Tfw reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra and listening to Bach at the same time after a long and satisfying day at the gym

>tfw reading Thus Spoke Zarathustra and listening to Bach at the same time after a long and satisfying day at the gym

Life's great, my friends!

Attached: the-youth-of-bacchus-1884bouguereau.jpg (2562x1404, 2.73M)

h a v e
s e x

unironically one of the best feelings friend, I know what you mean. metaphysics and hard, hard physical work is the only thing a man needs

Attached: file.png (1280x720, 501K)

I usually jam Bach piano suites or Handel while reading books like that

Scriabin if the book is spooky-ish

These things don't fit together at all.

Pick up your amethyst and go out drinking with your entourage!

where is the fucking????

>Bach
Try Brahms

OP is posting this status on Yea Forums because he doesn’t have friends that care enough about what he does. You think he’s patrician enough for Brahms?

They're all 'pre-modern' i.e., thereby and ironically, peak postmodernism

>In so far as contemporary listeners no longer hear Bach's music as natural and experienced connoisseurs of counterpoint and all varieties of fugal style (and accordingly must dispense with such learned and purely artisan appreciation), we feel in listening to his music--to use Goethe's magnificent phrase--as if 'present at God's Creation'; in other words: we feel something great in the making but not yet formed--aristocratic classicism--which, by conquering nationalities, the Church and counterpoint, seduced the entire world. In Bach there is still too much crude Christianity, crude Teutonicism, crude scholasticism; he stands on the threshold of classicism, but from there gazes backwards to the Middle Ages.

>Every composer in romanticism that lays claim to the 'classical' canon either deceives the listener or deceives themselves. 'Deceives me?!': most listeners' instincts protest against this - they don't want to be fooled that the music has depth - but one should still prefer even this type to the others (who 'deceive themselves'), for music which seduces is in good taste. To put it simply, for the benefit of those with 'Germanic' tastes: Brahms v.s. Wagner. Wagner deceives the listener, while Brahms deceives himself. Brahms remains touching so long as he dreams or mourns over himself in private (in the chamber, at the piano)--in that respect he is romantic--; however, he becomes sterile, we no longer feel at one with him, when he anachronistically poses as a child of the classicists .... people categorise Brahms as Beethoven's heir: I know of no more cautious euphemism!

Your point?

He’s reading Zarathustra ffs, he doesn’t need friends.

k

Go home, Glenn Gould.

Where is this from fren?

Tremendously low iq post

>using Bach as background music

you disgust me.

Attached: rppy-nietzche-your-co-acept-f-ood-boy-9-is-22240177.png (500x590, 71K)

Favourite prelude/fugue from WTC?

t. Berliner, 1907

>Mixing mediums

Attached: Disgust.jpg (291x348, 66K)

>listening to music while reading
>you are actually browsing this thread more than reading
>you are going to watch porn later

Attached: 1546738155996.jpg (800x450, 44K)

how can anyone concentrate on reading while also listening to music?
when I try to do that my mind goes all over the place and end up doing neither

listen to field recordings and lowercase

Yes they do lmao when are you on about...

Yes, those and most ambient music I can understand, but Bach?

If you listen to music while reading you aren't actually paying attention to the music.

I don't understand that either. Even minimal shit can make even easy philosophy hard to understand sometimes.

i listened to horowitz play rachmaninoff piano concerto no 3 and during one of the cadenzas i specifically had the thought go through my head that it was better than sex