Chris Bonds replies to me:

>>Yeah, but then you wind up with the Max Reger Syndrome, in which
>>craftsmanship - and, by the way, a specific kind of craftsmanship, strongly
>>related to contrapuntal skill and Germanic symphonic methods and aesthetic
>>notions of form - becomes sine qua non.  ...
>
>I agree with you to an extent.  I have never had the desire to get to know
>Reger's music (and am suspicious of those who do).

I didn't mean to single Reger out that way.  He wrote some beautiful music,
as far as I'm concerned.  His chamber music for clarinet is wonderful as is
his choral setting of "O Haupt voll Blut und Wunden."

>I think that because if you take the case of a hypothetical great soul
>whose music moves many people deeply, so deeply they can overlook the
>deficiencies in craft, one of 2 things will happen.  Either the moved
>listener has a blind spot about craftsmanship in music, or else eventually
>the flaws in workmanship will become more and more noticeable with repeated
>hearings until it's quite impossible to be moved anymore.  For me it is
>ultimately craft that allows for further discoveries with repeated
>hearings.  There's nothing to say that these discoveries won't be emotional
>or even spiritual in nature.

It's certainly true of a lot of music, but not all.  After all, there are
very learned people who find Brahms deficient, but it probably doesn't
affect most of them in their ability to enjoy Brahms.  As Aaron Copland
remarked, "I only really listen to the good parts of Liszt."

>>"Does the work move me" is of course more obviously subjective, but it does
>>take care of the ends first.
>
>Only if one agrees that to be moved (I'm assuming emotionally) is the
>supreme end of music.

I wouldn't limit "move" to "emotionally move."

>And why isn't it possible to be moved by supreme craftsmanship? Music
>awareness/cognition/appreciation/understanding exists on many levels--an
>emotional high being only one of them.  There are many people who are quite
>moved by the beauty of a mathematical proof.  Who's to say this isn't as
>much a validation of our humanity as deep emotional response to music?

I agree.  I've never sympathized much with the notion of the head-heart
split.  We can analyze our emotions and be passionate about ideas, after
all.  I merely suggest that there are absolutely stupendous feats of
musical craftsmanship that have produced damned unengaging music, at any
level.  Who was the 19th-century guy who wrote three oratorios, designed
to be performed separately or simultaneously? He was probably engaged in
contrapuntal feats that make Bach's efforts seem positively puny, but who
cares?

Steve Schwartz