Daneil Dennet’s new book “Breaking the Spell” was reviewed by Leon Wieseltier in the New York Times a few weeks ago. The review was not very favorable, to say the least. Further, the review was not very well thought out. What proof of this do I have? Well, this last weekend, the entire letter section of the Sunday New York Times Book review was filled with letters opposing the review of Wieseltier. Ouch. But really I’m only writing this blog post because I really really liked one of the letters. Here it is:
In his review of “Breaking the Spell,” Leon Wieseltier couldn’t resist the reflexive accusation that building a worldview on a scientific base is reductive, and as is often the case, he trotted out the existence of art to capture our sympathies. As a composer, I am weary of being commandeered as evidence of supernatural forces. Unlike Wieseltier, I do not find it difficult to “envisage the biological utilities” of the “Missa Solemnis”; it merely requires a chain with more than one link. Art, particularly religious and nationalistic art, has powerful social effects. Human beings have achieved their stunning success by becoming master cooperators, and emotions that drive us toward shared experience are prominent among the inspirations and outcomes of everything from grand public art to intimate love songs. Our emotion-filled social lives are the direct result of biologically endowed capacities for communication, from language to the delicate network of expressive muscles in our faces, and even our private imaginations bear the imprint. Awareness that I’m participating in this chain of capabilities in no way deprives music of its wonder; it enhances it.
SCOTT JOHNSON
New York
“As a composer, I am weary of being commandeered as evidence of supernatural forces.” Awesome.
Not just awesome. Totally awesome. Good find!