One of our Australian counsins, Richard Pennycuick, assumes Lebrecht is:

>[Lebrecht is] a household name in the US [and] a non-event elsewhere.
>
>...It's not clear just who the man is, but it seems that his opinions are,
>for the most part, passionately derided...
>
>Obviously, he's not worth too much time for a biography but a quick
>rundown would be interesting.  A web page would be, too.

Not everything "bad" comes out of America.  Lebrecht is music critic for
the London Telegraph and writes for the Times of London as well as zillions
of other publications.

Despite the cold welcome "Who Killed Classical Music?" got here most of the
reviews of it surprisingly are quite favorable.  Even the New York Times
praised it.  It even amazed me that his facts were not seriously challenged
even by these mainstream publications.  Their general reaction was "it is
obvious to everyone."

The major criticism is that he offers no solution.  But those who raise
this point were quick to acknowledge that one usually doesn't expect that
of critics.

If you don't believe me, here's all you'll ever want to know about Lebrecht
and the uproar over this book, first published in Britain two years ago
under the title "When the Music Stops." He is also the author of "The
Maestro Myth" (1991), on the same general beef.

In my view, MPR is by far the most exciting site because it is the only
one that really attacks Lebrecht's perspective with verve and excitement
that almost convinces me.  Bobby McFerrin as conductor of the St.  Paul
Chamber Orchestra is terrific in his description of how excited he is to
make Beethoven's Seventh "rock and roll," only to be told by a musician
that his excitement is inappropriate.  I don't think Lebrecht meant that
as an indication of the decline and fall of classical music.  But if he
did, then he is dead wrong.  It IS dying, but not for that reason.  I
emailed a comment to a friend on why I thought it is near dead.

   "It takes talent approaching genius to drain all life out of Bach's
   Brandenburg Concerti.  But such luminaries as flautist Ransom Wilson,
   oboist Joseph Robinson, and string-players Ani Kavafian and Fred
   Sherry and their cohorts succeeded admirably last Thursday evening
   in the next-to-last concert of this year's Mostly Mozart Festival.

   John Gibbons, harpsichord, put on a display of how Bach could be
   adapted to the sewing machine.  A elderly man said "it reminded me
   of Larry Adler doing such gymnastics on the harmonica, but without
   the bounce that brought him and his audiences to their feet.  Gibbons
   fell on his back.  But his fingers continued to do the walking.  His
   fingers left behind, he was rushed to a HIP surgeon, who saved what
   life he had without modern anesthesia."

There wasn't a bobbing head in the audience.  But they applauded
mechanically in tune with the playing.  They didn't realize they had
witnessed a murder and been robbed of forty dollars to boot.  It was a
younger-than-usual audience.  I winced at the thought that some agreed to
give Bach a try on the promise that they would hear that Bach isn't stuffy;
that, in fact, he swings.  Now thanks to our premiere music school, they
are probably lost to classical music forever.

Salon Magazine Lebrecht Essay and Debate Between Its Classical and Pop
Critic on Classical Music's Future

World Paper, December 1997, Mullins Review William Mullins is a former
editor with the London-based Debrett's Peerage.  He writes on artistic
topics from Cambridge, Massachusetts where World Paper is located.

This really requires a healthy debate unlike the other provocations I
posted.  Here's hoping all sides fire their slings and arrows.  I make no
apology for provocation.  That's what excites McFerrin about Beethoven's
Seventh.  It is provocative.

Andrew E. Carlan
Thank God they didn't play Nielsen