Handel's Messiah and Anti-Semitism : Dispatches from the Culture Wars

Profile

Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda's Thumb. He has written for such publications as The Bard, Skeptic and Reports of the National Center for Science Education, spoken in front of many organizations and conferences, and appeared on nationally syndicated radio shows and on C-SPAN. Ed is also a Fellow with the Center for Independent Media and the host of Declaring Independence, a one hour weekly political talk show on WPRR in Grand Rapids, Michigan.(static)

Search

Other Information

Ed Brayton also blogs at Positive Liberty and The Panda's Thumb

Ed Brayton is a participant in the Center for Independent Media New Journalism Program. However, all of the statements, opinions, policies, and views expressed on this site are solely Ed Brayton's. This web site is not a production of the Center, and the Center does not support or endorse any of the contents on this site.

Ed's Audio and Video

Declaring Independence podcast feed

YearlyKos 2007

Video of speech on Dover and the Future of the Anti-Evolution Movement

Audio of Greg Raymer Interview

E-mail Policy

Any and all emails that I receive may be reprinted, in part or in full, on this blog with attribution. If this is not acceptable to you, do not send me e-mail - especially if you're going to end up being embarrassed when it's printed publicly for all to see.

My Ecosystem Details

« DeLay on Imus and Rosie | Main | Tech Support Blues »

Handel's Messiah and Anti-Semitism

Posted on: April 15, 2007 9:40 AM, by Ed Brayton

I got an email the other day from my friend Don Weinshank. Don is one of my fellow board members of Michigan Citizens for Science, an emeritus professor at MSU, and he and his wife are experts in Jewish history. He sent me a link to this NY Times article about the origins of Handel's Messiah, one of the great pieces of choral music ever composed. He noted that this had long been one of his favorite pieces of music and that his wife had sung in many performances of it over the years. The article offers much historical evidence that Handel's famous composition was written not as a Christmas song but as a celebration of the Roman destruction of the Jewish temple in the year 70 ad, and that this was widely understood when the piece was written and performed.

Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

Comments

The thesis of the article is not too surprising given the well-recognized Antisemitism of the New Testament. As an atheist, of course I am more sensitive to fact that the Messiah glorifies a belief system utterly foreign (and even abhorrent) to me. However, this does not prevent me from enjoying the music both as a listener and a performer.

But I would prefer that the text be in Latin, as is the case with a lot of sacred music. Or, better yet, it would be great if someone would write a secular scenario to go with the music, say something that trumpets the beauty of nature, or urges us to work diligently to promote human rights, including freedom of religion.

As to the music, the Hallelujah chorus is my LEAST favorite part of the work, and I tend not to stand while it is being performed because it certainly does not express sentiments that I endorse.

Posted by: Tim Tesar | April 15, 2007 10:26 AM

From the article:

While still a timely, living masterpiece that may continue to bring spiritual and aesthetic sustenance to many music lovers, Christian or otherwise, "Messiah" also appears to be very much a work of its own era. Listeners might do well to ponder exactly what it means when, in keeping with tradition, they stand during the "Hallelujah" chorus.

This pretty much sums up the misdirection of the article. Of course the works of human beings are going to be works of their "own era". What else could they be?

It doesn't detract in the slightest from the greatness of the work itself.

Therefore, I would say when people stand for that chorus, they do it because of the universalism of its appeal as music, and not because of the narrowness of its historical genesis.

The reason why we still read Plato and Aristotle is not because they thrived in a society built upon slavery and elitism. People recognize the greatness of Mozart's Masses as such, not because Mozart himself was a Mason. Darwin was a great scientist and is so recognized, not because he followed the conventional thinking of his era in accepting racial inequality.

It isn't the person or even the society he or she comes from. It is the work itself that engenders respect and universal recognition.

That doesn't mean we turn our back on historical facts. But we have to keep things in context.

Posted by: Poly | April 15, 2007 12:10 PM

Well, I will say one thing; it was NEVER a Christmas song. It's an Easter song. That doesn't change the possible anti-semitism, but it's from the portion of the piece that's at the end. The word "hallelujah" is at least traditionally connected with Easter.

Posted by: Chris | April 15, 2007 12:11 PM

Poly-

Personally, I tend to agree with you on this. After all, I still listen to much Christian music despite having left Christianity 20 years ago. I just like the music. But I can also understand my friend's perspective and that's his personal choice. As he put it, for Jewish people the destruction of the temple was a tragedy of immense proportion. He wrote to me, "Now that I know the back story, I will be unable to attend performances. It would be as if somebody dropped a nuclear device on the Vatican and somebody else wrote music to celebrate the event." That's not an unreasonable reaction from someone so deeply involved with the history of his people. For me personally, I can generally enjoy something regardless of the meaning intended by the artist.

Posted by: Ed Brayton | April 15, 2007 12:33 PM

Like Poly, I have to think the article is so far off track as to be completely lost. As "Messiah" uses lots of verses from the New Testament, yes lots of those same verses have been used in antisemitic ways over the years. That hardly defines them as antisemitic. Our understanding of a text is not held prisoner by the understandings of prior readings and readers.

As for the "discovery" that antisemitism was alive and well in the early 18th Century -- well, I'm at a loss for words. It's like saying we should take away the Best Picture for "Braveheart" because Mel Gibson is such a tool. Well, Mel is a tool, but that doesn't change the fact that "Braveheart" was an extremely well-made and entertaining film, even if historically questionable.

As for "Hallelujah" I always wonder why it makes the highlight reels when Part I, especially "For Unto Us a Child is Born" is far more powerful. No accounting for taste.

Posted by: kehrsam | April 15, 2007 12:38 PM

The article offers much historical evidence that Handel's famous composition was written not as a Christmas song but as a celebration of the Roman destruction of the Jewish temple in the year 70 ad,

This is a badly muddled statement, I'm afraid.

First of all, Messiah covers a wide variety of events, and is neither narrowly Christmas- nor Easter-oriented. The first performances were at Easter. When the work was revived in Victorian times, it became more associated with Christmas.

The claim in the article was that the Hallelujah Chorus specifically, not the entire work, commented on the destruction of the temple.

And it can hardly be described as a "song"; it contains (depending on how you count and which version you're doing) some 50-odd instrumental pieces, recitatives, arias, and choruses.

An interesting article, and well worth reading.

Posted by: Scott Belyea | April 15, 2007 12:42 PM

I'm dubious about the merits of the article when it says this:

While Handel scholars and enthusiasts say repeatedly that significant numbers of Jews attended the original performances of Handel's oratorios, they offer no compelling evidence. Most Jews in 18th-century London were too poor to attend such concerts...

I guess they would certainly have been too poor to have travelled all the way to Dublin for the original performances.

Overall, I'm sceptical of the thesis. It all seems too circumstantial, and I can't see any indication in the text that the Jewish race was being held responsible for its actions. Or, if it was, then Händel is kicking off by saying that "her iniquity is pardon'd".

Bob
P.S. Why do the nations so furiously rage together?

Posted by: Bob O'H | April 15, 2007 3:15 PM

The problem with this thesis is that, to be best of my knowledge, there is no evidence of antisemitism on the part of Handel. On the contrary, many of Handels' works were popular with Jewish audiences in London, including Judas Maccabeus and Israel in Egypt (there were a substantial number of Jews counted among the middle classes in England at the time, mainly in the banking industry), and this fact was acknowledged by him. This, of course, is to be contrasted with Richard Wagner whose antisemitism was pervasive, especially in the Ring operas.

Posted by: SLC | April 15, 2007 3:51 PM

Oil, Bob, oil. Isn't that in the original Psalm 2?

Posted by: Countlurkula | April 15, 2007 4:11 PM

I seem to recall an essay by Stephen Jay Gould in which Gould recounted his participation in performances of Handel's "Messiah" despite the apparent anti-semitic content of the work. Anybody else have a notion where that might have been?

Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry | April 15, 2007 5:24 PM

Sigh...

This is the sort of thing that happens when people are uneducated in religion - they can be suckered into simplistic retellings in order to fit modern agendas.

There is a grain of truth in this: Handel's Messiah is indeed an Easter and not a Christmas performance. But the idea that the performance is concerned primarily with the siege of 70 AD is laughably absurd. It is about Christ's coming, his rejection, his death, and his resurrection. It's the sort of thing we Christians might be expected to, you know, talk about. The way that the political events of the first century and beyond fit into the central defining event of the Christian faith is a much broader and secondary question.

Now, as to 70 AD, I don't think Christians were ever excited about the event. It was horrible, and changed the world for all Jews, Christian and otherwise. However, I am mystified that the idea of the Temple's destruction being the judgment of God is considered anti-semitic. The Jewish scriptures have a long tradition of "critique from within", and the destruction of the original temple by Babylon is seen by the prophets as God's judgment. God had (temporarily) abandoned his people to their fate for their idolatry - otherwise it couldn't have fallen. This view absolutely permeates the Jewish scriptures.

So, likewise, the failure of the Jewish revolt of 70 AD was seen by both Jewish Christians and Jews like Josephus as the judgment of God. It was out of the question that God's power would have been overcome by the pagans - if the city fell, it was because he let it fall (for whatever reason). This is simply classical Jewish prophetic thought. To call it anti-semitic is to misunderstand Judaism.

Now, for the Jewish Christians, the failure of the revolt was a vindication of Jesus' critique of his contemporaries - that the calling of Israel was to be one of serving the nations, of being a light to them, rather than trying to hoard God's blessings through nationalistic ambitions. He seemed to think they had made their revolutionary aims an idolatry of its own, and were calling judgment upon themselves. This was one of many stances that put him in violent confrontation to the leadership of his day. When the revolt failed, the early Christians did indeed see it as a vindication of Jesus' warnings. But again, even this is a very Jewish idea of prophetic warning and judgment.

Sadly, the relationship between Christians (Jew & Gentile) and Jews was also severed by the fall of Jerusalem. And it is a wonderful thing about our own time that we are able to dialog more closely and learn new insights into our own faith from each other. But accusations of antisemitism (or anti-Christianity) at those who simply revel in the beauty of their faith is counterproductive to say the least. And I don't really see what Handel's Messiah has to do with any of this.

Posted by: Wonders for Oyarsa | April 15, 2007 6:42 PM

As I read my comment again, the first line comes across as terribly condescending, and while I may indeed be a pompous snob, I sure don't anyone else to know that!

I didn't mean to accuse anyone here of being ignorant of religion - rather there is an ignorance in general in our culture of all but the most basic tenants of our traditional faith (to say nothing of others), that is exploited by those with rather questionable agendas.

Really, what is to be gained by spinning dubious suspicions of anti-semitism around Handel's Messiah? There needs to be more appreciation of traditions between Christians and Jews, not less.

Posted by: Wonders for Oyarsa | April 15, 2007 10:00 PM

Don't get so worked up.

The Darwin Youth Club at our school has taught me how to handle adversity.

Just recognize that the fit survive, and the weak perish.

Its perfectly natural.

Posted by: Darwin Youth | April 16, 2007 7:55 AM

I am happy that Ed's comments on the New York Times article engendered so many responses.

For those who argue, "It's beautiful music; get a grip," I can only respond that many beautiful and stirring pieces of music carry their own historical baggage. Who today would sing the Nazi "Horst Wessel Song" (http://www.anesi.com/east/horstw.htm)? What about the Italian Black Shirt song, "Avanti populo .... Avanti Mussolini, avanti liberta?"

Sadly, after reading the New York Times story, I must consign "The Messiah" to the same category. The Destruction of the Temple (both the first one by Babylonians and the second one by Romans) was so traumatic an event that it is commemorated by the observance of Tisha B'Av, the ninth of the Hebrew month of Av. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tisha_B%27av.
You can hear the heart-rending chanting of the Book of Lamentations for Tisha B'Av at http://www.virtualcantor.com/tbav.htm

Now that I know the history, I will be unable to attend performances. It would be as if somebody dropped a nuclear device on the Vatican and somebody else wrote music to celebrate the event.

Posted by: Donald J. Weinshank | April 19, 2007 6:20 PM

I think this is a personal choice for how we wish to handle situations like this. As a rule, I don't concern myself with the views of an author, actor or singer if I enjoy their work. But I have my limits too. I certainly have no interest in listening to hate rock by white supremacist bands. No matter how good the music was, I couldn't overlook that. For someone like Don, who has devoted much of his life to the study of Jewish history, I can certainly understand his stance on this.

Posted by: Ed Brayton | April 19, 2007 6:50 PM