Re: And why. . .? (long)

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 13:49:13 -0800, Nora Renka wrote:


> It's awfully hard to write about and analyze Wagner fitting together
> both the purely musical issues (especially with real theoretical
> sophistication), the more general dramatic/structural ideas, and then
> throwing the philosophical background and questions of interpretation
> into it, it becomes very difficult to balance.  I'm having a lot of fun
> with it right now, as we're almost to the end of Parsifal in class...

Please let us know how it works out :-)

Several woman have contributed to the literature concerning "Parsifal" in
recent years.  Obviously Lucy Beckett, with whose interpretation of the
work I strongly disagree.  Also Mary Cicora who has written about the
reception of "Parsifal" in the "Bayreuther Blätter" and other
contemporary journals, and Ulrike Kienzle in her study of "Parsifal" as a
parable of the philosophy of Schopenhauer (I agree with much of Kienzle's
"Parsifal" book but regretfully conclude that she has failed to see the
forest of Monsalvat for the trees).  But you've probably read their books
already!

-- 
Derrick Everett   (deverett at c2i.net)
==== Writing from  59°54'N 10°36'E ====
http://home.c2i.net/monsalvat/index.htm