Horowitz "there are only Jewish, gay, and bad pianists" - true?

[forte88]

Lieutenant Columbo would have a hard time trying to unravel the historical kung fu around Tchaikosvky's love life and the more so around his death. There's a great deal of fabrication there. Still, presumption of innocence does not apply in this case (it was and is a crime, you know). I find that hard to digest.

I don't think it was his pedophilia at the time that was the crime(many married at 12), but his homosexuality. Anyway I don't really see what the big fuss is about. If I'd said he was a homosexual, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion coz homosexuality isn't a big deal in our time, but in Tchaikovsky's time THAT was a bigger deal than pedophilia and the very suspicious circumstances of his death make me believe he was.
Again, sexual proclivity isn't a choise. Besides IMO real music-lovers don't care about what a composer does in his personal life. It could be relevant for a Justin Bieber but surely not for a composer whose works have stood the test of time and has been dead for more than a hundred years. And religious bigots who don't listen to music because of a person's sexual proclivity aren't even worth the fuss(these guys even think the world is approx. 6 thousand years old, must we make a fuss about dumbies?)

[p2u_]

I don't think it was his pedophilia at the time that was the crime(many married at 12), but his homosexuality. Anyway I don't really see what the big fuss is about. If I'd said he was a homosexual, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion coz homosexuality isn't a big deal in our time, but in Tchaikovsky's time THAT was a bigger deal than pedophilia and the very suspicious circumstances of his death make me believe he was.

OK. I think we can close the subject/temporary off-topic so that it won't become too "religious". In order to understand who we are, we have to know our history and that history should be based on truthfull facts, not on assumptions or unbased insinuations (how can an Artist and a Teacher not be interested in the truth?). I would just like you to think about something: Did you know that in the 19 century in Russia, people were even killed for CALLING someone gay? Doesn't that contradict everything in the gay doctrine? Now that even Wiki Gay Celebrity List admits that there is really no evidence to substantiate the argument of Tchaikovsky's presumed homosexuality, let's turn him into a pedophile? Thanks, but no thanks.
P.S.: Although my profile says I'm in Moscow, I was born in Belgium, am a Dutch passport holder with Russian residence visa. Just in case anybody starts drawing wrong conclusions.

Paul

[forte88]

I would just like you to think about something: Did you know that in the 19 century in Russia, people were even killed for CALLING someone gay? Doesn't that contradict everything in the gay doctrine?

You make it sound as if that was the law, I can understand how a russian could kill a person that slandered him. There used to be a code of honor in Europe/States as well, after being slandered the only way to escape ignominy would be to settle it in a duel(somehow I can't picture the effeminate Tchaikovsky doing that)
I don't see how that dismisses the notion that Tchaikovsky was gay.

Now that even Wiki Gay Celebrity List admits that there is really no evidence to substantiate the argument of Tchaikovsky's presumed homosexuality, let's turn him into a pedophile? Thanks, but no thanks.

There's no hard evidence because as you rightly said it was a punishable offense(no Gay pride in those days). The wiki would say the same about Oscar Wilde had he not been convicted. To me the way he died drinking polluted water doesn't add up, someone so fastidious about cleanliness and hygiene. I could easily believe the rumor that he had a homosexual relationship with someone within the Russian royal family and was forced to commit suicide

[zezhyrule]

*munches popcorn*

[p2u_]

I don't see how that dismisses the notion that Tchaikovsky was gay.

The burden of proof is on them who accuse, not on me. I see it like this: some researchers from a certain minority group, in search of their own identity, suddenly start declaring some historical figures as members of their own minority group to make themselves accepted, but they do that with evidence that is at least ambigious. We, the people, swallow that because we don't have the sources and a legend is born. From what I've seen, I think it's high time for Tchaikovsky's rehabilitation.

To me the way he died drinking polluted water doesn't add up, someone so fastidious about cleanliness and hygiene.

Tchaikovsky had trouble with the women, which does not automatically make that person gay. Let's say he had an Oedipus complex (excessive mother devotion), which is a good explanation for his problems in marriage, etc. Besides, he was unbelievably insecure concerning his abilities as a composer, a problem of many great composers. One day, it all becomes too much and he decides to take his own life in EXCATLY THE SAME WAY HIS MOTHER DIED (she also died of cholera). Plausible? Plausible. Elvis Presley had the same problem. He died at the age and on the day, even on the hour (!) his mother died. No doubt in my mind it was suicide. End of story.

*munches popcorn*

Happy you find it entertaining. The rating of pianostreet.com must be sky-high by now...

Paul

[forte88]

The burden of proof is on them who accuse, not on me.

There's no proof he was heterosexual either, from what I heard and read it seems very likely he was gay and a pedophile. It's not an accusation btw. You could say the same thing about Mozart being a virtuoso pianist, I've never heard a recording so I suppose there's nothing to back up this 'accusation' coz it's all hearsay, but from what I've read it just seems very likely. And also the fact that homosexuality was a severly punishable offence and looked upon as pedophilia is looked upon today. He'd be buggered if he was going to ruin his reputation by admitting he was.

Tchaikovsky had trouble with the women, which does not automatically make that person gay. Let's say he had an Oedipus complex (excessive mother devotion), which is a good explanation for his problems in marriage,

 
I wouldn't say he had trouble with women, only with women that wanted sex as he was most probably attracted to men.And his marriage of convenience is typically gay, as is having your mother as example

One day, it all becomes too much and he decides to take his own life in EXCATLY THE SAME WAY HIS MOTHER DIED (she also died of cholera). Plausible? Plausible. Elvis Presley had the same problem. He died at the age and on the day, even on the hour (!) his mother died. No doubt in my mind it was suicide. End of story.

I see so Elvis actually wanted to emulate his mother and actually commited suicide? So Elvis's mother died on the toilet while trying to make a bowlmovement? How silly of me, I believed that he died coz of the pills and junkfood and the resulting constipation, ok you've convinced me, mother Russia will be proud of you for upholding the reputation of their greatest composer

[p2u_]

@ forte88

As to Elvis; you are twisting my words; The "same problem" was the Oedipus complex. Elvis did not die the same way his mother did (she died from a heart attack). He died at the same age, the same day, the same hour. Read again what I wrote. Pills and junkfood was slow suicide, yes, as many do, but the final decision was deliberate and forced - overdosis.

As to Tchaikovsky: we will never know. Not guilty. Case closed.

Paul

[forte88]

You would have made a great apologist for the KGB. "no sir, he wasn't shot in the back of the head by our secret service, evidence shows he had elastic arms and had had been depressed for some time now"
I know Russia for the most part still hates homosexuals, but to me all signs show he was and surely in 2012 that's nothing to be ashamed of(eventhough he liked 'em very young)

[philb]

Tchaikovsky was gay.

I thought that was common knowledge.

[p2u_]

You would have made a great apologist for the KGB. "no sir, he wasn't shot in the back of the head by our secret service, evidence shows he had elastic arms and had had been depressed for some time now"
I know Russia for the most part still hates homosexuals, but to me all signs show he was and surely in 2012 that's nothing to be ashamed of(eventhough he liked 'em very young)

If you think that's a good argument concerning Tchaikovsky, then you are entitled to it under protection of the Constitution in your country. I don't think it is, and that we should be very careful with such judgements of "truth", especially if they are not based on substantial evidence. And yes, in a country like Russia, where homophobia and pedophilophobia (if that is even a word in English) are growing and the promotion of either or both is severely punished by law, I'm doing the best I can. Unless it is conclusively proven that Tchaikovsky was gay, he will always be hetero to me. Now can we put the case to rest?

Paul

[marik1]

I think the best pianists are composers/improvisers as well as pianists.

Really?

Then what about Gilels, Sokolov, Kempff, Giseking, Cortot, Richter, Lipatti, Michelangeli, Hoffmann, Moiseiwitch, Friedman, Lhevinne, and many other giants of pianism of 20th century, who were not composers or improvisers?

Looking at my favorite composers I'd have to conclude(with the exception of Chopin/Saint Saens) that they're German. But that's highly subjective of course, others will think Russians are the best.

It would be little unthoughtful to say about the composers (as of pianists, or writers, or for that matter, anybody else) who is "the best". It is like to ask: "Who is better Haydn, or Prokofiev? Beethoven, or Schostakowitch? Schubert or Scriabin?"

Jewish composers aren't very high on the list either

Really?

Not sure who is on your list, but in my book such names as Mendelssohn, Meyerber, Bloch, Alkan, Mahler, Schoenberg, Offenbach, Strauss, Gershwin, Copland, Kurt Weill, Feinberg among many others are pretty darn important composers.

... Tchaikovsky who wasn't just homosexual but a pedophile as well

Really?

There were books dedicated to this very topic and even very serious researchers cannot come to the more or less definite conclusion. At the best, everything is whether allegations and guesses, or at the worst, just hearsay.

On the other hand, in the mind of some anonymous poster on piano street, there is no doubt that "Tchaikovsky wasn't just homosexual but a pedophile as well", and "there is nothing to be ashamed of"  

Sure Russians, Chinese and Jewish pianists are wellknown because they're forcefed from a very young age, but IMO the creativity is lacking(perhaps something to do with the culture?)

Really?

So which aspects of Russian or Jewish culture prevent creativity? Also, could you let us know which pianists and from which origin do not lack the creativity, and which cultural basis helps to nourish that creativity?

Thanks, M

[p2u_]

... Tchaikovsky who wasn't just homosexual but a pedophile as well

Really? There were books dedicated to this very topic and even very serious researchers cannot come to the more or less definite conclusion. On the other hand, in the mind of some anonymous poster on piano street, there is no doubt that he was, and "there is nothing to be ashamed of"  

Here's some food for thought about the subject. I doubt anybody with preconceived opinions will read it, but anyway: How Homosexual Was Tchaikovsky? [From Musical Musings, by Petr Beckmann, 1989. ISBN 0-911762-40-X. Golem Press, Box 1342 Boulder, Colorado 80306.]

I argued here in favor of Tchaikovsky because I'm also a parent who taught his child critical reasoning (= to never believe urban legends). I never told him who Ded Moroz (the Russian Santa Claus) was, for example, not to disappoint him in his dreams at later age. So what do I say to my child when he asks me:

Q. "Why was Tchaikovsky gay?"
A. Because everybody says so.

And what do I do with questions like:
"If T. was gay, why didn't the Orthodox Church anathemize (=curse) him?"

Of course, I could tell him to shut up and slam him in the face with a book by one of those gay "experts" on Tchaikovsky, but that's not my style. So I give him reasons why the Church does probably not believe (= does not know for sure in the religious sense) that her devout Christian (which Tchaikovsky was) was guilty of such a sin. Next attack, I can feel it coming, the Russian Orthodox Church as a phenomenon, with the usual BS I heard so often in Europe during the Cold War: "They were just the puppets of the Czar, and then became the puppets of the KGB; besides, they had their own agenda."

Why oh why was I taught critical reasoning in school, and why oh why, when you really practise that principle, do people want you to keep silent?

Paul

[forte88]

You discredit yourself with almost every word you write. Someone like Tchaikovsky, who was so sensitive, i.e. selfaware, doesnt commit suicide. His neuroses would show that he's someone that's scared of death. I say tolerance of all sexualities, just accept facts, wherever you live. Russia's greatest composer liked 'em young and homosexual, good for him, who cares? It doesn't take anything away from the music and he wasn't rubbing it in your face. I actually prefer what Tchaikovsky did to seeing two heterosexuals getting it off right in front of you, then I prefer lesbians:) But who'se being harmed?The more frustrating was his marriage of convenience, bad for two.  know you know I'm right coz you're supplying me the info.

[p2u_]

To me the way he died drinking polluted water doesn't add up, someone so fastidious about cleanliness and hygiene. I could easily believe the rumor that he had a homosexual relationship with someone within the Russian royal family and was forced to commit suicide

Someone like Tchaikovsky, who was so sensitive, i.e. selfaware, doesnt commit suicide. His neuroses would show that he's someone that's scared of death.

I'll just forgive you your insults for lack of good arguments, but aren't you contradicting yourself now?

Paul

[forte88]

Really?

Then what about Gilels, Sokolov, Kempff, Giseking, Cortot, Richter, Lipatti, Michelangeli, Hoffmann, Moiseiwitch, Friedman, Lhevinne, and many other giants of pianism of 20th century, who were not composers or improvisers?

So IMO they were not the best, someone perhaps from a time when they did compose their own music

So which aspects of Russian or Jewish culture prevent creativity? Also, could you let us know which pianists and from which origin do not lack the creativity, and which cultural basis helps to nourish that creativity?
I'd say the cult of the individual, unhindered in expressive potential

Thanks, M

It's left brained, rabbinical. Study, no play. at least that was something I thought was highly valued in the Jewish community, the studied man. Nothing wrong with that, nor with what I wrote. Óf course there will be exceptions, but that's despite it and not because of it.

[forte88]

I'll just forgive you your insults for lack of good arguments, but aren't you contradicting yourself now?

Paul

If you find it contradicting you live in a sad sad world

[marik1]

Nothing wrong with, and also nothing wrong with what I'm writing, so please chill out and let me post

I am actually pretty chill and this is an open public forum and you can post anything you want, including "who is the best composer, who is the best pianist", or "Russian and Jewish pianists did not have creativity because it had to something with their culture".

On the other hand, if you want somebody to take you seriously or for your posts to have any validity then that would be nice to give some kind of arguments, or support with some kind of evidence or knowledge. So far you presented none. Other than that all is good.

Best, M

[forte88]

Also, could you let us know which pianists and from which origin do not lack the creativity, and which cultural basis helps to nourish that creativity?

Best background would be no background, an individual unhindered in expressive potential, an individual connected to the collective unconscious. Internet is to electronics, what the soul is to human beings.

But If I had to choose, I'd say German coz I like German music and german porn:)

[forte88]

I am actually pretty chill and this is an open public forum and you can post anything you want, including "who is the best composer, who is the best pianist", or "Russian and Jewish pianists did not have creativity because it had to something with their culture".

On the other hand, if you want somebody to take you seriously or for your posts to have any validity then that would be nice to give some kind of arguments, or support with some kind of evidence or knowledge. So far you presented none. Other than that all is good.

Best, M

I 've given you arguments.

All the very very best

[marik1]

I 've given you arguments.

I followed your original message with 5 points. So far I saw only one "argument" (and it was in your previous post--hope you don't consider as "an argument" whatever you wrote about Jewish culture being "left brained, etc.--clearly you have no real expertise to talk about that topic). All the rest you just omitted. I gave you the long lists of names--those who were considered "the greatest of the greatests". You just come back saying "Those were not the best"--do you have any idea whom are we talking about? Any chance for any alternatives?

Did I miss something?

As for your argument:

Best background would be no background, an individual unhindered in expressive potential, an individual connected to the collective unconscious.

There is no such thing as "best background would be no background". Any art (including performing) cannot exist in a vacuum and is based on historical, political, economical, and socio-cultural background. Any art is a direct reflection and continuation of social life and deeply rooted in the cultural traditions. "Collective unconscious" comes later--when there is all that knowledge and cultural traditions get accumulated. For the further reading I'd suggest some philosophical essay on the topic--there are plenty of those around.  

But If I had to choose, I'd say German coz I like German music and german porn:)

Since we are talking about pianists, I am not sure I could call many German pianists being exceptionally creative (maybe you give me some names?). From top of my head the last one (which could be called "creative") I could remember, was Wilhelm Kempff, but that was loooong time ago.

As for German porn, I won't argue here--I am sure your knowledge is vastly broader than mine, as I prefer the "real thing".

Best, M

[forte88]

Societies turn people into conditioned machines. Imagine the will of the individual interacting with the soul of the machine, a symbiotic relationship. That said, I thinko there's something to be learnt from the tennents that make a culture excel at something.
Some might say it's a matter of taste, I disagree, the willingness of the Chinese to adopt  western music shows otherwise. For me Germany is the epicentre. Take discipline, in Germany Bach would get up 5:00 in the morning and write a Cantata every week, and in his spare time Passions, violin concertos, Wtk, etc That's disciplined creativity. Going East in becomes more and more forcefed, enforced, rote. In Russia you have 3 year olds being taught the violin. In China, conformity is the norm, and the discipline robotic

As for German porn, I won't argue here--I am sure your knowledge is vastly broader than mine, as I prefer the "real thing".

Why should I care about what your preferences are?, I couldn't think of anything more boring

[j_menz]

Bach would get up 5:00 in the morning and write a Cantata

Ah, that explains the Coffee Cantata. 

[p2u_]

Societies turn people into conditioned machines.

I have good news for you: people have the choice not to fall victim, but that takes some effort. One may, for example, attempt to read all of Tchaikovsky's 11 diaries and 5000 letters and find that there is not even the slightest hint of homosexuality there, unless one puts on pink spectacles. The downside: yes, it hurts to realize that one has been made a fool of all these years.

Paul

[marik1]

Societies turn people into conditioned machines. Imagine the will of the individual interacting with the soul of the machine, a symbiotic relationship. That said, I thinko there's something to be learnt from the tennents that make a culture excel at something.
Some might say it's a matter of taste, I disagree, the willingness of the Chinese to adopt  western music shows otherwise. For me Germany is the epicentre. Take discipline, in Germany Bach would get up 5:00 in the morning and write a Cantata every week, and in his spare time Passions, violin concertos, Wtk, etc That's disciplined creativity. Going East in becomes more and more forcefed, enforced, rote. In Russia you have 3 year olds being taught the violin. In China, conformity is the norm, and the discipline robotic
Why should I care about what your preferences are?, I couldn't think of anything more boring

Dear Forte88,

I have very hard time of following you. You start with one thing and then (I guess, running out of argument) keep wondering all over the place with completely unrelated stuff, bringing up Bach's schedule (while we are talking about pianists), talking about kids starting playing violin at age of 3 (BTW, ever wondered what age Mozart started his studies?, or what kind of vigorous training Bach went through?), and all that stuff.

I cannot talk about Chinese culture, as I don't know enough about it, but if you are talking about Bach as an example of creative discipline, I could give you numerous examples of no less disciplined Russians (including those of Jewish descent whose creativity BTW, is questioned only by some random anonymous folks on discussion boards), whose dedication to their craft and creativity was legendary. I could give you examples of people of colossal, encyclopedic knowledge, who were fluent in 22-25 (!!!!!) languages--people who on a yearly basis had read entire libraries (in many languages), and who were flagships of new cultural trends--people who were the emblems of creativity and who had discovered the new ways of art development.

But all of that would be completely unrelated. Instead of wondering around I'd suggest you to check your sources first, and then do some reading, so we could at least follow the thread of the discussion, instead of jumping from one unrelated thing to another. If anything, hope by that time at least you will realize that there is no such thing as "the best composer", or "the best pianist", as there is no such thing as "the best fruit", or "the best vegetable".

Best, M

[m1469]

I could give you examples of people of colossal, encyclopedic knowledge, who were fluent in 22-25 (!!!!!) languages--people who on a yearly basis had read entire libraries (in many languages), and who were flagships of new cultural trends--people who were the emblems of creativity and who had discovered the new ways of art development.

*perks ears up and pokes head in*  hmmm?  

I find myself experiencing a distinct feeling of interest in reaction to this.

[forte88]

I have good news for you: people have the choice not to fall victim, but that takes some effort. One may, for example, attempt to read all of Tchaikovsky's 11 diaries and 5000 letters and find that there is not even the slightest hint of homosexuality there, unless one puts on pink spectacles. The downside: yes, it hurts to realize that one has been made a fool of all these years.

Paul

I also read Goebbels diaries, I guess some people write with posterity in mind

[forte88]

I have very hard time of following you. You start with one thing and then (I guess, running out of argument) keep wondering all over the place with completely unrelated stuff, bringing up Bach's schedule (while we are talking about pianists), .

My thesis was IMO composers/improvisers make the best pianists, coz they instinctively bring musicality into it and to be an improviser the technique should be 'selbstverstandlich'. But for others technicality is preferable. What I read about Bach he was an amazing keyboardist, could play with the pedals on the organ faster than others could play with their fingers. There's a playfulness to creativity, I can see it in Italian German composers but not in Russian/Jewish composers.

talking about kids starting playing violin at age of 3 (BTW, ever wondered what age Mozart started his studies?, or what kind of vigorous training Bach went through?), and all that stuff

Again it's the method employed. From what I know of Mozart he was dying to learn. I know of this anecdote where a friend of the family came round to play a composition, Mozart asked if he could play second violin. His father got angry coz he'd never learnt to play, he joined in anyway and the friend couldn't believe how he blended in as if he'd been playing for years.
Contrast that with the learned, forcefed approach.
Of course there will still be creativity, people are creative, only some cultures are more conducive to creativity, depending on the inherent talent, it will be able to prosper better. It's just common sense, people in a culture follow what's valued in that culture, 'naturally selects' (i.e they get to make plentiful babies)who  answer best to these ideals. Rabbis, scholars, lawyers yes, creativity not so much

[chopantasy]

Hey, hang in there forte - I like the cut of your jib! (though actually children learn the violin at age 3 in most cultures)

[p2u_]

attempt to read all of Tchaikovsky's 11 diaries and 5000 letters and find that there is not even the slightest hint of homosexuality there, unless one puts on pink spectacles.

I also read Goebbels diaries, I guess some people write with posterity in mind

You still have a hole in your theory about Tchaikovsky, because the ONLY source of "proof" mentioned for his allegedly being gay is in those very 11 diaries and 5000 letters.

Paul

[p2u_]

Hey, hang in there forte - I like the cut of your jib!

Yeah? And how do you like this?

* If Google Street View happens to take a shot of you, crossing the street with a woman other than your spouse, you must be a womanizer and a raper;

* If Google Street View happens to take a shot of you, crossing the street with a man, you must be a queen;

* If Google Street View happens to take a shot of you, crossing the street with a child, you must be a pervert;

* If Google Street View happens to take a shot of you, crossing the street on your own, you must be addicted to masturbation and most likely also an axe murderer.

One day, forte88 may have a very successful career as a pianist, be on tour and be arrested and put in jail without trial in some exotic country for any of the above. Maybe the only person who will be able to get him out of jail will be the one he insulted the way he is insulting people on this board. I hope you realize that.

Lies are for the ads and commercials. The rest of the time, I (and anybody else on this board) have a right to demand a certain quality of verified information.

Paul

[chopantasy]

Oh Lord!  Everyone knows Tchaikovsky was gay - what of it?  Who cares either way?

[p2u_]

Oh Lord!  Everyone knows Tchaikowsky was gay - what of it?  Who cares either way?

Because it's an insult of the national and cultural heritage of a country, of a people, maybe? There is no proof. Read the material I quoted and see for yourself.
P.S.: I couldn't care less about Tchaikovsky's sexual preferences. I demand facts, not urban legends. If I don't do that, I deny my own existence both as an artist and as a teacher, because the task of both is to seek truth.

Paul

[chopantasy]

..as was Benji Britten, Leonard Bernstein, Aaron Copeland and Michael Tippett - were they a slur on their countries?  I don't think so.

[p2u_]

..as was Benji Britten, Leonard Bernstein, Aaron Copeland and Michael Tippett - a slur on their countries?  I don't think so.

You are not addressing the real problem by mentioning those people. If anybody tells any kind of lie about Bernstein or anybody else, be they American, Chinese, Russian, South-African or whatever, I will react in exactly the same way. Freedom of speech and freedom of press call for a least a minimum sense of responsibility.

Paul

[chopantasy]

Put it this way - Let's say I claim Tchaikovsky had a black cat - you prove it was actually white!  Does it matter?

[p2u_]

Put it this way - Let's say I claim Tchaikovsky had a black cat - you prove it was actually white!  Does it matter?

Do black cats and white cats have the same emotional and cultural significance as homosexuality?
Hint: Before replying, please, do not only consider your own culture.
Are you by any chance deliberately trying to make a fool out of me?

Paul

[chopantasy]

Any culture that's gives sexual orientation any significance is backward and wrong.  Wake up!  Consenting adults do what they want with whomever they want.

[p2u_]

Any culture that's gives sexual orientation any significance is backward and wrong.  It's totally a personal matter.

Ah, OK. I see. But that still does not address the issue. People here on the board are ready to kill each other because they disagree on how to press a piano key, but calling any person (and in this case a national symbol) gay without proof is, well, OK, because it is backward and wrong to even react against it. Got the message. Thank for enlightening me.

Paul

[chopantasy]

calling any person (and in this case a national symbol) gay without proof is, well, OK, because it is backward and wrong to even react against it. Got the message. Thank for enlightening me.

Exactly.  Calling someone 'gay' means nothing.  Of course that pits me as much against gay pride as it does gay prejudice.

[p2u_]

Exactly.  Calling someone 'gay' means nothing.  Of course that pits me as much against gay pride as it does gay prejudice.

Would you believe that I am actually a very tolerant person? I just want to understand: Why do people react so strongly (the truth, the truth and nothing but the truth) when someone says something incorrectly about when and why, let's say, Beethoven went to Vienna for the first time, but when quoting unverified biographical info that concerns Tchaikovsky, anything goes?

Paul

[chopantasy]

Sexual stuff's pretty irrelevant (though gender studies students may disagree) where and when Beethoven was is - it influenced who he met/heard etc.

[p2u_]

Sexual stuff's pretty irrelevant (though gender studies students may disagree) where and when Beethoven was is[/] - it influenced who he met/heard etc.

Well, I guess the ones that wrote their dissertations about it with shameless self-promotion, lecturing afterwards more about "that kind of love" than about Tchaikovsky himself, didn't think it was that irrelevant, did they? Why else create urban legends? It's at least relevant enough to call me "backward" (= behind others in progress or development) when I want to raise the issue of how shameless a lie it is.

Paul

[chopantasy]

Both you and the Gender Students are backward if you think the 'lie' matters in any way, shape or form.

[p2u_]

Both you and the Gender Students are backward if you think the 'lie' matters in any way, shape or form.

Yes, yes, it really doesn't matter. So now, I am not so backward anymore. What a relief. That's also probably why forte88 quoted that particular lie in this particular topic; just to create some redundant bytes. I see. Everything's clear now. No further questions...

Paul

[forte88]

Hey, hang in there forte - I like the cut of your jib! (though actually children learn the violin at age 3 in most cultures)

He was making out that there are a lot of great pianists that are Jewish/Russian/Chinese. What I was suggesting was that almost ANYONE that starts at age 3 would be good. The technical side would be second nature starting at that age. My point is a good pianist is both. And culture where you get forcefed, leftbrained, learned isn't conducive to creativity.

[forte88]

Well, I guess the ones that wrote their dissertations about it with shameless self-promotion, lecturing afterwards more about "that kind of love" than about Tchaikovsky himself, didn't think it was that irrelevant, did they? Why else create urban legends? It's at least relevant enough to call me "backward" (= behind others in progress or development) when I want to raise the issue of how shameless a lie it is.

Paul

The topic is good pianists are Gay etc, that's why I mentioned it, otherwise I couldn't give a donkey's ass, that was you that made a big thing out of it, like it was such a disgrace that Tchaikovsky was gay. He was, so what?

[p2u_]

The topic is good pianists are Gay etc, that's why I mentioned it, otherwise I couldn't give a donkey's ass, that was you that made a big thing out of it, like it was such a disgrace that Tchaikovsky was gay. He was, so what?

I want you to understand that I have nothing against you. I just want to say that if you are a pianist, forte88, then I hope you put more meaning in the notes and phrases of your music than you do in the things you are writing here. You do not seem to be really aware of the effect of each and every word on your audience.

Paul

[forte88]

I want you to understand that I have nothing against you. I just want to say that if you are a pianist, forte88, then I hope you put more meaning in the notes and phrases of your music than you do in the things you are writing here. You do not seem to be really aware of the effect of each and every word on your audience.

Paul

I'm sorry I made you cry, but I feel it's better to be honest.
Russians have every reason to be proud of Tchaikovsky, no need to be bigoted. See if I was Russian, I'd feel worse that Tchaikovsky's example was Germanspeaking(his idol was Mozart). That he took his que from Western music and not from Russian music(implicitly recognizing its superiority). The greatest Russian composer a wannabe Western European. If you want to take offence, take offence at that and not at his sexuality.

[p2u_]

I'm sorry I made you cry, but I feel it's better to be honest.

This is just one of those "musical effects" that miss the mark. You cannot make me cry, because I don't care about Tchaikovsky's sexual preferences. I do care about facts. For some reason unknown to me you choose to discredit yourself, actually. You have been given material that suggests the opposite of what you think is true. You didn't even react to my post about the hole that's still left in your theory after reading the only existing and alleged "proof" of Tchaikovsky's alleged homosexuality; his 11 diaries and 5000 letters. Instead, you choose not to take action to change your views, but to reiterate urban legend. Your choice. OK.
P.S.: Know this: If anyone ever slanders YOUR name, I'll defend you anyway and I'll do that in a grand manner and with appropriate style.
Humbly sumbitted from Moscow,

Paul

[forte88]

I already answered this, but you seem to think if you repeat it you'll be right if you repeat your misconstrued argument till I'm done responding to it? Last time. Famous people know when theyre writing a diary that the public is probably one day going to read it. I'm sure he acted surreptitiously in keeping his sexuality away from the public, probably the fame got to him and he thought he could get away with a homosexual relationship with Russian nobility.He was unfortunate he lived in Russia at the time, in Western Europe he probably would have got a few years hard labor instead