdi while trying to deny this existence of Giuseppina Strepponi. Did Strepponi "cause" Verdi to write La Traviata? Surely not. But knowing about their situation gives us a fuller understanding of the man. And trying to erase her from his history is, simply, disrespectful. Similarly, trying to erase Tchaikovsky's sexuality is disrespectful. IMO.


----------



## SONNET CLV

SONNET CLV said:


> Some of you may recall the _New York Times _"Arts" section article from July 26, 1981: "DID TCHAIKOVSKY REALLY COMMIT SUICIDE?" The argument hinges on the composer's homosexuality.
> I draw your attention to this section, quoted below:
> Tchaikovsky spent a lifetime covering up his homosexuality, and why not? Whatever the climate of acceptance may have been in certain clandestine circles, it is indisputably so that homosexuality in his time was a criminal offense. One of Mr. Spiegelman's documents gives the actual wording of the criminal code of the Russian Empire, as published in 1842, 1866 and 1885. The punishment for homosexuality was lashing with birch rods, deportation to Siberia and loss of all civil rights. No wonder Tchaikovsky, at age 37, tried marriage (he left his bride after nine days), and in letters to Modeste urged his brother to take a similar step in hopes of shielding the family name. It does not take a tremendous leap of imagination to conceive of such a tortured man committing suicide to keep the truth from coming out.





sharik said:


> no such code ever existed in Russia, they didn't even know how to deal with homosexuality, at the time.





Ravndal said:


> Let me spoil the fun for you: Most people here will claim the he was gay. *Then sharik (from moscow) will come and explain that the western world has been brainwashed, and therefore tchaikovsky was not gay*.


By the way, the reference above to Modeste, Peter Tchaikovsky's brother, ("…in letters to Modeste urged his brother to take a similar step…") is readily understandable when one realizes that Modeste, too, was homosexual. True, the odds of two brothers both being gay are high, but it happens.

I don't hold a lot of "stock" in Wikipedia articles, but they do serve generally for quick information. I have no reason to doubt this paragraph from Wiki:
Homosexuality has been documented in Russia for centuries. The earliest documented bans on homosexuality date to the early-mid 17th century. Gregory Karpovich Kotoshikhin recorded during the reign of Czar Alexis Mikhailovich that male homosexuals were put to death, and also states that female homosexuals are also put to death by burning.[1] Government attempts at preventing homosexual practices began in the 18th century, with Tsar Peter the Great banning homosexual relations in the armed forces in 1716, as a part of his attempt to modernise the country. In 1832 further laws were enacted criminalising certain sexual acts between two males; however, an LGBT subculture developed in Russia during that century, with many significant Russians being openly homosexual or bisexual.

And this:

In 1832,[3] Tsar Nicholas I added Article 995 which outlawed _muzhelozhstvo_. While this could have created a ban on all forms of private adult voluntary homosexual behavior, the courts tended to limit its interpretation to **** sex between men, thus making private acts of oral sex between consenting men legal. The law did not explicitly address female homosexuality or cross-dressing, although both behaviors were considered to be equally immoral and may have been punished under other laws (similar to how the Church would punish girls for being 'tomboys'), as lesbians were previously punished by law in the 17th century and prior.[4] Persons convicted under Article 995 were to be stripped of their rights and relocated to Siberia for four to five years. It is unknown how many Russians were sentenced under this law, although there were a number of openly gay and bisexual Russians during this era, and homoerotic rites were popular among some religious dissidents in the far north of Russia.[5] The relatively high number of openly gay or bisexual artists and intellectuals continued on into the late nineteenth century.

Apparently Russia is in denial, and that is not hard to understand when we learn about Putin's latest rants against homosexuality.
Consider this article by Arit John from _WIRE_: "Sorry, Russia, but Tchaikovsky Was Definitely Gay." Which says:

Historians don't doubt that Peter Tchaikovsky was gay, but an upcoming biopic filmed in his native country will. Yuri Arabov told a Russian newspaper that his adaptation of the 19th century composer's life won't focus on his sexuality because "it is far from a fact that Tchaikovsky was a homosexual," _The New York Times_ reported.
Arabov also said that films that "advertise" homosexuality are "outside the sphere of art," and that only "philistines" think the composer was gay. In light of Russia's recent anti-gay legislation, this could be seen as another effort to erase the country's gay history. Well, sorry Russia, but Tchaikovsky - along with dozens of other Russian cultural icons - were gay, as many scholars would readily attest. 
Pyotr Tchaikovsky (composer)
Tchaikovsky composed two of the most quintessentially Russian ballets - _Swan Lake_ and _The Nutcracker_. And as Christopher Harrity described in _The Advocate_, Tchaikovsky's sexuality was well known, and also well documented in his own letters. Harrity writes (emphasis added):
The history of Tchaikovsky's homosexuality was suppressed in Russia by the Soviets, and it has only recently become widely known in post-Soviet Russia. Tchaikovsky's* letters and diaries, as well as the letters of his brother Modest, who was also gay, make clear his orientation.* [...] Many of Tchaikovsky's most intimate relationships were homosexual: Tchaikovsky's servant Aleksey Sofronov and his nephew, Vladimir "Bob" Davydov. Gay author E.M. Forster referenced Tchaikovsky and Davydov in his love story Maurice, written in 1913-14 and published in 1971: "...Tchaikovsky had fallen in love with his own nephew, and dedicated his masterpiece_ [Symphonie pathetique] _to him."
And as _The Independent_ reported in 2009, a biography by Roland John Wiley found definitive evidence of sexuality:
A new biography by Roland John Wiley was published this autumn and ecstatically reviewed in these pages by Michael Church; it claims that some of those mysteries are no more than myths. For instance, Wiley points out that Tchaikovsky was openly gay all his life, to the point that he feminised the names of the young men he consorted with, and indeed his own - signing a letter to his brother (who was also gay) "Petrolina".http://www.thewire.com/entertainment/2013/08/sorry-russia-tchaikovsky-was-definitely-gay/68679/

If some contemporary Russians (as did their prior Soviet counterparts) choose to be homophobic, that's their prerogative. But the thinking progressive world knows better. We also know that homosexuality is a reality, unfortunately causes a lot of pain for a lot of people because of stigmas associated with it and the prejudice that accompanies it, but that gay people, men and women, past and present, are real people who, like heterosexuals, contribute great things to our world.

Tchaikovsky has long been a beloved composer to me. I became interested in classical music because of his music. I thank the man every day of my life because he made a difference in that life. I don't care if he is blue, from Mars, and has seven arms. The man produced profound music that I and much of the world cherishes. And we don't care if he was gay.

Many of our best artists are. What folly is it to attempt to cover that up? It is sheer stupidity. Period.

The one thing I do lament is the possibility that Tchaikovsky's homosexuality may have led to his early demise, by way of suicide. As far as I'm concerned, the book on that issue has not yet been closed.


----------



## sharik

peterb said:


> "Nowadays, when I read and hear that Tchaikovsky's homosexuality was a fiction invented by unpatriotic researchers, I can only laugh," said Polida Veydman, director of the Tchaikovsky Museum in Klin, outside of Moscow


you forgot to provide a link to that text, where and when it has been published?


----------



## sharik

SONNET CLV said:


> I have no reason to doubt this paragraph from Wiki


wiki is subject to further corrections, you can trust it only if you have a well documented proof.


----------



## sharik

SONNET CLV said:


> Apparently Russia is in denial, and that is not hard to understand when we learn about Putin's latest rants against homosexuality


what 'rants' eh?.. saw them while having a nap or what?


----------



## amfortas

sharik said:


> it's not that which is important really but keeping the name of Tchaikovsky out of today's politics & policies as well as anyone else.


I appreciate your reverence for the composer, but I find the man more interesting than the plaster saint.


----------



## Blancrocher

amfortas said:


> I appreciate your reverence for the composer, but I find the man more interesting than the plaster saint.


If you're looking for plaster saints, I don't really recommend hunting among music composers.

Or saints, for that matter.


----------



## sharik

amfortas said:


> I appreciate your reverence for the composer, but I find the man more interesting than the plaster saint.


'plaster saint' huh?.. no living person can be like that, neither was 'the composer' but he wasn't gay either.


----------



## sharik

SONNET CLV said:


> Consider this article by Arit John from _WIRE_


no i won't because you say 'Wire' as if it is a Gospel truth whereas it's only a tabloid.

i'd suggest you name at least one person persecuted in then Russia for being homosexual, will you?


----------



## peterb

sharik said:


> neither was 'the composer' but he wasn't gay either.


You forgot to provide a link to that claim, where and when it has been published? We can trust that claim only if you have a well documented proof.

:devil:


----------



## amfortas

sharik said:


> 'plaster saint' huh?.. no living person can be like that, neither was 'the composer' but he wasn't gay either.


Since others here have offered support for their position, can you recommend an authoritative biographical source that argues for Tchaikovsky's heterosexuality (if possible, in English)?

EDIT: peterb beat me to the punch. But I suspect my request is a bit less tongue-in-cheek.


----------



## peterb

sharik said:


> no i won't because you say 'Wire' as if it is a Gospel truth whereas it's only a tabloid.


The Wire is the internet presence of The Atlantic Monthly, which is literally one of the most highly respected literary outlets in the United States, second only to The New Yorker, I'd say. That you think this is (or are willing to characterize this as) a "tabloid" speaks volumes.


----------



## sharik

SONNET CLV said:


> the thinking progressive world knows better


'progressive world' omg!?.. must wanted to say '*degenerate world*' right?



SONNET CLV said:


> We also know that homosexuality is a reality


'reality' doesn't mean a reality of that sort should not be combatted.


----------



## sharik

peterb said:


> You forgot to provide a link to that claim, where and when it has been published? We can trust that claim only if you have a well documented proof


here's the proof: his contemporaries wrote of him anything but that he was a ********, see.



peterb said:


> The Wire is the internet presence of The Atlantic Monthly, which is literally one of the most highly respected literary outlets in the United States


respected by whom? respected for what?.. for ugly tripe boorish articles like the one in question?


----------



## sharik

amfortas said:


> can you recommend an authoritative biographical source that argues for Tchaikovsky's heterosexuality


there's none, because it would be like testifying for heterosexuality of prince Charles, for example; get the idea?


----------



## sharik

as for cross dressing in Russia, have a read - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadezhda_Durova


----------



## amfortas

sharik said:


> there's none, because it would be like testifying for heterosexuality of prince Charles, for example; get the idea?


Exactly. There's plenty of evidence for Charles's heterosexuality. Something similar for Tchaikovsky would be helpful.

But then again . . .



sharik said:


> 'progressive world' omg!?.. must wanted to say '*degenerate world*' right?





sharik said:


> 'reality' doesn't mean a reality of that sort should not be combatted.





sharik said:


> here's the proof: his contemporaries wrote of him anything but that he was a ********, see.


Sorry, it's not amusing anymore.


----------



## sharik

amfortas said:


> There's plenty of evidence for Charles's heterosexuality. Something similar for Tchaikovsky would be helpful.


same about the latter, i.e. his marriages and the society's perception of him as of heterosexual.


----------



## Mahlerian

SONNET CLV said:


> When I was young and first encountered the Beethoven Fifth Symphony, I was greatly disturbed by the notion that the second movement didn't seem to feature the famous theme (da da da DUM) which was so prevalent in the other three movements. In fact, to my ears, the second movement made no sense at all and didn't fit the symphony.
> 
> ...
> 
> So what about that second movement? Of course, it is denial. That is why the famous theme doesn't appear. Beethoven is in denial. How better to deny the impending deafness than to ignore the warning of Fate. No da da da DUM.


The problem with this is that the rhythm _does_ appear in the second movement.


----------



## Blancrocher

sharik said:


> as for cross dressing in Russia, have a read - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadezhda_Durova


Durova seems like a fascinating person--I've added her autobiography to my library queue. In the meantime, I've fallen down the Wikipedian rabbit-hole. Interesting page containing a "list of wartime cross-dressers":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wartime_cross-dressers


----------



## peterb

sharik said:


> same about the latter, i.e. his marriages and the society's perception of him as of heterosexual.


[Citation needed]


----------



## sharik

peterb said:


> [Citation needed]


its needed not, the absence of any quote is the best evidence Tchaikovsky was straight.


----------



## Ukko

sharik said:


> its needed not, the absence of any quote is the best evidence Tchaikovsky was straight.


"the absence of any quote"?


----------



## sharik

Ukko said:


> "the absence of any quote"?


the absence of a quote.


----------



## peterb

sharik said:


> the absence of a quote.


Actually, we've provided several sources in this very thread. You've dismissed the (excellent) sources. That's your privilege. _You_, on the other hand, have provided no actual sources and simply made assertions with no evidence. That's also your privilege, but you shouldn't be surprised when no one believes you. I will follow up with some additional sources in my next post. I really should thank you for motivating me to dig up such excellent evidence. It wouldn't have happened without you!


----------



## peterb

Biographer Roland John Wiley quotes a letter from Tchaikovsky to Modest in _Tchaikovsky_, Oxford University Press.



Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky said:


> Cursed buggermania forms an impassable gulf between me and most people, It imparts to my character an estrangement, fear of people, shyness, immoderate bashfulness, mistrust, in a word, a thousand traits from which I am getting ever more unsociable. Imagine that often, and for hours at a time, I think about a monastery or something of the kind.





Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky said:


> "I am now going through a very critical period of my life. I will go into more detail later, but for now I will simply tell you, I have decided to get married. It is unavoidable. I must do it, not just for myself but for you, Modeste, and all those I love. I think that for both of us our dispositions are the greatest and most insuperable obstacle to happiness, and we must fight our natures to the best of our ability. So far as I am concerned, I will do my utmost to get married this year, and if I lack the necessary courage, I will at any rate abandon my habits forever. Surely you realize how painful it is for me to know that people pity and forgive me when in truth I am not guilty of anything. How appalling to think that those who love me are sometimes ashamed of me. In short, I seek marriage or some sort of public involvement with a woman so as to shut the mouths of assorted contemptible creatures whose opinions mean nothing to me, but who are in a position to cause distress to those near to me."


The Washington Post reviewed the biography here. British newspaper "The Independent" discusses the biography here:



The Independent said:


> For instance, Wiley points out that Tchaikovsky was openly gay all his life, to the point that he feminised the names of the young men he consorted with, and indeed his own - signing a letter to his brother (who was also gay) "Petrolina". The imperial court, the book implies, appears to have taken such matters rather in its stride.


No doubt Sharik will be by momentarily to explain (without a citation) that "buggermania", in Russian, refers to the late-19th century fad for collecting various types of beetles.


----------



## sharik

peterb said:


> we've provided several sources in this very thread. You've dismissed the (excellent) sources


these - excellent?!
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...e-1818839.html
http://www.thewire.com/entertainment...ely-gay/68679/



peterb said:


> _You_, on the other hand, have provided no actual sources and simply made assertions with no evidence


i gave you evidence alright, it consists of the very fact that *none* of Tchaikovsky contemporaries, neither in Russia nor in the West, has noticed him to even slighly resemble a homosexual or demonstrate the behaviour of a such.



peterb said:


> "I am now going through a very critical period of my life. I will go into more detail later, but for now I will simply tell you, I have decided to get married. It is unavoidable. I must do it, not just for myself but for you, Modeste, and all those I love. I think that for both of us our dispositions are the greatest and most insuperable obstacle to happiness, and we must fight our natures to the best of our ability. So far as I am concerned, I will do my utmost to get married this year, and if I lack the necessary courage, I will at any rate abandon my habits forever. Surely you realize how painful it is for me to know that people pity and forgive me when in truth I am not guilty of anything. How appalling to think that those who love me are sometimes ashamed of me. In short, I seek marriage or some sort of public involvement with a woman so as to shut the mouths of assorted contemptible creatures whose opinions mean nothing to me, but who are in a position to cause distress to those near to me."


the man was in need of *money*, thats it!


----------



## sharik

peterb said:


> 'Cursed buggermania forms an impassable gulf between me and most people, It imparts to my character an estrangement, fear of people, shyness, immoderate bashfulness, mistrust, in a word, a thousand traits from which I am getting ever more unsociable. Imagine that often, and for hours at a time, I think about a monastery or something of the kind.'


this very text is another evidence he was not homosexual, he even thought of retirement to monastery.


----------



## sharik

peterb said:


> The Independent 'For instance, Wiley points out that Tchaikovsky was openly gay all his life, to the point that he feminised the names of the young men he consorted with, and indeed his own - signing a letter to his brother (who was also gay) "Petrolina". The imperial court, the book implies, appears to have taken such matters rather in its stride'


who the hell are those Independent hacks and that Wiley fellow at all?!.. they barely speak Russian and have never been here!


----------



## peterb

sharik said:


> who the hell are those Independent hacks and that Wiley fellow at all?!.. they barely speak Russian and have never been here!


http://lmgtfy.com/?q=roland+john+wiley&l=1#seen

Looks like you're wrong. Again.

Anyway, obviously if you really want to understand Tchaikovsky's inner life and music, one should speak French, not Russian. But that's neither here nor there. Given that you wouldn't even accept evidence from the _director of the Tchaikovsky Museum in Klin_, it's not like it matters. There's no amount of evidence that will convince you of the truth. That's OK with me. I'm not actually arguing with you, I'm just using your content-free assertions as a convenient place to hang actual documentation that those of us who are interested in actually discussion the issue can look at.

On a non-Sharik note, I _am_ legitimately interested in any scholarly sources that provide reasonable support for the idea that Tchaikovsky wasn't gay. As I've indicated, so far I haven't found any, but surely they must be out there, right? If you find one, please add it to the thread.


----------



## SONNET CLV

Mahlerian said:


> The problem with this is that the rhythm _does_ appear in the second movement.
> View attachment 45188


Yes it does ... subtley, almost like a subconscious thought, one that tries to take hold and is then quashed.

Anyone who has a major affliction that brings them into the stages of stress and who is in the denial stage knows that the stresser is still haunting their thoughts, whatever level of denial they assume. The very fact that one is denying portends that one is aware of what it is he is denying.

Thank you for reading my post.


----------



## amfortas

Sharik has already tipped his hand. Acceptance of homosexuality is "degenerate" and should be "combatted," while a gay man is no more than a "********."

With that backward a mindset, he won't change his tune any time soon.


----------



## Morimur

This thread should be closed and deleted.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Mister Man said:


> Did Neil Armstrong sneeze before stepping out of the lunar lander?


I am not sure, however he didn't step out of the lunar lander and onto the surface of the moon....


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

sharik said:


> 'progressive world' omg!?.. must wanted to say '*degenerate world*' right?
> 
> 'reality' doesn't mean a reality of that sort should not be combatted.


Well, the world is changing views and learning to understand more about people and how to accept them....sorry if you would prefer to move to a developing nations that still persecutes LGBTI people.

Further note, it doesn't matter to me that Tchaikovsky WAS gay and it doesn't make me hear his music any differently, but for people interested in his life and times then it would be so much more hassle free to simply accept that fact.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

amfortas said:


> Sharik has already tipped his hand. Acceptance of homosexuality is "degenerate" and should be "combatted," while a gay man is no more than a "********."
> 
> With that backward a mindset, he won't change his tune any time soon.


Now, multiply this opinion into several millions or even tens of millions, add nuclear weapons and a virulent hatred of the West fuelled by state-owned TV, and you have a cause for concern.


----------



## aleazk

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well, the world is changing views and learning to understand more about people and how to accept them....sorry if you would prefer to move to a developing nations that still persecutes LGBTI people.
> 
> Further note, it doesn't matter to me that Tchaikovsky WAS gay and it doesn't make me hear his music any differently, but for people interested in his life and times then it would be so much more hassle free to simply accept that fact.


I live in a "developing nation" and same sex marriage is 100% legal here, unlike, e.g., Australia. So, my first-world friend, less prejudice, please


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

aleazk said:


> I live in a "developing nation" and same sex marriage is 100% legal here, unlike, e.g., Australia. So, my first-world friend, less prejudice, please


The world is moving quickly! Congrats to Argentina! Although it wasn't the country I had in mind.


----------



## KenOC

Off topic but interesting.

The Chevalier d'Éon was a French diplomat, spy and soldier, whose first 49 years were spent as a man and whose last 33 years were spent as a woman. He dressed as, lived as, and claimed to be anatomically, a female (he wasn't, as it turned out).

There is a muslcal connection: Here he is in 1787 at a fencing match with the Chevalier de Saint Georges, the famous mulatto composer, conductor, violinist, and master swordsman. No word on who won.


----------



## sharik

peterb said:


> obviously if you really want to understand Tchaikovsky's inner life and music, one should speak French, not Russian


i meant to say that anyone writing on the subject of Russia has to have lived here and be able to speak Russian and not participate in any sort of politics.



peterb said:


> you wouldn't even accept evidence from the _director of the Tchaikovsky Museum in Klin_, it's not like it matters


she did *not* present any evidence whatsoever!



peterb said:


> I _am_ legitimately interested in any scholarly sources that provide reasonable support for the idea that Tchaikovsky wasn't gay


you must be joking... for example, how can a healthy person have a medical record unless got ill?
the same with being straight or gay; as long as your straight - nobody cares.



amfortas said:


> Sharik has already tipped his hand. Acceptance of homosexuality is "degenerate" and should be "combatted," while a gay man is no more than a "********." With that backward a mindset, he won't change his tune any time soon.


mine - backward?.. i thought it is yours that's backward and bigoted because you seem to advocate a vulgar and boorish perversion instead of trying to find a cure for it.

progress and enlightenment have existed to help man get away from his filthy and primitive desires, this is what you guys won't understand; you have a warped notion of progress and enlightenment.



ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Well, the world is changing views and learning to understand more about people and how to accept them


yes it does, and the changing should serve to ennoble and dignify man's spirit and not allow it degenerate.



ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> sorry if you would prefer to move to a developing nations that still persecutes LGBTI people


hold on there... who on earth has decided which of nations are 'developing' and which are not, please elaborate?


----------



## Headphone Hermit

sharik said:


> it is yours that's backward and bigoted because you seem to advocate a vulgar and boorish perversion instead of trying to find a cure for it.


A cure? How can a cure be found for something that isn't an illness?

There is little point in talking to someone with the views expresed by Sharik .... but my gay neighbour does not earn my disapproval simply because he engages in a form of sexual behaviour that I absolutely do not wish to share


----------



## sharik

Headphone Hermit said:


> A cure? How can a cure be found for something that isn't an illness?


i meant a cure kind of that of spiritual nature. Tchaikovsky seems to have found it.



Headphone Hermit said:


> but my gay neighbour does not earn my disapproval simply because he engages in a form of sexual behaviour that I absolutely do not wish to share


look, i personally have two gays among my buddies, i even visited a gay club here in Moscow (although in company with a girl) i have nothing agaist those fallen to sin (i myself am no saint) but i'm totally against the today's politics trying to manipulate gay people.


----------



## sharik

SiegendesLicht said:


> Now, multiply this opinion into several millions or even tens of millions, add nuclear weapons and a virulent hatred of the West fuelled by state-owned TV, and you have a cause for concern.


why concern?.. just move away from the West to some other, better, place.


----------



## ptr

sharik said:


> i meant to say that anyone writing on the subject of Russia has to have lived here and be able to speak Russian and not participate in any sort of politics.


I have lived in Russia for ten years and speak fluent Russian, I know more Russians privately then I can account for and the views Mr Sharik maintain are legio. Unfortunately I've seen similar views cook almost every where I been around the world, but not voiced in such medieval ways as done in Russia today.. As a member of a democratic environment I'm fine with others having reactionary views on sexuality, but I will not sit silent and allow these to be unchallenged!

As for not speaking/writing about Russia if You are engaged in politics, this statement just shows how oppressively backwards Russian thinking is, where there life there is politics! (And when You mention politics on TC You get censured, that is a part of the game so I expect this post to vanish!)

FWIW, is has already been shown in this thread by others that there is more then enough written evidence that PIT had more then a platonic interest in his own gender (fx. letters to Modest and Nadezhda von Meck). The fact that some individuals don't want to except this historical fact don't make it less of a truth, and unless they put written historical sources on the table that contradict this, their views will be but views!

/ptr


----------



## SiegendesLicht

sharik said:


> why concern?.. just move away from the West to some other, better, place.


Trust me, the West is good enough for me, even with gay pride parades. I love my German man, I feel at home in his country, and I don't think there is a better place, certainly not Russia. What I am concerned about, is how to keep this place clean and safe from certain nations with a government-fueled hatred of the West, and with nuclear weapons in their hands.


----------



## mmsbls

This thread has once again strayed from Tchaikovsky's sexual orientation and music to an overly political discussion. The thread is closed.


----------

