Donald Satz <[log in to unmask]>:

>Mike Leghorn writes:
>
>>I consider my ears to be the judge.
>
>Mike has garnered a lot of flak for the above statement and others he has
>written concerning his premise that the Beethoven Eroica Symphony has a
>musical theme which Beethoven might have known from the Mozart overture.

That's not surprising.  Your ears may be a good judge of the similarity
between two melodies, but they hardly can judge whether this similarity is
a borrowing or a casualty.

>What leads to me enter the fray is the distinction that has been posted
>about the relative merit of the listening experience versus what we can
>find in literary reference works, biographies, etc.

I don't think that anybody wanted to underestimate listening experience.

>I often disagree with Mike's views, but I feel sympatico with him
>concerning the trust that a person places in his/her ears.

I haven't known a single person who don't trust his ears (for good or bad).

>I trust my ears and body language much more than I trust what I read.
>Folks write all kinds of dribble and self-serving statements, and that
>often includes people writing about themselves.  Well, I said my views
>might be skewed.

Until this point at your original post, you haven't done anything but
writing about yourself.  Why should I distrust what I've read?.  I don't
think I would get a different impression of your ideas in a "tete a tete"
conversation.

>Scenario: A guy in Beethoven's time takes a business trip and happens to
>hear some music which is the overture in question.  A few days later, the
>gentleman is in Beethoven's immediate vicinity, humming a tune from the
>overture.  Beethoven hears it and continues going about his business, not
>giving the tune any concious thought.

Hmm, sounds good, but...wasn't he partially deaf at those times?

>It seems to me that Mike has been challenged to provide evidence, beyond
>what he hears, to support his premise.  Come on folks!  This isn't the
>academic circuit.

No, this is a discussion list, and what I want is, precisely, discussion.
Otherwise, I have no other choice than writing "Mike is right, perhaps, who
knows?".  Besides, I think that Mike was challenged to provide evidence to
support a premise that is beyond what anybody can heard.  The similarity
actually exists, and it's very remarkable, but your ears hardly can tell
you anything about the origins of that similarity.

>Some might say that it's Mike's responsibility to come up with good
>evidence; others don't need to debunk his premise.  But again, this isn't
>the classroom or a PHD dissertation, just good(?)discussion back and forth.

How can we build a discussion without arguments?.  On what are we going to
discuss?.

>Speaking of similarities in music, I just thought of a Kuhlau piano
>concerto I heard which had a musical theme that I'd call quite a match with
>a theme from one of the Beethoven piano concertos.  Can't prove anything,
>but the time frames and logistics are resonable for a possible borrowing.

Written in the way you did, your statement may be subject of diverse
opinions.  Written in this way:  "B took the theme from K", it may be
likely blank of flak.

>I borrow all types of ideas from others, but usually end up
>wishing I hadn't.

Why?. Have they sued you?:-)

Pablo Massa
[log in to unmask]