David W. Fenton wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2002 at 21:53, David H. Bailey wrote:
>
>
>>Heck, Mozart had to be the soloist to earn most of his
>>commissions! . . .
>
>
> ???
>
> He ran his own concerts as soloist and made money in his first few
> seasons and barely broke even after that. He was, of course, the
> first to ever try to make a living as a piano soloist.
>
>
>>. . . And he died a pauper (I know, I know, he gambled a bit too
>>much) . . .
>
>
> He actually had pretty significant assets, but he had debts that
> exceeded them.
>
> He had a pretty hefty cash flow and just couldn't control expenses.
>
> Had he lived 2 years longer, he would have been set.
>
> It was not entirely uncommon for a musician his age to not yet have a
> permanent position.
>
> []
>
>
>>Anybody who thinks composers in general have had a good life have
>>definitely not done their historical research!
>
>
> The other thing the article leaves out is that there's an awful lot
> of good music that's been left on history's cutting room floor, some
> of it significantly better than the music that's made it into the
> narrative of music history.
>
Yes, indeed! And while often I am at wit's end as musicologists get
into battles over fairly unimportant minutiae (to my mind at least), I
can only get down on my knees and say "Thank you, thank you, thank you!"
for those gems which they have salvaged from the cutting room floor so
that we can gradually expand that music history narrative and get a much
more realistic view of the musical world of the past.
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
