Mozart a fraud?

[robnewman]

My dear fellow, again you have some data, but no sense of history. Of course all these people knew each other, did (music) business together. Look a little further and there are dozens other people in that socio-artistic web. It was a small world. Your data however give no indication there was something sinister going on. Actually your little piece gives every indication the clarinet cto and quartet were written by Mozart  -  the Stadtler business. The fact that countless other composers also wrote clarinet pieces doesn't mean they also wrote Mozart's cto. It just means the clarinet (or it's near predecessor) was a hot instrument at the time.

Well, in that case read my book. Since the making of posts on any subject begs an understanding of the true context of Mozart's career, the scale of exaggeration and false attribution which have always featured in it. The documented procurement (even by Mozart's widow) of works to be published in Mozart's name, the case of composers such as Anton Eberl (who twice publicly protested at works appearing in Mozart's name of his own), the affair of the Requiem, the falsification of the story that Figaro was a work by Mozart (when, in fact, it was merely a botched arrangement of a work already existing in German), and countless other examples, only some of which are reflected in the embarrasing and successive versions of the Koechel catalogue. The fact that virtually no symphony of 'Mozart's' prior to 1771 shows any sign of being attributable to Mozart. And so on. This is a catalogue of lies, deceipt and falsification, pawned off to the gullible for 200 years and today dominating the 'Easter Island' of icons, of which Mozart is one. This for control of musicology and of music 'education', so-called.

Which I make no apology in drawing the attention of music lovers to.

Anyway, thanks for reading and for allowing me to post on this here.


Robert Newman

[Herman]

Well, in that case read my book.

It doesn't exist.

[robnewman]

Herman,

If you had bothered to read this thread you would have known that it will be finished in September. By which time you may be able to read this thread, and the book !

Right ?

[knight66]

Well, I have read the 'proof' quite carefully and what it amounts to is that all these composers knew one another, they all sat round the dinner table and Mozart proceeded to steal all the food from their plates. None of them said a word about it. They just starved in silence.

Proximity and the equivalent of brushing past people on the stairs does not amount to some kind of conspiracy.

Let's be referred to the material these lesser known people wrote, that has been recorded, and expand our enjoyment without all the Dan Brown trails of false clues.

Finally, do please stop claiming that we all 'know' or 'acknowledge' as facts aspects of your arguments. This is like trying to subliminally implant an idea as a fact; something that though you argue against it, it is your technique of choice.

Mike

[drogulus]

Well, in that case read my book.

     Thanks, but I'll pass.

     You'd be amazed at the weird things that turn up on the Web when you try to figure out who people are or why it's so hard to find out.

     Yow!! Is this guy pretending to be you?


     http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/mkbPjean9aA

     Then there's this fellow who also thinks he's Rob Newman:

     No Planet B - Part Eight



or, The History of the World Backwards
July 2006
The Anti-Social Movement

A gathering swell of anti-sociability breaks over Britian from the late 1800's to the early 1700's and beyond.

Everybody blames each other for the rise in illness, the shorter lives and why it all went wrong. People leave the cities after arguing with neighbours and go and live in isolated cottages.

But most representative of the AntiSocial Movement is that people are now deliberately affecting or inventing an unintelligible local dialect, so as to discourage conversation and enquiry. Not only do people in different areas have different accents but in the same street.

'Peter, old man, what's going on? You didn't talk like this yesterday.'

''Appen I did, 'appen I's dusna. Ret recky tae ken. Bahoobe! And I'll thank 'ee to caw me Gallamumphrey for now on.'
Crime
Rough Music

'Why are we still devoting huge amounts of resources to ID theft and computer fraud,' asks a Constable Of the Peace, 'when nowadays the crimes people are really concerned about are cony-catchers, bully-cocks and flimpers? They are worried by organised crime on the coaches in the form of bung-nippers rolling the leer, not to mention queer-bit makers with their fletches, queer-cole and fleet notes. It's all a result of technology die-off. What were once high-street spy-cameras are now maypoles.
Samuel Johnson laments decline of the English language

Sir, the English language is in decline. Allow me to quote you a transcript of a conversation from the twenty-first century. People then would think nothing of using as many as twenty similies in a single sentence:

'I was like getting off the bus and he was like on the pavement and I was like 'is he blanking me?' cos if he is that's like 'oh my days!'
1764 Opera

Mozart gives a press conference at which he declares that his new opera will stay true to the key operatic principles: nostalgia for British rock acts of the 1980s! The grand opening of Mozart's new opera is held at La Scala, Milan. In 1764 the curtain rises for the first time on Don Giovanni or Rip It Up And Start Again - Featuring the Music of Orange Juice.

LIGHTS: THEATRICAL

IL COMMENDATORE:
Don Giovanni, a cenar teco
M'invitasti, e son venuto!

DON GIOVANNI:
When I first saw you, something stirred within me,
You were standing sultry in the rain.
If I could have hed you I would have held you,
Rip it up and start again!

Rip it up and start again!
Rip it up and start again!

    Source: http://www.robnewman.com/history8.html

[Holly]

Well, I have read the 'proof' quite carefully and what it amounts to is that all these composers knew one another, they all sat round the dinner table and Mozart proceeded to steal all the food from their plates. None of them said a word about it. They just starved in silence.

It always come back to the same basic questions: why did these various alleged suppliers of music to Mozart agree to do such a thing in the first place, and what documentary evidence exists to show any actual payments made by Mozart or received by any of the supplying composers?  So far as I know, Newman has never been able to answer either of these questions.  He doesn't have any evidence whatsoever about payments made/received, and the best he has ever come up with as to a motive is that the whole plot was inspired and orchestrated by a bunch of dodgy Jesuits, who possibly threatened hell and damnation to any would-be composer who failed to oblige with a nice piece of work on a gratis basis.  That's the best one ever gets.  Not credible is it?

[robnewman]

It always come back to the same basic questions: why did these various alleged suppliers of music to Mozart agree to do such a thing in the first place, and what documentary evidence exists to show any actual payments made by Mozart or received by any of the supplying composers?  So far as I know, Newman has never been able to answer either of these questions.  He doesn't have any evidence whatsoever about payments made/received, and the best he has ever come up with as to a motive is that the whole plot was inspired and orchestrated by a bunch of dodgy Jesuits, who possibly threatened hell and damnation to any would-be composer who failed to oblige with a nice piece of work on a gratis basis.  That's the best one ever gets.  Not credible is it?

It always comes back to the same basic answers. That regardless of how many inconsistencies may be shown to exist in the Mozart fairytale there are always people who simply can't see the wood for the trees. From childhood onwards the holes in the story are so massive, so consistent, so completely at odds with documented reality we can only regret there are people who still believe this stuff. Look, there is not a shred of evidence Mozart composed ANY of the symphonies said to be his before he was 17 years old. None. There is instead a massive amount of evidence he did not. There is again no evidence he wrote the first 7 'Mozart' piano concertos. Because he did NOT. There is NO evidence he even studied music theory, harmony, orchestration and the necessary fundamentals of music, even by the time he was in Italy at the age of 14. When, when, when, will DOCUMENTARY FACTS finally register with you ? And if you still can't accept these plainest facts, from documentary evidence, what hope is there for you to learn anything ? The Mozart story is a story of collusion, of the fraternal manufacture of a Musical Superman, and so riddled with exaggerations and false attributions that only kids actually believe the stuff. The average music professor has never actually studied the subject. He reads textbooks based on other textbooks. He allows the multi million dollar 'industry' to con you. And this is just as true of music history as it is of politics, finance, banking and any other area of human activity. That's the fact. The net result of which is a dumbed down group of people who know less of music and its history than does the average rock and roll enthusiast. Witness the attitude to examining these issues ! We are not here examining a 'genius' but one of the most relentless and ruthless frauds in the entire history of music. A fraud which continued well beyond his childhood and youth. In to his mature Vienna period. And even for years after his death. Aided and abetted by an entire group of composers whose life and careers are virtually unknown to you until your own critics bring the details of them to you in bite sized chunks - for years, and years and years  ! Your candyfloss image of Mozart, 'musical genius' is nothing more than an early exercise in corporate fraud in the cultural realm, sustained until today, by the tourist industry, the chocolate industry, the movie industry and by those who are not only ignorant but the very cause of ignorance.

People do things for different motivations. Some for money. Others for prestige. Others out of warped philosophical or religious convictions. Still others out of a sense of duty and sacrifice to others. But in the case of Mozart the exploitation began with the very person you adore and who you seem unable to criticise in any sensible way, W.A. Mozart.

Thanks for the time

R.E. Newman

[Holly]

The average music professor has never actually studied the subject. He reads textbooks based on other textbooks. He allows the multi million dollar 'industry' to con you. And this is just as true of music history as it is of politics, finance, banking and any other area of human activity. That's the fact.

I thought I would highlight the second of the two sentences above in case people are so bored reading your long-winded replies that they missed this nugget.   You reckon that the general public is just as misinformed about politics, finance, banking and any other area of human activity as it is about Mozart?  Your condition is worse than I feared. 

All this further repetition of your main allegations apart, when are you going to provide some convincing information as to motive, and evidence of payments made?  Please tell us why the various composers agreed to writing music for Mozart and Haydn to pass of as theirs. It's no good simply saying there were various reasons.  What were these reasons exactly, composer by composer?   And tell us if it was all done free of charge, or if you don't know the answer kindly tell us so.

[Guido]

In reply to Guido's question -

/

ANTONIO CASIMIR CARTELLIERI

To confer iconic status on an revered artist or composer has consequences. One of which, over time, is the inevitable distortion and diminishment of the role of his own contemporaries, another the blurring of social, religious and artistic times in which lived and often a lack of appreciation of the interaction between all of these. The great significance of Mozart's musical contemporaries has tended to be diminished, marginalised, or often turned in to cardboard caricatures or props at the expense of the ever expanding myth of the hero himself and have, in still other cases, been suppressed or ignored altogether. A classic case in point is the life and career of the composer Antonio Casimir Cartellieri (1772-1807).

This problem of 'hero status' is not easily resolved. In fact, it's not until it's acknowledged to be a problem we are able to see there's something of an inevitability about the effects of hero worship. Far less appreciated is  that biographical distortion is a side-effect of this ongoing 'canonisation' process. Especially so in the case of Mozart. Since we are, in Mozart's case, dealing with both biography and also with propaganda constructed to support his iconic status in the decades following his early death in December 1791. We are able to detect an underlying cause of biographical corruption in the constructing of a pantheon of great composers of which Mozart is widely believed to be a member. This being a process, we must agree, which can have strange effects which tend, over time, to play tricks on our ability to appreciate reality itself. Some might call this phenomenon 'the fruits of idolatry'. We might compare it to strange, visual effects on the horizon of hot desert, where a mirage can form, obscuring and visibly distorting the object we have in view, detaching it from its true context, so that, in extreme cases, it appears to float in a haze without context and with little prospect of appreciating from where it came nor its true distance from us, the observer. In the case of music history, the  benefits of learning our subject by reference to members of a pantheon of hero composers are real but they may be offset and seriously diminished as a consequence of the existence of a pantheon itself. So the whole notion of 'great composers' can and should be seen as  both a solution but also as a real problem.

ANTONIO CASIMIR CARTELLIERI, THE QUINTET KV581 AND THE CONCERTO KV622 - ATTRIBUTED (BY TRADITION) TO W.A. MOZART

That these two great works (KV581 and KV622) should traditionally be attributed to Mozart and have for 200 years been published in his name should be counterbalanced by appreciating that neither were published in his lifetime. Their eventual publication first occurring years after his death. That is, after 1800, when Andre, publisher at Offenbach is said to have first acquired their autographs together with many others - this after protracted negotiations that lasted almost a decade with Mozart's widow, Constanze. This improbable scenario, together with the fact these autographs have long since disappeared (in circumstances which stretch our credulity to breaking point) may be said to be the rough outline of the history of these two great works from a Mozartean perspective. We might add that the average music lover has little, if any, appreciation of works already existing in the same forms (clarinet quintets and clarinet concertos) composed by Mozart's musical contemporaries. Indeed, a hallmark of 'Mozart research' (whatever that means) being the extent to which he and his musical reputation exists within a context which is minimalist in context, consisting of cardboard cutouts to the drama with which we are all familiar in 'Amadeus' - figures who play only an incidental and largely insignificant token appearance in the unfolding Mozart drama. It's possible to note that dozens of talented composers have fallen victim to the rise of this Mozart myth. Amongst them important composers such as J.B. Vanhal, J.C. Bach, J, Myslivececk, A. Luchesi, G. Paisiello, J. Fiala, A. Salieri, Giovanni Paisiello, H.A. Gelinek, Forster, Theresia von Paradis, Viotti, and a whole host of others, all of whom are known to have interacted with Mozart and all able to be proved of considerable importance in creating the music today attributed to him. These are able to provide a little known context within which the subject of these two pieces can be considered. Amongst which I would like to include and briefly present as a candidate for him being their  true composer Antonio Casimir Cartellieri (1772-1807).

In order to do so briefly I'd like first to call to your attention two events that occurred 18 and 19 years after Mozart's death. Events which, at first, you might think have little if any relevance to this question. But which, I hope, will provide much needed context in attempts to resolve this issue of the determining the composer of both these great works. First being the well known  dedication associated with published versions of Beethoven's 3rd Symphony, the 'Eroica', Op. 55.  A work completed (so we are told) around 1803/4. Now, this famous symphony has long been associated by biographers with Napoleon Bonaparte. But the dedication itself dates from almost 5 years after its completion , first appearing in the London edition of  the full score in early 1809. A dedication to a fallen hero. A testimony, in fact, to an event which had only recently occurred. Not that of the death of Napoleon. But, rather,  the death of little known musical colleague, friend and long time working associate of Beethoven himself, Antonio Casimir Cartellieri.

The second event I'd like to briefly refer to was the first recorded performance given in England in 1810 of 'Mozart's' Clarinet Concerto, this commented on in a London newspaper of the time as being, 'the latest product of that factory of Andre at Offenbach and not, in fact by Mozart at all'.

Now, let it be agreed from the outset that the main composer of both this Quintet and this Concerto were one and the same person. This, stylistically, analytically, seems beyond dispute. Let it further be agreed there exists in Mozart's hand, a short introductory section of this Concerto (a work intended for Basset Horn, but not Clarinet). And let it further be agreed clarinetist Anton Stadler, friend of Mozart, has long been associated with this piece and even with loss of both autographs. (The general belief being that he, Stadler, premiered the work in Prague and elsewhere in Bohemia during the year of  its composition, in 1791. (The same Stadler is also generally credited with having participated in the premiere, years earlier, of the Serenade for 13 Woodwinds, KV361). So association of Stadler with both the Quintet and the Clarinet is not disputed. Nor can it be disputed the short Mozart 'sketch' of this Concerto begs an explanation. Just as does a sketch in Mozart's hand of the 'Paris' symphony (KV297) - a sketch to the finale of that piece seen by various researchers as being a late attempt by Mozart to produce a new version near the end of his life, around 1789  - long, long, after its Paris premiere of 1778.

Which brings us to Cartellieri. A boy who (apparently) ran away from home and is first recorded as being a music student of Antonio Salieri, in Vienna ! Writing there a string quartet (which still survives dedicated to him). And who, after a period with Count Oborsky (associated with Mozart's career) eventually comes to Vienna again and, in 1795, had already written major works. A Cartellieri so talented (and yet so almost completely unknown today) who was rated so highly he shared the first concert ever given by Beethoven in the Austrian capital, in 1795. And so phenomenally gifted in the works performed on that single occasion that he was quickly recruited from Oborsky by Prince Lobkowitz, at whose palaces (in Vienna and later in Bohemia) he was to work for the rest of his short life. The composer of concertos (4 alone for clarinet) and symphonies, chamber music and much else, including two remarkable oratorios, one of them performed to general astonishment in Vienna. Again a symphony in C Minor, this years before that of Beethoven, who was to be very closely associated with him from 1795 onwards. The same Lobkowitz who was a patron to Mozart. The same Lobkowitz who for years after Mozart's death staged early performances of 'Mozart' operas at a specially built theatre on his estates in Bohemia. The same Lobkowitz who was patron of the churches in Prague where many of 'Mozart's' church works were stored after Mozart's death. And a Cartellieri who worked on editing and revising music of the Lobkowitz archives for the rest of his own life - the public acclaim going to Beethoven. That the 'Mozart' concerto is in fact an early work of Cartellieri is further indicated by the amazing skill and depth of Cartellieri's music. A sample of which has already been posted here, the early concerto in G Major for Flute. I dare to say that if you were to listen to quartets, sonatas, sextets, concertos and even symphonies of Cartellieri (these amazingly not known for almost 200 years) you would readily agree that Cartellieri was of huge value to one of Mozart's most famous patrons, Prince Lobkowitz. (In fact, it was at the Palace of Lobkowtiz in 1795 where Beethoven and Cartellieri gave their joint concert in Vienna that year). And it was in to the service of Lobkowitz that Cartellieri's son entered in to musical service after the sudden death of his father, in 1807. (Employed as a music librarian and deputy Kapellmeister. The same place as many Mozart manuscripts were stored).

That Cartellieri is the true composer of the Quintet and also the Concerto becomes more and more likely if you listen to his music. That these two works finally appeared in print in 'Mozart's' name only in the first years of the 19th century is, again, indicator of the fact that much work was done on 'Mozart's' music by the likes of Cartellieri before it ever came to first publication, and this posthumously, for Mozart had of course died in 1791. So the decade of 'negotiations' for sale of 'his' manuscripts is little more than an elaborate ruse. For, in this decade 1791-1801 we witnessed the manufacture of dozens, even hundreds of works today falsely attributed to Mozart.

Finally (since this post must be short) the 4 clarinet concertos of Cartellieri (and the many clarinet quartets) have only recently been recorded for the first time. Created in direct response to demand. Add to this the remarkable fact that 'consultant' for Cartellieri's clarinet works was none other than, yes, the very same Anton Stadler. The Anton Stadler associated, as already said with 'Mozart's' Clarinet Concerto and 'Mozart's' Clarinet Quintet.

The full story of these and other works would require a post of far greater length that I have little time to provide. Suffice to say that, in my considered view, the true composer of both works was not W.A. Mozart, by Antonio Casimir Cartellieri, yet another composer whose name and achievements are today virtually unknown, obscured by the Mozart industry and consigned to the dungeons of our appreciation. But which, I hope, you will at least hear some of before forming a judgement on this issue.

Regards

I'm astonished. I know it's taken you a long time to type this out, but is this it? This isn't even circumstantial evidence. There is absolutely nothing about what you have presented here that looks sinister.

[Holly]

I'm astonished. I know it's taken you a long time to type this out, but is this it? This isn't even circumstantial evidence. There is absolutely nothing about what you have presented here that looks sinister.

I wish I could say the same.  Why do you think he has such a bad reputation for peddling nonsense? I have seen the same thing almost exactly several times previously, and know all his tricks and more or less exactly what to expect when he is asked questions.  In fact he has been slightly better here than on previous "outings" elsewhere where he usually resorts to asking the questioner to justify their belief in Mozart.  The only way to deal with him is to keep plugging away at the same question, and when things get very difficult that's when to expect assistance from a "white knight" who sudenly turns up out of the blue to lend support.  

[Guido]

I wish I could say the same.  Why do you think he has such a bad reputation for peddling nonsense? I have seen the same thing almost exactly several times previously, and know all his tricks and more or less exactly what to expect when he is asked questions.  In fact he has been slightly better here than on previous "outings" elsewhere where he usually resorts to asking the questioner to justify their belief in Mozart.  The only way to deal with him is to keep plugging away at the same question, and when things get very difficult that's when to expect assistance from a "white knight" who sudenly turns up out of the blue to lend support.  

Oh no, you misunderstand me. I was talking about his evidence that Mozart's clarinet works were not in fact written by him.

There's not much to fear if this is the worst he can do!!! Sort of comically bad evidence!

[Guido]

The only way to deal with him is to keep plugging away at the same question, and when things get very difficult that's when to expect assistance from a "white knight" who sudenly turns up out of the blue to lend support.  

Why bother?

[robnewman]

I'm astonished. I know it's taken you a long time to type this out, but is this it? This isn't even circumstantial evidence. There is absolutely nothing about what you have presented here that looks sinister.

OK, so it has to look 'sinister' before you accept it, right ? What exactly do you want ?  

Before I posted this article (perhaps you forget ?) you were asked if you had actually listened to any clarinet music from the time of Mozart. You spoke vaguely about having heard some. But no details were provided of whose music you had actually heard. I assume this has not changed since last evening. Which means, I believe, you cannot tell us anything about this subject, other than the belief that you have heard some - by composers unknown to you. This is your own state of knowledge on this issue.

And now, because I have not presented any 'sinister' information, it's not accepted by you. The fact that you didn't even know of Cartellieri seems to have been, well, completely ignored by you.

Let me leave it here - I think it's fair to say your lack of any knowledge, even basic knowledge, on the music and musicians of Mozart's own time is the most 'sinister' thing of this entire thread. And, as to the subject of clarinet music of Mozart's time - the same applies. And you want somebody to not only educate you on things you know nothing about but also convince you that what you believe is wrong ? And what, exactly, DO you believe on the clarinet music of Mozart's time if you don't know anything about the whole subject in the first place ?   LOL !!!

[robnewman]

I wish I could say the same.  Why do you think he has such a bad reputation for peddling nonsense? I have seen the same thing almost exactly several times previously, and know all his tricks and more or less exactly what to expect when he is asked questions.  In fact he has been slightly better here than on previous "outings" elsewhere where he usually resorts to asking the questioner to justify their belief in Mozart.  The only way to deal with him is to keep plugging away at the same question, and when things get very difficult that's when to expect assistance from a "white knight" who sudenly turns up out of the blue to lend support.  

Quote of the week from Holly -

'The only way to deal with Newman is to keep plugging away at the same question, and when things get very difficult that's when to expect assistance from a 'white knight' who suddenly turns up out of the blue to lend support'.

Well, it seems Holly, that this knight has not appeared to save you from repeating once again the following questions -

1. Can you give us any evidence a single symphony of 'Mozart' written during his childhood is actually by him ?
2. Can you, Holly, give us any evidence of Mozart going to school during his entire childhood and youth ?
3. Can you Holly, give us any evidence of Mozart spending any time in detailed study of orchestration, composition, harmony under any recognised teacher of these subjects during his entire childhood, youth or adulthood ?

and finally -

4. Can you, Holly, at the 5th time of asking, tell us on what grounds you believe the musical works attributed to Mozart are free from the most fantastic exaggeration and falsehood in the entire history of western music ?

Maybe THIS time we will finally get an answer ?

Earth calling Holly - Earth Calling Holly !!!

[Herman]

Asking questions 'stead of providing evidence.

One doesn't have to be familiar with C's music. Even if it were terrific, that doesn't mean he also wrote Mozart's terrific music.

[robnewman]

Asking questions 'stead of providing evidence.

One doesn't have to be familiar with C's music. Even if it were terrific, that doesn't mean he also wrote Mozart's terrific music.

I never said it does prove it. But one thing is sure Herman. The man who writes terrific music is a writer of terrific music. Right ? Which sort of narrows down the field, right ? Add this fact to your study of the subject. Learn a little of Cartellieri and his career. Study the various links already given.......and......who knows......you might actually learn something. Which is the point of this thread. Not least that there were MAJOR composers around you've never even heard of. One of which wrote clarinet music, concertos etc. Associated with Anton Stadler, the very man associated with these same two works. Patronised by a Mozart patron. etc etc etc.

Now I can't teach you how to suck eggs, for sure. But boy, I'm trying hard !! Hope that doesn't offend you !

[jhar26]

Quote of the week from Holly -

'The only way to deal with Newman is to keep plugging away at the same question, and when things get very difficult that's when to expect assistance from a 'white knight' who suddenly turns up out of the blue to lend support'.

Well, it seems Holly, that this knight has not appeared to save you from repeating once again the following questions -

1. Can you give us any evidence a single symphony of 'Mozart' written during his childhood is actually by him ?
2. Can you, Holly, give us any evidence of Mozart going to school during his entire childhood and youth ?
3. Can you Holly, give us any evidence of Mozart spending any time in detailed study of orchestration, composition, harmony under any recognised teacher of these subjects during his entire childhood, youth or adulthood ?

and finally -

4. Can you, Holly, at the 5th time of asking, tell us on what grounds you believe the musical works attributed to Mozart are free from the most fantastic exaggeration and falsehood in the entire history of western music ?

Maybe THIS time we will finally get an answer ?

Earth calling Holly - Earth Calling Holly !!!

It isn't up to Holly or anyone else here to provide evidence that Mozart wrote the music credited to him - it's up to you to prove that he didn't.

[robnewman]

It isn't up to Holly or anyone else here to provide evidence that Mozart wrote the music credited to him - it's up to you to prove that he didn't.

Really ? And I thought you had all the evidence ?  Must have been mistaken ! You don't have any, do you ?

A simple trip down 'sensible lane' tells us we can't prove a negative, only a positive. Now, prove to us (if you can) that Mozart did these things.

- SILENCE - PICTURE BREAKS UP - COMMERCIAL BREAK - LOL !!  WHAT'S NEW

Private Message - Rustling of Papers - Nervous Laughs - Telephone Rings - 'Will somebody please come to the rescue of Mozart, this is getting embarrasing' -  

//

[Brian]

Private Message - Rustling of Papers - Telephone Rings - 'Will somebody please come to the rescue of Mozart, this is getting embarrasing' - 

Okay.

Here is PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE that Mozart was present at the premiere of his opera Don Giovanni:

[robnewman]

Okay.

Here is PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE that Mozart was present at the premiere of his opera Don Giovanni:

Well that's convinced me, for sure !!!!  Must be correct Brian. The trailer of 'Amadeus' tells us 'Everything you've heard is true' !!! So thank you ! Thank you for rescuing our Mozart from that horrible Robert Newman. Our 'genius' is safe again from such nasty criticism. Please accept, with the grateful compliments of the educated world an Oscar, or, well, a Nobel Prize, or, sorry, membership of the Order of the Golden Spur - the same as was given to Mozart during his visit to Rome. Why, your chest must swell with pride !!!!