Analyzing Music: Mozart's Lacrimosa

Music is one of the greatest forms of art ever conceived. From the earliest days of banging sticks together to make a rhythm, to composing massive symphonies and orchestras in today's greatest music halls, the art of music is among the most influential and impactful art forms ever. This, in no small part, is thanks to the many great musical legends that have come and gone throughout history. Bach, Beethoven, Vivaldi, just to name a few. Today, wanted to become better at not only listening to music, but also understanding what each piece of music means. To help me, I decided to briefly study the work of the great Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, and his piece Lacrimosa.

Mozart stands among the titans of European musical composers in the 17th and 18th centuries. His many famous works are known by all, even people who do not regularly consume classical music. His natural talent for playing music at an 

early age kick-started his career in the music industry, and brought the world one of the greatest artistic minds ever seen. Who better than for me to analyze than one of the greatest? The two works of his I eventually had to decide on for this analysis (if you could call it that) were between Requiem and Lacrimosa, both I instantly recognized, but had never actually known the names of (which is just the power of Mozart, I suppose). I eventually chose the latter of the two.

Lacrimosa is a beautiful piece that carries the emotion of sorrow or mourning with it. The heavenly vocals combined with the powerful horn and percussion lines, led by a string group, make this piece an unforgettable cantata (at least that's what I believe it is). I love how the sound is soft, but heavy with emotion using a calm tempo and soothing flow. Even as I write this post, I am listening to the piece on repeat, and it is not getting boring or dull to me. I can't help but believe this work tells the story of some great loss or failure that led to a time of great sadness. Overall, a very inspiring piece.

My recommendation: I love this piece, and I would recommend it to anyone, especially to those who do not listen to this type of music regularly. Also, listen to it using some surround-sound headphones or speakers, as I did. This was an overall positive experience for me, I had my doubts going in, but I am glad to have done this.

Locke or Hobbes?

John Locke and Thomas Hobbes; two of the greatest early philosophers in western history. The two pondered on ideas like human nature, the role of rulers, and eventually became two of the major contributors to the Social Contract Theory. However, like all good philosophers, both men had differing worldviews; some might say conflicting views, even. So, based on the many works of both men, what they said, theorized, and published, which one do you side with? John Locke, the father of modern Liberalism; or, Thomas Hobbes, the Monarchist?

It is difficult for me to personally side with one philosopher over the other entirely. Both individuals have very strong arguments for their views, and neither is wholly wrong in any way. Hobbes puts forth some hard truths, while also displaying little interest in what many of today's societies are composed of. Locke, alternatively, provides a more positive image of a number of mankind's issues, but fails to realize the possibility, or even reality, of man's violent inclinations. 

Having to pick sides between philosophers, whose ideas each apply to a different form of society, government, and even person, is difficult; but, based on my own values, and the values instilled upon me, I would have to side with John Locke. 

Locke's opinions on issues like the Social Contract, rights, and the role of the state is much more in line with my own pattern of thinking. Hobbes' views are too harsh and restrictive, which is hardly surprising being that he prefers monarchies over democracies, and he simply has too little faith in the society and too much trust in monarchs. Locke sees the world as it works in most nations today. The people, who are endowed with many rights, being governed by people who represent them; "by the people, for the people" and all that. The people give their governments meaning, and, in return, those governments give the people protection. The United States has operated on this principle, more or less, for the extent of its existence; and many other nations, even those with a constitutional monarchy, have followed suit. It is because, I believe, so many nations based their governmental structures on the works of John Locke, that we now have fewer dictators and cruel leaders than ever before. Hobbes said that all democracies are doomed because of their innate and deep contradictions, but I think we will be doing just fine for many decades to come.

Three Postcards from the Rijksmuseum

The Dutch Golden Age was an incredible time of artistic expression for the Dutch people. Today, most of the works of the artists from that time are held in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. If I ever found myself in said museum, I would like to pick out maybe three postcards depicting my favorite works from the museum's halls.

The first work I might buy a postcard of is one called "The Inauguration of King Willem II in the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam" by the painter Nicholas Pieneman. 

This incredible historic scene was oil painted in 1840, and features, as the name suggests, the inauguration of King Willem II in Amsterdam. The painting itself is a mid-sized painting standing at 46.5 cm (18.3 in) high and 55.5 cm (21.85 in) tall. I like this painting in particular simply because of the gran scale of the scene depicted. Though not every face in the crowd is detailed, you can still see the sheer number of people in that room, and you can almost imagine the energy and that this event is creating.

Next, I  would have to pick the work "View of Houses in Delft, known as The Little Street" by one Johannes Vermeer in 1658.

This oil painting depicts what seems to be a quiet "Little Street" in the city of Delft, showing an everyday life image of these people. The painting's size comes in at 54.3 cm (21.3 in) high and 44 cm (17.3 in) wide. For me, the height of the painting adds to its glory. The tall buildings appear taller against the visible sky, and the people small in perspective. It is a simple, yet homely picture, which is why I like it.

Lastly, a painting by Willem van de Velde (II) called "A Ship at Sea in Violent Storm, known as 'The Gust of Wind,'" oil painted in the year 1680.

The dimensions of this work are 77 cm (30.3 in) high by 63.5 cm (25 in) wide. This painting depicts two ships, on larger and one smaller vessel, out at sea during a very violent storm. I love the energy resonating out of this picture. The dark clouds combined with the raging waters and the bobbing ships makes this painting feel like a picture taken from reality.  It is dark but lively and exciting, and it almost entertaining to just stare at.

Those are the three works that I would most likely purchase postcards of out of the many works I looked at in the archive at the Rijksmuseum.