The question becomes, by what criteria do we determine what is objectively the “best” in the arts? I think that “communication” is a crucially important criterion, and I propose that a transcendent reflection of God, who is the divine source of objective truth, expressed in human creativity is indeed objectively, theologically “better” than mathematical integrity or symmetry alone.
I offer these comments in response to Joseph Pearce’s thoughtful essay, “Which Is Beethoven’s Best Work?” First, his comments about “objective best” vs. “subjective favorite” are well taken and can be applied to many creative genres today. I agree that it is with some rare delight when those two things can actually be found in the same object, as Mr. Pearce finds them in Beethoven’s Symphony No. 6 in F major, Opus 68 (“Pastoral”). Then the question becomes, by what criteria do we determine what is objectively the “best” in the arts? Strictly in terms of craft, and speaking as a university music professor who teaches the analysis of Beethoven’s scores, many scholars regard the pinnacle of Beethoven’s technical achievement to be his very late string quartets (and I see someone has already left a comment to that effect on Mr. Pearce’s essay, since the “Grosse Fugue” that the commenter proposes is part of that group of quartets). Those quartets, however, while on a par with Bach’s greatest counterpoint, are practically incomprehensible to most people as music for listening, including to me. Beethoven was completely deaf when he wrote them, and I have often spoken of them to students as the work of either a genius or a madman, because I find them so hard to comprehend, myself. In the same way, but to an even greater degree, Arnold Schoenberg’s 12-tone, atonal works are crafted on some level of mathematical perfection, on paper, but are practically incomprehensible to most people for actual listening.
So, if the criterion of also communicating to the listener on some emotional level in actual sound is arguably crucial, and not only cold, structural skill “on paper,” then I agree with Mr. Pearce that the sixth symphony is unsurpassed as Beethoven’s most communicative large-scale composition, while not sacrificing greatness of craft of technical construction. (There are other contenders for me, if ties are allowed, like his delicious fourth piano concerto.) I think that Mr. Pearce does imply by his defense of the “Pastoral” symphony that communication is a crucially important criterion. It may be argued that Beethoven’s beloved “Moonlight” piano sonata is also communicative, but if the sixth symphony is a novel, the Moonlight sonata is a poem. The symphony wins overall by having both human communication and also a large-scale formal architecture all-too-seldom achieved in history, in the sheer “achieve of, the mastery of the thing,” to reiterate Mr. Pearce’s quote from Hopkins.
To put a finer point on it, and speaking of architecture by way of analogy, perhaps the most technically perfect architectural structure, in merely mathematical terms alone, is the so-called “Geodesic Dome,” with its perfect distribution of structural stress. And there is some beauty, perhaps, in its simple clarity of design. The “Spaceship Earth” building at Epcot Center is an example, like a giant golf ball on the landscape. R. Buckminster Fuller did not invent the geodesic dome but coined the term and popularized this structure, even using the design to build his own home. However, if aesthetic communication to the viewer is added as a criterion, then I would say that Filippo Brunelleschi’s brilliant design for the dome of the Florence Cathedral is a greater work of dome architecture, because the dome has far more varied and artistic features, that is, intricate aesthetic detail and emotionally satisfying communication while remaining, still today, the largest standing brick dome in the world. This is due to a most ingenious series of gravity defying features, equally impressive to those of the geodesic dome, which were centuries ahead of Brunelleschi’s time.
However, I think that “communicative” as a criterion for evaluating greatness, itself, requires further defense, lest it be deemed merely subjective, too—that is, as a subjective factor of how to determine objectivity. The Florence dome and the “Pastoral” symphony of Beethoven communicate because they reflect the image of God through God-given human imagination involving the whole human person, including innate or visceral emotional appeal. Through their combination of both emotionally perceived beauty and intellectually perceived technical truth, they project a higher quality, greater than the sum of those two factors, which is to say transcendence and not only immanence. I propose that such a transcendent reflection of God, who is the divine source of objective truth, expressed in human creativity is indeed objectively, theologically “better” than mathematical integrity or symmetry alone. The latter are marvelous qualities but are only components of the more holistic, greater work. In other words, I agree with Joseph Pearce.
This essay is part of a series commemorating the 250th anniversary of the birth of Ludwig van Beethoven.
The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.
The featured image is a portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven in 1803, painted by Christian Horneman, and is in the public domain, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
As one who reads Beethoven’s works without sound as the most invigorating method of communicating to him through his music, as Beethoven became better and better at his craft as he became less distracted by sound, I can say that his late string quartets are amazing in every respect. Writing music, creating Art, even at the end of the Classical Period was far more than following the rules of counterpoint, set down by Joseph Fux and studied by every composer from his day through the 19th century. Beethoven was criticized for ‘breaking rules’ of counter point, moving from Consonant to Consonant interval by mean of ‘direct motion’, for example, but he never did so without a very good ‘linguistic’ reason. As far as Beethoven’s own opinion, his greatest work was the Missa Solemnis, and for good reason. He had successfully communicated the Mass, Christ’s Redeeming Sacrifice that continues in every Catholic Church around the world every day, but Good Friday, to this very day. Like most great artists, Beethoven put the most effort of his capacity at the service of the greatest object of all- The Mass. Although the Sixth Symphony is a wonderful work, it has as its object of communication a far less important and beautiful End. Teleology matters not least in Art.
Beethoven’s Sixth? Over his Seventh, Third or Fifth? No way?
Better than his Fifth and Fourth Piano Concertos or the Violin Concerto? Not hardly?
Better than the Waldstein, Apassionata and Pathetique sonata? Nyet, nada, no how!
The Sixth is less profound, less impactful and less beloved than any of these.
But beauty is “in the eye of the beholder”, is it not? So, your opinion, and that of my friend Joseph Pearce, warrant consideration and respect. To that end, I will give in another listen
JA Motter, I feel your dilemma, for all the pieces you list would be at least tied with the 6th or well beyond it, for part of me, as for you, and for those who more deeply know music and who can comprehend those more sophisticated pieces. But the 6th symphony does have a unique character and spirit of endearing innocence among all of Beethoven’s works, and a vulnerability, so I am trying to put on the “hat” of the broader listening audience. It is his piece that “became as a little child” as Jesus taught us. And this is precisely embodied in the fact that it was the piece chosen by Disney for Fantasia. However, I do not agree that beauty is in the eye of the beholder — but it is in the thing beheld, as Joseph Pearce points out. There is an objective standard, or else the complete works of The Monkeys would be equal to the works of Beethoven, if someone beheld that. But as I said, I think there is room for an honest disagreement and for a “tie” among the works you list, along with the 6th symphony. At some point there is an apples and oranges comparison between the several most great works of Beethoven.