Comments on: Stephen Jay Gould

By: alfred venison

alfred venison — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 15:12:54 +0000

dear Llwddythlw
gustav mahler’s third symphony is that composer’s exposition, in a programmatic symphony, of schopenhauer’s ‘world as will & idea’. there is a good essay examining this symphony in these terms, by william mcgrath. its called “the meta-musical universe of gustav mahler” and is to be found in his book, “dionysian art & politics in fin de siecle vienna”. your university library might have a copy. if you’re inclined to try coming at schopenhauer from another direction, i heartily recommend it, in conjunction with the symphony. it was a real “ear opener” for me – a lively & immensely cultivated introduction to the notion of music as a kind of aural philosophy, a notion not at all uncommon in schopenhauer & mahler’s time.
yours sincerely
alfred venison

By: CherryBombSim

CherryBombSim — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:02:31 +0000

I don’t think you can overstate how important the concept of punctuated equilibrium was at the time of that paper. There was a sort of cognitive dissonance in the way paleontologists looked at the fossil record before that; describing fossils as if they were species in stasis at the same time they were intuitively “hidebound gradualists.” The take-away message was that your data are more important than your intuitions.

The paper came out when I was just starting to study geology, and I would say that that, and his ideas about contingency, have had a lasting impact on me. It was an interesting time to be studying geology, I don’t think we ever used a textbook when I was an undergraduate because they were all wrong.

By: Dale Hoyt

Dale Hoyt — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 19:09:52 +0000

I’m late to the discussion but thought I’d submit my impression of Gould. I only met him once, but I had read his early columns in Natural History and was envious of his ability to lucidly and entertainingly explain evolutionary concepts. I was teaching at Agnes Scott College in Decatur, GA, when Gould agreed to give a lecture at this small, liberal arts college for women. After the lecture he and I shared a pitcher of beer and I found him to be gracious and friendly, not at all conceited and certainly willing to clarify and defend his positions vis-a-vis his evolutionary ideas. Why had he come to lecture at an obscure, Southern educational institution? He told me that he felt an obligation to speak in places that would probably never have an opportunity to hear a contrarian viewpoint. I didn’t know it, but this must have been around the time that he was first diagnosed with cancer. I felt privileged to have had an opportunity to share some personal time with him (and embarrassed that none of my colleagues were interested to joining us).
A few years later he appeared at Kennesaw College, on the north side of Atlanta and gave a rousing, anti-racist talk to a packed room.

By: CindyG

CindyG — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:34:56 +0000

If I had read Gould 5 years earlier I might have gone into biology or something like science journalism. As is was, a couple years out of design school, I picked up a copy of “Hen’s Teeeth and Horses Toes” on a whim, because I thought the title was cool. I don’t think I had ever read a popular science book before. It completely changed the way I looked at the world–at natural history and human history, and the nature of reality. I did eventually go back for a second undergraduate in biology, though never took the plunge into professional science. I still hope to come up with a children’s book about evolution. There are a lot more good ones today than there used to be, but still not nearly enough.

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:15:07 +0000

Gould is the reason I’m currently doing my PhD in History of Science (focusing on hist of bio and evolutionary theory). His book Mismeasure of Man and his essays had an enormous impact on my intellectual development and I regret never having the chance to tell him so. A great loss.

By: JS1685

JS1685 — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 04:49:06 +0000

Yes, word-painting is a part of the art. It’s undeniably of some interest and can often be very effective. The point is that it has nothing to do with whether or not the music works. The best composers fulfill the demands of a purely musical logic first, then layer on the more extra-musical elements. Or, perhaps to put it more accurately, the greats would only conceive of “leitmotivic” gestures that can also be justified in a purely musical sense.

The even bigger point is that, in a sense, there is no “religious music.” There is only music. The things that make Brahms’ (an atheist) music great are the same things that make Bach’s music great. There is no need to worry about “giving up” any music simply because of the circumstances under which it was created.

The Missa Solemnis is unbelievable. The end of the Gloria? Fuhgeddaboutit!

By: Cath the Canberra Cook

Cath the Canberra Cook — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 03:54:09 +0000

I’m another atheist choral singer. Love the Bach & Mozart, but Monteverdi’s and Rachmaninoff’s vespers are personal favourites. Most recently I sang the Beethoven Missa Solemnis – an amazing work.

In my opinion, you’re better off not ignoring the words. “Word painting” is a part of the art: rising to heaven, descending to hell, falling silent and dying, shimmering angelic voices, the “tuba mirum” trumpet call… I consider it as story-telling, of a myth. I’d be just as happy to sing songs written to or about Bacchus, Brahma, Buddha or Beer.

On the rare occasion when someone asks how I can sing Xmas carols when I’m not a Christian, I usually note that I also don’t have to be a Japanese teenager to sing Un Bel Di, so what is their point?

By: M31

M31 — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 00:33:33 +0000

Yeah, that too.

There was a very well-known Boston violinist would not play the piece because of that text.

JS1685, I think that the text of the opening chorus of the St. Matthew _is_ pretty much banal vulgar rubbish. “Behold the bridegroom! Where?” etc. I’m in complete agreement with you that the wonder and awe should be directed at the human who created the music, and the humans who created the musical customs and culture that JS Bach made such brilliant use of.

There is something about music that makes us feel we have access to deeper levels of meaning than language can provide. Which, of course, is why religion, the great parasite of the world, uses it so much.

The musical connection to religious feeling can be hard to give up. I think that people who ‘should’ be atheists but aren’t might find the music the hardest to give up. Didn’t Martin Gardner remain at least nominally Anglican for the ritual and music?

I’ve known Christians who converted to Judaism and more than one of them said that the Christmas carols were the hardest thing to say goodbye to.

I of course, love Christmas carols and sing them loud and clear with my proud atheist voice.

By: Shuggy

Shuggy — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 22:24:47 +0000

“a Jewish friend of mine said the music made her want to convert to Christianity. (At least until she thought about all the Resurrection/Easter stuff, then she came back to her senses.)”

I’d have thought the chorus “His blood be on us and on our children” would have brought her back to her senses.

By: Michael Fisher

Michael Fisher — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 21:07:19 +0000

Well put, “passionate amateur” shines through your words !