Overtones, a book of temperaments : $b Richard Strauss, Parsifal, Verdi, Balzac, Flaubert, Nietzsche, and Turgénieff — Nietzsche — John Shaqi
Overtones, a book of temperaments : $b Richard Strauss, Parsifal, Verdi, Balzac, Flaubert, Nietzsche, and Turgénieff
Nietzsche · en
Balzac’s Gambara and Massimilla Doni—what genius he had for
selecting names which outwardly and inwardly fitted his character!
After reading the former I felt almost tempted into echoing Mr.
Moore’s extravagant assertion. Balzac is indeed a magician and not
a novelist. What puts him apart from other novelists, even from
his technical superior, Flaubert, is his faculty of vision. He is
a _Seer_, not a novelist. Any motive he touched, whether usury
or music-erotics or patriotism, he vivified with his prophetic
imagination. He saw his theme concretely; he saw its origins, its
roots in the dead past; and plunging his eyes into the future he saw
its ghost, its spiritual aura, its ultimate evolution. Such a man as
Balzac might have been a second Bonaparte, a second Spencer. He had
science, and he had imagination; and he preferred to be the social
historian of the nineteenth century, the greatest romancer that ever
lived, and a profound philosopher besides. All modern novelists
nest in his books, draw nourishment from them, suck in their very
souls from his vast fund of spirituality. The difference between
such a giant as Balzac and such a novelist as Thackeray is that the
latter draws delightful and artistic pictures of manners; but never
turns a soul inside out for us. The best way to describe Balzac is
to enumerate the negatives of his contemporaries and successors.
All they lacked and lack he had in such amazing prodigality that
comparison is not only impossible, it is brutal.
Balzac and music! Balzac and women! Balzac and money! Balzac and
politics! Or,—Balzac and any subject! The encyclopædic knowledge,
extraordinary sympathy and powers of expression—do they not all
fairly drench every line the man wrote? He could analyze the art of
painting and forsee its future affinities for impressionism—read The
Unknown Masterpiece—just as in Gambara he divined Berlioz, Wagner,
and Richard Strauss. I am quite sure that Wagner read Balzac. Gambara
was finished June, 1837, and there are things in it that could only
have been written about Berlioz. The key to the book, however, is
passion, not any particular personality. Balzac always searched for
the master passion in men and women’s lives. Given the clew-note, he
developed the theme into symphonic proportions. It is Andrea’s love
of intrigue that leads him to follow the beautiful Marianna, wife
of the composer Gambara,—a fantastic creation worthy of Hoffmann.
He is an Italian in Paris, who wrote a mass for the anniversary of
Beethoven’s death, and also an opera—Mahomet. But that opera! Has
such a score ever been dreamed of by any one except Richard Strauss?
Gambara is a poor man, looked upon as a lunatic, living at an
Italian cook shop kept by Giardini,—the latter one of Balzac’s most
delightful discoveries. Born at Cremona, Gambara studied music in
its entirety, especially orchestration. To him music was a science
and an art—fancy writers of fiction going into the philosophy of