Re: La Marioneta Revised

[Andante]

Well, you could apologize.  Why should Schoenberg still be treated as a pariah?  He wrote some great books on composition that any aspiring composer, no matter what style they want to write in, can learn from.

Thinking that he only taught students to write in his own style is more of the same ignorance that is often spread about him.

I apologize to Mark for derailing his thread.  It was impolite of me.

Now now Mahler man don't go looking for trouble, I don't care one hoot, and was not referring to books he has written, it was a bit of banter with Mark not you.
If you took offence its your problem so no apology.

[Mahlerian]

Now now Mahler man don't go looking for trouble, I don't care one hoot, and was not referring to books he has written, it was a bit of banter with Mark not you.

Actually, that was exactly the thing under discussion.

Clearly you did care enough to say "Oh no," and you thought this was in some way adding to this conversation.

[MarkMcD]

Good morning chaps,

Andante, sadly my teacher died about 30 years ago so unless I get on the ouija board, that's a no go 

Cato, joining this forum and submitting some of my work for inspection was one of the methods I wanted to employ in my learning, and people have been kind enough to give me pointers, for which I am very grateful.  I will ask questions in the future I'm sure, so be prepared 

Mahlerian, Thanks for your suggestions, I do appreciate your insights and will try to use them in further revisions and future work.  I know I am a novice at this, and that is why I really do appreciate the critique as much as the folks telling me they enjoyed the piece.  P.s. I don't mind the hijacking, its entertaining at least, probably not for you, but perhaps this could be a topic for a new thread, it seems to be a bone of contention that might produce some interesting points of view.

Best regards
Mark

[Karl Henning]

Great attitude!

[Andante]

Actually, that was exactly the thing under discussion.

Clearly you did care enough to say "Oh no," and you thought this was in some way adding to this conversation.

You say don't want to derail this thread but that is exactly what you are doing by deliberately misinterpreting my comment "Oh no not Schoenberg.........please"
I have explained this to you but you want to make a meal of it, well I don't and suggest that we put an end to this childish exchange.

[Mahlerian]

You say don't want to derail this thread but that is exactly what you are doing by deliberately misinterpreting my comment "Oh no not Schoenberg.........please"
I have explained this to you but you want to make a meal of it, well I don't and suggest that we put an end to this childish exchange.

I did not and would never deliberately misinterpret your comment.  If you wanted to drop in a comment about some other aspect of Schoenberg other than the one that was specifically under discussion, you could have indicated this.  I merely assumed that your comment was about the same topic as what it was responding to.

[Andante]

For goodness sake it was not a discussion when I made the comment!
Enough Mahler Boy enough. Let it go.

[Mahlerian]

For goodness sake it was not a discussion when I made the comment!

The only thing mentioned had been a book by Schoenberg:


Your comment was in relation to that from my perspective (because it was the absolute only thing about Schoenberg relevant to this discussion), and I tried to explain that contrary to what you might think, it's actually a really traditionally-oriented text.

[Andante]

The only thing mentioned had been a book by Schoenberg:
Your comment was in relation to that from my perspective (because it was the absolute only thing about Schoenberg relevant to this discussion), and I tried to explain that contrary to what you might think, it's actually a really traditionally-oriented text.