Geoffrey Gaskell raises an intriguing point:

>Is it not possible that what is perceived by the modern scientific
>mind[set] is nothing more potent than influence? Is it not possible that
>what is perceived as evolution is nothing more that a change in fashion?

Sure, in some cases.  But consider how few really new things in Western
music have appeared:  polyphony, harmony replacing modality, Impressionism
& dodecaphony (in a certain sense, different ways of getting to the same
thing), total serialization, aleatorics, and several post-war blips that
haven't caught on.  The crux is, I suppose, that it's hard to create
something entirely new.  One doesn't innovate as easily as one changes
one's suit, and most everything comes from somewhere.  Denis Fodor's
point about influence is relevant.

Steve Schwartz