Dave Pitzer writes:

>In 3) above don't you mean measure 35&ff or -- better -- measure 47 &ff??
>
>I'll not quibble.  Ain't worth it and I think we are closer in though than
>it may appear.  My principal objection is to those who feel compelled to
>attach a program to this music -- or to those who feel that such a ad hoc
>program is delivered to them unbidden.

You are right, That's what happens when you count measures with a tape
measure:-)

>Music doesn't have to "mean" anything.

Right again.  See my last post on art vs craft.  I did not mean to state
that music HAD to mean something but that some does and based on the
opinion of the list on this thread, this is as often as not, based on the
experiences and L/R brain orientation of the listner as it is based on the
intent of the composer.  Forgive the Rock music reference but I recall how
great meaning was ascribed to some of the lyrics of Beatle songs only to
have John say that he used it just because it rhythmed with another word in
the song, etc.  ("Now they know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert
Hall")

In fact, John got great pleasure in writing meaningless lyrics to see what
great meaning people would read into them.  Perhaps Beethoven did the same
thing.  For example, some day some one may find this letter in an attic

   Dear Therese Von Malfatti,

   I have just finished the 2nd movement to my 4th piano concerto.  A
   great effect was had by using a simple interplay between a very strong
   and very weak theme.  I am curious to hear what lofty and absurd
   meanings that the intellectuals will give to this one.  The Count
   and I were so amused by the comments on the piano sonata.

   Your most devoted servant and friend
   Beethoven

Bill Pirkle