A Stroke of Genius
Do you know why Peter Shaffer’s play (and later the movie based on the play) about Mozart is titled “Amadeus”? The story is a variation of Mozart i Salieri, by Alexandr Pushkin where Antonio Salieri recognizes and struggles with the genius of Mozart. Why didn’t Shaffer call his play “Salieri and Mozart”? Or just “Mozart”?
Shaffer titled his play “Amadeus” because “ama” is Latin for “love,” and “Deus” is Latin for “God,” so in fact, his play is titled and is about “the love of God” – certainly a fundamental theme of the play and the central struggle of Salieri.
Mozart was certainly “gifted,” but was he, in fact, favored by some supreme being? And what about other geniuses? Do certain individuals derive higher levels of intellect and virtuosity due to some undeniable level of divine partiality?
The architect Frank Lloyd Wright was certainly a genius, and biographers note that his mother declared even before he was born that her child would grow up to become a famous architect. As a result, she decorated his nursery with engravings of English cathedrals and other celebrated structures to encourage his ambition. So was his genius the product of his environment or his genetics? Nature? Or nurture?
E. E. Cummings is another of my favorite geniuses. I am continually amazed and in awe of his vision and understandings when I review and re-review his poetry. One of my favorites is called “r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r.” At first glance this is not an easy poem to read, and students do struggle with it. However, I always prepare them with a few of Cummings’ more uncomplicated poems first (see my blog entries dated June 11 and June 13) so that when they see ““r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r” they are ready to tackle it.
Cummings’ poem is about a grasshopper and the physical engineering of his body that allows him to leap great distances. On another level, the poem could be about changing, rearranging, and conforming to the environment to accomplish one’s aims and aspirations. Are the mixed up letters at the start and throughout the poem meant to suggest that the grasshopper is undefined, that he is not truly authenticated until he manages to realize (and experience and/or endure) his work? Are you as reshuffled as the r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r? Do you have dreams, aspirations, and objectives that you need to leap to?
Of course, Pablo Picasso – another of my favorite geniuses -- certainly leapt to his work, and “upgathering” and “rearrangingly,” he defined and redefined art and our understanding of art throughout most of the 20th century – from painting and sculpting realistic representations to creating unconventional and experimental figures where shape, style, and form were more important and meaningful than a true-to-life depiction.
So what makes a Picasso a Picasso? That thought inspired my take-off on Cummings’ grasshopper poem. Unfortuately, the formatting properties of the Goodreads' blog site won't allow me to arrange the text here like the Cummings' poem, but my poem reads like this: “Pablo Picasso, who, as he painted, now rearranging objects, forms! Attaining Pablo Picasso to become reinventingly a Picasso.”
So is a genius born, bred, or designated by some higher being? Perhaps it’s based on any and every combination of the three.
Shaffer titled his play “Amadeus” because “ama” is Latin for “love,” and “Deus” is Latin for “God,” so in fact, his play is titled and is about “the love of God” – certainly a fundamental theme of the play and the central struggle of Salieri.
Mozart was certainly “gifted,” but was he, in fact, favored by some supreme being? And what about other geniuses? Do certain individuals derive higher levels of intellect and virtuosity due to some undeniable level of divine partiality?
The architect Frank Lloyd Wright was certainly a genius, and biographers note that his mother declared even before he was born that her child would grow up to become a famous architect. As a result, she decorated his nursery with engravings of English cathedrals and other celebrated structures to encourage his ambition. So was his genius the product of his environment or his genetics? Nature? Or nurture?
E. E. Cummings is another of my favorite geniuses. I am continually amazed and in awe of his vision and understandings when I review and re-review his poetry. One of my favorites is called “r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r.” At first glance this is not an easy poem to read, and students do struggle with it. However, I always prepare them with a few of Cummings’ more uncomplicated poems first (see my blog entries dated June 11 and June 13) so that when they see ““r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r” they are ready to tackle it.
Cummings’ poem is about a grasshopper and the physical engineering of his body that allows him to leap great distances. On another level, the poem could be about changing, rearranging, and conforming to the environment to accomplish one’s aims and aspirations. Are the mixed up letters at the start and throughout the poem meant to suggest that the grasshopper is undefined, that he is not truly authenticated until he manages to realize (and experience and/or endure) his work? Are you as reshuffled as the r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r? Do you have dreams, aspirations, and objectives that you need to leap to?
Of course, Pablo Picasso – another of my favorite geniuses -- certainly leapt to his work, and “upgathering” and “rearrangingly,” he defined and redefined art and our understanding of art throughout most of the 20th century – from painting and sculpting realistic representations to creating unconventional and experimental figures where shape, style, and form were more important and meaningful than a true-to-life depiction.
So what makes a Picasso a Picasso? That thought inspired my take-off on Cummings’ grasshopper poem. Unfortuately, the formatting properties of the Goodreads' blog site won't allow me to arrange the text here like the Cummings' poem, but my poem reads like this: “Pablo Picasso, who, as he painted, now rearranging objects, forms! Attaining Pablo Picasso to become reinventingly a Picasso.”
So is a genius born, bred, or designated by some higher being? Perhaps it’s based on any and every combination of the three.
No comments have been added yet.
