Bert Bailey wrote:

>Krishan P Oberoi wrote:
>
>>...some would argue that the bulk of Britten's ouvre can be linked to his
>>sexuality and to his relationship with Pears, and not just the operas.
>
>How do they argue this?

For the same reason that many heterosexual male artists have lavished
attention on the female voice, face and psyche.  The relationship in Peter
Grime, the subtext, is of the societal view of "the love that dare not
speak its name".  More over - the loss of innocence, and particularly the
loss of young manhood - is the subtext in Billy Budd, in the War Requiem,
homosexual longing is the subtext of "Death in Venice".

It is a trap to argue the irrelevance of sexuality for the content and -
thrust - of an artists work.  Every creative artist needs motivation to get
up and work, and sexuality is a powerful source of energy and of material.
Perhaps there are some prudes out there who would deny the validity of
presenting homosexuality in music or on stage, and there are probably more
people who would fail to realise that sexuality, of whatever sort, provides
a particular lense on the human experience as a whole.

In Britten's case, the focus on the coming of age and loss of innocence
is clearly linked to his own sexuality, his realisation of it, and his
reaction to his society's view of its practice.  What makes Britten a
great artist is that he finds what is human and portrays it so that it is
appreciated even by people who are not middle aged well educated homosexual
males in the upper middle class of mid century British soceity.  As a
result, more people find kinship with the sense of hunted isolation in
*Peter Grimes* than they find with characters drawn more locally to them.
And the characters are reinterpretable a new with each passing generation.
Some years ago Peter Grimes had far more overtones of "Britian alone
against the Germans" than it does now, far more sense of isolation - where
as now Peter Grimes is in exile from society, and his pangs are all the
more personal for that.  Instead of being everyman, he is anyman.  A subtle
but important difference.  No doubt next generation will have a different
slant on the character, just as Verdi's characters have evolved over time,
and Wagner's and Mozart's and so...

- - -

The artist's life and loves do matter, with appropriate apologies to
Schumann, and it is in the differences that we may draw comparisons and
seek contrasts.  Or should we all be alike in our passions and be decanted
rather than born? The prospect is not alluring, afterall, to paraphrase
Ovid - "the same delight does not enrapture us all" but to continue the
thought, the sensation of delight is, at root, the same for everyone.

Stirling Newberry
[log in to unmask]
http://www.mp3.com/ssn