Symphony No. 1 Analysis

Is it possible to recreate a historical event through music? Daniel Bukvich attempts this very feat in his piece Symphony No.1(In Memoriam, Dresden, 1945). This piece of music has been the topic of many discussions in the musical world, and I’m sure that it would be a hot topic in the philosophy world as well. In particular, I think that Aristotle and Leo Tolstoy would have a lot to say about this piece. Aristotle’s definition of art focuses on humans’ ability to mimic real life and create a spectacle that causes certain emotions, like fear, to arise in the audience. Meanwhile, Tolstoy’s definition of art focuses on the communication of specific feelings from the artist to the audience. I think that Aristotle’s definition of art that emphasizes a welling up of emotion which leads to a catharsis, and gives us a better understanding of ourselves and humanity describes Symphony No. 1 better than Tolstoy’s definition of art. In order to properly understand why I think this is true, you need some background information of what Symphony No. 1 was written about and why it was …show more content…
1 very similar to the Greek tragedies that he uses as the foundation for his definition of art. Aristotle’s theory of art is based on the idea that man naturally mimics the things that he sees, so art, and as an extension, tragedy, is a continuation of this mimesis. (Aristotle W, Anthology 2nd ed., p. 29-30). Another requirement of tragedy is that the spectacle must arouse emotions of fear and pity and these emotion leads to what he calls a catharsis (Aristotle W, Anthology 2nd ed., p. 31, 36). He doesn’t say specifically what a catharsis is, but it is basically the release of a build-up of emotions. Aristotle places a lot value of art on how the audience responds to it with his idea of catharsis. He also implies that art, specifically tragedy, can help us gain a better understanding of humanity and our own emotions (Caraway “Aristotle Handout” p.