"Too many notes, Mozart"

[Mark Kohut]

Right, rich. Just a little counterpoint. 

Sent from my iPad

> On May 9, 2017, at 1:43 PM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> no reason for us to voice our differences on late Pynchons work as we've done that time And again. 
> As someone who has been deeply influenced by his work, I laud that experience and cherish the things I've learned along the way. 
> Pynchon doesn't speak to me as deeply as he once did. It's s bummer getting old. :)
> 
> rich
> 
>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:00 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I remember when THAT was all over the Gravity's Rainbow judgment and still is by many readers. Still is re V., Vineland too, of course and most especially Against the Day.   
>> 
>> All wrong. 
>> 
>> "The peculiar thing is that this charge of "an excess of art", which was used to cudgel Bach in his last years, was one that dogged Mozart throughout his maturity. 
>> 
>> The famous complaint of Emperor Joseph II about The Marriage of Figaro - "too many notes, Mozart" - is generally perceived to be a gaffe by a blockhead. In fact, Joseph was echoing what nearly everybody, including his admirers, said about Mozart: he was so imaginative that he couldn't turn it off, and that made his music at times intense, even demonic. Hence Mozart's bad, or cautionary, reviews: "too strongly spiced"; "impenetrable labyrinths"; "bizarre flights of the soul"; "overloaded and overstuffed". 
>> 
>> Advertisement
>> Still, in the end, the reputation of Mozart in his own time was about what it is today: he was considered an incomparable master. "
>> 
>> 
>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:43 AM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Exactly :)
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 10:40 AM Jochen Stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> They? Them? 
>>>> 
>>>> 2017-05-09 17:35 GMT+02:00 rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>:
>>>>> Maybe if they'd cut 250 pgs minimum from BE I'd agree. 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:32 AM John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I like the idea that historical fiction can be prescient. It's sort of
>>>>>> Pynchon's M.O.
>>>>>> Not that he treats the past as an equation whose result is the
>>>>>> present, and that we could have predicted our now by better analysing
>>>>>> what led to it (which is a lot of historical fiction). It's more like
>>>>>> reverse science fiction. In SF the future is usually a way of thinking
>>>>>> about our current historical moment. In Pynchon the past is no more
>>>>>> real than SF, but is a most useful fiction through which to ken our
>>>>>> circumstances, if the light is right.
>>>>>> Anyway Bleeding Edge has it all.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:53 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> > Mr. Auerbach has latterly suggested that the election of Donald Trump is a
>>>>>> > Decoherence Event ala his mythos  of Pynchon's vision. Just FYI.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Declared BLEEDING EDGE to be prescient, which, when I think about dark
>>>>>> > money, the deep web in BE and Cambridge Analytics, unsolved mysteries, what
>>>>>> > is the truth?,  seems righter than ever.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Sent from my iPad
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On May 8, 2017, at 7:46 PM, Monte Davis <montedavis49 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > One of the best early considerations of BE, fer sure
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> https://twitter.com/AuerbachKeller/status/861623079067365378
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20170509/cdb59954/attachment.html>