The autobiography about the infamously “crazy” classical composer Beethoven and his relationship with his nephew is a sad sad story. There are many authors who have researched and analyzed Beethoven’s life, especially his manic relationship with his nephew. All scholars who’ve done any amount of research all note that Beethoven is simply a anti-woman for most of his life. However, he was that way for good reason; his relationship with his mother soured his taste for women forever.
The noted researches in Maynard Solomon’s articles about Beethoven have built off one another for many years in the studies of Beethoven’s rational and irrational behavior. Not one scholar has found loads of info about him, but rather taken what’s been discovered in the past and taken from his or her peers. This is how research and analyzation of a musical figure should be done, in my opinion. This method provides credibility and legitimacy.
Some highlighted themes in this chapter are the very divided sex/gender roles with men having many prejudices towards women’s capabilities to raise children, the guardianship battle between Beet (Beethoven) and his sister, Beet’s irrational behavior explaining and even igniting his creativity for music, Beet’s relations with women that bordered desire and irritability, Beet’s ‘Fuhrer-personality, the relationship between art and innovation, and Beethoven’s deep-seated longing to be accepted and part of a family structure that loves him as much as he loves them.
The story appears to be quite tragic and is intended to break the heroic image many people in popular culture have of Beethoven. He was not all glory. He was a tortured soul, like many crowed artists… So maybe Soloman was correct when he notes that there exists speculation that psychosis is directly related to creativity within ‘art’.
I am fasho going to read the book, and I think YOU should too! Good day to all 
