Bob Draper writes concerning Beethoven's Fifth Symphony,

>But one question we should both consider here. How can we be sure
>that our views are truly objective? Just like a child is brought up
>to believe in a particular religion (or not), so we encounter the
>legend of the fifth at an early age. The experience is reinforced by
>repeated statements, of what a fine work it is, that we hear over the
>years.

A similar concern was expressed by another list member wondering how he
could be sure that Haydn was REALLY great. Despite my recent non-serious
claims to being in possession of objective truth, I think that these
concerns need not worry anybody. What counts for most of us is our response
to the music. I believe that most people on this list are independent and
have strong opinions.  They are generally not about to invest large amounts
of time or money listening to music which does not engage them, despite
what other people have told them they oughta like. Bob's well publicized
low opinion of Mozart, although deplorable, is an expression of his
individual taste. More power to him.  A Supreme Court justice once said
that he could not define pornography but he knows it when he sees it. In
the same way we know great music when we hear it. We may not all agree on
what is great, yet there is a basic consensus covering what we have come
to think of as the master composers.  So in my opinion it is not really
productive to consider whether or not the music is REALLY great. There is
no computer program which will rate composers, no poll of experts which
will convince us, nothing written in the stars. We have our ears,our
hearts, and the stuff between our ears, and that will have to do. We
are privileged to be able to appreciate an art which uniquely combines
the deepest emotions with an all but mathematical order and structure.

Professor Bernard Chasan
Physics Department, Boston University