Janos Gereben points us to Lebrecht's latest tirade -- against Mozart, of all people. I admit I'm not Mozart's biggest fan, but -- my goodness! -- not even I would gobsmack him with this: Mozart is a menace to musical progress, a relic of rituals that were losing relevance in his own time and are meaningless to ours. Beyond a superficial beauty and structural certainty, Mozart has nothing to give to mind or spirit in the 21st century. Let him rest. Ignore the commercial onslaught. Play the Leningrad Symphony. Listen to music that matters. In its breathtaking certainty, it reminds me of Samuel Butler's little monograph "Bach vs. Handel" (Butler decided, decisively, in favor of Handel). I mean, this is cranksmanship of the first order. Notice how vague it all is. Notice also that Lebrecht's identification of music exclusively with social rituals (elsewhere in the article) makes it impossible for *any* composer born in a time different from ours to legitimately claim us. It reminds me once again of the dreary Relevance argument of the Sixties. Weak as the argument is with linguistic and representational art, it's even weaker with an art as abstract as music. The crude version of Lebrecht's argument is that your parents are stupider than you. Steve Schwartz