Ulvi Yurtsever writes:

>Just wanted to point out that it is possible to know well and love these
>(Mozart) works, and yet rate them no higher than other great works like
>the Beethoven piano concerti and the (best of the) Haydn string quartets,
>and also rate them below even greater works such as the late Beethoven
>quartets.

No disagreement at all, but not very interesting.  It is all there to be
enjoyed- all of classical music is spread out in front of us- a huge and
varied feast.  The rewards of a late Beethoven quartet are not the same in
kind as the rewards of the Mozart Viola Quintet K 515, or for that matter,
Das Lied von der Erde.  We don't have to hold up rating numbers like judges
at a figure skating competition,

>Also, "Mozart basher" should be reserved for people who dismiss his entire
>output out-of-hand; those listeners for whom Mozart is not in the top three
>or top five greatest (like he is for most people) are not Mozart bashers,
>they just have a different (and possibly minority) opinion.

I just don't see why we need to rate composers like sports writers rate
basketball teams.  It is a mildly amusing parlor game - nothing more.
There also seems to be an "either Mozart or Haydn" mentality - as if
only one of them can be annointed as the great classical composer.  Two
electrons cannot occupy the same quantum state, but there is no evidence
that master composers are so constrained.

Bernard Chasan