Do we really need to know everything about Mozart?

Musicologist and record producer Maynard Solomon, in his article “Taboo and Biographical Innovation: Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert”, explores the little snippets of information we know about the lives of composers that, perhaps, we’d rather not know. Using psychoanalysis as a rationalization for the use of these taboos in the biography and study of these composers, he breaks down some of the major oversights within the documental records of the composers’ lives. In an age where hundreds of biographies have been written through the years about a single composer, Solomon makes an impassioned argument that the next frontier in the field of musicology is the juicy stuff, the flaws that reveal a deeper view of a person’s character.

Most of the taboos that Solomon discusses come from the life of Wolfgang Mozart, and though some seem to be largely irrelevant or obvious, such as whether or not Mozart ever told a lie in his life, others do illuminate Mozart’s life in an intriguing way. For example, Solomon discusses the popular perception of Mozart during his own lifetime, which was in many cases a reflection of the belief that Mozart was not an extremely innovative composer or a “genius”, but rather a conduit for the creative forces of some mysterious influence, divine or otherwise. This detail is quite relevant in the analysis of Mozart’s own view of his motivation, as well as in the analysis of his compositional style. According to Solomon, other details of Mozart’s life, such as his bawdy letters and his poor relationship with his father, are often mentioned in biographies, but are glossed over as irrelevant to the overall image of Mozart the author is trying to portray.

Another interesting biographical taboo that Solomon discusses is the ambiguous sexuality of Franz Schubert. After congratulating himself for bringing sexuality into the popular discussion of Schubert’s life, Solomon does delve into some interesting questions about why this possible interpretation of Schubert’s lifestyle had been ignored in so many biographies. Fittingly for a paper based on psychoanalysis, Solomon quotes Sigmund Freud to explain the ignorance of this and other taboos, saying “ ‘Now it is inherent in human nature to have an inclination to consider a thing untrue if one does not like it. . . . Thus society makes what is disagreeable into what is untrue’ ” (14). This Freudian analysis of the biographers reasons for excluding information about Schubert’s love life seems to be fairly reasonable, given historical societal taboos about homosexuality, but doesn’t make a strong case for why a composer’s sexuality is relevant to his music and biography.

Solomon does not necessarily reveal any new information about the composers he discusses in this article; the article actually reads as more of a meditation on the philosophy of biography. He discusses how much a person’s wishes to hide personal information should be taken into account by biographers, but ultimately comes down fiercely on the side of those who believe that every detail about a person’s life, good or bad, should be revealed, arguing that “We need not shrink from political or theological disputes. We ought not be embarrassed in the presence of transgression, desire, rage, loss, and tears” (19). However, though the musical examples he gives are certainly interesting, the article lacks a thorough argument as to why knowing some of the types of details he is so excited about advance our knowledge of a composer in any way.