Allen Gotthelf's thoughtful posting points to a difficulty unique to music amongst all the arts: the content of music, its meaning, if you will, is at root non-verbal; as a result, when one tries to speak of it in non-technical language, one is forced to resort to analogies which, useful as they may be for a general overview, have limited use when attempting to go deeper. The bottom line is that the more complex aspects of musical thought can only be discussed in terms that are specifically "musical", in a way that is analogous to mathematics or physics. Einstein defined relativity for the layman as follows: "A hair on your head, that's not too much; a hair in your soup, that's too much." This is illuminating up to a point, but it won't send a rocket to the moon. Needless to say, I'm totally in favour of intelligent discussion about any of the arts (or sciences, for that matter) by anyone, be they professionals or amateurs (in the true sense of the word); in fact, I've heard more intelligent discourse on this list than I have on some of the supposedly professional lists of learned societies. However, this does not negate the problem of trying to discuss issues (such as the nature of melody) that are "hard-core" technical matters, using non-technical language. I think what music needs is someone who is to it what Carl Sagan was to science (or Mortimer Adler is to philosophy); i.e., someone who, through the power of his or her writing, is able to bridge this gap between the non-professional and professional without trivializing the content to the point of its not being useful. Any takers?:-) Leslie Kinton, Piano Faculty, The Glenn Gould Professional School, Royal Conservatory of Music, Toronto, Anagnoson and Kinton duo website: http://www.pianoduo.com