Muzio's Music

Have you heard any good piano music lately? Pianos are very versatile instruments. They can be employed in any genre of music and work surprisingly well, whether it be the newest catchy hip hop song or the most scream-driven death metal song. While he didn't necessarily invent the piano, Muzio Clementi is the man to thank for the piano of today. To be fair, he is known as "The Father of Piano".

At the age of 9, Clementi was already an organist at a church, so his skills were developed very early in life. Though born in Italy in the year of 1752, he was taken to England to serve as an entertainer by "Peter Beckford, a cousin of William Beckford" in the year of 1766 (Encyclopedia Britannica). From then on, his music career continually grew until he was rich enough to own his own piano manufacturing company. Clementi died at the age of 80 in the year 1832.

Clementi earned his nickname not through the pianos he created (although he did tweak his pianos in a way that can still be seen today), but rather, he earned his nickname through his technique. Looking at Clementi's Gradus ad Parnassum No. 90 and No. 91, we can hear why he is the Father of the Piano. One example is in No. 90. For those of you that don't know about pianos, there is a device called a sustain pedal that allows the sound of a key to continue playing even after the finger has been lifted off the key. The sustain pedal was popularized during the Romantic period of music, aka after Clementi's time. While listening to No. 90, Clementi is able to produce this sustained sound, though he does not use a sustain pedal. We can see in his sheet music that there are no signs of pedaling. However, we do see that Clementi uses two voices for each hand. Clementi uses one finger to hold one key while the rest of his fingers continue to play the melody. Ultimately, Clementi was playing four melodies simultaneously by himself. This technique is unique in the fact that Clementi creates a sound that is before its time. While the sustain pedal did exist during Clementi's life, it was only used for very specific times, as it was very rudimentary. However, the sound produced by Clementi sounds as if it is being played on a modern piano.

In No. 91, we are introduced to Clementi's conflicting emotions. A great deal of the music created by classical composers are very one sided in terms of emotions. What I mean by that is that a song is usually just happy or just sad. Clementi himself is guilty of this trend as well, however, with Clementi's No. 91, he creates a feeling of confusion. During the first listening, it sounds happy in the beginning, but then turns into a sound of fear or panic partway through. Just as you start thinking of how you feel about the sudden change in emotions, the song then jumps back into a happy tune and ends on a good note. If you cut out the middle section, the beginning and ending of the song would make it seem like a cheerful melody. However, the abrupt middle section appearing briefly and then disappearing creates an attention-grabbing moment that really makes the listener pay more attention to what Clementi has presented with us as the audience.

Overall, if you are a pianist (like myself) or just appreciate the piano, I would highly recommend Muzio Clementi's works. His Six Sonatinas Op 36 are fairly popular pieces and can provide very efficient homework/study music. Ultimately, it is thanks to Clementi that mankind received the brilliant works of more famous pianists such as Beethoven and Mozart. While listening to Clementi's works, you can make subtle connections to the sounds of these legendary piano titans. That alone is reason enough to hear what Clementi has to offer.

Hobbes is Un-Locke(d)

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are two of the most well-known social contract theorists in history as their influences can still be felt in the modern world. However, as much as I wish humans were naturally good, I would have to say that overall, Hobbes depicts humans better than Locke.

One of the main points made by Hobbes is how society could not exist without a government. One could say that a collection of people with similar goals or beliefs is a society. While this could be true, I would say that this definition would fit the term of community better. For example, a group of farmers would be a community of farmers, rather than a society of farmers. If there was a ruler or a commanding group in charge of the farmers, then they could be considered a society of farmers. In the modern world, there are hundreds of communities that fill societies. One that stands out the most is the LGBT community for their current progress in the 21st century. However, they do not have a central leader or any form of government, so they are called a community.

Another point brought up by Hobbes is the idea that rulers decide what is right and what is wrong. If a society has a ruler that decides that eating the corpses of the deceased is the right thing to do, then you shouldn't be too surprised when you see a funeral procession end in a cannibalistic banquet. Looking at our own society in the United States, the government states that gays can marry each other. However, in other societies, such as some found in the middle east, homosexuals are seen as criminals. This difference in morals are a result of each society's government. Therefore, governments control the morals of society.

To finish on a dark note, Hobbes believes that humans lose any kind of natural rights to the government. If a natural human right conflicts with a government right, the government right will win every time in the eyes of the ruler. For example, if the right to live is a natural human right but the government has a right that if you commit a serious crime then that person must die, then the government will overpower that natural human right. Despite John Locke's belief that all humans have the right to "life", the death penalty exists in modern America. The fact that a theory created by Locke is made inapplicable by a theory created by Hobbes proves how Hobbes is more accurate on human nature.

All I Can Afford

Having a piece of famous art in your possession is highly valued in today's society, just as it was back then. However, since I am a college student, cheap reproductions will have to satisfy my need for high class. If I had a chance to go to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam and had the chance to buy three postcards with my favorite pieces from the museum, I would choose: "The Corpses of the De Witt Brothers", "Morning Ride Along the Beach", and "Still Life with Peacocks".

My first option, "The Corpses of the De Witt Brothers" was painted by Jan de Baen. The actual canvas oil painting is 69.5 cm by 56 cm. Here we see the De Witt Brothers, Johan and Cornelis, after they have been lynched. There is also another onlooker down in the bottom right corner holding a torch to provide the light source for the painting. Johan and Cornelis were key political figures in Holland during the mid 17th century. After being accused of treason, both brothers were killed by an angry mob. The reason why I find this piece interesting is due to the fact that their bodies appear to be on a stage. The brick wall and the positioning of the man in the corner makes the corpses look elevated above ground level. The stage effect really puts an emphasis on the death of these two politicians. That's why this piece would go great with the rest of my souvenirs. The painting exemplifies the significance of these men's deaths that furthered the political events of the Dutch Golden Age.

My second souvenir would be "Morning Ride Along the Beach" by Anton Mauve. This 43.7 cm by 68.6 cm oil painting is a simple scene of men in suits riding their horses by the beach. These men are most likely members of the upper class or possibly the middle class that started emerging during the 19th century when this painting was created. I would like to take this on a postcard due to the textures of the ground. I love the beach (despite living in Arizona) and just looking at the sand beneath the hooves of the stallions makes me remember how sand really does feel on the bottom of my bare feet. The shadows and brush strokes work well together to create a realistic depiction of sand at a beach.

My final treasure to bring home would be "Still Life with Peacocks" by Rembrandt Hermensz. Another oil painting on canvas, this masterpiece is 145 cm by 135.5 cm. This bizarre image shows two dead peacocks with what appears to be a little girl staring at the birds in the background through a window. With the fruit basket in the background, it would appear that the birds were killed in order to be prepared to be eaten; especially since one of the peacocks is hung upside down, which is a technique to let all of the blood spill out of the body. I would take this home purely for the bizarre feeling of the little girl in the background. At first glance, I thought she was just looking at the birds out of curiosity. However, I can almost see a faint smile on the girl's face making this scene a little more eerie. Now, she appears to be amazed or happy that the birds are dead. It's a strange piece by Rembrandt, so I would definitely take this one home with me.