Mike Leghorn wrote:

>I have a question: what is the big deal about Bach's Mass in B minor?
>Why (according to the liner notes in my Eliot Gardiner recording) in
>1817 did Swiss critic Hans-Georg Nageli acclaim the piece as the "greatest
>work of music of all ages and of all peoples"?  (I doubt that he knew
>the music of "all peoples".) I can't seem to get into this piece.  I
>find it boring.  Is my recording faulty?  Should I get my hearing checked?

My husband used to own a copy of this recording.  I say used to because
some years back I listened to it and was deeply disappointed, feeling
that the performance totally lacked the forward drive and sense of
direction that I find characteristic of Bach's music.  How could such a
distinguished lineup of performers go so badly wrong?  My husband (-to-be
in those days) said that he'd felt the same thing about this recording
and after a while I replaced with the Herreweghe one, which I like much
more although it still isn't the ideal B minor mass I have in my head.
I know other people feel the same about the Gardiner as we did, others
esteem it highly.  So I suggest you at least try listening to another
recording before dismissing the work.

Having said this, no piece of music is above criticism and I still find
the 'Quoniam tu solus Sanctus' aria pretty routine, albeit by Bach's
high standards.

We can't prove now that Bach held the faith that he appeared to believe
in, unlikely though it may be that he didn't.  And even if some of us
may feel that we share it, no one now can have a totally 18th-century
world view, unaffected by developments since.

Virginia Knight
(who is not sure how many crimes she might have committed without music)