Donald Satz opines:

>There's an alarming trend on this list.  All of a sudden, list members
>are referring to conductors as "maestro".  Sorry, but I can't abide a
>designation that has a larger than life or royal aura to it.  What I really
>can't comprehend is how a reasonable person who is aware of his/her human
>qualities and happens to be a conductor could possibly want to possess that designation.

Hmm.  I'm half-and-half with you on this one, Don.  I'm not sure it's an
'alarming' trend...

On one hand, it -can- be a tad obnoxious.  Certainly any fool with a
baton (me, for example, had I one) should not be 'maestro'.  It's a bit
high-falootin', and can be offensive.  Plus (and this is what I sense from
you) it offends our democratic, anti-royalist tendencies that are our
birthright.

On the other, isn't it a matter of nomenclature and respect? 'Maestro'
just means 'master', same as 'chef d'orchestre' or something.  Really,
except being a 'foreign' word [whatever that means in English=not much]
it is pretty much the same as 'conductor', no?

Certainly if (by some act of the gods) I got an OBE or something, I'd want
to have 'Sir' before my name, perhaps not to be addressed that way, but
even so...how cool is that? Pretty dang cool...

Or even a PhD, or other degree earned; having that manner of addition
to your name is just an aknowledgement that you went through a lot of
time, trouble, and training to achieve what you've achieved.  Is is that
different? How about 'Dame' for famous/accomplished divas? Is that too
haughty too? (I don't really understand what makes a singer a Dame exactly,
though.)

So...I'm on the fence.  Certainly there's a part of me that loves the 'cult
of the conductor'.  But I also have strong anti-elitist sentiments.

Bob K.