Allen Gotthelf's thoughtful posting points to a difficulty unique to
music amongst all the arts:  the content of music, its meaning, if you
will, is at root non-verbal; as a result, when one tries to speak of it in
non-technical language, one is forced to resort to analogies which, useful
as they may be for a general overview, have limited use when attempting to
go deeper.

The bottom line is that the more complex aspects of musical thought can
only be discussed in terms that are specifically "musical", in a way that
is analogous to mathematics or physics.  Einstein defined relativity for
the layman as follows:  "A hair on your head, that's not too much; a hair
in your soup, that's too much." This is illuminating up to a point, but it
won't send a rocket to the moon.

Needless to say, I'm totally in favour of intelligent discussion about any
of the arts (or sciences, for that matter) by anyone, be they professionals
or amateurs (in the true sense of the word); in fact, I've heard more
intelligent discourse on this list than I have on some of the supposedly
professional lists of learned societies.  However, this does not negate the
problem of trying to discuss issues (such as the nature of melody) that are
"hard-core" technical matters, using non-technical language.

I think what music needs is someone who is to it what Carl Sagan was to
science (or Mortimer Adler is to philosophy); i.e., someone who, through
the power of his or her writing, is able to bridge this gap between the
non-professional and professional without trivializing the content to the
point of its not being useful.  Any takers?:-)

Leslie Kinton,
Piano Faculty, The Glenn Gould Professional School,
Royal Conservatory of Music, Toronto,
Anagnoson and Kinton duo website: http://www.pianoduo.com