"If Thomas Tallis was not a homosexual then why portray him as such?"
I've been reading different versions of this sentiment on various blogs and boards for the last few weeks, and I thought it was time that I came up with an answer to satisfy myself.
~
(
Why not? )
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
And I don't deny that there isn't something a little shifty about Hirst's contrarian, sensationalist tendencies. But on this particular case I'm leaning towards judging him on the basis of the results, rather than his motives, because at this current juncture, Tallis and Compton are the most interesting people in the show, for me. :)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
The contemporary need to 'sex-up' what is effectively a deeply intriguing historical period makes it appealing to, shall we say, the less educated members of the viewing public.
As for Tallis'(or William Compton, for that matter)portrail as a gay man. Well there's no evidence to support he was. However, it was not uncommon for intimate, not necessarily sexual, relationships between same same sexes at this time, or indeed before - Edward et al. The Victorians ratified all sexual relationships through law.
With especial regards to Tallis it remains unimportant as to his true sexuality for his sublime music remains as a testament to his genius and the spectacular achievements encompassed within the Tudor and Elizabethan ages.
Reply
And I am compelled to add that Tallis isn't exactly "living, breathing" any more.
I'm not offended by the manner of your comment. Thank you for putting your opinion in the open.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment