Interesting article on The Economist webpage about the composer.  (I'm not
sending a link because I am confused about what Dave wants us to do or not
to do about this.) [What an odd way to bitch about something.  I see no
confusion.  But most people refuse to understand that links to news sites
are often personal (so that won't work for others) or they are temporary.
What use is such a thing? I'm also afraid this whole fasciation with the
facile and trite writing we find in newspapers, but that's another topic.
-Dave] Instead I will cite a few points I found particularly
pertinent--especially in view of some recent threads here.  [And isn't
that about a thousand times more interesting than just a link? -Dave]

1.  Notified he had won a $350,000 prize he responded almost glumly voicing
the concern that:  "Artists who become famous are no good because they have
no time to be good." It seems to me this would make an interesting thread
along the lines, but more serious than, the one about what classical
musicians listen to for relaxation.

2.  Quotas against Jews kept him from pursuing science as he wanted to.
Today, as a composer, he claims that "I am not a musician, I am a
scientist." Later in conversation he is quoted as saying:  "I create
neither for an audience nor for myself.  I create for solutions."

Ed