"D. Stephen Heersink" wrote: >...Ever since Andrew Porter left TNY in Tina's bloodbath, I've not been very >fond of their musical reviews. He and Roger Sessions can talk about music >in the most poignant ways, without being professorial or pedantic.... No doubt about it, Porter's reviews for the New Yorker were first class--instructive and readable. But his writing since then, eg in the Times Literary Supplement, has been something else--perhaps even a touch professorial and pedantic. How come the difference? I'm wondering whether it's encroaching age, lack or helpful editing, or just different requirements between the two publications. Denis Fodor Internet:[log in to unmask]