Karl Miller wrote:

>Writing this I am reminded of the notion of how tastes change, and how
>what was once considered significant, is no longer valued.  Clearly the
>pendulum continues to swing, but sadly, it seems that in doing so, so
>much that was good, can be lost.  I am reminded of all of those who wrote
>tonal music, some of it quite good, during the years when 12 tone was
>"in." So much wonderful music was ignored...and still is.

And disparaged by the atonalists and many university ensconced composers,
thereby influencing young listeners.  At least it felt that way when I
was a student back then.

>And, as I continue to ramble...I wonder if anyone might have read the
>Ross article on Nielsen.  Any thoughts as to why Nielsen has never enjoyed
>a level of popular given to Sibelius?  Was Nielsen out of step with the
>critical thinking of his time?

Interesting question.  As far as I know, Nielsen was very much in step
with the critics in Denmark--much to the distress of composers like Ruud
Landggard.

Just theorizing here, but Sibelius sounds "newer" to me than Nielsen,
and he leaned more to the neoclassical fashion of the 1920s and 1930s.
He was never at the core of any movement I'm aware of, but there was
something very forward looking about his spare style that must have
appealed to modernists more than the Romanticism of Nielsen.  

Roger Hecht

             ***********************************************
The CLASSICAL mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R)
list management software together with L-Soft's HDMail High Deliverability
Mailer for reliable, lightning fast mail delivery.  For more information,
go to:  http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html