Karl Miller wrote:

> Oddly, it seems that Korngold is probably more "relevant" today, with
> the bulk of Webern's work being viewed as a curiosity.

Viewed by whom, I must ask?  Personally I still consider Webern one
of the great composers of the 20th century and a more interesting and
important figure than Korngold - no matter how much I might (and do)
enjoy the latter's music.

> 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.

I don't believe it is ignored still, not all of it.  The symphonies
of George Lloyd (which I don't care for) and those of Robert Simpson 
which I do) have both been recorded in the last couple of decades.

Maybe the pendulum was allowed to swing too far in academia (particularly
the US) but to dismiss the work of a composer such as Webern is to go
too far (much) in the opposite direction.

deryk barker
[log in to unmask]

             ***********************************************
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