There seems to be no middle ground in the `Moses & Aron' controversy (love it or hate it), but I am staking out an agnostic position. I just don't know if it's `good' or `bad.' I know only that I doesn't speak to me, and that it's entirely possible that those who champion it (including those poor musicians) know something I don't know. I saw (and was irked by) the film and I listened to the darn thing a couple of times, went pretty much through the broadcast -- and nada. My gut (which is a third ear for me) tells me that it's not for me. Perhaps I wouldn't have been so wishy-washy in the past, but -- unlike the rest of humanity -- I had some experiences of not `getting' great works the first time. (Blush: `Elektra' went right by me at age 10; worse: I failed to appreciate Nielsen when I first heard him, even though I was no longer a teenager.) Of course, it can the reverse situation and I can appreciate something that's too good for the great unwashed. Here too I have mellowed a great deal. Just this week, I was very impressed by Kurt Rohde's new work, `Minerva's Pools,' but it fell on the admittedly deaf ears when Josh Kosman wrote in the SF Chronicle: `I'm happy to take on faith the skill of Rohde's creations; I can only say that he speaks a musical language that is as incomprehensible to me as Urdu or Basque. I listened carefully to "Minerva's Pools," in what seemed a precise and cogent rendition led by conductor George Thomson (a rare departure from the group's no-baton policy), without catching the slightest glimmer of what the piece was about.' Rather than stomp on my esteemed colleague, I congratulated him on acknowledging his role as the Listener. While it would be impractical (and annoying) to preface every review by saying `This is what *I* hear,' it doesn't hurt to mention that from time to time -- and `Moses und Aron' may be a good candidate. Janos Gereben/SF [log in to unmask]