Evening in the Palace of Reason (James Gaines, 2005)

This book was based on an interesting conceit - a visit by Bach to Frederick the Great during which Frederick posed a musical challenge - I didn't comprehend the intricacy, but it involved the use of canons and/or fugues. Frederick apparently was pretty sophisticated musically (though his employee - Carl Bach! - is thought to have come up with the challenge.) Anyway, Bach came up with what is now referred to as "The Musical Offering." I have listened to that CD quite often over the years but hadn't known about its background.

The book actually doesn't spend all that much time on this specific episode, which in the end didn't seem all that important to either party. But the episode did present an opportunity to compare and contrast the ages represented by Bach (old school Lutheran, belief in original sin etc.) and Frederick (Enlightenment, rationality, belief in perfectibility of man).

The author gave a brief biography of each protagonist; he concludes Bach was a bit of an individualist within the Lutheran tradition and in fact a precursor to the Romantics.

It was interesting to think of a person like Bach in those days -a village cantor or organist because there wasn't much else of a market for musicianship - recognized for talent, but in a role where followed orders and did music as a craft; his music depicted theological "truths." The notion of an independent artist expressing his or her own vision just didn't exist in that part of the world at that time. Yet Bach did some pretty independent composing, ergo the esteem in which the later romantics held him.

The portrayal of Frederick wasn't very flattering - the author spends a great deal of time explaining how his father was controlling and abusive, and how this appeared to affect Frederick's relationships ever after. He was intent on expanding Prussia, ended up with lots of wars. Apparently relatively progressive as a ruler; also somewhat forgotten until Hitler came along. Not sure why Hitler picked up on Frederick the Great, maybe he was as good a symbol as any that were available; I read that Hitler made the formal declaration of the Third Reich at Frederick's tomb. (I think the "first reich" was the Holy Roman Empire, and the "second reich" was the German empire as it existed after the unification by Bismark in 1870 through the end of WWI.)

The author gave a lot of details about canons and fugues, how they are constructed etc. I'm confident I still don't understand this, and could never pick out the elements - though I certainly like the sound of Bach's work of this nature, or at least the little to which I've been exposed.

Also, the author exults over Bach's B minor Mass and the Passion According to St. Matthew - I would agree that both are great listening. It's also interesting how Mendelssohn did a version of the B minor Mass that was catalytic in bringing Bach to public attention - after 100+ years of Bach having been largely forgotten.

Muhammed - A Biography of the Prophet (Karen Armstrong, 1992)

Reading this was a bit odd. I would like to be less ignorant about the roots of Islam and I think it was helpful to read this. But the author (who I later learned is quite a prominent writer and commenter on all things religious) seems to be anticipating a non-Muslim Western readership that is hostile to Islam. She ends up working too hard to define various occurrences as justifiable under or consistent with the Torah or the gospels or the New Testament; I'm not sure why she strains to make the effort, I would assume Islam doesn't require that kind of justification?

Her concluding comments leave no doubt she blames the West for any conflict that exists with radical Muslims, maybe she thinks this type of book will help enlighten the ignorant Westerners? But as far as I can tell, the West (and Christendom in general) has a long and well-publicized list of failings in relations among Christian denominations and non-Christian religions alike, but continually calling this out isn't very helpful and probably is irrelevant to discussing others?

She quite often takes the same approach with passages in the Koran; again, I'm not sure why this was necessary. She comes across as almost over-sensitive about perceptions of Islam as unfair to women, the harem, "religion of the sword," violence, relationships with Jews, etc. The effort to point out - or interpret where necessary - various Koran passages seemed unnecessarily strained. After all, it seems like all religions have authoritative writings full of admirable ideas about justice, social justice (widows, orphans), peace, family, etc., along with other passages that might sound awkward to the "modern" ear. The challenge is translating this into a workable civil society (including not having the various religions run into each other). I can see where this could be extra difficult where the political leadership's claims are based on divine authority rather than consent of the governed . . .

An interesting idea was the author's discussion of the differing emphases between Christianity and Islam, including a description of the primitive status of desert Arabia in comparison to more developed civilizations (Greece, Rome, Persia, Byzantium, etc.) or religious traditions. She notes that Muhammad was very preoccupied with not getting himself killed, establishing alliances, etc.; that there was no established civil order in this part of the world within which the religion could function. Christianity by comparison grew up in a (Roman) state with order - if directed aggressively at the Christians in the early going - in any event, the Christians didn't need to start with an army or establish their own state, they emphasized healing, preaching, submission; and then took over the Roman machinery when the time came. Also with the emphasis on "end of days" in the early going for Christians, why try to build anything? So there were very good reasons for Islam to have different, more practical, priorities. I think there are some interesting ideas here.

Muhammed's unfolding revelations were reminiscent of (what little I've read of) Joseph Smith; handy concepts came along as needed; admittedly can sound cynical but in the end if a charismatic leader creates something that works for folks on a large scale, it's impressive. And I certainly can't figure out how anyone generates inspirational ideas, by definition these are coming outside the normal process of analysis etc.

Piano (James Barron, 2006)

The author follows a concert grand (number K0862) through the 11-month building process in the Steinway factory in New York. This was quite interesting. But not as interesting as I had hoped. I was looking for more history of the piano, not so interested in the assembly and mechanical details.

He does a good job of conveying the individuality of the pianos; I also liked the stories of the various world-class pianists associated with Steinway.

As far as history, one does get a sense of the ascent of the piano - really a late 19th and early 20th century phenomenon. As discussed in the Liszt biography, the piano was developed into its modern form at that time and became something of a status symbol - communicated both prosperity and culture, so who wouldn't want one sitting in the front room? The drop-off in sales was massive once radio - and then the real killer, TV - became mainstream.

And I learned that I've heard K0862 (now renumbered CD-60 after assignment to Steinway's concert division, where the best grands go) on a recording by a family group - the "Five Browns" - they used the piano on their debut album, which I had received as a gift from one MB Stern.

Anyway, this read like a long newspaper article. Which basically is what it is . . .