# Divine Inspiration?



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

Mozart and Prokofiev are said to have conceived their compositions in a ready-made state, they only needed to write down the notes. Beethoven on the other hand, and Bruckner, are known to have started from scratch, making sketch after sketch, crossing out and starting anew. In short: composing was a messy nightmare to them.
My question for TC: what do you think of the suggestion that Mozart (and Prokofiev) received divine inspiration (or the Muse, as the ancient Greeks believed)? Where do your sympathies go, to such Sunday & Sabbath children who got everything so miraculously & lightly or to such hard workingday labourers, who sweat & agonise in order to produce their works?


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I think it is a personality trait more than anything. I'm sure Beethoven or Bruckner could write down a great piece without much hard work just fine. I think it's just that some people know exactly what they want and are able to imagine that for themselves. Others are not sure and need to constantly strive and improve to realize what they want.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

violadude said:


> I'm sure Beethoven or Bruckner could write down a great piece without much hard work just fine.


Similarly, I think the image of a composer penning something with immense speed thanks to divine inspiration is greatly romanticised - I'm sure Mozart slaved over many of his works.


----------



## Guest (Aug 17, 2011)

Hmmm, haven't we discussed this topic before? It should be pretty easy to find - just look for a locked thread.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

I feel divine inspiration from a greater Christian power is as likely as chillin' with Thor and Zeus.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

We have possibly talked of this before, but I like this one's more directness.

You ought to put Beethoven on that list of "God-glorifying" composers, because I discovered a wonderful story about him just a few days ago. Someone had asked him after the premiere of his 9th symphony why he could possibly compose in the circumstance that he can neither enjoy the music nor hear man's praises of a work of his own mind (he was completely deaf at that time). To that question, Beethoven responded, "God planted this in me." 

And of course, there's Bach, who wrote J.J., _Jesu Juve_, Jesus help me, and S.D.G., _Soli Deo Gloria_, to God alone be the Glory, on his manuscripts. Supposedly he even wrote those initials on "secular" compositions too. 

Just because it took someone 3 years to write a composition means it wasn't God's power in him to compose at all? Just because one composer's music sounds completely different than another would it mean God wasn't in both, or even either of them? But you've already seen me speak of this, so I will stop.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant (Mar 11, 2010)

Polednice said:


> Similarly, I think the image of a composer penning something with immense speed thanks to divine inspiration is greatly romanticised - I'm sure Mozart slaved over many of his works.


Exactly. And there are not a few Mozart works which would have benefitted from more thought and revision.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

regressivetransphobe said:


> I feel divine inspiration from a greater Christian power is as likely as chillin' with Thor and Zeus.


I don't mean to be controversial or insensitive, but my personal experience has been different in this area, so I'm not as quick to dismiss those who claim inspiration. And maybe we can leave it at that.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Ok, I'm not telling anyone what to believe.


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

I personally believe that the music may be God-inspired in as much as everyone's natural talents came from God. Some people have different talents or different personality traits, and so have to work more to compose good music. My talent is not in music, but in learning, so I have to learn how to compose music, and the pieces I write before I reach mastery will undoubtedly be horrifying, but each will hopefully be better than the last. I do think it's possible to conceive of a piece of music in its entirety before writing a single note (Tchaikovsky said his 6th symphony came to him that way while riding a train), but there will undoubtedly be mistakes along the way that must be fixed. No one's perfect.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Far as I know, the Muses are/were not Christian. There seems to be some disagreement about whether God is Christian. And speaking of divine inspiration, Tartini was suspected of receiving inspiration from Satan. Paganini's agility on the violin was also suspect, but that's another sort of input.


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

Then getting more modern, there's Robert Johnson and Tommy Johnson. Interesting how art enters mythology.


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

I don't know about divine inspiration, but I'm sure that Bach composed on divine dictation.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

Polednice said:


> Similarly, I think the image of a composer penning something with immense speed thanks to divine inspiration is greatly romanticised - I'm sure Mozart slaved over many of his works.


It is not about speed, but about being complete and ready. In architecture it is Antoni Gaudí who started where other architects would end: at making the presentation model. After making this model of his vision (that what he saw in a ready-made state) he made the building plans and lo! all details were fitting on their right place, nothing collapsed because of being wrongly designed. Speaking of 'divine inspiration' is not meant dogmatic but as how-else-can-this-miracle-be-explained? 
So again: the difference between those who get whooossshh a ready vision and those who start with a blank page, scribble something, start again with something else, but do *not* have an end-vision at hand.


----------



## GoldenKey (Aug 16, 2011)

Divine inspiration. Inspiration = 'in-spirit'. Not 'in-ego'. Look at all the masses Mozart and Bach wrote for example. It was composed not for themselves but for a force that inspired them.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

GoldenKey said:


> Divine inspiration. Inspiration = 'in-spirit'. Not 'in-ego'. Look at all the masses Mozart and Bach wrote for example. It was composed not for themselves but for a force that inspired them.


And, boy oh boy, you should look at Verdi's Requiem. That guy must have been one real big god-botherer, right? I mean, I bet he was probably the most religious person who lived.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

Divine inspiration functions on TC like a Siren's song with many many rocks to rock one's boat, but I would like to stay clear them and just behold what is there to behold.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

Polednice said:


> And, boy oh boy, you should look at Verdi's Requiem. That guy must have been one real big god-botherer, right? I mean, I bet he was probably the most religious person who lived.


I don't think GoldenKey was saying that everyone who writes music, religious or otherwise, is claiming an outside inspiration. Verdi definitely wouldn't ascribe his creativity to a deity. Neither would Janacek when speaking of his Glagolothic Mass.

But some composers did claim to compose for the glory of God. I'm reminded of Bruckner's statement, "They want me to write differently. Certainly I could, but I must not. God has chosen me from thousands and given me, of all people, this talent. It is to Him that I must give account. How then would I stand there before Almighty God, if I followed the others and not Him?"


----------



## Lenfer (Aug 15, 2011)

I do not want to get into politics or ideology here so I'm not going to state if I believe in god(s) or not as I feel it will influence peoples reaction to my comment. Regardless of there being a "God" or not it doesn't matter, if you believe in something to be true wholeheartedly enough, like some people do. That is enough to motivate them into doing great things and conversely the most evil wicked things. It does not matter if there is a god what matters is that these people where inspired by the idea of god, some of them even perhaps thought they had god on their side.

You must also remember that genuis and madness are two sides of the same coin, perhaps without this "god" none of this work would have been created but on the other hand it may have with a whole other inspiring force behind it. The fact that there may or may not be a divine power has no effect on the capacity for human beings to create and destroy beautiful things.

One of my favorite authors *Nikolai Gogol * destryoed the reaming thrid of his first book and it's two sequels of his "*Dead **Souls * Trilogy" while on his death bed at the behest of a priest. Thus leaving the frist book unfinished and the two others lost for all time, I'd have much rather he didn't do this but he feared "god's" wrath. Many authors and poets such as *Tolstoy* beveled in god and he was able to create what he did. It's never black and white but shades of grey just my thoughts on the matter. :tiphat:


----------



## Andy Loochazee (Aug 2, 2007)

DrMike said:


> Hmmm, haven't we discussed this topic before? It should be pretty easy to find - just look for a locked thread.


It sure has. Here it is:

http://www.talkclassical.com/8513-music-creation-divinity.html

This must surely be the biggest of them all, where just about about every conceivable viewpoint on the subject was debated. As far as I recall, the chappie who started this thread packed up in disgust at the way his proposition was mauled to bits about half way through the thread and hasn't been seen since.

I can't blame newcomers to this forum for not knowing about this particular thread, but I bet there's nothing on virtually any subject even vaguely related to classical music that hasn't already been discussed at least once, if not several times, before.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Andy Loochazee said:


> It sure has. Here it is:
> 
> http://www.talkclassical.com/8513-music-creation-divinity.html
> 
> ...


Yep. I will put the kibosh to this rebirth by pointing out that Music ain't God's job; we humans have sole (not soul) responsibility for it. Suck it up.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

The ancient Greeks looked up at the heavens and thought it to be full of perfect spheres that actually made music. For them was astronomy, astrology, mathematics and music one and the same. Already the idea of heaven as being full with music appeals more to me than that senseless emptiness of which stargazer Hubble makes millions and millions of photos. The ancient Greeks wouldn't associate music with 'human', because for them the concept of 'human' was filled with *im*perfectness, *in*constantness etc., quite negative things. Without Apollo & Dionysos no festivities & no music.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Humanity's imperfections and inconstancies are what makes us so intriguing. And who cares what's more appealing? Truth rules.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

Polednice said:


> Humanity's imperfections and inconstancies are what makes us so intriguing. And who cares what's more appealing? Truth rules.


Is music to be savoured because of being perfect in itself or not? When you listen to Brahms, do you allow this listening to overwhelm you fully or is there still something left to keep you away from Brahms?


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

Hilltroll72 said:


> Yep. I will put the kibosh to this rebirth by pointing out that Music ain't God's job; we humans have sole (not soul) responsibility for it. Suck it up.


I disagree *somewhat*. We humans do not have _sole_ responsibility for music, because the perception of music is something we are all born with. It's part of our brains. We have the responsibility for the _creation_ of music, of course, but not the _existence_ of music. The responsibility for the existence of music lies wherever you put the responsibility for the development of the human brain (evolution, creationism, etc.).


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

TxllxT said:


> Is music to be savoured because of being perfect in itself or not? When you listen to Brahms, do you allow this listening to overwhelm you fully or is there still something left to keep you away from Brahms?


I don't really understand what your first question means. Yes, I do allow myself to be overwhelmed by listening to Brahms.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

GoldenKey said:


> Look at all the masses Mozart and Bach wrote for example. It was composed not for themselves but for a force that inspired them.


That force is called hunger. They did it for the paychecks.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

Mozart must have got all his inspiration from the ****(s) of the God(s).


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

Polednice said:


> I don't really understand what your first question means. Yes, I do allow myself to be overwhelmed by listening to Brahms.


For the ancients Greeks only the gods or divine beings are perfect in themselves, auto-nomous. The rest is rotten, unworthy for true attention. In some kind of music, which is called 'classical', this divine autonomity touches down into the wretched shortlived existence of human beings, to make some of these unlucky mortals luckily aware of the outworldly perfectness & beauty of music. To let yourself be savoured by this music = to become one with the gods, to become like Apollo or Dionysos yourself, as long as the divine music lasts... This letting yourself become a god through music the ancient Greeks found intriguing and appealing. :cheers:


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

TxllxT said:


> For the ancients Greeks only the gods or divine beings are perfect in themselves, auto-nomous. The rest is rotten, unworthy for true attention. In some kind of music, which is called 'classical', this divine autonomity touches down into the wretched shortlived existence of human beings, to make some of these unlucky mortals luckily aware of the outworldly perfectness & beauty of music. To let yourself be savoured by this music = to become one with the gods, to become like Apollo or Dionysos yourself, as long as the divine music lasts... This letting yourself become a god through music the ancient Greeks found intriguing and appealing. :cheers:


That is certainly a very beautiful way of looking at it, though it of course has no bearing to reality whatsoever.


----------



## TxllxT (Mar 2, 2011)

Polednice said:


> That is certainly a very beautiful way of looking at it, though it of course has no bearing to reality whatsoever.


The ancient Greeks made their reality filled with shrines and temples. A pity that no single note of their music has survived....


----------

