Jon Gallant ([log in to unmask]) wrote:

>Permit me to enter this thread with a suggestion.  I don't know whether
>Mahler should be viewed as "overrated" or not, but I would designate him
>(perhaps in a dead heat with Wagner) as "most overstated".  By this, I
>refer the simple ratio of what is achieved to what is employed.  Consider
>the following comparison of two works, and the means they employ.

All you have compared is the resources, not what is done with them.

And frankly I think Mahler would have seen through Speilberg's shallow
flash in about 10 seconds.

Deryk Barker
[log in to unmask]