John Dalmas wondered:

>>Ears, writes Solomon are a symbol of the male genitals.  Hm.
>
>Viewers of "The Sopranos" will recall when Tony Sopranos's emasculating
>mother conspires to have him killed, the killers botch the job and shoot
>off his ear instead.  Hm, again!  So in Beethoven's case, who is the
>emasculator? Fate knocking at the door?

Yes, some kind of "must", some sort of sign from...  from where? above or
so? God himself? I don't know, maybe Solomon does, but frankly, I doubt it.
Anyway, he also points to the fact that Beethoven's father shouted so often
so loudly to little Ludwig, who tried to become "deaf" to this ugly noise.
His ears became oversensitive and vulnerable and therefore he dropped
playing the loud church organ.  And later on, grown-up......  et cetera.
You get the picture? If so, enlighten me, please, for I can use some
enlightenment on this issue!:-) One begins to wonder why Beethoven wrote so
much loud music...  No, apologies, I'm not fair, I'm kidding.  I know very
well what Solomon meant, for I do know my Freud.  In Solomon's view the
mysterious sender was the cruel unconscious part of Beethoven's mind.  I'm
not a lover of such psychoanalytical attempts (to say the least) without
having had the victim on the couch and that's one of the reasons why I'm
not a lover of the man's writings on Beethoven.

>And what is the consequnce of the "emasculation"? Impotence with the
>Immortal Beloved?

More or less, according to far too obedient Freud followers like the
Sterbas and Solomon.  Solomon points to Beethoven's diary entry that he "no
longer must be a man" (written down in 1813) and obviously takes it very
literal.

And Dave added:

>[And demonstrates clearly the ridiculousness of long-distance
>psychoanalysis.  -Dave]

I couldn't agree more.

Joyce Maier
www.ademu.com/Beethoven