Richard Todd wrote:

>Bach did indeed convey an enormous range of human emotion, but I don't
>think he conveyed the "entire" range.  Later composers, particularly in
>this century, learned to convey rage, despair and, on the more positive
>side, the erotic.

Richard might be correct, but this is an area where resolution is very
difficult.  Emotions such as rage, despair, eroticism certainly existed
in Bach's time and for centuries before.

I'd like to just address the "erotic." Yes, from all accounts, Bach was a
religious and family-oriented man of stright-laced nature.  On this level,
it is unlikely that he was sending any erotic messages.  However, at least
two considerations need to be noted:

1.  I'm a 20/21st century man listening to music written in the early
1700's.  I could easily think that I'm receiving a particular message when
the composer is sending out no such theme.

2.  I can't read Bach's mind.  There's the public Bach and the domestic
Bach and the "internal" Bach.  Each of these categories can be very
different.  I can't guarantee that Bach never put erotic messages into his
music; only Bach would know.  I do know that I feel I'm receiving erotic
messages from Bach in, say, the Musical Offering.  It just could be "me",
but it could also be Bach as well.

In conclusion, I'm not willing to admit that Bach did not convey the full
range of human emotions.  My emotions tell me that he did convey them all,
including eroticism.  Sure, folks like Bantock and Zemlinsky were very
up-front about the erotic content of their music.  Bach, given his status
and the time he lived, would not have composed music with clear erotic
images.  That does not mean that he did not convey them in more subtle
forms that highly-charged folks like myself would recognize instantly.
Listen carefully to the Musical Offering while thinking of eroticism -
what do you hear?

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]