Discussion Questions for Gay’s Mozart: A Life, Chs.1-3 (pp.1-63)
Answer TWO of the following for Wednesday’s class. Remember,
don’t simply give me an answer, such as “yes, this is true,” or “the book says
that Mozart was spoiled.” Give me a
response, which shows me an honest attempt to understand the
work. The responses should be at least
a few sentences in length—no one word or one sentence responses will be
accepted (that is, I'll ask you to try again).
Even if you’re not sure
what to say, try to explain why you’re
not sure; an honest, detailed answer is always better than a short response
that tries to cover your tracks. I’m
less interested in seeing you look ‘smart’ than in approaching the work in a
humble, curious manner.
QUESTIONS (post responses to any TWO as a comment)
1. Why is it important for
Peter Gay to paint a portrait of Mozart’s father, Leopold? What specific details does he include about
Leopold’s life, philosophy, and habits that you feel is significant to
understanding either the culture of the eighteenth century or Mozart
himself?
2. According to Gay, what
made Mozart’s works (even his teenage ones) stand out from his
contemporaries? Why does a Symphony No.
29 or a Violin Concerto No.5 sound like Mozart when hundreds of other composers
were churning out the same, often generic, works?
3. On Page 36-37, we get a
lengthy (and explicit) excerpt from one of Mozart’s letters. Obviously, Mozart would have never wanted anyone outside his intimate
circle to read these letters. What do
you think are the ethics of biography: should a biographer expose his subject
so nakedly—or should he hide certain details that were meant to be private, and
don’t necessarily help us ‘read’ or appreciate his music? In other words, should we be reading this?
4. Why do you feel Mozart
was unwilling to play the conventional role of an eighteenth-century
servant? His father saw no reason not
to play the role, and indeed, no composer before him chafed at the bit as
violently as Mozart. Do you feel Mozart
was influenced by Enlightenment philosophies of democracy and free will…or was
he just a pig-headed, spoiled brat? Cite
a passage in the book to explain why you feel this way.
Kendall Dobbs:
ReplyDelete3. Ethics is a difficult subject to discuss, regardless of the topic. I think that when it comes to biographies, it all depends on what it is we are wanting to know about Mozart. If we are just concerned with his music, then these letters don't play any kind of role. But it we are wanting to look at Mozart as a person, then I think these letters give us some valuable insights to his personal life. For me personally, I want to know about the man more than the music, so these letters (even though they are graphic and bizarre) help me 'see' him as he really was. Yes, we would all like to think that Mozart was a musical genius who lived a 'perfect' life. But I admire him more and can related to him more knowing that everything in his life wasn't 'perfect' or 'normal.'
4. Mozart was a genius, he knew it, and he acted like it. I think that Mozart didn't want to play the role of a servant simply because of his pride. I wish I thought it was due to the Enlightenment philosophy of the time, but I just think it was because he felt he was different and better than everyone else around him. This self-perception comes from all of the special treatment he got as a young boy. In chapter 3, Mozart seems to prove my point exactly in a letter to his father. Gay writes, "Even more disgraceful, Mozart grumbled, at the noon meal he had been seated with the servants, below the valets, who were placed at the head of the table, and close to the cooks and the baker. 'At least,' he commented caustically, 'I have the honor of sitting ahead of the cooks.'" (p.60). This passage just screams conceited and self-centered to me. I think that if he had the Enlightenment philosophy of the time, he wouldn't have degraded the valets and and cooks in his letter to his father. I truly believe that if Mozart hadn't been pampered and praised as a young child, he wouldn't have had a problem playing the role of a eighteenth-century servant.
1) Leopold Mozart influenced his son's life greatly. He arranged recitals and concerts all over Europe. While he seemed to genuinely care about his son, he saw him as a meal ticket-the son would support the entire family from a very early age. While he was young, Wolfgang enjoyed the attention bestowed upon him. As he grew older, however, he began to chafe at the domineering, restrictive role his father played in his life. Leopold used tactics such as his supposed bad health and filial obligations to try to continue to subjegate Wolfgang to his will.
ReplyDelete4) Wolfgang did not see himself as an ordinary composer. As he wrote to his father, "A man of mediocre talents always remains mediocre, may he travel or not--but a man of superior talents, which I cannot deny myself to have without being blasphemous becomes--bad, if he always stays in the same place" (Gay 55). He had God-given talent that should be used not as a service to a mere patron but as a gift to be shared with all mankind.
Casey Bear
ReplyDelete1. I think to understand the biography you need to know different aspects in the subjects life. Leopold played a big role in Mozat's development by being a constant stern teacher. He was controlling by taking Mozart with him everywhere.
4. I think Mozart was a little spoiled by being sheltered but like alot of kids it became rebellious. He wanted love in his life(pg 25) He was constantly occupied by his father and the only love he came across was his cousin, he could be himself with her. (pg 36) He seems full of anxiety and depression as he tries to satisfy his father but sees his own potential as being greater than others believed. (pg 57) Maybe his father wanted him to serve to become responsible or to have a foot in the door with greater people
Nikki Ennis
ReplyDelete1. Mozart's father, Leopold, was a huge influence in his life. He not only introduced his children to music, but supported them in their careers. He worked hard to make sure his children were not only the best, but had every opportunity available to them. I think this is why it is important for Gay to include him so heavily in Mozart's story. Also, Leopold wrote extensive letters detailing their lives as a musical family. This not only gives us information about events that may have otherwise been lost, but his boasting nature is typical of parents in the 18th Century culture and gives us insight into the times of Mozart.
3. A biographer's job is to reveal to us all of the moments of a life that give us insight of who that person was. Often, this involves intimate details because it is in those details that the subject was in his/her truest form. Those moments often shape the subject, and make him/her the person we want to read about. Assuming that is the case, I find those moments important to truly understand the subject. Sometimes, this is more obvious than others, but it's all at the discretion of the author. (Therefore, it would seem the wisest road for a person to take would be to live in such a way that will not cause embarrassment if/when a biography is written. :P)
1. Sometimes unfortunately, children are generally the products of their upbringing. The story is all the more personal and legitimate-feeling because the author describes Leopold's parenting style. Leopold is painted as a strict, overbearing, managerial type of father. Despite his talents and ambitious work, he always strove for more money and lived above his means. He did however, engrain in young Mozart that if his credit goes bad, so does his honor, and honor means more than life (page 8). Leopold was interested in preventing Mozart's personal affairs with women, and he "suspected mischief and got deeply involved" (37). I think that because Leopold treated his son as a product and attempted to retain control of every personal and public aspect, Mozart was driven to rebelliousness, but had an unavoidable and insatiable appetite for attention and approval. The book says Mozart's mother "complemented...her husband's ambitions for his children" (5), and I imagine that in an age where many of their children often die in infancy, parents would make it their utmost priority to secure a favorable position for the child at any cost.
ReplyDelete4. I feel that Mozart was unhappy with his servant position because of his self-awareness and confidence. While his knowledge of the splendors available because of his talent is already known to him because of his spoiled childhood, he understands that his great skill depends on constant work and careful development using international influences. While his father "had nothing but contempt for lower orders" because he was "pampered by the great" (11), Mozart made his demands in order to benefit not only himself, but the reputation of his home city, Salzburg. Mozart had a distinct "feeling of self-worth and sense of mission...no false modesty about his gifts" (56). Because of his controlled self-importance, I think he was empowered by the feelings of free-will during the Enlightenment as opposed to being a spoiled brat.
Dakota Breeze.
ReplyDelete2.) I think what made his works stand out the most, was that he was so young when he started writing his own music. Mozart wrote his first symphony at the age of eight years old. Impressive right? That being said, Mozart was often emotional.Even if it appears he is reading what he wrote, he often improvised his work on the spot, and let his emotion take control. Thus giving the "generic" works, individuality.
3.) Although it is rude to read something that is private, in this case I believe it is acceptable. Reading these letters give us more personal information about Mozart, also revealing a lot of his emotion. All in all, I think these letters are a big part of Mozart. If we are wanting to learn about him, what better way than to read something we were never supposed to?
Nesha Pickens
ReplyDelete1) To me Mozart's father, Leopold, was more intrested in how people thought about him and how they saw him musically. He was never concerned with how his son felt. Leopold was a major influence on Mozart's life. Its because of his father that he knows all there is to know about music. For some reason I still feel like his father had much control over him. Basically throughout Mozart's life his father sheltered him way to much. Then again if it wasn't for his father, he wouldn't have turned out the way he did.
3) A biographer's job is to give us insight on someones life which may include personal details. It gives us information on what that person is like so we can have our on perspective of that person. If a biographers subject wants to keep some things private I can understand that but in this case Mozart's letters are what kind of helps us learn about him more. So yes I do think its okay for us to be reading this.
Josh Coats
ReplyDelete3. As a music major, this isn't something that I would associate with Mozart...being explicit! However, I think Gay approached this aspect of Mozart ethically. Mozart wrote many, many letters that were extremely explicit and I found this excerpt to yes, be explicit, but it also helped to shine light on Mozart as a person. If I want to know about Mozart's music, then I will study anthologies. However, if I want to learn about Mozart as a PERSON, then it can be critical to read how Mozart viewed love explicitly. I think it's okay to read this excerpt because it really does put a spin on how we view Mozart. Classical music, by definition, is clear, simple in melodic and harmonic structure. To say that Mozart himself was "classical" in style would be negated by the short, explicit excerpt. This side would have never been known about Mozart if Gay or other biographers decided the content of the letter was too risque.
4. Mozart knew, from early on. that he was a genius and felt very strongly about his talents. Gay even wrote Mozart "had no false modesty about his gifts; since they were God-given, it would be sacrilegious, he thought, to make light of them" (56). The Enlightenment era focused on individualism rather than tradition. As a young child, he was highlighted and played at several venues. Haydn, one of his influential composers, even said that Mozart was his "superior." As a young composer, it would make sense to rebel and not want to live a life as a servant. As clear as his melodies, the was definitely clear about not wanting to be a servant and how felt superior. Some would say he was quite arrogant, but he was fed compliments all of this life. I understand this rebellion and his acceptance of the Enlightenment philosophies.
Stephanie Callen
ReplyDelete(2) Mozart's works stand out because of his daring shifts in key and fascinating echos in later movements from earlier ones. He never had to go back and change a note. Symphony #29 in A Major (K.201) was said to be rich in original thematic material stands out as an arresting move beyond earlier exemplars.
(4) I think a biography should include both the good and bad points of a person so that the reader gets a well-rounded view. However, some things should be kept private. Everyone has a skeleton in their closet. Would they want their secrets exposed to the world? So my answer is no. We shouldn't be reading this.
Destiny Coley
ReplyDelete1. It is important for Gay to paint a portrait of Leopold because his life and what he did every day influenced Mozart to become what he did and to do the things he did. Leopold was a well educated and professional musician and was stern and controlling of his children's musical laborers. This is part of the reason that music always came first in Mozart's life. Leopold was well known across Europe and a huge influence on Mozart's life. These things are important for us to know to understand Mozart and abut his career.
3. Of course Mozart never intended for any one else to read this letter, but exposing this tells us slightly more about him. A biography is about a person and their life, not just one specific detail about them. If we were focusing on just his music then exposing this letter would be inappropriate, but because this is about his life we should be reading this to better understand him.
Weston Haynes
ReplyDelete1.) I think it was important for author Peter Gay to incorporate information about Mozart's father Leopold, because more than any other person, Leopold was the driving force behind Mozart, and Gay also shows insight on the person Mozart was most like and where his ambitious personality stemmed from, which was his father. Leopold was a musician also, so it is obvious in some way that he wanted Mozart and his daughter to be somewhat part of the "family business". Though Leopold and his family was not that wealthy, he refused to sell him short, which is exactly what Mozart never did. I wouldn't say Mozart and Leopold were cocky, but they definitely were confident in what they did, and when they were around royalty, they often sought and felt that they were part of the hierarchy. I also believe that the way Mozart was definitely stemmed from his fathers expectations. Personally in my opinion, Leopold saw his son as a business, and did not want romance or any distractions to get in the way of his sons success. He instilled honor and personal respect in Mozart at a very young age and aimed to keep it that way. I also feel that even though Leopold played a major influence on Mozart and his works, maybe Mozart could have even gone farther and beyond in his works if his father wasn't always on his back. Leopold was a defining factor not just in Mozart's musical life, but personal life as well.
3.) I believe that more or so, this is not just a biopic about Mozart's music, but a biopic about Mozart and his personal life as well. I believe that the explicit nature of the letters that Mozart wrote was a way of showing how passionate and disturbing the young man was. People always associate Mozart with his music, but now we get to see the odd passionate side as well. I believe that if you are writing a biopic, you want to show what made the artist or subject your writing about ticked, or what got him going. You want to dive into what this person was about and how he or she came to be that way. The letters are very disturbing and paint a very disturbing image in your mind, having said that, I believe that it was important to incorporate the letters to show the readers the "different" side of Mozart. If the information was irrelevant to the biography, then it would not be necessary to put it in the book, but in this case, it was.
Amanda Hogue – HUM2123-01 MWF 11:00am
ReplyDelete1. Many say, the apple never falls far from the tree, so to understand how someone thinks and why they act the way they do looking to their parents may give you a clue of why. In this time era as well, many sons would follow in their father’s footsteps to keep the family business going or that was the only skill the family knew how to do. Mozart’s father was a well-educated professional musician for a prince, and a successful violinist and assistant conductor, from his profession already you can understand that Mozart had large shoes to fill. Mozart was a hardworking man who never allowed 'ordinary' to enter his life, he made sure all his works were of breathtaking beauty, and that is understandable when his father was a strict, demanding, egotistical, and vain schoolmaster. It would seem that perfection would still not be enough to his father so when Mozart composed, he composed masterpieces.
3. Everyone has secrets, and everyone has even deeper, darker secrets that you would never want to see the light of day but when you pass and a biographer uproots those secrets, you can’t really tell them to not publish those skeletons because those secrets then help define you and the life you lived. Biographies seem to usually leave that person naked with no secret left hidden, and I don’t completely agree with that, we all have mistakes we made in the past that are best left in the past and I think biographers should use their judgment to see what details are appropriate and not when publishing. For example, Anne Frank’s diary was a DIARY, she wrote her most deepest and personal thoughts in that journal. When her diary was published it did keep her memory alive but that would also be humiliating for her to have other people know her deep, dark secrets when they were that certain kind of private and no one could understand her situation leading her to think the way she did. I think those types of private details or thoughts help us, the reader, get a grasp that this is a person, it helps us humanize them instead of idolizing them like they are a god when they’re just a person who did something special.
Paul Sandy
ReplyDelete1) I'm fond of the statement made by Mozart's mother that hints toward the household opinion of their patriarch. On pg. 6, Gay notes her as viewing that her paramount duty was to serve her husband. This echoed throughout the home in such that Leopold was ultimate authority in the household. This was evident when Mozart resigned to go to Paris at direct command from his father, only to have his mother die there. I couldn't help but feel that Leopold was , to some degree, exploiting his son, or at least the control he had over Mozart.
3) Whatever paper trail one leaves behind for biographers to uncover is fair game for publication. The thoughts we have and secret lives we lead have a true and real impact on who we are. That said, I've only known Mozart as a great musician. But these types of details tell us more than any musical legacy ever would reveal about who he actually was. It is a biographers job to compel readers to actually come to know their subject in an intimate fashion, and Gay has done just that here.
1. Leopold was a successful, or somewhat succesful musician and business man as he made Mozart's work into a money making deal. These days you would call him Mozart's manager. The culture of the time was a culture where the son was a servent to his father and followed in his footsteps, that's just what you did. I cant help but feel Leopold w as a little jealous of his son's accomplishments.
ReplyDeleteI am Sorry, the last post anonymous question 1 was for Kay Shurtleff, the one I replied to
DeleteKAY SHURTLEFF
ReplyDelete4. These letters are very private and brings up an ethical issue. My job at the Journal as a news reporter has given me practice to deal with ethics in print but there is never a black and white answer. At the time Mozart wrote the letters it would be a violation of his privaacy if anyone, including his father, snooped around and found them. In the case of this book and other biographers I personally feel it is okay to print them as there is noone left alive that it would embarres or hurt. It does give us a more in debt outlook and understanding of Mozart and his inner self and not just his music, I even would go so far to say if a book was strictly about his music, his life work, that it would not be interesting to most people and therefore the book wouldn't sell.
#3 When writing a biography the reader is expecting the book to be litterly wide open with every detail even the not so nice this in turn gives the reader something to understand about how they became who they are or were supose to be.
ReplyDelete#4 Mozart was indeed spoiled by fathely attintion too mush purhaps but yes he long to be free but not really knowing what that this would intell because he had never been in to the wild always father at hand. He realized he could go further and was urnning for this out of reach of his father.
Amory Morgan
ReplyDelete2. I believe that Mozart’s work stood out more because it was so emotional. He started composing music at such a young age that I feel like he had more of an understanding for music. He wrote and played from his heart, not just something that people would like to hear and wanted him to play.
3. Like you said in class earlier, Mozart is dead now. So is his privacy. To really understand someone, especially someone with such a complex history, you HAVE to dig deep and try to find all of the dirt. If Gay wouldn’t have put the “intimate” letters in here, then would we really have got a feel of how he actually was? We probably would just assume that he was a simple person with an extraordinary music mind. That didn’t think of anything besides music. So, yes I don’t think it should matter that we read his letters that weren’t meant for outsiders eyes.
Ashley Barnes
ReplyDelete1) I feel that Mozart's father played in important role in his childhood and to fully understand him we must know about his father as well. Mozart's father was his teacher and the one who really started him in music, but I feel that once his father realized how great Mozart really was he saw an opportunity and took it. He pushed Mozart further than he did his sister, although I do believe that he truly cared for them and wanted them to become better, I feel that he used them not selfishly but to better his family in any way possible. This is what the men of that time were supposed to do, provide and care for their family in anyway possible.
3) Even though the letters may be an invasion of privacy, the biography was written long after they had been written, and they can play important pieces in truly getting to know Mozart .You can gather characteristics and learn things about him that otherwise may never had been known or brought up had the letters not been used. Every little thing available should be used to help us learn and understand about someone so different from our time.
1. Mozart's father was a huge roll in his life with out his father pushing him he would have never become the great composer he was. In order to understand Mozart you need to understand how he grew up and how he was raised. Mozart grew up with higher standards then most children. Its was a very difficult challenge to face. It made him a little socially awkward, but it also made him the best. His father had good intentions even though I believe he did push him too hard and took away his childhood he just wanting the best for his child. Understanding his background gives us a better incite to who he was and that's why I believe gay makes sure we know about his father.
ReplyDelete4. I believe he wouldn't play the role of a servant, because he thought he was too good. He thought he had too much skill and didn't care about the consequences of pissing some one of higher standings off. Why wouldn't he had felt that way though whenever he's always had his father in his ear telling him he's to good. When you hear something for so long your going to believe it. He was a little bit of a brat.
ReplyDeleteStormee Chestra
ReplyDelete(2) To me Mozart's music speaks to you emotionally, because he started composing his music as a child basically and I feel that you have a better understanding when you're that age compared to us as adults.
(4) Mozart didn't play that role was because he felt he was of a higher standing than the other people. A servant is the lowest of the lows back in the day and for him to play that was demeaning to him. He was been composing music for so long that he feels he's the best at it.
Michelle Wyant
ReplyDelete1) Mozart's father was a major part in his life. All throughout his childhood his father taught him and looked out for his well being. In order to understand the way Mozart was you need to see what lies behind the veil. What was his family like and how he was raised. He was always traveling as a child and wanted to please everyone especially his father.
4) To me I believe that Mozart thinks he is better than a servant because of how good he was with his musical talents. He didn't care who he would make extremely mad and frustrated because his whole life he had been told how extremely gifted he was and he was, but you can only take that so far. I think that he forgot where his place was and needed to be told he was wrong.