Robert Peters writes in response to Mats Norrman:

>>If the man now sometimes was antisemit, why need to knead it over and
>>over again?  I think to be doomed to be the worlds spitjar for ever is
>a rather hard punishment.
>
>Being regarded as one of the greatest composers of all times and having
>your own annual (exclusive!) Festival can hardly be called "being the
>world's spitjar".

Evidently, to some of Wagner's advocates, being the supreme composer of
German opera is not sufficient.  They want more!  - maybe legendary status
for his poetry and for the tongues to stop wagging about Wagner's less
desireable traits.  Some day they may get what they want, but I won't be
supporting their efforts.

I really don't understand the premise that "sometimes" Wagner was
antisemitic/bigoted.  To me, a person either is one or isn't; it's not a
condition that goes away and comes back like a hangnail.  Also, I've been
reading on the list that many folks back then were not enamored of Jewish
people.  I agree with that premise, but most antisemitic individuals do
not have their views on the subject published and available for posterity.
That was not too smart on Wagner's part.

Although this subject is getting old, I keep noticing a tendency for a
couple of list members to continue saluting Wagner, and in more than just
musical terms.  Is it not good enough to acknowledge Wagner's supreme
musical gifts and leave it at that? Does Satoshi really think that he can
raise Wagner to "deity" level and have all the troops rally around the
cause? My personal opinion is that Satoshi's view of Wagner only results
in a more negative view on the part of others, most of whom would normally
never be thinking of the man at all except for his music.  When it comes
to Wagner, the less said the better (nonmusical areas).

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]