Bernie Chasan writes:

>The problem is- what to make of Bill's  hypothetical high school student (
>or computer program for that matter) who writes in a Mozartian style and
>does it very well? This came up about a year ago, and my stance was and
>remains that such efforts are to music what forgeries are to art. I assume
>that a previously unknown Van Gogh would be subject to the sternest
>scrutiny and would be rejected if it was determined to be a forgery, even
>if it was a GREAT forgery. So musical value and composer are categories
>which are hard to separate out. At the time that this was discussed others
>energetically defended an opposing point of view.

I hope I was one of the people who disagreed.  At least, I do now and would
like to think myself consistent.  My main reason for doing so is that one
no longer considers the work, which is really the only thing worth talking
about.  We wouldn't give a damn about Mozart if the works he wrote weren't
especially good.

Let's take it from the other end.  Suppose you came across a piece of music
and you didn't know the composer.  The only thing you could say about it
was that it was written in a late Classical style.  Do you really have to
know who the composer is before you can decide whether it's any good? It
seems very strange to me.  It also means that the aesthetic value of the
work changes once discover the composer - also, a strange notion.

I stress "aesthetic" value, because we all know that "market" value will
probably change.  Money dominates the art market to an extent inapplicable
to classical music - in art, the creator is almost always the performer;
in music, the creator is not necessarily the performer.  In art, you're
actually talking about the buying and selling of objects (usually
antiques), and authenticity is a value that affects price.  Music doesn't
usually need provenance.  We tend to value music for its own sake.  About
the only creative object that can be sold is a manuscript score.  In that
case, authenticity obviously counts.  Authenticity - ie, an authentic link
to a composer - doesn't enter into the music itself.  You enjoy it or not.
If you enjoy it, you have your reasons, which I hope would arise more from
what you've heard than from who wrote it.  Furthermore, if you've got a
piece as good as anything Mozart wrote on his best day but Mozart didn't
write it, why is it any less valuable aesthetically? I think I'd count
myself lucky to have heard it.

Steve Schwartz