ARTICLE | Ask the Author: Joan Biskupic

Ronald Collins (University of Washington School of Law) posed a series of questions to Joan Biskupic about her book The Chief: The Life and Turbulent Times of Chief Justice John Roberts (2019).

RELATED PROGRAMMING | ROBERT MERRY WITH JOAN BISKUPIC: THE STATE OF AMERICAN POLITICS

Question: I want to begin with that excerpt from a letter that the young law clerk to Justice William Rehnquist wrote to his former boss, Judge Henry Friendly. In your opinion, do such divisions continue to plague the court nearly four decades after that letter was written? If so, how do you think Roberts will manage them in what you term “turbulent times”?

Biskupic: Thank you, Ron, for these questions about “The Chief.” And, yes, it was ever thus. Such divisions reflect the nature of political appointments to America’s highest court. But our times are even more politicized. So, the challenge for Roberts today is greater than it was in his earlier years. He has shown a pattern of trying to compromise a bit with alternate sides, as happened in his Affordable Care Act moves. We’ve seen that in a sequence of orders this term, e.g., in the Louisiana abortion case and the Alabama Muslim death penalty dispute of early February.

Question: You’ve known John Roberts for over two decades, having covered him throughout his career as a Justice Department lawyer, an appellate court advocate and a court of appeals judge. And yet, you describe him as an “enigma.” You draw upon something suggested by David Leebron, one of Roberts’ Harvard Law Review colleagues: “Roberts is an introvert who has learned to act as an extrovert.”

Can you give us a rough sketch of the man whom Kenneth Starr tagged “Mr. Everything”?

Biskupic: Yes, terrifically smart and determined but with a personal reserve, shyness even. I liked Leebron’s description and was pleased to draw that out of him. The “Mr. Everything” line from Ken Starr regards John Roberts’ youth at La Lumiere School. He was a star student who participated in all manner of extracurriculars. I often asked people who knew Roberts in his younger years about setbacks he might have experienced. That question stumped people. He seemed to have so few things go wrong, and he appeared good at just about everything.

Question: You describe the chief justice as “strategizing more than sublimating, always with an eye toward what he wants in the ultimate ruling and how it will appear.” Can you give us an example?

Biskupic: I think we see elements of that in his concurring statements in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, in which he tries to influence how the majority opinion will be regarded and to uncut the dissenting arguments. Roberts rarely writes concurrences; when he does, it’s revealing.

Question: How does Roberts differ from the jurists for whom he once clerked, Friendly and Rehnquist?

Biskupic: He is not as moderate on the law as Friendly. He is not as easygoing with his colleagues as Rehnquist. When Rehnquist became chief in 1986, he already had had 14 years on the bench. He had built up relations of trust. Roberts, far younger and with less experience than his colleagues, had to start from scratch to build relationships.

Question: Do you think the chief justice is more judicially temperate than the other Republican appointees on the Supreme Court bench — Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh?

Biskupic: Yes, and I think that’s partly because he is chief justice. Roberts has acknowledged that he takes a different approach to cases as chief than he would as an associate justice.

Question: Regarding Roberts’ opinion in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), in which the court upheld the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate to buy health insurance, you write: “Viewed only through a judicial lens, his moves were not consistent and his legal arguments were not entirely coherent. But he brought people and their different interests together. He acted, in short, more like a politician.”

Is that ever likely to happen again? And how does this square with the chief justice’s concern for protecting the institution of the court?

Biskupic: His actions arose from many motives, including an effort to protect the Supreme Court as an institution. He wanted to avoid a 5-4 decision along predictable political lines in a presidential election year. Is that likely to happen again? Probably, but perhaps in a less sensational case. So much was happening in the dispute centered on the long-intractable healthcare problem and the signature domestic achievement of President Barack Obama.

Question: Last February, while speaking at Belmont Law School, Roberts declared: “I’m probably the most aggressive defender of the First Amendment. Most people might think that doesn’t quite fit with my jurisprudence in other areas… People need to know that we’re not doing politics. We’re doing something different. We’re applying the law.”

You devote a thoughtful chapter to the chief justice’s free speech jurisprudence. What do you make of his Belmont remarks and their implications for the future course of free speech law in the Supreme Court? Do you view his jurisprudence in this area as, in Justice Elena Kagan’s words, “weaponizing the First Amendment”?

Biskupic: That Belmont remark jumped out at me, too, Ron. First Amendment issues often do not break in the usual ideological patterns. But I think that Citizens United and the Janus v. AFSCME case that drew Kagan’s “weaponizing” rebuke had overriding political dimensions and divided the Republican and Democratic appointees precisely along political lines. I also do not believe Kagan is less committed to the First Amendment in the traditional sense, even though she was on the opposite side in Janus.

Question: During oral argument in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), Roberts took exception to the claim of the petitioners’ attorney that her clients were only asking the court to allow “a class of people who are, by state laws, excluded from being able to participate in this institution.” The chief saw the matter through a different lens: “No … you’re not seeking to join the institution, you’re seeking to change what the institution is. The fundamental core of the institution is the opposite-­sex relationship and you want to introduce into it a same­-sex relationship.”

Given that, and given the chief justice’s dissent in Obergefell, how likely do you think it is that he will adhere to that precedent, especially in cases involving countervailing claims of religious conscience?

Biskupic: I think his dissent in Obergefell, particularly that he voiced it from the bench (first and only time ever for such an oral dissent) reveals Roberts’ deeply held views in this area. I cannot see him voting to overrule Obergefell but he could diminish the reach of its protections. We saw that in the Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission decision last term. In a similar vein, I think Roberts would be inclined against extending Title VII to cover sexual orientation and gender identity. The court has so far this term deliberately avoided the issue.

Question: In Dickerson v. United States (2000), Rehnquist declined to expressly overrule Miranda v. Arizona (1966), despite a forceful dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia joined by Justice Clarence Thomas. In his majority opinion, Rehnquist declared: “We do not think there is [sufficient] justification for overruling Miranda. Miranda has become embedded in routine police practice to the point where the warnings have become part of our national culture. … While we have overruled our precedents when subsequent cases have undermined their doctrinal underpinnings, … we do not believe that this has happened to the Miranda decision. If anything, our subsequent cases have reduced the impact of the Miranda rule on legitimate law enforcement while reaffirming the decision’s core ruling that unwarned statements may not be used as evidence in the prosecution’s case in chief.”

Do you think Roberts would follow the jurisprudential path paved by Rehnquist in Dickerson when it comes to Roe v. Wade (1973)?

Biskupic: I think Roberts would offer something less than the endorsement Rehnquist gave Miranda. The chief might come as close to overruling Roe as possible without explicitly overruling it.

Question: As you point out, Roberts has long been concerned about “racial balancing.” In his majority opinion in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007), he wrote: “The principle that racial balancing is not permitted is one of substance, not semantics. Racial balancing is not transformed from ‘patently unconstitutional’ to a compelling state interest simply by relabeling it ‘racial diversity.’”

Currently, there are several affirmative action cases in the lower courts, including Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. Among other things, that case raises the question of whether the court should overrule its precedents and hold that Title VI forbids any consideration of race by a federally funded university.

How do you think the chief justice would approach this issue?

Biskupic: I covered that Harvard trial in Boston, and I am sure the chief and other justices know that issue is slowly moving toward them. I believe Roberts would rule that Title VI indeed forbids any racial considerations in education. This is one area in which Roberts has been consistent since his time in the Reagan years. He abhors race-based policies, saying they do more harm than good.

Question: As you know, administrative law and the power allotted to federal agencies is an immensely important, though not “sexy,” topic. Kavanaugh has advanced some noteworthy arguments concerning statutory interpretation and administrative law. Specifically, he objects on separation-of-powers grounds to the growth of the “administrative state,” which he called the “headless fourth branch” of the government.

If an appropriate case came before the court, would the chief justice embrace Kavanaugh’s view?

Biskupic: We just had oral argument on this topic, and I sensed some resistance on Roberts’ part, perhaps because of how strongly Justice Stephen Breyer and Kagan framed the issue of precedence. How much does the chief justice want to roll back the law in the volatile Trump era? I’m inclined to think Roberts would wait to reverse Auer v. Robbins, etc.

Question: Should the court ever be reconstituted with a 6-3 conservative-liberal split, do you think that would affect Roberts’ ability to influence the direction of the law?

Biskupic: Yes, it would change his current position at the exact ideological center of the bench and put him – strange to say – more on the “left.” But even as I witnessed his often-failed efforts to woo Justice Anthony Kennedy and now watch his struggles to steady the court, I would never underestimate his ability to influence people. In fact, the chief justice may already be thinking ahead to that very 6-3 possibility. You quoted Ken Starr earlier. I’ll close with another former colleague of Roberts from the Reagan era: “John Roberts has always seen everything with pristine clarity, and almost instantly,” Mike Luttig told me.

SOURCE: SCOTUSblog

---

MEET THE ARTISTS | VILLAGE BY THE SEA STORYTELLING FESTIVAL

Deborah Harris-Branham

Doug Banner

Anne Rutherford

Norm Brecke

Rebecca Hom

Deborah Harris-Branham | Weavin’ and tellin’ tales for more than 30 years in a variety of settings, Debra brings stories to life in an energetic, dramatic, and toe tappin’ style. She specializes in sharing African and African-American folktales filled with tricksters, humor, participation and thought provoking themes.

Doug Banner | Co- founder of the Bellingham Storytellers Guild, Doug Banner has been a leader and promoter in the storytelling community in Northwest Washington for over 20 years. Recognized as a World Folklorist, he has been part of a cultural exchange storytelling team working in Gengcun, China and a national educational reform team in Aruba.

Anne Rutherford | Anne delights audiences nationwide with funny, touching performances that include tales of personal adventure, Pacific Northwest folklore and prize-winning lies. Her singing and mandolin playing add to the fun, along with vivid vocal and physical characterizations such as her Wild West alter-ego, the adventurous Clementine Ryder.

Norm Brecke | Before becoming a full-time storyteller, Norm was an award-winning teacher who told stories in his classroom and taught storytelling skills to students. He’s told stories professionally from Oregon to South Carolina, LA to BC; his extensive repertoire includes traditional tales, personal narratives, historical tales, and stories in song.

Rebecca Hom | Rebecca is a seasoned performance storyteller, has traveled across the US and onto six continents sharing, gathering and creating life stories. Around a campfire, on a couch or in a crowded theater, Rebecca takes listeners from hilarious to heartfelt in a heartbeat.

RELATED PROGRAMMING: VILLAGE BY THE SEA STORYTELLING FESTIVAL | Mar 14-15, 2020

---

ARTICLE | The Glorious History of Handel’s Messiah

George Frideric Handel's Messiah was originally an Easter offering. It burst onto the stage of Musick Hall in Dublin on April 13, 1742. The audience swelled to a record 700, as ladies had heeded pleas by management to wear dresses "without Hoops" in order to make "Room for more company." Handel's superstar status was not the only draw; many also came to glimpse the contralto, Susannah Cibber, then embroiled in a scandalous divorce.

The men and women in attendance sat mesmerized from the moment the tenor followed the mournful string overture with his piercing opening line: "Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God." Soloists alternated with wave upon wave of chorus, until, near the midway point, Cibber intoned: "He was despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief." So moved was the Rev. Patrick Delany that he leapt to his feet and cried out: "Woman, for this be all thy sins forgiven thee!"

Now, of course, Messiah is a fixture of the Christmas season. Woe to the concert hall in the United States or Britain that fails to schedule the piece around the holiday, when, as well, CD sales and Web downloads of the oratorio soar. For many amateur choirs, the work is the heart of their repertoire and the high point of the year. In most of Handel's oratorios, the soloists dominate and the choir sings only brief choruses. But in Messiah, says Laurence Cummings, director of the London Handel Orchestra, "the chorus propels the work forward with great emotional impact and uplifting messages."

He was born in Halle, Germany, into a religious, affluent household. His father, Georg Händel, a celebrated surgeon in northern Germany, wanted his son to study the law. But an acquaintance, the Duke of Weissenfels, heard the prodigy, then barely 11, playing the organ. The nobleman's recognition of the boy's genius likely influenced the doctor's decision to allow his son to become a musician. By 18, Handel had composed his first opera, Almira, initially performed in Hamburg in 1705. During the next five years, he was employed as a musician, composer and conductor at courts and churches in Rome, Florence, Naples and Venice, as well as in Germany, where the Elector of Hanover, the future King George I of England, was briefly his patron.

Handel's restless independence contrasted him with the other great composer of the age, Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750), whom he did not meet. "Bach never moved out of the cocoon of court patronage or church employment," says Harry Bicket, a conductor, harpsichordist and London-based director of The English Concert chamber orchestra. Handel, on the other hand, rarely attached himself to any benefactor for long, although he would compose court music when asked. He wrote The Water Music (1717), one of the few of his pieces other than Messiah recognizable to the average concertgoer, for George I, to be performed for the monarch as His Majesty's barge navigated through a London canal on a summer evening. "But [Handel] didn't hang around palace antechambers waiting for his lordship or royal highness," says Jonathan Keates, author of Handel: The Man and his Music.

Such free-spirited musical entrepreneurship was more than possible in London, to which Handel moved permanently in 1710. A commercial boom underpinned by overseas trade had created a thriving new merchant and professional class that broke the monopoly on cultural patronage by the nobility. Adding zest to the London music scene were rivalries that split the audience into two broad musical camps. On one side were defenders of the more conventional Italian opera style, who idolized the composer Giovanni Bononcini (1670-1747) and brought him to London. Enthusiasts of Handel's new Italian operas cast their lot with the German-born composer. The partisanship was captured in a 1725 verse by poet John Byrom:

Increasingly elaborate opera productions led to rising costs due, in part, to hiring musicians and singers from Italy. "It was generally agreed Italian singers were better trained and more talented than local products," notes Christopher Hogwood, a Handel biographer and founder of the Academy of Ancient Music, the London period-instrument orchestra he directs. But beautiful voices were often accompanied by mercurial temperaments. At a 1727 opera performance, Handel's leading sopranos, Francesca Cuzzoni and Faustina Bordoni, actually came to blows onstage, with their partisans cheering them on. "Shame that two such well-bred ladies should call [each other] Bitch and Whore, should scold and fight," John Arbuthnot (1667-1735), the mathematician and satirist, wrote in a pamphlet describing the increasing hysteria of London's opera world.

In the 1730s, the emotional and financial toll of producing operas, as well as changing audience tastes, contributed to Handel's growing interest in sacred oratorios—which required neither elaborate scenery nor foreign stars—including, eventually, Messiah. "With oratorios, Handel could be more his own master," says Keates.

Despite his fame, Handel's inner life remains enigmatic. "We know far more about the environment in which he lived and the sort of people he knew than about his private life," Keates adds. Part of the explanation lies in the dearth of personal letters. We must rely on contradictory descriptions of Handel by admirers and detractors, whose opinions were colored by the musical rivalries of 1700s London.

Although he neither married nor was known to have had a long-lasting romantic relationship, Handel was pursued by various young women and a leading Italian soprano, Vittoria Tarquini, according to accounts by his contemporaries. Intensely loyal to friends and colleagues, he was capable of appalling temper outbursts. Because of a dispute over seating in an orchestra pit, he fought a near-fatal duel with a fellow composer and musician, Johann Mattheson, whose sword thrust was blunted by a metal button on Handel's coat. Yet the two remained close friends for years afterward. During rehearsals at a London opera house with Francesca Cuzzoni, Handel grew so infuriated by her refusal to follow his every instruction that he grabbed her by the waist and threatened to hurl her out an open window. "I know well that you are a real she-devil, but I will have you know that I am Beelzebub!" he screamed at the terrified soprano.

Handel, who grew increasingly obese over the years, certainly had an intimidating physique. "He paid more attention to [food] than is becoming to any man," wrote Handel's earliest biographer, John Mainwaring, in 1760. Artist Joseph Goupy, who designed scenery for Handel operas, complained that he was served a meager dinner at the composer's home in 1745; only afterward did he discover his host in the next room, secretly gorging on "claret and French dishes." The irate Goupy produced a caricature of Handel at an organ keyboard, his face contorted into a pig snout, surrounded by fowl, wine bottles and oysters strewn at his feet.

"He may have been mean with food, but not with money," says Keates. Amassing a fortune through his music and shrewd investments in London's burgeoning stock market, Handel donated munificently to orphans, retired musicians and the ill. (He gave his portion of his Messiah debut proceeds to a debtors' prison and hospital in Dublin.) A sense of humanity imbues his music as well—a point often made by conductors who compare Handel with Bach. But where Bach's oratorios exalted God, Handel was more concerned with the feelings of mortals. "Even when the subject of his work is religious, Handel is writing about the human response to the divine," says conductor Bicket. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Messiah. "The feelings of joy you get from the Hallelujah choruses are second to none," says conductor Cummings. "And how can anybody resist the Amen chorus at the end? It will always lift your spirits if you are feeling down."

Handel composed Messiah in an astounding interlude, somewhere between three and four weeks in August and September 1741. "He would literally write from morning to night," says Sarah Bardwell of the Handel House Museum in London. The text was prepared in July by the prominent librettist, Charles Jennens, and was intended for an Easter performance the following year. "I hope [Handel] will lay out his whole Genius & Skill upon it, that the Composition may excel all his former Compositions, as the Subject excels every other Subject," Jennens wrote to a friend.

There were several reasons for the choice of Dublin for Messiah's debut. Handel had been downcast by the apathetic reception that London audiences had given his works the previous season. He did not want to risk another critical failure, especially with such an unorthodox piece. Other Handel oratorios had strong plots anchored by dramatic confrontations between leading characters. But Messiah offered the loosest of narratives: the first part prophesied the birth of Jesus Christ; the second exalted his sacrifice for humankind; and the final section heralded his Resurrection.

Dublin was one of the fastest-growing, most prosperous cities in Europe, with a wealthy elite eager to display its sophistication and the economic clout to stage a major cultural event. "So it was a great advantage for Handel to make the voyage to Dublin to try out his new work, and then bring it back to London," says Keates, comparing the composer to Broadway producers who tried out plays in New Haven before staging them in New York City.

Messiah's success in Dublin was in fact quickly repeated in London. It took time for Messiah to find its niche as a Christmas favorite. "There is so much fine Easter music—Bach's St. Matthew Passion, most especially—and so little great sacral music written for Christmas," says Cummings. "But the whole first part of Messiah is about the birth of Christ." By the early 19th century, performances of Messiah had become an even stronger Yuletide tradition in the United States than in Britain.

There is little doubt about Handel's own fondness for the work. His annual benefit concerts for his favorite charity—London's Foundling Hospital, a home for abandoned and orphaned children—always included Messiah. And, in 1759, when he was blind and in failing health, he insisted on attending an April 6 performance of Messiah at the Theatre Royal in Covent Garden. Eight days later, Handel died at home.

His total estate was assessed at 20,000 pounds, which made him a millionaire by modern standards. He left the bulk of his fortune to charities and much of the remainder to friends, servants and his family in Germany. His one posthumous present to himself was £600 for his own monument at Westminster Abbey, final resting place for British monarchs and their most accomplished subjects. Three years after Handel's death, the monument by French sculptor Louis François Roubillac, was installed.

Abroad, Handel's reputation—and that of his best-known composition—only continued to grow. Mozart paid Handel the supreme compliment of re-orchestrating Messiah in 1789. Even Mozart, however, confessed himself to be humble in the face of Handel's genius. He insisted that any alterations to Handel's score should not be interpreted as an effort to improve the music. "Handel knows better than any of us what will make an effect," Mozart said. "When he chooses, he strikes like a thunderbolt."

RELATED PROGRAMMING: MUSIC TALKS: REALLY HEARING HANDEL'S MESSIAH | DEC 04, 2019

SOURCE: Smithsonian.org

---

BIOGRAPHY | George Frideric Handel

George Frideric Handel composed operas, oratorios and instrumentals. His 1741 work, Messiah, is among the most famous oratorios in history.

Georg Frideric Handel was born on February 23, 1685, to Georg and Dorothea Handel of Halle, Saxony, Germany. From an early age, Handel longed to study music, but his father objected, doubting that music would be a realistic source of income. In fact, his father would not even permit him to own a musical instrument. His mother, however, was supportive, and she encouraged him to develop his musical talent. With her cooperation, Handel took to practicing on the sly.

When Handel was still a young boy, he had the opportunity to play the organ for the duke’s court in Weissenfels. It was there that Handel met composer and organist Frideric Wilhelm Zachow. Zachow was impressed with Handel’s potential and invited Handel to become his pupil. Under Zachow's tutelage, Handel mastered composing for the organ, the oboe and the violin alike by the time he was 10 years old. From the age of 11 to the time he was 16 or 17, Handel composed church cantatas and chamber music that, being written for a small audience, failed to garner much attention and have since been lost to time.

Despite his dedication to his music, at his father’s insistence, Handel initially agreed to study law at the University of Halle. Not surprisingly, he did not remain enrolled for long. His passion for music would not be suppressed.

In 1703, when Handel was 18 years old, he decided to commit himself completely to music, accepting a violinist’s position at the Hamburg Opera’s Goose Market Theater. During this time, he supplemented his income by teaching private music lessons in his free time, passing on what he had learned from Zachow.

Though working as a violinist, it was Handel's skill on the organ and harpsichord that began to earn him attention and landed him more opportunities to perform in operas.

Handel also began to compose operas, making his debut in early 1705 with Almira. The opera was instantly successful and achieved a 20-performance run. After composing several more popular operas, in 1706 Handel decided to try his luck in Italy. While in there, Handel composed the operas Rodrigo and Agrippina, which were produced in 1707 and 1709 respectively. He also managed to write more than a few dramatic chamber works during this period.

Touring the major Italian cities over three opera seasons, Handel introduced himself to most of Italy’s major musicians. Unexpectedly, while in Venice, he met multiple people who expressed an interest in London’s music scene. Enticed to experiment with a freelance music career there, in 1710 Handel left Venice and set out for London. In London, Handel met with the manager of the King’s Theatre, who commissioned Handel to write an opera. Within just two weeks, Handel composed Rinaldo. Released during the 1710–11 London opera season, Rinaldo was Handel’s breakthrough. His most critically acclaimed work up to that date, it gained him the widespread recognition that he would maintain throughout the rest of his musical career.

After the debut of Rinaldo, Handel spent the next few years writing and performing for English royalty, including Queen Anne and King George I. Then, in 1719, Handel was invited to become the Master of the Orchestra at the Royal Academy of Music, the first Italian opera company in London. Handel eagerly accepted. He produced several operas with the Royal Academy of Music that, while well liked, were not especially lucrative for the struggling academy.

In 1726 Handel decided to make London his home permanently, and became a British citizen. (He also Anglicized his name at this time, to George Frideric.) In 1727, when Handel’s latest opera, Alessandro, was being performed, Italian opera in London took a hard hit as the result of a hostile rivalry between two female lead singers. Frustrated, Handel broke away from the Royal Academy and formed his own new company, calling it the New Royal Academy of Music. Under the New Royal Academy of Music, Handel produced two operas a year for the next decade, but Italian opera fell increasingly out of style in London. Handel composed two more Italian operas before finally deciding to abandon the failing genre.

In place of operas, oratorios became Handel’s new format of choice. Oratorios, large-scale concert pieces, immediately caught on with audiences and proved quite lucrative. The fact that oratorios didn’t require elaborate costumes and sets, as operas did, also meant that they cost far less to produce. Handel revised a number of Italian operas to fit this new format, translating them into English for the London audience. His oratorios became the latest craze in London and were soon made a regular feature of the opera season.

In 1735, during Lent alone, Handel produced more than fourteen concerts made up primarily of oratorios. In 1741 Dublin’s Lord Lieutenant commissioned Handel to write a new oratorio based on a biblical libretto assembled by art patron Charles Jennens. As a result, Handel’s most famous oratorio, Messiah, made its debut at the New Music Hall in Dublin in April 1742.

Back in London, Handel organized a subscription season for 1743 that consisted exclusively of oratorios. The series opened with Handel’s composition Samson, to great audience acclaim. Samson was eventually followed by a run of Handel’s beloved Messiah.

In addition to his oratorios, Handel’s concerti grossi, anthems and orchestral pieces also garnered him fame and success. Among the most noted were Water Music (1717), Coronation Anthems (1727), Trio Sonatas op. 2 (1722–33), Trio Sonatas op. 5 (1739), Concerto Grosso op. 6 (1739), and Music for Royal Fireworks, completed a decade before his death.

Over the course of his musical career, Handel, exhausted by stress, endured a number of potentially debilitating problems with his physical health. He is also believed to have suffered from anxiety and depression. Yet somehow, Handel, who was known to laugh in the face of adversity, remained virtually undeterred in his determination to keep making music.

In the spring of 1737, Handel suffered a stroke that impaired the movement of his right hand. His fans worried that he would never compose again. But after only six weeks of recuperation in Aix-la-Chapelle, Handel was fully recovered. He went back to London and not only returned to composing, but made a comeback at playing the organ as well.

Six years later, Handel suffered a second springtime stroke. However, he stunned audiences once again with a speedy recovery, followed by a prolific stream of ambitious oratorios.

By 1750, Handel had entirely lost sight in his left eye. He forged on, however, composing the oratorio Jephtha, which also contained a reference to obscured vision. In 1752 Handel lost sight in his other eye and was rendered completely blind. As always before, Handel’s passionate pursuit of music propelled him forward. He kept on performing and composing, relying on his sharp memory to compensate when necessary, and remained actively involved in productions of his work until his dying day.

On April 14, 1759, George Handel died in bed at his rented house at 25 Brook Street, in the Mayfair district of London. The Baroque composer and organist was 74 years old.

Handel was known for being a generous man, even in death. Having never married or fathered children, his will divided his assets among his servants and several charities, including the Foundling Hospital. He even donated the money to pay for his own funeral so that none of his loved ones would bear the financial burden. Handel was buried in Westminster Abbey a week after he died. Following his death, biographical documents began to circulate, and George Handel soon took on legendary status posthumously.

RELATED PROGRAMMING: MUSIC TALKS: REALLY HEARING HANDEL'S MESSIAH | DEC 04, 2019

SOURCE: Biography.com

---