In June of this year, the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra, led by the outstanding conductor Kirill Petrenko, will perform four symphony concerts at the Shanghai Grand Theater after an absence of seven years. As soon as the news came out, music fans were overjoyed and rushed to tell each other, so that all tickets of all price levels for the four performances were sold out within five minutes. This is undoubtedly the long-lasting "classical music craze" since the 1980s. Another sign of. This grand occasion not only made me sigh with emotion, but also reminded me of another "classical craze", that is, the Greek and Roman "classical culture craze" that also started in the 1980s. Although it did not have such a sensational effect, it was not comparable in comparison. inferior. Moreover, there are many young students who love "classical culture" and are also obsessed with "classical music". Although these two products of Western civilization with the word "classical" are separated by a thousand or two thousand years, when they came to China at the same time and fascinated young people at the same time, I always felt that there was some kind of correlation between them and they were worthy of each other. Reflect and examine. Now I will use the analogy of "practitioners" to try to look at "classical culture" from the perspective of "classical music" and clarify what can be compared.
Kiril Petrenko
There are three main categories of “practitioners” directly related to classical music. The first category is composers, who create music and are immortal stars in the history of classical music; the second category are performers (including conductors), who perform music and are stars admired by one or more generations; the third category is performers (including conductors), who perform music and are stars admired by one or more generations; Classes are musicologists, who study music and conduct objective studies of a composer's work or the music itself, and whose existence is often little known. Of course, some people combine the first and second categories, such as composers who are also conductors or performers, and others combine the second and third categories, such as conductors or performers who are also musicologists. But generally speaking, the three types of people have their own strengths and are good at winning.
By analogy, "classical culture" also has three categories of "practitioners", of which the first and third categories are more obvious. The first category is the creators of "classical culture", especially the authors of classical texts, which are important carriers of "classical culture"; the third category is classical scholars, who are researchers of classical culture. The second category is often ignored by the world, as if this link is missing. In fact, classical culture, especially ancient classic texts, also has its contemporary interpreters, that is, classical scholars as teachers. He teaches ancient classics in the classroom, just like a performer playing classical music in a concert hall, which is also an interpretation of the classics. The confusion and choices he faces are also very similar to those of classical music performers! Countless performers have performed this work countless times before him. Is there anything new in his performance? If there is nothing new, what is the point of playing it again? Is it to restore the "composer's intention"? Then why try to restore the intentions of an ancient man hundreds of years ago? His performance is not for the purpose of restoration, but because of the greatness of the work itself. It is the work that allows the performer to have a spiritual resonance with it that spans hundreds of years. Every successful performance he performs will resonate with him and will also resonate with him. The resonance is transmitted to the audience. The significance of his performance after countless performances by his predecessors lies in the fact that he is unique and he enriches the connotation of the work with his own unique voice. So, isn’t this the case for teachers, the performers of “classical culture”? When he lectures on ancient classics on the podium, is it just to restore the intention of a certain author thousands of years ago? Isn't it also because classic works have resonated with his soul across thousands of years, and he must try his best to convey the resonance to the audience under the podium? If this is the case, the teacher who steps up to the podium should be different from the researcher who is buried in his study. Although this interpreter of "classical culture" rarely does not also have the third identity of a researcher.
A pattern drawn by the ancient Greeks based on Homer's epic poem, showing Helen and Priam.
What is more interesting and important than the second category above is the analogy between the first category of "practitioners". There are many spiritual affinities between the creators of "classical music" and the creators of "classical culture," which can be more clearly revealed through analogical relationships.For example, what is the highest way for a composer to pay the highest respect to another composer (a predecessor he admires or a peer he admires)? It is to use that person’s musical theme to create a series of variations, dance with him, share the joy and sorrow, and advance the theme to a place where it is indistinguishable from him, applauding and even surprising him (such as Beethoven’s composition for Mozart’s opera Two cello variations on the theme of "The Magic Flute"), or use his musical style to compose a work of his own (such as Prokofiev's "Classical Symphony" based on the style of Haydn's symphony); never It is to conduct musicological research on his works as some kind of research object that belongs to the past and has no direct connection with myself. This latter approach is even the opposite of tribute, for that which is alive, that which stirs up our being, should not become the object of objective study and become lifeless, that which numbs our being. So too is the way in which the creators of "classical culture," especially the authors of classical texts—poets and thinkers—pay homage to one another. Taking Homer as an example, either we should regard him mainly as a poet, then we should pay him the highest tribute in the way of a poet, such as the lyric poets and tragic poets of ancient Greece, Virgil of ancient Rome, and later poets (such as Goethe, Kleist); either regard him mainly as a thinker, then use the thinker's method, such as the ancient Greek historians (Herodotus and Thucydides), philosophers ( Sophists and Plato) and later thinkers (such as Nietzsche and Weil). In contrast, the study of Homer by classical scholars is just like the study of Bach or Beethoven by music scholars, and can only play a minor supporting role. Because - still using music as an example - Homer's epic poem was originally a great bell, but in the hands of overly technical classical scholars, it turned into a Swiss clock. After they continued to disassemble and assemble it, its internal structure was so sophisticated that it became a Swiss clock. It can be seen almost at a glance, but it no longer makes the sound of a bell or a bell. Instead, it ticks softly like a clock. Only sophisticated classical scholars can hear the subtle music, for fear that it will eventually become mute.
The second day of March in the Jiachen year
