>I'd even say that Beethovan's music reflects some of the
>progressivity of the bourgeoisie. Sort of like Hegel. So his
>being bourgeois or middle class doesn't mar his composition.
I am not aware of any remark by Marx "marring" the quality of Beethoven's composition (or Hegel's and Aristotle's philosophy) by relating it to his standing in society. As far as Aristotle is concerned Marx' "marring" reads like this: "The brilliancy of Aristotle's genius is shown by this alone, that he discovered, in the expression of the value of commodities, a relation of equality. The peculiar conditions of the society in which he lived, alone prevented him from discovering what, 'in truth', was at the bottom of this equality." (Capital, vol. I, p. 66)
However, did the peciluar condition of the society prevent Beethoven to compose a 'more complex' or a 'better' music? Apart from the fact that the relation of development of society and thought also comprises a relation of society and art - the formulation of the question in relation to the arts should be put in this way: "In the case of the arts, it is well known that certain periods of their flowering are out of all proportion to the general development of society, hence also to the material foundation, the skeletal structure as it were, of its organization.... The difficulty lies not in understanding that the Greek arts and epic are bound up with certain forms of social devlopment. The difficulty is that they still afford us artistic pleasure and that in a certain respect they count as a norm and a an unattainable model." (Grundrisse p.110-111) Such as Beethoven - apart from Shostakovitch - is and will be the unattainable model for symphonic music???
Back to future, to "the first economic law on the basis of communal production":
In relation to the expansion of "disposable time" and to the generalization of "mental production" Marx focussed his argument on the fact that you need time in order - to develop your abilities to enjoy music of different variations - to compose music - "to work really freely".
Hence talking about music under the - nonsensical - subject line of "Beethoven was an entrepeneur" is just as talking - in an unconscious way - about the allocation of time for necessary social work and time for other "material or mental production".
And the latter is what socialism is all about. So give the following paragraphs a chance of being re-read and re-thought.
"Really free working, e.g. composing, is at the same time precisely the most damned seriousness, the most intense exertion. The work of material production can achieve this character only (1) when it's social character is posited, (2) when it is of a scientific and at the same time general character, not merely human exertion as a specifically harnessed natrual force, but exertion as subject, which appears in the production process not in a merely natural, spontaneous form, but as an activity regulating all the forces of nature." (Marx, Grundrisse, p. 611-612)
"On the basis of communal production, the determination of time remains, of course essential. The less time the society requires to produce wheat, cattle, etc., the more time it wins for other production, material or mental. Just as in the case of an individual, the multiplicity of its development, its enjoyment and its activity depends on economizaton of time.
"Economy of time, to this all economy ultimately reduces itself. Society likewise has to distribute its time in a purposeful way, in order to achieve a production to its overall needs; just as the individual has to distribute his time correctly in order to achieve knowledge in proper proportions in order to satisfy the various demands on his activity.
"Thus, economy of time, along with the planned distribution of labour time among the various branches of production, remains the first economic law on the basis of communal production. It becomes law, there, to an even higher degree." (Marx, Grundrisse, p. 172-173)
HK