"D. Stephen Heersink" wrote:

>...Ever since Andrew Porter left TNY in Tina's bloodbath, I've not been very
>fond of their musical reviews.  He and Roger Sessions can talk about music
>in the most poignant ways, without being professorial or pedantic....

No doubt about it, Porter's reviews for the New Yorker were first
class--instructive and readable.  But his writing since then, eg in the
Times Literary Supplement, has been something else--perhaps even a touch
professorial and pedantic.  How come the difference? I'm wondering whether
it's encroaching age, lack or helpful editing, or just different
requirements between the two publications.

Denis Fodor                     Internet:[log in to unmask]