Response to Turuskin's "Facing Up, Finally, to Bach's Dark Vision"

I do not believe myself to be naïve. I believe there are great scholars whose work should be admired and respected. Furthermore, I believe all men, even the greatest scholars in their respected fields, are still human, complete with agendas, opinions, and soapboxes. Turuskin’s achievements are momentous, unfathomable landmarks in the field of music. They are not, however, a gratuitous credential for we scholars to blindly agree with. We needn’t wash the feet of a man with whom we may disagree with because of his past accomplishments.

That being said, I agree with the vast majority of Turuskin’s article. Personally, my love for Bach has been unwavering since entering college. His music embodies everything in music that I wish for. As Turuskin points out, to truly know Bach’s music is to recognize that it can be ugly, aggressive, painful, and sometimes downright exhausting. Listen to a violinist attempt to play multiple quadruple stops whilst bringing out a prominent melodic line. There is nothing beautiful about these fugues from the violin sonatas (BWV 1001, 1003, 1005). To say a composer’s music is at times ugly is in no way an insult. In what way is ugly music better than beautiful music? Absolutely none.

The portion (a mere sentence) of Turuskin’s argument that I take offense to is “Listeners value performances to the extent that they are beautiful-sounding.” (309) Bach, Ligeti, Lutoslawski, Carter, Penderecki – these are my favorite composers. Of course, these composers have created beautiful music, but its beauty is usually amidst horrific sounds of tone clusters, obtrusive polyrhythms, and harsh extended techniques. It is just these stretches of the grotesque that make the “beautiful” moments ever more sublime. How can one truly enjoy beauty without experiencing repugnance?