Len Fehskens replies to me:

>>I can't think of any Ravel work that has the impact of, say, Debussy's
>>Images for Orchestra or Prelude on the Afternoon of a Faun.
>
>I'm not sure exactly what you mean by impact, but Bolero sure gets a lot
>of attention, and La Valse and the Daphne et Chloe suites are staples of
>the Boston Symphony's repertoire.

Well, you've put your finger on it.  What does anybody mean by their
criteria for this RC? Somehow, we're supposed to intuit what's on there and
what's off.  As far as what I meant by impact, none of these pieces might
have been written and the course of music wouldn't have changed.  They're
not important to the *intellectual history* of music.  I consider them
great works, however, even though not canonical -- which should show you
right away the limits of a canon.

>>With the exception of the string quartets, Bartok's historically
>>important works also suffer from a similar fate.
>
>Again, the Concerto for Orchestra and the Piano Concertos (all three of
>them) make regular appearances on BSO programs.

But, if you'll recall, I set down two criteria, only one of which was
currency.  I think currency is important, but alone it simply records the
mood of the moment, certainly not the permanence implied by a canon.  You
could still argue for either's impact on the course of music.  I simply
couldn't think of it.

Also, lucky you.  I've never encountered either the first or the second
piano concerto live.

Let me give you an analogy.  Shakespeare, Ibsen, Strindberg, and Shaw, I
think we would all agree, made an impact on the course of drama.  O'Neill
wrote some terrific plays, but, again, if he hadn't written, drama would be
pretty much the same.

>Regarding RVW, the Tallis Fantasia seems to be programmed fairly
>frequently.  I suspect I've heard it live from the BSO more often than
>the Beethoven 5th Symphony.

In over forty years of concert going, I've heard it exactly once, live.
But, again, that's not the point.

Steve Schwartz