Dave Harman wrote:

>I spoke to Cook in 1964 and it was his opinion that Mahler did complete
>a first version of the symphony.

Precisely!  A first version was completed, that only.

>Cooke felt the form was essentially set - Mahler would have retained the
>5 movemont form if he had gone through his usual changing and revising
>method of composition.  In copying the score by hand for the BBC program
>that first presented previously unperformed sections of the 10th, Cooke
>became convinced that the symphony was essentially complete for the stage
>of composition it was in, and can stand alone as it is.

I even possess a recording of Cooke's 1960 presentation but I fear we may
be arguing smenatics.  Nevertheless, the fact remains that Mahler did not
complete his Tenth Symphony *as he had completed all his others*.  If he
had, Cooke, Wheeler, Carpenter, Mazzetti and Barshai would have had no work
to do.  To quote Deryck Cooke:

   "The score is still not, and never could be, Mahler's Tenth Symphony
   as he himself would have completed it,and that fact is enough for
   purists to condemn in.  But its justification is that it enables us
   to experience as living sound Mahler's final musical testament in
   the provisional form in which he left it."

My feelings about Cooke's great work also.

I go into some detail myself about the state the Tenth was left in in my
Mahler recording survey:

   http://www.musicweb.uk.net/Mahler/Mahler10.htm

Soon to be in need of revision on the versions front.

Tony Duggan, England.
Mahler CD recordings survey is at: http://www.musicweb.uk.net/Mahler/