Donald Satz <[log in to unmask]> writes:

>Jocelyn Wang replies to Margaret Mikulska:
>
>>>Thank goodness Carter, Boulez, and others do get some recognition as
>>>well.
>>
>>Yeah, we need more cacophony.
>
>Jocelyn's comment is snide and insulting to those who appreciate Carter,
>Boulez, and others.  Do I hear a vote for 'variety'?

It may be insulting to Boulez, Carter, and company, but I don't see
how it's any more insulting to their listeners than those occasional
What's-so-great-about-Mozart threads are to Mozart lovers.  As for variety,
there is plenty to choose from among tonal composers to provide that.

>Does the music of Carter and Boulez do any damage to Jocelyn and others of
>similar musical taste?

well, for one thing, it gives me a headache.  For another, it makes a
great many listeners wary of anything composed, say, within their or their
parents' lifetimes, and for those who want classical standards to continue.
Many living tonal composers have a hard time even being considered for
programming because there is the ridiculous attitude among many music
directors that if it's modern, it has to be tonal.  I know.  I've
communicated with a number of such composers whose works have been
programmed in the CCMS.

>Lighten up and respect alternative tastes.  It keeps the blood pressure
>down.

Looking at your reaction to my post, it seems that your blood pressure is
in greater peril than mine.

Jocelyn Wang
Culver Chamber Music Series