hollander for the mass, part 3

[jbor]

on 7/15/01 2:35 AM, lorentzen-nicklaus at lorentzen-nicklaus at t-online.de
wrote:

> when i hinted hollander at this parallel, he was, actually, not so delighted.
> 
> unfortunately our correspondence, which went on for several months, never
> reached the point, where we could have communicated on his works in a way
> pleasurable to both participants ...
> 

Yes, though there is much that is interesting in his work, it is apparently
not open to discussion.

Thanks to both yourself and Terrance for very considered and scholarly
analyses of both the strengths and weaknesses of Hollander's
interpretations.

best