{"id":652,"date":"2020-04-23T01:45:55","date_gmt":"2020-04-23T06:45:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/?p=652"},"modified":"2020-04-23T01:47:46","modified_gmt":"2020-04-23T06:47:46","slug":"652","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/2020\/04\/23\/652\/","title":{"rendered":"Dorf is dwarfed by Moore’s more convincing argument"},"content":{"rendered":"

Both Dorf and Moore argue retroactively for queer readings of pieces that have been typically interpreted in more traditional ways. Both are convincing to some degree, but Dorf less than Moore. I find Dorf to be less persuasive because his argument is more assumption based than fact based.1<\/sup><\/a> He derives his queer reading from two main premesis. First, <\/span>Socrate<\/span><\/i> is different from the rest of Satie\u2019s output: less exoticized and more simple than his other Greek inspired works (90). Second, that Polignac, who was known to be lesbian, comissioned and collaborated heavily with Saite on the libretto for <\/span>Socrate<\/span><\/i>. He deems this important to this work because \u201crestraint and decorum were paramount to [both Satie\u2019s and] Polignac\u2019s survival in Paris\u201d (93). These are interesting ideas, but really don\u2019t prove anything because they rely more on what <\/span>Socrate<\/span><\/i> isn\u2019t than what it is. It isn\u2019t like Satie\u2019s other works, and it isn\u2019t overtly sexual because the composer and commissioner couldn\u2019t afford for it to be societally.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"Erik Erik Satie, https:\/\/interlude.hk\/erik-satie\/<\/p>\n

Moore\u2019s argument, on the other hand, is much more persuasive because he uses many primary source examples that directly support his thesis (through his interpretation of course).2<\/sup><\/a> He uses many anecdotes that all point towards very specific tendencies of camp, or \u201clies that tell the truth\u201d (303), which mainly center around the musical and personal theme of costume parties and cross dressing (304). Moore also uses interpretations of works from those Poulenc worked closely with (318) as well as critics from the time (305). Moore addresses musical evidence, including who Poulenc quoted and the music and literature that influenced him (309-316). Most convincing, were the quotes of Poulenc talking about his homosexuality and how much these pieces meant to him in a letter to Diaghilev about <\/span>Les Biches<\/span><\/i> choreography (306-307) and various letters about <\/span>Aubade<\/span><\/i> (320). Moore\u2019s argument was much more successful than Dorf\u2019s because he drew information from many sources that came from a wide variety of places. Furthermore, Moore\u2019s argument is based on realities rather than inferences from the lack of a reality.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"Francis Francis Poulenc, https:\/\/www.seattlechambermusic.org\/composers\/francis-poulenc\/<\/p>\n

\n

1 <\/a>Samuel Dorf, \u201c\u2018<\/span>\u00c9trange, n\u2019est-ce pas?<\/span><\/i>\u2019 The Princesse Edmond de Polignac, Erik Satie\u2019s <\/span>Socrate<\/span><\/i>, and a Lesbian Aesthetic of Music?\u201d <\/span>FLS: Queer Sexualities in French and Francophone Literature and Film<\/span><\/i> 34 (2007), 87-99.<\/span><\/a><\/a><\/p>\n

\n

2 Christopher Moore, “Camp in Francis Poulenc’s Early Ballets,” The Musical Quarterly<\/em>, Vol. 95, No. 2\/3 (Summer-Fall 2012), pp. 299-342<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Both Dorf and Moore argue retroactively for queer readings of pieces that have been typically interpreted in more traditional ways. Both are convincing to some degree, but Dorf less than Moore. I find Dorf to be less persuasive because his argument is more assumption based than fact based.1 He derives his queer reading from two […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3604,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-652","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/652","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3604"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=652"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/652\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":657,"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/652\/revisions\/657"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=652"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=652"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pages.stolaf.edu\/performinghistory\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=652"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}