Stephen Drury, as noted on this forum yesterday, is a pianist and a
professor at New England Conservatory.  He appeared on Chris Lydon's
Connections program to give his view on the late twentieth century music
most likely to survive.  His choices:  Feldman, Berio, Xenakis, Berio, Zorn
and above all, John Cage.  He emphasized his preference for experiencing
sound rather than for music which tells a story.  Music which does THAT, is
dead music, not at all appreciated by the new audience which is even as we
speak supplanting the old audience.  It was all very Now.  A listener who
called in and asked for late twentieth century equivalents of the Death and
the Maiden Quartet and LaTraviata was made to feel very Not Now,
particularly by the acolytes of Now, who called in.

So why does the whole business leave me mildly uncomfortable? For what it
is worth, I like some of the composers he mentioned, Berio in particular.
Still, the emphasis is on a certain approach to music which is by no means
universal in the last fifty years.  Listeners not familiar with the music
of this era (and many avoid all of this stuff, as we know) surely got a
skewed view of contemporary music.  In Drury's musical world, symphonists
need not apply.  No Shostakovitch, Schnittke, Holmboe, Britten, Norgard,
Lindberg, Maw, Gubadilina..., just to mention a few whose music I happen to
value very highly.  They certainly not of the same school, but they are all
composers who, in Drury's terms, tell a story.  I have no idea what Drury
does think of their music, but they do not seem to fulfill Drury's idea of
Now.  What is a shame is that listeners who heard this interesting program
will not come away with an appreciation for the rich variety of
contemporary music.

Bernard Chasan