Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Sat, 13 May 2000 07:02:27 -0300 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Christopher Webber:
>"The Merchant of Venice" is an excellent case in point. Many theatrical
>practitioners feel (I would be one of them) that the play is unperformable
>nowadays without offending against either (a) aesthetic or (b) ethical
>integrity. It is impossible to avoid nailing your colours to one of these
>twin masts. You can't choose both.
I think that Mr. Webber pointed the "quid" of this thread: aesthetics
vs. ethics. My point is that there is no dilemma: the ethic offense
doesn't exist in art. Art is not "ethical", and it doesn't must be. I'm
a catholic: should I stop reading Plinius just because he wrote about
christians: "that bunch of freaks"?. Danish people should feel offended
too, because Shakespeare shows a danish prince as sissy and irresolute?.
This false dilemma may leads us to certain paths: the same of those who
condemned Baudelaire and Joyce. Oh yes, don't say that this is not the
same case: the work of Baudelaire and Joyce was reputed "inmoral" and
"offensive" in its times. ("Unperformable"....brrr, what a dangerous
word!...).
PS: Sorry for my insistence on this thread. I know that some comments
goes often far beyond music, but this is a debate of particular interest
for me.
Pablo Massa
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|