On Jun 1, 2012, at 6:22 AM, joseph berg wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:56 PM, joseph berg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> *On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 5:38 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> * >> >>> *In a message dated 3/12/12 4:39:25 AM, **[email protected]*<[email protected]> >>> * writes: >>> >>> * >>> To show I'm not an undiscriminating pushover for >>> anything Mozartian, I report that, for me, IDOMENEO provided only three >>> hours of >>> tedium. >>> >>> >> Only a person who could post the word ORGASM here could fail to revel in >> the restrained glories of IDOMENEO. >> >> The following is required listening: >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28l_3IC0cLk >> >> > > You call THAT tedium? > I'm afraid I do, Artsy6.. My impression is that Mozart was vamping till ready throughout IDOMENEO's three hours or more, waiting for the inspiration that was with him during his creation of his other operas. If it thrills you, I say, More power to you. But saying to me, "Listen to that!" is like telling me to listen again to Lucky's mono-rant in GODOT. I have, and it just doesn't work for me. I have to believe there are "works of art" that you've seen praised but which leave you cold. I understand your feeling that only a defect in the sensibility of another listener could prevent that listener from loving IDOMENEO. But absolutism like that in matters aesthetic is misplaced, I think.
As for using 'orgasm', I don't think it's a scandalous or disgraceful word, any more than I think 'aesthetic experience' is disgraceful.
