As it is, such remarks are continuing demonstration that you don't have a grasp on what a fact is.[/font]
Wagner was a genius. Liszt was not. That is as undeniable a
fact as they come. I don't have to provide an explanation (even assuming such a thing was possible) because the truth inherent in this statement is self evident to anyone who has even the slighest stretch of artistic sensibility. You however conveniently chose to
avoid denying those "facts", but you still want to object, ever so strongly, to the simple idea that I (I mind you) might have any specific knowledge or insight into so difficoult a subject. You want to accuse me of being
dead wrong, always, without necessarily confirm or deny the truth inherent in my statements. You accuse me of having no grasp on what a fact is, and yet you are yourself prone of making statements of
fact regarding my alleged
ignorance. Pray tell, how do
you know whether i am in fact wrong?
(unless we go on to say that, once Wagner had his go at advancing those harmonic ideas, he retrenched to arguably safer harmonic ground with his next opera)
It needs to be stressed of course that the advancement of harmony is not a great or important artistic goal in and of itself. Brahms made no advancement whatsoever in the field of harmony and he was still a greater artist then Liszt. I hope one day Grieg will come to realize the
truth of this.