Re: Peter Ostwald's book.

[Jost Ammon <Jost.Ammon@telda.net>]

I sort of share Anne's reading experience. I started the book with great
enthousiasm, that faded first horizontally (with the progress of the
reading) and then vertically (with the time of digesting and re-reading).

All in all I think Ostwald struggled intellectually to understand GG, to
grab his very essence. He sticks too much to the facts, of which he doesn't
draw valuable conclusions and he often insinuates the bickering undertone,
of which Anne has given a good example. I have written the following passage
some three months ago to this list, but it might show you what I mean by
saying Ostwald fails in grabbing GG's essence:

I have split feelings about the Ostwald book. It is interesting as the view
of someone having a special relationship with Gould, especially the medical
angle. On the other hand it shows an ever present substrate of
mecontentement - presumably the attitude of the deceived lover. What stirrs
me most is Ostwalds "down to earth character". I frequently have the
impression Ostwald is too simple a character to understand Gould's
attitudes. For example:

Addressing the graduates of Royal Conservatory Gould says:

"All aspects of the learning you have acquired...are possible of the
relationship with negation - with which is not, or which appears not to
be.The most impressive thing about man...is the fact that he invented the
concept of that which does not exist..."

Ostwald comments on this paragraph " I wouldn't call that a particular
upbeat message for music students about to enter the professional world as
teachers, performers and composers. But in the view of the difficulties
ahead...for work opportunities in the field of music were discouragingly
limited in the 60ies..."

I think Ostwald totally missed that Gould may most probably have referred to
the dichotomy of existence and non-existence - of the concept of Scio Ut
Nescio. Considering the very personality Ostwald wrote about, he should have
been able to conceive that he was dealing with an ever contrapuntally
thinking person, who was always perceiving fact as well as its inversion. In
that sense Ostwald in my view doesn't leap long enough. Nontheless I would
recommend reading this book.

Nothing to add meanwhile,

Jost


----- Original Message -----
From: Sara Meneses <samenese@DU.EDU>
To: <F_MINOR@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 8:10 PM
Subject: Peter Ostwald's book.


> Hello all f-minors:
>
> I am new member and i wanted to ask a question: To those who have read
> "Ecstasy and tragedy of a genius" by Peter Ostwald, what do you think
> about that book?
>
>
> Sara Meneses.
>
----- Original Message -----
From: Sara Meneses <samenese@DU.EDU>
To: <F_MINOR@EMAIL.RUTGERS.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 8:10 PM
Subject: Peter Ostwald's book.


> Hello all f-minors:
>
> I am new member and i wanted to ask a question: To those who have read
> "Ecstasy and tragedy of a genius" by Peter Ostwald, what do you think
> about that book?
>
>
> Sara Meneses.
>