Composers that Tried to Commit Suicide
HIHI
David Cleary
: Tchaikovsky is one. know any others. a thousand thanks
Schumann tried to drown himself by throwing himself into the Rhine. He was
dispatched to an insane asylum shortly after.
Dave
richard hihn
: Tchaikovsky is one. know any others. a thousand thanks
Robert Schumann is perhaps the most notorious example.
Dick Hihn
Wayne Reimer
>
> Tchaikovsky is one. know any others. a thousand thanks
Well, I composed a bit a while back, and I was starting to think that if
I saw another subject line in all caps with a superlative from HIHI that
I'd kill myself, but I guess I don't have to now. :-)
WR
Tim Horwood
Peter Warlock
Jaromir Weinberger
Bernd Alois Zimmerman
HIHI wrote in message <36DBF092...@idt.net>...
HIHI
Wayne Reimer wrote:
> HIHI wrote:
> >
> > Tchaikovsky is one. know any others. a thousand thanks
>
Oscar Ugarriza
Oscar Ugarriza
> HIHI wrote in message <36DBF092...@idt.net>...
> >Tchaikovsky is one. know any others. a thousand thanks
The alleged story of Tchaikovsky attempt has been discredited as a very
late story by one of his contemporaries...
Agur,
Oscar
RichieM2
Eric Schissel
>Oscar Ugarriza
You say it has been discredited. I say the story is still open.
-Eric Schissel
--
schi...@lightlink.com
http://www.lightlink.com/schissel ICQ#7279016
standard disclaimer
Eric Schissel
>Also
>Peter Warlock
>Jaromir Weinberger
>Bernd Alois Zimmerman
Dunno about Weinberger, I fear, but Warlock and Zimmerman did rather more
than just try. As did Hugo Distler.
Donald Rice
pretty convincing that Tchaikovsky did not attempt suicide. His death from
cholera appears to have been accidental and a fair amount of documentation
is presented. What do you think of this book?
Don
Eric Schissel wrote:
> Oscar Ugarriza (leso...@gate.net) wrote:
>
> >Oscar Ugarriza
>
> >leso...@gate.net
>
> >> HIHI wrote in message <36DBF092...@idt.net>...
> >> >Tchaikovsky is one. know any others. a thousand thanks
>
> >The alleged story of Tchaikovsky attempt has been discredited as a very
> >late story by one of his contemporaries...
>
> You say it has been discredited. I say the story is still open.
David Cleary
: I just finished reading Poznansky's biography of Tchaikovsky which seemed
: pretty convincing that Tchaikovsky did not attempt suicide. His death from
: cholera appears to have been accidental and a fair amount of documentation
: is presented. What do you think of this book?
Given what I've read, I'm inclined to agree with you about Tchaikovsky's
death not being a suicide. However, he did try to commit suicide eariler
in his life. During his brief marriage, he apparently stood in a freezing
cold river trying to catch pneumonia.
Dave
William Satterthwaite
Eric Schissel <schi...@adore.lightlink.com> wrote:
>Tim Horwood (t...@horwood.prestel.co.uk) wrote:
>>Also
>>Peter Warlock
>>Jaromir Weinberger
>>Bernd Alois Zimmerman
>
>Dunno about Weinberger, I fear, but Warlock and Zimmerman did rather more
>than just try. As did Hugo Distler.
As did, I believe, Frank Bridge.
Bill
Alex Leach
Rubinstein when a young man, by hanging with his dressing gown cord.
Fortunately it broke.
Alex
RichieM2 wrote in message <19990303213126...@ng134.aol.com>...
Chris Hunt
Warlock. His death may have been by his own hand.
Christopher Hunt
Dept of Music Studies
Mohawk College
Hamilton Ontario Canada
Eric Schissel
Now this is something I have never heard. Program notes never mention it.
(But then, they never give the cause of his death in 1941 at all, or do
they? Let me go check :) )
Eric Schissel
>In article <36de1...@news2.lightlink.com>,
>Eric Schissel <schi...@adore.lightlink.com> wrote:
>>Tim Horwood (t...@horwood.prestel.co.uk) wrote:
>>>Also
>>>Peter Warlock
>>>Jaromir Weinberger
>>>Bernd Alois Zimmerman
>>
>>Dunno about Weinberger, I fear, but Warlock and Zimmerman did rather more
>>than just try. As did Hugo Distler.
>As did, I believe, Frank Bridge.
The biography
http://www.netreach.net/~druid/FB/biog.htm
gives no hint of suicide.
Donald Rice
marriage, it didn't drive him to a suicide attempt. The story comes many years
after Tchaiovksy's death, from an acquaintance, Kashkin, who was not one of
Tchaikovsky's intimate friends and hence an unlikely person to be told this
intimate and private information - at least according to Poznansky. Tchaikovsky
did mention in a letter to Karl Albrecht (I don't know what relation he had to
Tchaikovsky) the "if I stayed one more day in Moscow, I should have lost my mind
or drowned myself in the foul-smelling waves of the Moskva river."
Tchaikovsky was a very emotional person and his letters are filled with hyper
emotionalism of this sort. His behavior was not that of a depressed, suicidal
man, but that of a person who felt trapped by his error. Though he was
desperately unhappy with the way his marriage turned out, that is his wife did
not accept his homosexuality and was convinced that she could "convert" him to a
hetrosexual by her diligence and sincere love, Tchaikovsky left Russia for a
year to get away from her. He wasn't happy, but Poznansky feels he was not
suicidal.
Don
Mark Starr
Donald Rice wrote:
>
> Poznansky addresses this story also and though Tchaikovsky was devastated by his
> marriage, it didn't drive him to a suicide attempt. The story comes many years
> after Tchaiovksy's death, from an acquaintance, Kashkin, who was not one of
> Tchaikovsky's intimate friends and hence an unlikely person to be told this
> intimate and private information - at least according to Poznansky.
More nonsense from Poznansky. Here is yet another example of him basing a
conclusion on his own inference of a vague situation, offering no
documentary evidence to support it. Kashkin "was an unlikely
person to be told this intimate and private information." On the basis of
this totally unsupported opinion, he dismisses the evidence of
Kashkin--whose word no other biographer has ever questioned--simply
because it doesn't fit in with his (Poznansky's) argumentative agenda.
Kashkin wrote that, in a conversation with Chaikovskii shortly after
the breakdown of the composer's marriage, Chaikovskii's related to
him the details of the attempted suicide. Kashkin wrote: "In utter despair,
Chaikovskii decided to take his own life. But he determined to do it in
such a way that no one would be able to suspect suicide.
He contrived a means of dying whereby his immediate circle
would conclude that his death was the result of illness.
And so, once cold autumn night, he went to the Moscow River,
immersed himself in the water and stood there until his
body was seized with cramps. When he got home, he explained that
he had stumbled and fallen into the river. He was sure that he
would catch pneumonia and die."
Unlike Poznansky, Alexandra Orlova documents everything she says
with quotations from a vast trove of hitherto unknown or unpublished
letters by Chaikovskii that she copied from the autographs before
she defected from the Soviet Union. She adds to the corroboration
of Kashkin's story with a letter to Mme. von Meck discussing in
detail the breakdown of his marriage. Chaikovskii wrote: "There
was one evening in September when I was very close to that state
of blind, insane, pathological rage which can lead one to a
criminal act. I was no more than a tiny distance away from it and
was saved by a miracle."
In sum, this is one more example of why I believe that Poznansky
is utterly unreliable and has little credibility as an historian.
He has a preconceived agenda to prove; and he is willing to bend
or dismiss evidence on subjective whims that does or does not
suit his purpose. This is never the case with Alexandra Orlova.
> David Cleary wrote:
>
> > Donald Rice <don...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > : I just finished reading Poznansky's biography of Tchaikovsky which seemed
> > : pretty convincing that Tchaikovsky did not attempt suicide. His death from
> > : cholera appears to have been accidental and a fair amount of documentation
> > : is presented. What do you think of this book?
> >
> > Given what I've read, I'm inclined to agree with you about Tchaikovsky's
> > death not being a suicide. However, he did try to commit suicide eariler
> > in his life. During his brief marriage, he apparently stood in a freezing
> > cold river trying to catch pneumonia.
> >
> > Dave
Regarding the question of Chaikovskii's successful suicide, I suggest
that you investigate the recent 900-page biography--unfortunately only in
French--by Andre Gershke. After meticulously examining all of the
published claims and counterclaims, and all of the ascertainable facts
and remaining documentary evidence, Gershke strongly endorses
the account by Alexandra Orlova--that Chaikovskii did indeed
commit suicide by taking arsenic poison, and that the story of cholera
was a fraud perpetuated by Modest Chaikovskii and the two brother
doctors who treated the composer during his final days. However,
Gershke also believes that while the story of the Court of Honor composed
of old classmates from the School of Jurisprudence may indeed have happened,
the evidence for the Court of Honor is merely hearsay--although the hearsay
can be traced to several different sources.
The two parts of the story--the suicide/fraud and the Court of Honor--are
not inter-dependant. For the triggering event, Gershke offers an
alternative supposition: Chaikovskii may have decided to take his own life
after being accosted in a restaurant by a furious woman who accused him
of all sorts or treachery in front of his group of friends. Quite possibly,
she was relative of the young man whose family accused Chaikovskii of
homosexual seduction in a accusatory letter to the Czar's Court.
About the suicide itself, there can be no longer any doubt. Recently
several expert medical investigators have looked into the suicide hypothesis,
and they have concluded that there exists today more than enough evidence
to compel any forensic medical inquest to rule that the official death
certificate indicating cholera is false, and that death by arsenic poising
was the likely cause of death.
Regards,
Mark Starr
Donald Rice
mentions parts of letters that are censored and then infers what was left out.
Although in a brief note at the beginning of the edition I read, Poznansky says he's
had a chance to see the originals of the censored letters he quoted and that they
support very closely his inferences, I felt still a little suspicious.
Is Alexandra Orlova's book in English and is it available in the U.S.?
Don
Eric Schissel
English and available in the US- I read it while at college, and I know no
Russian. Is that the book in question?
Brett Langston
from Donald Rice <don...@yahoo.com> contains these words:
> After reading the 600 pages of Poznansky's book, I felt I had read a supposition. He
> mentions parts of letters that are censored and then infers what was left out.
> Although in a brief note at the beginning of the edition I read, Poznansky says he's
> had a chance to see the originals of the censored letters he quoted and that they
> support very closely his inferences, I felt still a little suspicious.
After Alexander Poznansky's book 'The Quest for the Inner Man' was
first published in 1991, the Tchaikovsky archives at his last home in
Klin, near Moscow, were finally opened to outside researchers. The
texts of the uncensored letters largely confirmed Poznansky's earlier
inferences; for example, the composer talks frankly about his
infatuation with the violinist Iosif Kotek (amongst others).
Poznansky included a summary of this research in the introduction to
his next book, 'Tchaikovsky's Last Days' (OUP 1995).
And last year, Poznansky published for the first time in English the
full texts of a number of previously censored letters from
Tchaikovsky to his brothers, in the collection 'Tchaikovsky and His
World' (ed. by Leslie Kearney; Princeton Univ. Press. ISBN
0-691-00429-0). These shed some new light on the circumstances
surrounding his disastrous marriage to Antonina Milyukova.
The Russian scholar Valerii Sokolov has also done an enormous amount
of work in restoring the texts of the composer's letters which had
been suppressed by Soviet censors, for their perceived references to
homosexuality or politics. He has also published the results of his
research: in Russian, in the collection 'P. I. Tchaikovsky: Zabytoe i
novoe (Moscow, 1995), and in German in 'Cajkovskij-Studien Nr. 3'
(Moscow/Tübingen, 1998).
Brett Langston
The Tchaikovsky Web-Site
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/blangston/pitch/
Donald Rice
updated materials, can you clarify the question of whether Tchaikovsky actually attempted
suicide by wading in the Moskva river or only mentioned it as a literary device to
emphasize his anguish at his marriage?
Don
<snip my original comments>
Brett Langston
from Donald Rice <don...@yahoo.com> contains these words:
> Thanks for your enlightening update on Poznansky's work. If you've read some of the
> updated materials, can you clarify the question of whether Tchaikovsky actually attempted
> suicide by wading in the Moskva river or only mentioned it as a literary device to
> emphasize his anguish at his marriage?
As far as I know, there's no new evidence one way or the other.
Kashkin's account was written in 1918, which was fifteen years after
Tchaikovsky's death, and over 40 years after the events described
were supposed to have taken place. And Kashkin, possibly for dramatic
effect, claimed to be reporting word-for-word exactly what
Tchaikovsky had told him in a conversation some decades earlier,
which would be a remarkable feat of memory!
In that respect the account is misleading, but whether the substance
is correct, i.e. that Tchaikovsky waded into the River Moscow to try
to kill himself by contracting pneumonia, well we may never know.
None of the composer's letters from the period of his marriage refer
to this event, even with the censored passages now restored. We may
never know for sure.
Mark Starr
Brett Langston wrote:
> As far as I know, there's no new evidence one way or the other.
> Kashkin's account was written in 1918, which was fifteen years after
> Tchaikovsky's death, and over 40 years after the events described
> were supposed to have taken place. And Kashkin, possibly for dramatic
> effect, claimed to be reporting word-for-word exactly what
> Tchaikovsky had told him in a conversation some decades earlier,
> which would be a remarkable feat of memory!
A silly response! There is no reason to doubt the accuracy
of Kashkin's account--with only furtive suppositions and no
evidence whatsoever.
> In that respect the account is misleading, but whether the substance
> is correct, i.e. that Tchaikovsky waded into the River Moscow to try
> to kill himself by contracting pneumonia, well we may never know.
> None of the composer's letters from the period of his marriage refer
> to this event, even with the censored passages now restored.
That statement is plainly wrong. Read my previous post.
> We may never know for sure.
As I pointed out in a post last year on this subject, there is indeed
a "smoking gun" in the matter of Chaikovskii's suicide. The fact
that the "smoking gun" has now physically disappeared changes nothing.
I am referring to the second of two letters discovered among
the papers of Modest Chaikovskii after his death. This second
letter has mysteriously disappeared. But as Alexandra Orlova
details in her book, and as Andre Gershke has corroborated in
his recent biography, several noted music historians of
unquestionable integrity read the letter before it disappeared
and they remembered its contents. The first letter, the one
that still exists, was a short note of condolence to Modest
from the doctor who treated Pyotr Chaikovskii during his last days
and who signed the death certificate. The second letter, many
pages long, was an impersonal clinical description of the
progressive symptoms of cholera--much of it copied from a
contemporary medical textbook. The letter was dated in the
period AFTER Pyotr Chaikovskii's death and BEFORE Modest
wrote a long article in a Moscow newspaper that attempted to
correct the many contradictory and inaccurate medical
statements that Modest had given to the Moscow correspondent
of the New York Times in the form of hourly bulletins
during Pyotr's progressive degeneration. The doctor's
letter--a direct response to a request from Modest--was a
clear attempt to coach Modest on the accurate progressive
symptoms of cholera to promulgate their fraudulent conspiracy
in the historical record.
That this document, but not the accompanying letter, has
disappeared from the Chaikovskii archives in Klin, raises
the raises the gravest suspicions about the intregrity
of the musicologists associated with that institution
during the Soviet Era--in particular with the late N.
Davidova, the composer's great-niece who served as Director.
Just before her death she was writing an article attempting
to justify all of the censuring, editing and distorting
of documents that has gone on since the composer's death.
It is only because of Alexandra Orlova's indomitable
courage and integrity that many of those documents have
seen the light of day.
I spoke with Nicholas Slonimsky about the Chaikovskii
suicide shortly before his (NS's) death. His reactions' were
very revealing. He had investigated the matter for
Baker's Biographical Dictionary of Musicians prior
to WW II, and he had been convinced at that time that
the the composer died from cholera and not by suicide.
He based his conclusion at that time heavily in part
on the short letter of condolence from the doctor
to Modest--which he, Slonimsky, had personally examined.
When Slonimsky learned from Orlova's book about the
existence of a second letter among Modest's papers, he
was flabbergasted. Slonimsky said to me that he now
had grave doubts about cholera as the cause of death.
And he was unstinting in his praise and admiration for
Orlova's courage and integrity. He wanted the truth
about the matter, whatever it was, to come out--and
he was not forever holding on to his earlier conclusions.
Poznansky and company could learn a great deal from
Slonimsky's attitude in this matter.
Regards,
Mark Starr
the
Brett Langston
from Mark Starr <st...@inow.com> contains these words:
During Tchaikovsky's last illness, he was treated by Dr Vasily and Dr
Lev Bertenson (who were brothers), and another doctor (Nikolay
Mamunov). Alexandra Orlova wrongly claimed that Vasily Bertenson was
at the composer's bedside when he died, whereas Alexander Poznansky's
research revealed that Vasily had travelled to Smolensk the night
before, and in fact he sent a telegram of condolence from Moscow when
he learned of the composer's death (Klin archive, ref. v16, no. 466).
Dr Lev Bertenson also wrote to Tchaikovsky's brother Modest on the
evening of the day the composer died, offering his condolences, and
expressing considerable upset about 'the dreadful disease which took
the life of your unforgettable brother' (Klin archve, ref. v16, no.
493). So we have two private communications from the doctors
attending the composer, showing their distress at having failed to
save him from cholera. Neither of these letters was intended for
publication, nor did they appear in print for almost 100 years, so
there can be really no question that they were a deliberate attempt
to conceal anything untoward.
As you pointed out, Modest Chaikovskii wrote a long and medically
detailled account of his brothers illness and death, which was
published in the St. Petersburg newspapers a week or so after the
event. For this, he presumably sought the assistance of medical
experts in explaining the various stages of the disease. If such a
document or letter existed, then this could well be what Orlova
described in the Klin archives. Unfortunately no trace can be found
of it at Klin. Incidentally, all the letters there have sequential
reference numbers (allocated in the 1930s), and since the references
are known from pre-war sources, any gaps should have been easily detectable.
However, in Modest Chaikovskii's papers at Klin, there is a draft
article by Dr Vasily Bertenson, dating from 1905 (ref. v10, no.
468), in which he discusses the symptoms of cholera, in connection
with a medical textbook he was writing about the treatment of the
disease (V. Bertenson, 'On cholera', St. Petersburg, 1905). This
might also fit the description of Orlova's document, which other
researchers may have seen.
> That this document, but not the accompanying letter, has
> disappeared from the Chaikovskii archives in Klin, raises
> the raises the gravest suspicions about the intregrity
> of the musicologists associated with that institution
> during the Soviet Era--in particular with the late N.
> Davidova, the composer's great-niece who served as Director.
> Just before her death she was writing an article attempting
> to justify all of the censuring, editing and distorting
> of documents that has gone on since the composer's death.
> It is only because of Alexandra Orlova's indomitable
> courage and integrity that many of those documents have
> seen the light of day.
Presumably 'N. Davidova' refers to Xenia Yurevna Davidova? She was
the daughter of the composer's nephew Yury, and she published a
considerable deal of material about the composer over 3 decades, many
of which (e.g. 'Muzykalnoe nasledie Chaikovskogo') contained
information which had never been presented before. She was the last
family member to work at Klin, up to her death in 1995 (incidentally,
Alexander Poznansky publishes an account of a conversation he had
with her in 1992 in 'Tchaikovsky's Last Days', pp. 77-78). I heard
that she had been writing an article about the effects of Soviet
censorship on Tchaikovsky research, which maybe what you are referring to here.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that Alexandra
Orlova did not bring any copies of documents, or even archival
references, with her to the West when she emigrated in 1979? That is,
apart from a published edition of the composer's letters to his
family ('Pis'ma k rodnym'), which contained many passages about the
composer's homosexuality which were censored in subsequent editions
of his correspondence. (This book was already available in limited
numbers in US and European libraries).
> When Slonimsky learned from Orlova's book about the
> existence of a second letter among Modest's papers, he
> was flabbergasted.
So Slonimsky hadn't seen this letter himself, during the course of
his earlier research?
> And he was unstinting in his praise and admiration for
> Orlova's courage and integrity. He wanted the truth
> about the matter, whatever it was, to come out--and
> he was not forever holding on to his earlier conclusions.
> Poznansky and company could learn a great deal from
> Slonimsky's attitude in this matter.
I have no reason to question Alexandra Orlova's integrity, and I'm
sure that she is faithfully reporting the stories told to her and her
late husband about Tchaikovsky's 'suicide'. When the Russian archives
were firmly sealed, this seemed a distinct possibility, and if you
had asked me ten years ago, I would probably have said that he took
his own life.
But now that the Soviet era is over, and the archives have been
opened to outside researchers, there can be little doubt that
Tchaikovsky died from cholera -- none of the other explanations put
forward stands up to scrutiny. I can understand there is an
unwillingness to believe that a great composer could have been
snatched away in the prime of life by something which can be easily
treated nowadays, but in this case the simple explanation is the only
one which fits the facts.
Regards,
Alexander Damyanovich
While following this thread of conversation (as well as its predecessors over
these 3 months), one question I need to ask, having read Anthony Holden's
biography of the composer as well as a few flames against it on this
newsgroup: what's so bad about the book? It seems to have many complete
end- notes and a rather full bibliography that seems well-used. It's also
reasonably well-written, from what I could tell. Definitely, the case it
makes for his unhappy death being due to suicide committed under duress seems
quite convincing; furthermore, the very fact of the composer-archives still
being under the control of people with the old mindset (very plausible given
what's known of Russian society throughout history) jars harshly with one of
the postings from these 2-3 days. [It almost seems that the only way for
this controversy to be put to rest once and forever is to have the genius's
remains exhumed and tested for traces of the suspected poison - arsenic - the
pro- suicide camp believes was the means of carrying out this virtual murder
(assuming they're right).]
Dear colleagues, please don't flame me just for flaming's sake: if the book
is as bad as what one or two people seem to have made it out to be, then
please simply let me know what's bad about it. Thank you very much. ---- "I
run to death, and death meets me as fast, and all my pleasures are as
yesterday" - John Donne "Deliver me, O LORD, from lying lips and from a
deceitful tongue" - Psalm 120, v.2
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Mark Starr
Alexander Damyanovich wrote:
>
> Dear Ladies & Gentlemen:
>
> While following this thread of conversation (as well as its predecessors over
> these 3 months), one question I need to ask, having read Anthony Holden's
> biography of the composer as well as a few flames against it on this
> newsgroup: what's so bad about the book?
Bad? Holden's book is superb. I read several reviews
in major publications when it was published. They
were all highly favorable.
> It seems to have many complete
> end- notes and a rather full bibliography that seems well-used. It's also
> reasonably well-written, from what I could tell. Definitely, the case it
> makes for his unhappy death being due to suicide committed under duress seems
> quite convincing; furthermore, the very fact of the composer-archives still
> being under the control of people with the old mindset (very plausible given
> what's known of Russian society throughout history) jars harshly with one of
> the postings from these 2-3 days. [It almost seems that the only way for
> this controversy to be put to rest once and forever is to have the genius's
> remains exhumed and tested for traces of the suspected poison - arsenic - the
> pro- suicide camp believes was the means of carrying out this virtual murder
> (assuming they're right).]
Holden makes clear that he investigated the matter of Chaikovskii's
suicide without preconceptions or bias, without an ax to grind.
Unlike Poznansky, he had (and still has) no vested interest one way
or another to show that the composer did or did not take his own life.
He examined first-hand all the available evidence, claims and arguments.
Independently, he corroborated much of the evidence brought forth by
Alexandra Orlova, and he strongly endorsed her conclusions. Thus Holden
joins Andre Gershke (author of a recently published a 900-page biography in
French)
and David Brown (author of a classic multi-volume biography), as well
as several forensic scientists who have written on the matter for
medical publications. All of these authors have concluded that
there exists now sufficient documented evidence to compel any
medical inquest to rule that the cause of death listed on the
composer's death certificate--cholera--is false, and that the
highly probably real cause of death was arsenic poisoning.
> Dear colleagues, please don't flame me just for flaming's sake: if the book
> is as bad as what one or two people seem to have made it out to be, then
> please simply let me know what's bad about it. Thank you very much. ---- "I
> run to death, and death meets me as fast, and all my pleasures are as
> yesterday" - John Donne "Deliver me, O LORD, from lying lips and from a
> deceitful tongue" - Psalm 120, v.2
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
--
Regards,
Mark Starr
Oscar Ugarriza
Oscar Ugarriza
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Mark Starr wrote:
> Bad? Holden's book is superb. I read several reviews
> in major publications when it was published. They
> were all highly favorable.
Holden's book has little new to offer except for parroting well known
third-party hearsay. He knows no Russian language or history and his main
occupation is making documentaries for the BBC from what I have read.
It appears that he made no actual use of the documents at Klin.
> > the postings from these 2-3 days. [It almost seems that the only way for
> > this controversy to be put to rest once and forever is to have the genius's
> > remains exhumed and tested for traces of the suspected poison - arsenic - the
> > pro- suicide camp believes was the means of carrying out this virtual murder
> > (assuming they're right).]
Unfortunately this is true in order to satisfy the tabloid minds of many
of the people who are interested in the fantasies of Orlova.
>
> Holden makes clear that he investigated the matter of Chaikovskii's
> suicide without preconceptions or bias, without an ax to grind.
Says who ?
> Unlike Poznansky, he had (and still has) no vested interest one way
> or another to show that the composer did or did not take his own life.
Poznansky made a thorough investigation using not only the evidence in the
Russian archives but placing all of this in the context of actual Russian
history and laws of the time. Holden has a vested interested in creating a
tabloid setup for his telly documentaries...
> He examined first-hand all the available evidence, claims and arguments.
> Independently, he corroborated much of the evidence brought forth by
> Alexandra Orlova, and he strongly endorsed her conclusions. Thus Holden
> joins Andre Gershke (author of a recently published a 900-page biography in
> French)
> and David Brown (author of a classic multi-volume biography), as well
If you depend on Orlova you are in deep trouble and quoting Brown depends
on when you read him.
> as several forensic scientists who have written on the matter for
> medical publications. All of these authors have concluded that
> there exists now sufficient documented evidence to compel any
> medical inquest to rule that the cause of death listed on the
> composer's death certificate--cholera--is false, and that the
> highly probably real cause of death was arsenic poisoning.
Several forensic publications have also disagreed with the conclusion of
arsenic poisoning. It appears that for some people a suicide theory that
has no real value forces an approach to calling for tests on the
exhumed corpse (which unfortunately or not, it is something I do not
believe the Russian government may authorize).
> >
>
> > Dear colleagues, please don't flame me just for flaming's sake: if the book
> > is as bad as what one or two people seem to have made it out to be, then
> > please simply let me know what's bad about it. Thank you very much. ---- "I
> > run to death, and death meets me as fast, and all my pleasures are as
> > yesterday" - John Donne "Deliver me, O LORD, from lying lips and from a
> > deceitful tongue" - Psalm 120, v.2
The book is well written, it has some very nice photos and when it comes
to the usual bio of uncontrovertible facts it presents no problem. But his
comments and conclusions are way off base IMHO. We have too long based our
facts on hearsay (Orlova's incredible fantasy, the alleged river suicide
attempt, etc.) and it seems a very hard thing to accept the simple truth
that the man did not have the life and death so often portrayed by those
who have an ax to grind, usually because of a great deal of envy about
someone who could attain success in his lifetime in a field that many
times takes death to bring about that accomplishment.
Agur,
Oscar