In reply to what Don Satz and Steve Schwartz wrote (being too lengthy
to quote):

I will probably digress from the initial point.  Joseph's opinion about
John Cage seems to coincide with mine and, starting this thread, I was
actually expecting a better developed idea of what I wanted to say.  I
think that people who claim to love Cage's music must deliberately or
unconsciously force themselves to believe they really feel the affection.
A trace of snobism can be observed here.  In every kind of modern art
(especially in painting!) there are charismatic personalities to be adored
by the formula of "a connoisseur has told me it's good so it must be good".
Authoritative teachers can almost hypnotically persuade their students that
those vague and ugly blobs of paint on linen are deep and meaningful.  So
a person who's looking with concealed disdain upon those who do not like
modern art, might've been caught in the abovementioned trap before.

>It was only later in his life that he started to 'think' about
>what he was writing, and put what he meant into his music.

It's always interesting to observe people trying to criticize Mozart.  Why
do they choose this composer? "The most overrated composer" is a frequent
label.  I'd be really glad if someone explained to me why it's so.

>If he'd lived another 20 years or so he'd probably have become
>the greatest composer ever.

Superlatives in a text about music never appealed to me.  In the above
sentence Joseph states that Mozart "is not number one".  Maybe he regards
Beethoven as number one, maybe other great composer.  "The best composer",
"the greatest ever", "number one", "second-best composer of the romantic
era"...  Value of music shouldn't be measured in numbers.  It's not a sport
and there can be no world records.

Juozas Rimas