Judaism Rejects The Notions Of Beauty That Underscore Christian Classical Music, From Bach To Mozart- But The Music Still Speaks To Us
In his ethnocentric search to distinguish what he considers the Jewish true notions of beauty from the Christian false sense of beauty, David Goldman lets slip the perpetual Jewish war on the other, Christian, European or Aryan whichever you want to consider it.
At the conclusion of his imaginary humiliation of Father A he says:
“What about Mozart’s opera Cosi Fan Tutti, in which music as beautiful as any Mozart ever wrote promotes outright lies?’ The opera involves two young men who set out to test the faithfulness of their fiancées by seducing the others intended. There is not a single sympathetic character in the work, whose music is on a par with The Marriage Of Figaro or Don Giovanni. That may explain why it is less popular. The men are cynical and the women slutty.
“If art employs beauty to promote falsehood, then I cannot consider it truly beautiful.” Father A decided. “ If you include, Cosi, your idea of beauty won’t convince a single classical musician,” I said. And we moved on to dessert. The Greek idea of beauty, naturalized into Catholic theology by St. Thomas Aquinas, is entirely alien to Mozart’s quirky humor. One might even speak of Mozart’s Jewish sense of humor, for his librettist in Cosi Fan Tutti, was the converted Jew Lorenzo da Ponte, and his ironic view of Christian society belongs to a peculiar mode of Jewish irony.
Here as later Dave makes a clear distinction of the separation of the Jewish from that of humanity while assuming the absolute correctness of the Jewish view against what he imagines is the falsehood of the European or Aryan.
This is clear in the concluding sentences of the above quote when he smugly reveals that the librettist of all these lies that Mozart has apparently set to beautiful music is in fact- Jewish. Thus the father of the lies is a Jew.
Now, does the fact that the Jew Da Ponte has played a dirty trick on Mozart diminish the beauty of Mozart’s music? After all the Jewish ethic is that good can come from evil so there is no reason that beauty cannot arise from filth. Jewish filth in Dave’s case. Da Ponte according to Dave has ‘an ironic view of Christian society,’ which he treats with ‘a peculiar mode of Jewish irony.’ So da Ponte is dishonest from the beginning which Dave characteristically applauds as Jewish.
In this case as throughout Dave’s essay he bases his argument on false premises to derive his imagined infallible conclusions.
While dismissing the undeniable beauty of Mozart’s superb music that stands the test of beauty regardless of the libretto which in any case can be easily rewritten and a better substituted for that of da Ponte which would match beauty to beauty completely invalidating Dave’s absurd argument. Poor old Father A who can’t speak for himself.
In order to impose his Jewish Knowledge on Aryan Knowledge Dave offers us what he considers a conclusive argument: Kohelet tells us that beauty comes from God. For this to be true of course, the Jewish god would have to have an objective existence. In fact the Jewish god is merely a projection of the Jewish ego hence being a fantasy having no objective existence.
As Dave’s definition of beauty is that it comes from God it is easy enough to see that Dave’s conception of beauty is no conception at all. We have no choice but to accept Mozart as our standard of musical beauty and as luck would have it he was Aryan and not Jewish.