A few years back, I wrote a piece for the Huffington Post about new discoveries surrounding the holiday classic, Handel's "Messiah." Several months later, I followed it up with additional revelations. Given that 'tis its season yet again - it seems like a fine time to repeat the story, as just another of the many holiday traditions. Sort of like a very early, 18th century version of "The Grinch." But have a glass of nog, as well. Fa la la... Over the passage of years, we lose track of the conditions that existed when artworks were created. When those years become centuries, the history vanishes, and all that remains is the work itself.That is, until someone researches that history, and puts the piece in its original context.
And that brings up Handel's "Messiah." By any standard, it's a brilliant piece of music, which has understandably lasted 250 years. Even to those who don't share its religious underpinning, the music is enthralling, and part of the celebration of the Christmas season. Oops. Now comes this detailed, deeply-researched article in the New York Times by Michael Marissen. "So 'Messiah' lovers may be surprised to learn that the work was meant not for Christmas but for Lent, and that the 'Hallelujah' chorus was designed not to honor the birth or resurrection of Jesus but to celebrate the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple in A.D. 70. For most Christians in Handel's day, this horrible event was construed as divine retribution on Judaism for its failure to accept Jesus as God's promised Messiah." Oops. Mr. Marissen does an impressive, scholarly and even-handed job uncovering the history of Handel's "Messiah." If anyone is interested in that history, do read the article. At the very least, read it before stating an opinion on it... To be clear, this is not about political correctness. This is about correctness. The truth, we are told, shall set us free. Either we go out of our way to learn the truth in our lives - and embrace it - or we bury our heads in the sand and listen to the sounds of gravel. People will still listen to Handel's "Messiah" for centuries to come, whatever the reality behind it. The music is glorious. The words? Well, be honest, it's a fair bet that most people don't know <em >exactly</em> what's being sung about anyway - it's 2-1/2 hours, for goodness sake. Most fans wouldn't listen to "American Idol" for that long. People tend to tune out Handel's "Messiah" about six minutes in and let the music wash over them. When the "Hallelujah Chorus" is about to begin, they get nudged and sit up straight. And even at that, the only words most people know are "Hallelujah" and that it will "reign forever and ever." (Some people probably think it's about Noah's Ark.) So, in some ways, the libretto of Handel's "Messiah" is not of critical importance 250 years after the fact. And that might be the biggest joke on Charles Jennens, who wrote the text and apparently saw the work as a way to confront what he believed was "a serious menace" in the world By having his friend Handel set his pointed tracts to music, Jennens felt that would help get his point across more subtly to the public. The result, of course, was that the spectacular music swamped over the words, and over time they took on a completely different meaning. This is known as the Law of Unintended Consequences. Or also, be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. Somewhere up in heaven, or more likely down in hell, Charles Jenniens has been pounding his head against a wall for the last couple hundred Christmases, screaming, "No, no, no! Don't you people get it?!! It's supposed to be about celebrating the destruction of heathen nations, not the embracing love of mankind. You people are so lame!" And it gets worse, because starting the day after Christmas - until the next Christmas when Handel's "Messiah" starts playing again - Jennens berates himself all year, wondering if he screwed up his work and didn't make it clear. Like maybe he used too many metaphors, or commas. Or perhaps in Scene 6, when he wrote, "Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron," he should have explained who "them" was or described a different bludgeon. No doubt there will be some people aghast by the revelations (no matter how valid) about the writing of Handel's "Messiah." I also have no doubt that almost all those who are aghast have never sat through the 2-1/2 hour work. Nor that most of those ever paid attention to what the precise words actually were. But they will be aghast anyway. On the other hand, most people who <em >have</em > sat and sat through a 2-1/2 hour performance of Handel's "Messiah" likely welcome having an excuse now not to have to do so again. Mr. Marissen concludes his study with a thought on the subject. "While still a timely, living masterpiece that may continue to bring spiritual and aesthetic sustenance to many music lovers, Christian or otherwise, 'Messiah' also appears to be very much a work of its own era. Listeners might do well to ponder exactly what it means when, in keeping with tradition, they stand during the 'Hallelujah' chorus." And while singing along, they might want to add a "Hallelujah" for the truth, as well. And that, I thought, was the end of the story. But it wasn't. A few months later, while reading Volume 9 of Will and Ariel Durant's majestic Story of Civilization, entitled "The Age of Voltaire," I came upon their extensive discussion of Handel. After the passage on "The Messiah," the Durants continue on with the composer's life and eventually reach five years later, April of 1747, when Handel had hit hard times. Not only had he written a string of failures and needed to close his theater, but he went into a sort of retirement, and rumor passed that he may even gone insane, though perhaps it might have been mental exhaustion. (The Earl of Shaftesbury remarked, "Poor Handel looks a little better. I hope he will recover completely, though his mind has been entirely deranged.") However there was yet more to Handel - and to the story relating somewhat to the controversy today about "The Messiah." The Durants write - "...Handel, now sixty years old, responded with all his powers to an invitation from the Prince of Wales to commemorate the victory of the Prince's younger brother, the Duke of Cumberland, over the Stuart forces at Culloden. Handel took as a symbolic subject Judas Maccabaeus' triumph (166-161 B.C.) over the Hellenizing schemes of Antiochus IV. The new oratorio was so well received (April 1, 1747) that it bore five repetitions in its first season. The Jews of London, grateful to see one of their national heroes so nobly celebrated, helped to swell the attendance, enabling Handel to present the oratorio forty times before his death. Grateful for this new support, he took most of his oratorio subjects henceforth from Jewish legend or history: Alexander Balus, Joshua, Susanna, Solomon and Jephtha. By contrast, Theodora, a Christian theme, drew so small an audience that Handel ruefully remarked, "There was room enough to dance." No doubt, Charles Jennens, author of the text for "The Messiah," is spinning even faster and deeper in his grave. But quality does win out over time. And so does transcending decency. And that, perhaps, in part, and in the end, may well be what we're left with. Hallelujah, indeed.
0 Comments
Today's song comes from what I believe was the first season of the animated series South Park. It was their initial Christmas special, centered around the adventures of Mr. Hanky the Christmas Poo, which brought the show even more attention. I have a tangential story connected to the song, "It's Hard to Be a Jew on Christmas." As I think I've mentioned, back in my dark days of P.R. I was the unit publicist on the movie BASEketball, which was directed by David Zucker (of the Airplaine! and The Naked Gun series, which was why he brought me along) and starred Trey Parker and Matt Stone, who did -- and still do -- South Park. During the movie's production, which overlapped with them being in production on South Park (so, in essence, they were doing two jobs at the same time), Matt and Trey mentioned that the only reason they signed to do the movie is because they were sure the TV series would be canceled after 10 episodes, and they'd have plenty of time to make the movie. Ha. So much for the best laid plans. It was during the movie's production that the TV series started peaking -- for instance they made the cover of both Time and Newsweek during the film. They said that if they had any idea that the TV show would still be going on, they never would have agreed to be in the movie. It was a crushing schedule -- including having an editing trailer for them on the set every day, and going back to their production offices after the day's filming -- but they handled it seriously impressively. Anyway, going back several months, we had a read-through of the movie script one night, and given that it was the "South Park guys," families and kids were invited. And as it happened, the read-through took place the night after their Christmas special aired. In the milling around phase of the evening, I went over to Trey and Matt to introduce myself, and I also wanted to tell them how much I particularly had love this specific song. Given the fame of South Park at that time, they were not surprisingly surrounded by a bunch of young boys gushing about the show. But in particular, they were gushing about another song in the TV special. So, I stood off to the side and waited for their fans to finish. The other song in the show as sung by the character 'Cartman," and lasts about 30 seconds, with the words basically being, "Kyle's mom is a big fat b*tch, she's a b*tch, b*tch, b*tch, she's a big fat b*tch," over and over for half a minute. The little boys just loooooved that. And one after another, they enthused to Matt and Tray about it, singing the song. After they all departed, I finally walked over. I said hi, we chatted a bit, and then I said how terrific I thought the song, "It's Hard to Be a Jew on Christmas" was. That the lyrics were so funny, yet touching, and the music was wisftul, and it was just really nicely crafted. And what was hilarious and memorable was how their faces suddenly filled with a smile of relief. They completely understood why the little boys all loved the "Kye's mom is a b*tch" song -- but this other was an actual song. And one they took great pride in. So, they were SO relieved to have someone praise it, rather than the one getting all the attention. I also had one question for them. About a minute into the song, the character Kyle singing it mentions some Hebrew phrase which I couldn't make out, words from some Hebrew Hanukkah song he has to sing instead of getting to sing "Silent Night." I asked what it was, since I didn't recognize the song, and if they did research to find it or what. Trey broke out with a big laugh, "Oh, that," he said, "we just made the words up. We didn't know any Hebrew, so we just wrote some gibberish that sounded right." (Note: Though this is the audio track of the song from the special, it's only a still of the scene. I couldn't find a full video of the song.) I often write here about the Apology Society of American that I run with my cohort Nell Minow. This is a hilarious twist on all that. Alas, I can't embed it, but here's a very funny video (and short article about it) by Liz Plank of Vox about Trump apologizing to women. It's wonderfully edited -- as you might imagine it would have to be...
(P.S. I love her line in the article where she explains that as a woman and a Canadian, she's a foremost expert at apologizing.) You can get to it here. Bye, bye. Bye, bye... One of the most disappointing votes for the Trump tax bill was Susan Collins, Republican senator of Maine. She never came up with a good explanation why this bill, which had so many issues that would seem problematic to her existing voting record. And when she got challenged by the press and public for suggesting that she was naive in believing GOP leadership promises that would smooth over her biggest concern, she slammed her critics for being sexist in suggesting a woman would be so befuddled. Of course, it wasn't that at all, it was that she was being self-serving and profoundly naive in trusting the promises. And now that the bill has passed, it turns out that she was indeed "scammed" by Republican leadership, and the "fix" she was promised isn't happening this year. If ever. Gee, go figure. The reaction to her voter has been harshly critical. She's always been popular in Maine, and for all I know she'll weather this storm. Or not. Because she sits in a party whose leadership is a man with a 32% approval. And this wasn't just any old vote, it was one that affects every American deeply and has been called one of the most outrageous in U.S. history, with a 24% approval. So, I don't know if her seat in the Senate is safe -- or in trouble. What I do know, is that I wrote the following article on the Huffington Post 11 years ago, back in 2006. "Paradise Found! An Actual, Good Person in Government" It speaks for itself. Though to give it a deserving bonus, there's an addendum afterwards. As I write in the article, I have no idea what plans there may be today, what with all the changes in the political landscape. I'm just saying. But in any case, whatever does or doesn't happen next, this is just a story I always like telling. June 15, 2006 People have been cynical about politicians since the Roman Empire. (“O, that Marcus Aurelius. He too hath a lean and hungry look.”) It’s just that these days – between Bill Frist diagnosing brain-dead strangers via television, the Vice-President shooting someone without investigation, and the White House outing a covert agent for spite – Republicans have turned cynicism into an art form. However, it’s important to remind oneself that there actually are incredibly good people in government service. I don’t mean “people I agree with.” I mean, simply, good people. Kind, decent, thoughtful. While banging my head against the wall, weary of yet one more outrage (I think it was conservatives comparing Al Gore to Hitler), I was saved a concussion when I thought of Chellie Pingree. It’s good to always recognize that the Chellie Pingree’s of the world exist. It brings comfort. I was covering the 2000 Democratic Convention in Los Angeles. In fairness, “covering” is too grandiose. I was covering it like one snowflake covers the Alps. I was dong a single article for the Writers Guild of America magazine. A delegate from Maine named Chellie Pingree saw my press badge. Mentioning that I’d worked briefly in Maine and loved it, that’s what we talked about. Politics didn’t enter into the conversation. This was the National Democratic Convention. If two mimes met, politics would have entered into the conversation. But we talked about Moody’s Diner, Campobello Island and wild blueberries. She just wanted to chat. But after 15 minutes, I didn’t even know what this Pingree person did. She was about to floor me. “Oh, I’m a delegate from my local area,” she said, and left it at that. So, I had to drag out more. How’d you get to be a delegate? “Oh, I’m in politics.” Well, okay, what do you do in politics? (By this point, I figured she’s a poll watcher in Waldoboro.) “I’m the State Senate Majority Leader.” Okay, here’s the thing: that’s not what amazed me. It’s that I still had to do yet more questioning to find that she was running for the United States Senate in 2002. Again, remember, this was the Democratic Convention. Candidates will trample little children to reach someone with a press badge – but it had to be dragged out of her that she was running for the U.S. Senate There was enough politics there; she just wanted to chat. But even that isn’t what impressed me most about Chellie Pingree. It was a small matter later – small, as in, “bizarrely insignificant.” But its very insignificance is what speaks volumes. Over the next year, we exchanged periodic emails. That she took the time during her exhaustive Senate campaign was notable enough. We discussed politics, and chatted frivolities. Once, I even mentioned buying a University of Maine baseball cap while there, but bemoaned losing it. She kindly commiserated. Many months later, she came to Los Angeles for a fund-raiser. Noticing her get off the hotel elevator, I wandered over to re-introduce myself. But before I could say a word, she greeted me with a big hello, and said, “Wait, I have something for you.” At that, she reached into her bag, and pulled out…a University of Maine baseball cap. I didn’t live in Maine, I couldn’t vote for her. I wouldn’t be writing about her. We’d met one time. And yet she listened, tracked down a cap, remembered to pack it, remembered to bring it downstairs, and the first thing she did at her fundraising event – for the United States Senate – was deliver it. This was an insignificant act, make no mistake. But the ability to notice small things and be thoughtful about them – even at the times of greatest stress – is what speaks to a person’s character. I wish the story had a perfect ending. Unfortunately, she got caught in the Republican mid-term steamroller after 9/11. She came close in her race, but lost to Susan Collins. But at least the story has a good ending. Because of Chellie Pingree’s reputation for decency and ability, she was approached to be President and CEO of Common Cause, positions which she holds today, working for the public good. I’ve avoided mentioning the issues Chellie Pingree has worked for, because issues color our perception of a person. But basic decency, that’s core. I have no idea if Chellie Pingree will run for political office again. Or be appointed to some post. Or continue with Common Cause, or elsewhere. But as I look at the mean-spirited, divisive political landscape today and cringe, I only know that whatever she does, we all are served best when people like Chellie Pingree are part of the process. And that was the article I wrote in 2006. As it happens, only nine months later, after writing those final words about having no idea if Chellie Pingree would run for political office again...she did. And that brought about a follow-up article, "Return to Paradise," which I wrote a year after that. I won't repeat the whole piece, because the first part recapped much of the article I just posted above. But after recapping, I then updated the story. We'll pick up the tale from there -- November 13, 2008 Well…nine months after that, Chellie Pingree decided to try getting back into elective politics. When Rep. Tom Allen took on the challenge of running for the U.S. Senate against incumbent Susan Collins (a race he ultimately didn’t win), it left his First District seat open. And Ms. Pingree entered the highly-contested primary. One of the great difficulties of politics, though, is to attempt a second act. Most people – wisely – don’t even try. No matter your credentials, lose once, and it’s “thanks for trying before, but…next!” But some stories have a happy ending. On Tuesday, Chellie Pingree was elected to the United States House of Representatives. She won by 15 points. Two years ago, she may not have been “officially” in government – but that story is over. She is, once again. And we’re all better for it. We understandably think of the House Representatives as being about local concerns. But the moment they sit in Washington, their voices and actions impact all of America. And having Chellie Pingree sitting in Washington, all of America has a strong and profoundly decent voice representing it, not just the First District of Maine. Ms. Pingree remains one of the earliest, most ardent voices against the Iraq War and ending America’s involvement there. She not only remains an outspoken proponent of health care reform, but helped pass Maine’s law to negotiate for lower prescription drug costs. She doesn’t just speak for renewable energy as a popular issue of the day – her college degree is in human ecology. She has long-pushed for campaign finance reform, ethics reform and far more – you don’t become the head of Common Cause without having a wide palate to work from. And perhaps just as important, you don’t become the Majority Leader of a state senate without having the ability to accomplish your goals. To be clear, it’s just one voice in a sea of voices. But it is a voice that speaks with honor, kindness and fairness as its hallmark. I don’t live in Maine. I’m not represented by Chellie Pingree. I reside 3,000 miles away on the opposite side of the continent. But I’m okay knowing that the country I live in is represented by her. We’re all of us now in two, new, good hands. There was a monumental headline on Election Day. But it’s wonderful when you turn the page and can also find that the day signaled a vibrant change on so many different and deep levels. And that among those many, an actual, good person in government beat the odds and returned to government. This doesn't qualify as a unknown Christmas song, though it's a cousin. It's well-known that Johnny Marks wrote the song "Rudolph the Red-Rednosed Reindeer," which was used as the basis for the holiday classic TV special. And for that musical, he also wrote what become another Christmas hit song, "Have a Holly Jolly Christmas." Now, having written two Christmas songs that are traditional favorites is highly impressive. But -- did you know that before the TV special he had actually written what is a third, popular Christmas song, as well? This third song was not included in the Rudoplph TV special, I suspect, because he only wrote the music for it. The lyrics though weren't by a fellow-collaborator, but rather adapted from an old poem -- albeit by another fellow, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. It had previously been set to music in the late 18th century (by English organist John Baptiste Calkin -- don't worry, it won't be on the test), but when Marks wrote his own music for the poem in the 1950s, that has now become the version most-heard today. The song is "I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day." (Having said that most people don't know that the music is by Johnny Marks, I suspect that almost as many people don't know that the words are by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow...) For that matter, having said that the song is not in the TV special, I should clarify by noting that it sort of is -- the music, at least. Near the very beginning of the show, as Sam the Snowman is introducing us to the tale, if you listen carefully you can hear Johnny Marks's music to "I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day" playing as underscoring. But here's the full song. There are a lot of recordings, but since we're talking about "Rudolph," we might as well use the recording by Sam himself, Burl Ives. Three popular Christmas songs by Johnny Marks. Not shabby. And just to prove that I am not lying to you about the music being in the Rudolph TV special, here's that opening sequence. After some lead-in advertising, the show itself begins at 2:25. The music comes along at about the 3:20 mark, in case you want to jump all the way forward, and runs for around 25 seconds. It comes a bit after the well-known line that viewers will recognize, "What's the matter? Haven't you seen a talking snowman before?" (And it plays in the background while Sam the Snowman introduces you to the "Christmas seals.") I suspect that a lot of people who have watched this special for decades will hear the music and go, "Oooooooooohhh, yes! I remember hearing that!!" Though the Senate voted to pass the GOP tax bill, it's still not official since the House oddly screwed up and has to re-vote. But for all intents, it's settled.
Yes, it's dismal, and shameful to have passed any such tax bill that drastically impacts the entire country so quickly and to do so without any hearings, rushing it through by giving officials only the weekend to read and try to understand the 1,100-page bill. And all the more so for a law that is so deeply problematic, most notably in essence kicking 13 million people off of healthcare and adding $1.5 trillion to the deficit -- from a party that always cries at Democrats to balance the budget. (Indeed, we know what will happen next. When Democrats next take the White House -- which Republicans now helped make likely in 2020... -- the GOP will start their traditional crying at the budget deficit being so high, and demanding that standard programs be cut, and especially that Medicare and even Social Security be cut, while increasing spending on defense. The good news is that they telegraphed this SO early now and created a national outrage over this money-grab for the wealthy that this $1.5 trillion addition to the deficit was out in the clear light of day and known.) There's other good news. Not the kind of "good news" you'd normally hope for, since it comes as a result of this tax disaster, but when you face such a horrifically awful law, you take what good you can find. And there's much good to find. For starters, I think the GOP just guaranteed Democrats taking over the House in 2018. As I've written in the past, this outcome was likely before, but I think this nails it down. And not only taking the majority, but now I think by a significant amount, rather than squeaking in. Adding to this is a recent report that showed Democrats have won all special elections by an average of 10 points, and if that holds -- an "if," but I think sentiments are likely to even increase -- then Democrats could potentially win the House by 257-178. And that was before this tax bill. In addition, I think that this tax bill vote -- as well as a 32% approval of the Republican president, among other things, like the Russia investigation which will only get worse -- will make it more likely that Democrats could actually take the Senate. Going into this year, this is something that was a very tough hurdle since more seats held by Democrats were up for re-election. But that's now no longer a safety net that Republicans can count on. It's still a challenge for Democrats, but last night made it more likely. Alas, even if Democrats do win the Senate they won't get a veto-proof majority, but that potentially could be coming in 2020. Not likely, but given how Republicans seem to like shoot themselves in the foot, and given what could be revealed in the Russia investigations...who knows? Also, with these party changes in Congress, know that this tax law will change, as well. Even what we hear described as "permanent." Just because something is called a "permanent tax cut," it is only permanent until another Congress rewrites it. It won't happen immediately, unfortunately, since it requires getting a Democratic president in office who won't veto what the House and Senate pass -- but I think that White House change was made all-the-more likely for 2020 last night. Happily, since the tax bill doesn't make all its draconian laws effective immediately (the corporate tax doesn't plummet until 2019, for instance), that means the entirety of the pain won't be felt for the full three years. Some of it will, and all of it will for some people -- like those who lose their health care -- but all of it will change when the parties in control change. I'm certain of it. By the way, let's be clear about something, too. It is now officially "TrumpCare." Any complaints that the public has about healthcare -- like the 13 million losing coverage, and premiums rising for all the rest -- that's where all mail should be delivered. And will be. What Trump and Republicans also did this week was make it far more likely that Trump will be impeached. With these actions I believe making it most probable that Democrats will take control of the House in 2018, that means we should see articles of impeachment drawn up soon after, and a committee formed. And it only takes a majority of Representatives to impeach. Conviction in the Senate is more difficult -- it takes two-thirds, and I don't see Democrats anywhere near that. But -- what will be interesting to see is how Republicans react for their political lives after having watched a potential tsunami wash away so many of their fellow-Republicans. Also in the mix is what evidence the Special Counsel finally presents. Keep in mind that the evidence doesn't have to be on just Trump himself directly conspiring Russia, though that may-well exist, but money laundering, tax fraud, obstruction of justice and any other manner of high crimes and misdemeanors. And IF the evidence presented is massive and compelling and clear to all but the most blindly-partisan, then Republican senators -- gauging the political temperature of the angered American public -- may find that self-preservation is the road to take. Maybe. Who knows? Maybe not. For all we know, maybe Trump will have resigned. Or not. But I do know that Republicans made all of that more possible. Of course, none of this might happen. There's a long way to go before the next election. So much could change. And the public could certainly keep control of Congress as it is. That's absolutely possible. Or -- things could get much, much worse for Trump and Republicans. I don't know. But based on what's already on the table, including this tax bill will only a 32 percent approval, I'd certainly rather be a Democrat going into the next two elections. And as much as this is all just a guess...it's a guess based on a lot of foundation. And it's the guess I make of what will happen. So, while the Republicans in Congress are celebrating passing a tax cut bill that according to today's NBC poll only 24 percent of Americans support -- which is a stunning reality when you consider it, only 24 percent supporting a tax cut bill -- with 13 million Americans (both Republicans and Democrats) losing their health care, and premiums rising for the entire remainder of the public, look forward to seeing video of those celebrations in campaign ads next year by Democrats. After today's re-vote, Republicans will have passed a new law. But it's an old law which will be the biggest problem for them. The law of unintended consequences. Trump and Republicans officials in Congress were wishing for this bill to pass. As the admonition goes -- be careful what you wish for, you might get it. |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|