THE BACH SYNDROM

Very dangerous - most of the time assumes the shape of an ethic parasite which touches musicians with a classical background and education.
Also, academic moralists are notorious Bach syndrom specialists.

 

 

So what is the Bach syndrom ?
It's based on the following statements :

1. Bach's music is abstract (true)
2. Bach's music architecture is often perfect, his counterpoint skills are amazing (true)
3. Bach's music has inspired generations of composers - it can even been said that it contains the seeds of all the music that was written during the two following centuries, so, after a fashion, he was a visionary (true)
4. the size and span of Bach's complete works make your head spin (true)

 

Then, though it's unclear why, people subject to the Bach syndrom are lead to the following conclusions :

1. All music should contain a part of abstraction. Abstraction is the master notion associated to the Bach syndrom.
2. It's even better - more serious - if it contains parts with counterpoint. Counterpoint is the real serious music.
3. Any music should be rooted in this tradition. It must be a continuation of this process.
4. It's out of the question to criticize any of Bach's work. We're too stupid and small, the only thing we can do is to revere the Master.

 

This syndrom could also be referred to as the Pierre Boulez syndrom.
Pierre Boulez is a specialist, if not the specialist on the issue.

 

 

Though he may looking like he is, this guy is not God....

 

By extension, the Bach syndrom divides music in two categories : the good, serious, "Bach compliant" music on one side, and mediocre music on the other side.

Whenever an academic moralist wants to be reassured about his belonging to the good side (in these times of incertainty... ), he refers to the Bach syndrom, and he feels better : at least, he knows that any music garanteed by the Bach Syndrom will not be decadent ! With a bit of luck he may even go to heaven when he dies.

 

Back to main index