Indeed, as Mozart is one of my least favourite composers, he is certainly not here. I am not a big Romantic fan, so same goes for Schubert or Berlioz…same with Tchaikovsky; his music, aside from a few pieces that are sentimental to me, smack of that quality that one could dub “just too much” (at least in my view. Mussorgsky, however, and crazy as this may sound, to me has always had just the right amount of restraint). And, although I have a very dear friend who is a descendent of Antonin Dvorak and would therefore hate to offend him, I must admit that I have always found Dvorak’s work to be extremely tedious, really–more of a chore than a pleasure.

On the other hand, I do indeed love Handel and Haydn; they simply just couldn’t crowd their way in, I’m afraid. As for Mahler, I admire his Second Symphony, but was just never enamoured by the Eighth (which was, arguably, supposed to be his most unbeatable work). Apart from that, I am largely ambivalent to Mahler and certainly bear him no ill regard.

Des Prez and Cage: as for the former, he’s extremely underrated and under-represented; as for Cage, he can be a classroom oddity, I suppose, but he was such an important keystone in post-twelve-tone 20th-century music; he was certainly limited in certain aspects, but one reason why I admire him so much was because of his extreme innovation, and his never-ending quest for such. I don’t know…I’ve always been rather under the impression that Cage is rather fashionable, although my own tastes certainly are not dictated by fashion.

I was very happy to read, despite your disagreement, that you found some scant scrap of redemption in my list–and for that I am quite grateful. Thank you, Tom, for your comments.

All the best,
Jet Dee.

Much as I hate to seem critical, you couldn’t be more wrong; I’m not interested in debating over subjective tastes with people (a practice that I have always disdained as “silly”, myself). Sorry, but there was no bait for you to take in the first place; the “bait” was a creation of your own misconception and/or ambivalence regarding just how fulfilling the practice of list-making can be. Additionally, the curator of this blog and I have long been “list aficionados” and as such I believe that we do not require your own subjective approval or disapproval; we merely are who we are. You probably practice a whole host of activities and habits that I personally might toss off as “silly” or “worthless” to my own tastes, but I would hesitate to make such a pointlessly judgemental and truly unnecessary call; my own subjective opinion of a complete stranger is, really, quite invalid. In any case, it doesn’t really matter; this list was an exercise in love and pedagogy. Things we value most in life are far from silly or worthless, but rather sustaining; I was simply sharing views of music that sustains me, in the event that I can further purvey that love and sustenance to others. The point, if I may state it for the record, is to share beautiful music and recordings that many would otherwise leave undiscovered–not to argue about who deserves the number-one slot, as that is ridiculously competitive and gets accomplishes nothing amongst peers except the perseveration of annoyance. Have you heard von Karajan’s “Metamorphosen”? Have you heard Stokowski’s “Verklärte Nacht”? Have you heard Gould’s Beethoven? No? Well, THAT was the point which I had thought was rather more than obvious, but which, alas, you misidentified as “bait”–that you might go out and listen to it, and perhaps form your own viewpoints from there.

Regards,
Jet Dee.

I would also like to point out–in regards to your wanting of more moderns to satisfy your “20th-century bias”, that the list is also similarly “biased”, if you like–after all, an overwhelming 60% of the composers on this list are men who died in the same century in which we were born. And one can hardly get more “avant-garde” than Schoenberg, or even Cage. So there.

Your friend,
Jet Dee.