This is a huge subject, and Alex Ross does a great job of covering it. Not everyone will be happy if their pet composer or movement has been tackled only briefly (if at all), but it would be impossible to fit the entire century into a single volume. As a result of reading this I have been moved to listen to Schoenberg and Strauss (esp. the Metamorphosen) for the first time; they are challenging works but rewarding and it has been great to have my musical horizons expanded by reading this book.
For me, the book was worth buying for the chapter on Sibelius alone; the passage describing the walk around Ainola and linking it to Sibelius' music is just superb - it sent me straight back to my CD collection to dig out and listen to the symphonies ... Read More:
>>More Details
Having both a strong interest in music and a medical training, this book greatly appealed to me. Sacks is also a good speaker, and although I would have bought this book anyway, the lecture I attended didn't do anything to dissuade me from doing so.
Having read copious medical text, I always baulk at anything that might remotely stink of such, when choosing my recreational reading. Musicophilia does discuss the dry scientific evidence, in a fairly in-depth dry scientific way. This, I suppose is unavoidable given the task Sacks has set himself, of scientifically explaining both musical talent and musical pathology. Which is probably my main criticism of the book for my own personal reasons (as outlined above). However saying this, it is done ... Read More:
>>More Details
Having both a strong interest in music and a medical training, this book greatly appealed to me. Sacks is also a good speaker, and although I would have bought this book anyway, the lecture I attended didn't do anything to dissuade me from doing so.
Having read copious medical text, I always baulk at anything that might remotely stink of such, when choosing my recreational reading. Musicophilia does discuss the dry scientific evidence, in a fairly in-depth dry scientific way. This, I suppose is unavoidable given the task Sacks has set himself, of scientifically explaining both musical talent and musical pathology. Which is probably my main criticism of the book for my own personal reasons (as outlined above). However saying this, it is done ... Read More:
>>More Details
Having both a strong interest in music and a medical training, this book greatly appealed to me. Sacks is also a good speaker, and although I would have bought this book anyway, the lecture I attended didn't do anything to dissuade me from doing so.
Having read copious medical text, I always baulk at anything that might remotely stink of such, when choosing my recreational reading. Musicophilia does discuss the dry scientific evidence, in a fairly in-depth dry scientific way. This, I suppose is unavoidable given the task Sacks has set himself, of scientifically explaining both musical talent and musical pathology. Which is probably my main criticism of the book for my own personal reasons (as outlined above). However saying this, it is done ... Read More:
>>More Details
Having both a strong interest in music and a medical training, this book greatly appealed to me. Sacks is also a good speaker, and although I would have bought this book anyway, the lecture I attended didn't do anything to dissuade me from doing so.
Having read copious medical text, I always baulk at anything that might remotely stink of such, when choosing my recreational reading. Musicophilia does discuss the dry scientific evidence, in a fairly in-depth dry scientific way. This, I suppose is unavoidable given the task Sacks has set himself, of scientifically explaining both musical talent and musical pathology. Which is probably my main criticism of the book for my own personal reasons (as outlined above). However saying this, it is done ... Read More:
>>More Details
Having both a strong interest in music and a medical training, this book greatly appealed to me. Sacks is also a good speaker, and although I would have bought this book anyway, the lecture I attended didn't do anything to dissuade me from doing so.
Having read copious medical text, I always baulk at anything that might remotely stink of such, when choosing my recreational reading. Musicophilia does discuss the dry scientific evidence, in a fairly in-depth dry scientific way. This, I suppose is unavoidable given the task Sacks has set himself, of scientifically explaining both musical talent and musical pathology. Which is probably my main criticism of the book for my own personal reasons (as outlined above). However saying this, it is done ... Read More:
>>More Details