Bernard Chasan wrote:

>Do you really believe that you can judge a piece of music the way you would
>judge gymnastics, or the dogs at a dog show? In the final analysis the work
>moves you and draws you into its world or it doesn't.  And different works
>will do it for different listeners, although there is clearly great overlap
>in the results when masters are producing the music.  By no means perfect
>overlap as discussions of Vivaldi and Beethoven on this liszt demonstrate!!

I would think that a scientist would believe that scientific study of what
people think constitutes a good piece is possible at least in principle.
I don't presume to offer rigorous criteria for assessing works as to their
greatness.  What I had in mind, I think, relates more to the composer's
craft than to individual opinions of value to the listener.  Compare it
to building a fine violin.  It's generally conceded that Stradivari and
Guarneri instruments represent the acme of violin craftsmanship.  Violins
are judged by how close they come to this standard.  (I hope it doesn't
destroy my point to admit that many of Guarneri del Gesu's instruments are
pretty sloppy in spite of their fabulous tone.) There are things you can
point to that indicate mastery.  That is what I tried to do.  It has less
to do with whether a particular piece moves a particular person.  That's
rather subjective, and can be related to a number of factors, nostalgia
being one.

Chris Bonds