Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Introduction

Introduction 2 Bryan Gilliam and disconnected. Chandos laments that ‘‘the abstract terms of which the tongue must avail itself, crumbled in my mouth.’’ Hofmannsthal sought to move away from the preciosity of the polished word to a language that embodied the perfect gestural idea. That new language was theater, which contained within it acting, gesture, ritual, myth, scenic design, and (with his association with Richard Strauss) music. But such a combination of various expressive components should in no way be confused with any Wagnerian notions of Gesamtkunstwerk, decried by Hofmannsthal and Bertolt Brecht alike as disingenuous, where—in the name of egalitarianism—various art forms are compromised or degraded in favor of music. Indeed, Hofmannsthal’s concerns reflect a general language skepticism at the outset of a new century. Or, perhaps it should be stated the other way around: that in the early twentieth century there was a growing faith in the power of gesture. This faith crossed national borders as well as the boundary lines of artistic genres. The relationship between image, gesture, and its musical ramifications was one of the great culminating concerns of turn-of-the-century modern art. It was a relationship that grew geometrically as the century progressed. There were, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png South Atlantic Quarterly Duke University Press

Introduction

Gilliam, Bryan
South Atlantic Quarterly , Volume 104 (1) – Jan 1, 2005
Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/introduction-QlMVl4rljs

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2005 by Duke University Press
ISSN
0038-2876
eISSN
1527-8026
DOI
10.1215/00382876-104-1-1
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

2 Bryan Gilliam and disconnected. Chandos laments that ‘‘the abstract terms of which the tongue must avail itself, crumbled in my mouth.’’ Hofmannsthal sought to move away from the preciosity of the polished word to a language that embodied the perfect gestural idea. That new language was theater, which contained within it acting, gesture, ritual, myth, scenic design, and (with his association with Richard Strauss) music. But such a combination of various expressive components should in no way be confused with any Wagnerian notions of Gesamtkunstwerk, decried by Hofmannsthal and Bertolt Brecht alike as disingenuous, where—in the name of egalitarianism—various art forms are compromised or degraded in favor of music. Indeed, Hofmannsthal’s concerns reflect a general language skepticism at the outset of a new century. Or, perhaps it should be stated the other way around: that in the early twentieth century there was a growing faith in the power of gesture. This faith crossed national borders as well as the boundary lines of artistic genres. The relationship between image, gesture, and its musical ramifications was one of the great culminating concerns of turn-of-the-century modern art. It was a relationship that grew geometrically as the century progressed. There were,

Journal

South Atlantic Quarterly – Duke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.