Jocelyn Wang wrote:

>Not at all.  Since the entire process of atonal composition is inconducive
>to producing anything resembling beauty, it does not take a leap to dislike
>every last one of them.

Nonsense.  My first serious encounter with atonal music was when I first
the Stabat Mater from Penderecki's St. Luke Passion.  I was 19, I think.
This is a work of profound beauty and unfathomable depth of feeling.  I
have performed it many times since and it never fails to have a tremendous
impact on both the listener and the performer.

>Who the devil is frightened of it? No one.  Saying one is repulsed by it,
>can't stand it, wish it never existed so as to drive audiences away from
>modern works, and so forth, is a far cry from being frightened of it.

This kind of editorializing is as useless as it is uninformed.  If you
don't like it, fine, Ms. Wang, but kindly leave the rest of us to form
our own opinions.  Your sermonizing completely discounts your credibility.

>This is a bit like saying, "If you like orange juice, then gulping down
>this nice glass of sulfuric acid really shouldn't present much problem
>to you." It's the old atonalists' mantra: Hardly anyone likes what you
>want them to like, so that means they haven't heard enough of it, are
>closed-minded toward it, etc.  SNORE!

Who's being closed minded? You are.  Again, you are more than welcome to
discount atonal music till the cows come home.  Surely, however, you don't
expect an audience as enlightened as this one to be influenced by such an
undergraduate rant as that, do you?

Kevin Sutton