I've just finished listening for the third time to a very enjoyable disc
of David Diamond's music that I grabbed out of the used CD bin earlier this
week.  It is the Schwartz/Seattle Symphony recordng of the Third Symphony,
Kaddish for Cello and Orchestra, Psalm, and Music for "Romeo and Juliet."
I grabbed it because I had a vague memory that the composer had been
discussed as an important American composer here on the list, and I am
trying to familiarize myself with twentieth century American composers
beyond Copland, Bernstein and Gershwin.  This has led me to seek out music
of Roy Harris, Ernest Bloch and Walter Piston among others.

I was unprepared for what Diamond might sound like.  I feared it would be
an ordeal to listen to, but one that would "improve" me as a consumer of
modern music.  Of course, there was nothing to fear:  the music was tonal,
rational and, in places, quite moving.  I was impressed by its forward
motion; whether agitated, or slow and reflective, I felt that there was a
strong sense of what I would call "narrative momentum" at work.  This seems
particulary impressive for music with strong vertical, harmonic interest as
well.  Dashes of notable and memorable orchestral color stand out against
the canvas and remind me of moments in Mahler symphonies.  For example, I
loved the use of piano in some of the works and of bells in others.

A quick trip to the archives failed to turn up too much about Diamond.  I
learned that the moniker "neo Romantic" could be applied, which makes sense
to me.  And Steve Schwartz made a tantilizing speculation about possible
mental illness manifesting itself in tirades about seemingly unimportant
matters.  (This seems at odds with the tenor of a composer interview in the
disc's notes, where he comes across as a rather avuncular, elderly man.)

The music itself strikes me as quite reflective.  In particular of course
the lovely, ruminative Kaddish but, also, elements of the other works.
It does not strike me as particularly American however--whatever that
means.  I don't hear the openess of a Copland or Harris.  Nor do I hear
the hurly-burly, urbanized feel of Gershwin or Bernstein.  (The scherzo
of Symphony 3 being an exception to this comment.) If anything, I think he
might belong more closely linked to Bloch:  a European who moved to America
if I'm not mistaken.

So, I am left eager to explore more, and would love to know where to turn
next.  Also, I'm surprised I can't find anything about Diamond in the three
or four standard music history books I consulted.  Is he a "lesser"
composer in the conventional wisdom? Can anyone tell me more about his
biography? Lastly, I hope my reflections above are coherent:  I'd be
interested to know if others feel I am on the right track in my first
impressions of this composer.

Ed