You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
This is the first of several articles on Maynard Solomon's Beethoven. Esman cites this recent psychobiography to re-emphasize his own view of the artist's relation to his creativity: "that which makes his product art, however, is its comment upon, its reaction against, or its integration of the formal devices emergent from the artistic tradition." He contrasts his opinion with one more prevalent in psychoanalytic tradition, that of art as defensive and/or integrative resolution of conflict. He criticizes P. Noy for suggesting that formal artistic structure can almost be reduced conceptually to an encoding suitable for transmitting contents from the inner depth of the artist to a similar locus in his audience. The argument, or course, is about where to place the accent. Esman rightfully states that creativity predates, transcends, and endures through most of the significant events of one lifetime. To suggest that the categories of art and defense are one is to make a severe categorical error. In the process of making his case, Esman does not deny that artistic content and expression often reveal significant past and present emotional concerns.