There seems to be no middle ground in the `Moses & Aron' controversy (love
it or hate it), but I am staking out an agnostic position.  I just don't
know if it's `good' or `bad.'

I know only that I doesn't speak to me, and that it's entirely possible
that those who champion it (including those poor musicians) know something
I don't know.

I saw (and was irked by) the film and I listened to the darn thing a
couple of times, went pretty much through the broadcast -- and nada.
My gut (which is a third ear for me) tells me that it's not for me.

Perhaps I wouldn't have been so wishy-washy in the past, but -- unlike
the rest of humanity -- I had some experiences of not `getting' great works
the first time.  (Blush: `Elektra' went right by me at age 10; worse: I
failed to appreciate Nielsen when I first heard him, even though I was no
longer a teenager.)

Of course, it can the reverse situation and I can appreciate something
that's too good for the great unwashed.  Here too I have mellowed a great
deal.  Just this week, I was very impressed by Kurt Rohde's new work,
`Minerva's Pools,' but it fell on the admittedly deaf ears when Josh Kosman
wrote in the SF Chronicle:

`I'm happy to take on faith the skill of Rohde's creations; I can only
say that he speaks a musical language that is as incomprehensible to me as
Urdu or Basque.  I listened carefully to "Minerva's Pools," in what seemed
a precise and cogent rendition led by conductor George Thomson (a rare
departure from the group's no-baton policy), without catching the slightest
glimmer of what the piece was about.'

Rather than stomp on my esteemed colleague, I congratulated him on
acknowledging his role as the Listener.  While it would be impractical
(and annoying) to preface every review by saying `This is what *I* hear,'
it doesn't hurt to mention that from time to time -- and `Moses und Aron'
may be a good candidate.

Janos Gereben/SF
[log in to unmask]