1. Ned Rorem, Knowing When to Stop (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994), 20.

2. E. M. Forster, “The Raison d'etre of Criticism in the Arts,” in Music and Criticism: A Symposium, ed. Richard F. French (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1948), 14.

3. Charles Jencks, The Language of Post-Modern Architecture, 4th ed.(New York: Rizzoli, 1984), 44.

1. Hannah Arendt, “Society and Culture,” in Culture for the Millions? Mass Media in Modern Society, ed. Norman Jacobs (Princeton: D. Van Nostrand, 1961), 46.

2. The lecture was called “The Irrational Element in Poetry” and waspublished much later in Opus Posthumous: Poems, Plays, Prose by Wallace Stevens, ed. Samuel French Morse (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957), quotation on 225. It was the first lecture on poetry he ever gave. My brief recollection of the occasion is published in an oral biography by Peter Brazeau, Partsof a World: Wallace Stevens Remembered (New York: Random House, 1977), 162–65.

3. See Arthur Berger, Aaron Copland (New York: Oxford University Press, 1953); rpt., with introduction by Leonard Burkat (New York: Da Capo Press, 1990).

4. Aaron Copland and Vivian Perils, Copland sincehi 1943 (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1989), 181–203.

5. Things have not noticeably changed in matters of this nature. The Philadelphia Orchestra was scheduled to do Milton Babbitt's Transfigured Notes atthe weekly subscription concerts starting 7 December 1989. The players had

6. In the twenties there was Gebrauchsmusik, “music for use,” a movementwith Paul Hindemith as its most celebrated exponent, which was supposed tobe a reaction against music that was stigmatized as being of the “art for art'ssake” variety. It was on a less sophisticated level than the Copland. I remembera concert in Harvard's Sanders Theatre led by Hindemith himself at whichthere was a handout with a simple tune for the audience to sing along at a givenpoint in the proceedings. It was in the thirties, but I do not have a record of the date. The only thing I recall of the event is that we were given the tune and invited to join in.

7. Berger, Aaron Copland, 27.

8. Berger, “Copland's Piano Sonata,” Partisan Reviewhi 10, no. 2 (March-April, 1943): 187.

9. Aaron Copland to Arthur Berger, Hollywood, 10 April 1943, publishedin Letters of Composers: An Anthology, 1903–1945, ed. Gertrude Norman(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1946), 403.

10. Henry James, preface to The Wings of the Dovehi (Modern Library, 1930), xxvii-xxviii.

11. Norman Schlenoff, Art in the Modern Worldhi (New York: Bantam Books, 1965), 177.

12. Judith Tick, Ruth Crawford Seeger: A Composer's Search for American Music (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 192.

13. Virgil Thomson, American Music since 1910 (New York: Holt, Rine-hart, and Winston, 1971), 7.

1. During part of the period that this book covers, the New York Philharmonic was known as the Philharmonic-Symphony Society of New York—areflection of its merger with Damrosch's Symphony Society. “New York Phil-harmonic” will be used here whether the event referred to was recent or early.

2. Edmund Wilson, A Piece of My Mind: Reflections at Sixtyhi (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Cudahy, 1956), 35.

3. See Beth E. Levy, “How Roy Harris Became Western,” American Music 19, no. 2 (summer 2001): 131–67.

4. Joseph Horowitz, “Yes, Virgil, There Were Composers,” New York Times, 28 July 1998.

5. Roy Harris, “Problems of American Composers,” in American Composers on American Music: A Symposium, ed. Henry Cowell (New York: F. Ungar, 1962), 151.

6. “The Rhythmic Basis of American Music,” in Elliott Carter: Collected Essays and Lectures, 1937–1995, ed. Jonathan W. Bernard (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1997), 58.

7. Aaron Copland, Music and Imaginationhi (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952), 100.

8. Aaron Copland, “Composer from Brooklyn,” in Copland, The New Music: 1900–1960 (New York: McGraw Hill, 1941; rev. and enlarged ed., New York: W. W. Norton, 1968), 159. (Quote from revised edition.)

9. Wilfrid Mellers, Music in a New Found Land (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1964; rev. ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), 92, 100.

10. Wilfrid Mellers, “American Music: An English Perspective,” Kenyan Review 5 (summer 1943): 370–71.

11. Peter Evans, “The Thematic Technique of Copland's Recent Works,” Tempo (spring-summer 1959): 5.

12. Alfred Kazin, “The Stillness of Light in August,” in Twelve Original Essays on Great American Novels, ed. Charles Shapiro (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1958), 280.

13. See Stuart Feder, “The Veneration of Boyhood,” Annual of Psychoanalysis 9 (1981): 265–316.

14. Henry Cowell and Sidney Cowell, Charles Ives and His Music (New York: Oxford University Press, 1955), no; (rpt. New York: Da Capo Press, 1983).

15. Ibid., 102.

16. Berger, “The Young Composers Group,” Trend (April-May-June 1933):26–28.

17. Aaron Copland and Vivian Perils, Copland: 1900–1942 (New York: St. Martin's/Marek, 1984), 201. The review from which the sentence was quotedwas headed “Yaddo Music Festival” and appeared with my initials (A. V B.) inthe New York Daily Mirror, 3 May 1933.

18. Cowell and Cowell, Charles Ives, no.

19. Berger, “The Songs of Charles Ives,” Musical Mercury i, no. 4 (October-November 1934), 97.

20. My good friend Bernard Herrmann, destined to be one of Hollywood'smost accomplished composers later on, was the person who persuaded Kalmusto undertake publication of the magazine. But Benny had not the slightest ideahow to start it or even to write for it. So, in view of my experience on the Mirror he enlisted my help and made me coeditor. The whole venture seemedglamorous to him until he realized how much work was involved, and the thirdissue consequently had no Bernard Herrmann on the masthead but listed meas editor with an associate editor by the name of Dorothy Veinus. Benny hadrapidly tired of it.

21. As Joseph Kerman has pointed out: “Seeger and Ives (twelve years hissenior) both came from solid New England families who sent them not to conservatories but to the right colleges, where the traditional, European-basedmusic instruction was to the taste of neither. They resisted furiously the academic ‘rules’ of composition…” Contemplating Music (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985), 160. Charles Seeger, by the way, never really developed his compositional skills since his interest turned to the branch of comparative musicology dealing with folk music.

22. See Arendt, “Society and Culture,” in Culture for the Millions'? 47–48.

23. Bernard Holland, “Rorem's Songs Offer a Guided Tour through Life,” Times, 26 January 1998.

1. Nicholas Slonimsky, A Lexicon of Musical Invective: Critical Assaultson Composers since Beethoven's Time (New York: Coleman-Ross, 1965).

2. W. H. Auden, “Speaking of Books,” New York Times Book Review, 15 May 1955.

3. Samuel Lipman, Music after Modernism (New York: Basic Books, 1979), 163. See my review, Partisan Review 48, no. 4 (1981): 624–28.

4. Harold C. Schonberg, “Can Composers Regain Their Audiences?” New York Times, 4 December 1977.

5. Paul Griffiths, “A Violinist's Playing Belies Her Publicity,” Times, 17 January 2000.

6. Ernest Newman, A Musical Critic's Holiday (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1925), 160.

7. Ibid., 158.

8. See Henry Pleasants, The Agony of Modern Music (New York: Simonand Schuster, 1955).

9. Constant Lambert, Music Ho! A Study of Music in Decline (London: Faber and Faber, 1934), 231.

10. Joseph Kerman has suggested that “the turn towards nineteenth-century studies” on the part of musicologists could be related to the circumstance “that for better or worse, the largest body of music that gains an immediate response from musicians at large is music of the nineteenth

11. George Santayana, Reason in Art (New York: Scribner, 1942), 51.

12. Joseph Wood Krutch, “Is Our Common Man Too Common?” Saturday Review, 10 January 1933, 9.

1. Aaron Copland, “The Personality of Stravinsky,” in Igor Stravinsky: AMerle Armitage Book, ed. Edwin Corle (New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pearce, 1949), 122.

2. Wallace Stevens, “The Relations between Poetry and Painting,” undatedpamphlet published by the Museum of Modern Art (New York, 1951?), 7.

3. See, for example, Berger, “The Stravinsky Panorama,” in Igor Stravin-sky: A Merle Armitage Book, 114. First published in Listen: The Guide to Good Music 3 (August 1943).

4. Richard Taruskin, Stravinsky and the Russian Traditions: A Biographyof the Works through Mavra (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996), 1501.

5. Milton Babbitt in Stravinsky memorial (double issue) PNM 9, no. 2(spring-summer 1971) and 10, no. i (fall-winter 1971): 106–7.

6. Allan Kozinn, “Transpositions and Contrasts,” review of a New York Philharmonic concert, Avery Fisher Hall, New York Times, 26 November 1996.

7. “What is sometimes called an act of self-expression might better betermed one of self-exposure; it discloses character—or lack of character—toothers. In itself it is only a spewing forth”: John Dewey, Art as Experience (New York: G. P. Putnam, 1934; rpt., New York: Capricorn Books, G. P. Putnam, 1958), 62 (quotation is from the reprint edition).

8. Igor Stravinsky, Chroniques de ma vie, vol. i (Paris: Denoel and Steele, 1935), 116. An anonymous published translation exists: An Autobiography (London: Calder and Boyars, 1975).

9. Robert Craft and Igor Stravinsky, Expositions and Developments (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1962), 114; (rpt. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980).

10. Andre Gide claimed, “Like Valery… who takes the word as point of departure, Chopin, as the perfect artist, departs from the notes (and it is this factalso which makes us say that he ‘improvised’)”: Harold A. von Arx, “Andre Gide on Chopin,” Musical Mercury 3, no. 3 (September 1936): 39.

11. Ferruccio Busoni, Entwurf einer neuen Asthetic der Tonkunst (Trieste: C. Schmidt, 1907), 23; trans. T. Baker, Sketch of a New Esthetic of Music (New York: G. Schirmer, 1911), 8.

12. The Dominant (London, 1927).

13. See the excellent discussion of stratification in Edward T. Cone, “Stravinsky: The Progress of a Method,” in Perspectives on Schoenberg and Stravinsky, ed. Benjamin Boretz and Cone (New York: W. W. Norton, 1972), 155–64. First published in PNM i, no. i (fall 1962): 18–26.

14. Stevens to L. W. Payne Jr., Hartford, Conn., 31 March 1928, Letters of Wallace Stevens, ed. Holly Stevens (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1966), 250.

15. See William Empson, Seven Types of Ambiguity: A Study of Its Effects on English Verse (New York: A Meridian Book, Noonday Press, 3d ed.,

1. There was no composition major at Harvard in the mid-thirties when Ientered. My thesis subject was the nearest I could get to composition in musicology: a defense of Stravinsky's neoclassicism in the light of aesthetic theory, which enabled me to spend time with David Prall, the aesthetician I admired somuch. Prall was a refuge for those of us at Harvard in the arts who could escape to his Leverett House quarters for relief from the stultifying academicism.

2. See Klaus George Roy, “Preview of Music by Berger,” Christian Science Monitor, 21 January 1951.

3. “Among our younger generation it iseasy to discover a Stravinskyschool: Shapero, Haieff, Berger, Lessard, Foss, Fine.” Aaron Copland, “Influence, Problem, Tone,” in Stravinsky: In the Theatre, ed. Minna Lederman(New York: Pellegrini and Cudahy, 1949), 122.

4. Rudolph Elie, review of concert of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, Charles Munch conducting, program including Berger, Ideas of Order, Symphony Hall, Boston, Boston Herald, 23 January 1954.

5. New York Review of Books, 7 October 1999, 49.

6. Paul Henry Lang, Music in Western Civilization (New York: W. W. Norton, 1941), 901.

7. “‘Star-Spangled Banner’ Version of Stravinsky Startles Audience,” unsigned, New York Herald Tribune, 15 January 1944.

8. See Robert Craft and Igor Stravinsky, Memories and Commentaries (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1960), 93–94; (rpt. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1981).

9. See Berger, “The Stravinsky Panorama,” in Igor Stravinsky: A Merle Armitage Book, 105–14.

10. D. Rudhyar, “‘Going Back’ in Music: Where To?” Pro-Musica Quarterly 5, no. i (March 1927): 10–15. Rudhyar wrote some innovative musicearly in his career much under the influence of the Eastern tradition, but then he lapsed into a nondescript conservatism. He had too many other interests toaccord music the full-time attention for making a career out of it.

11. Stravinsky's Westernization was something, as a matter of fact, that hiscompatriots felt was adumbrated years before the October Revolution inPetrushka. See Taruskin, Stravinsky and the Russian Traditions, 1120.

12. Ibid., 992–93.

13. Ibid., 995.

14. Taruskin, “Back to Whom? Neoclassicism as Ideology,” i$th Century Music 16, no. 3 (spring 1993): 291–93.

15. Jacques Maritain, Art et Scholastique, rev. and enlarged (Paris: Louis Rouart et fils, 1920), 98; Maritain, Art and Scholasticism, trans. J. F. Scanlan, rev. and enlarged (London: Sheed and Ward, 1934), 60.

16. Stuart Isacoff, “Remembering Stravinsky,” Keyboard Classics (September-October, 1981): 13.

17. Ibid., 14.

18. Stravinsky and Craft, Expositions and Developments, 73.

19. Igor Stravinsky, Poetique musicale sous forme de six lemons (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1942), 8; Poetics of Music: In the Form of Six Lessons, trans. Arthur Knodel and Ingolf Dahl (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1947), 9–10.

20. George Perle, Serial Composition and Atonality 6th ed., rev. (Berkeleyand Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1991).

21. Olin Downes, review of stage performance of Histoire du soldat by Stravinsky, Edward Clarke, conductor, Art Theatre, London, 13 July 1927, New York Times, 3 July 1927.

22. John Rockwell, All American Music: Composition in the Late Twentieth Century (New York: Vintage Books, Random House, 1984), 76.

23. Denis Donoghue, “The Promiscuous Cool of Postmodernism,” New-York Times Book Review, 22 June 1986.

24. Stravinsky and Craft, Dialogues and a Diary (Garden City, N. Y.: Double day, 1963), 183.

25. The progression of chord-roots or tonicizations by thirds instead offifths is a characteristic of Romantic music that has lately been getting some attention. See David Kopp, Common-tone Tonality in Nineteenth Century Music, forthcoming from Cambridge University Press. Taruskin cites Schubert asa composer employing this device and gives the example of “a fragment of a circle of minor thirds that counter-balances the major-third circle just completed” (italics mine) contending that “in its use of passing tones it foreshadows the scale of alternating whole steps and half steps—the so-called ‘octatonic’ scale—that looms so large in Stravinskian harmonic practice” (Taruskin,Stravinsky and the Russian Traditions, 257). I am somewhat concerned aboutthe use of the locution “circle” since the members of the adjacencies in a chainof thirds have scarcely any of the special properties of harmonic relation and direction that fifths in the same position would have. That (acoustical) propertyis essentially what we mean by “circle.” If all twelve are used, it returns to the initial member of the series, and that's what makes it a “circle.”

1. Quoted by Anthony Tommasini in “Babbitt's Notes Strike Colorful Continuity,” report of panel (Babbitt, Berger, Robert Cogan, and Robert Seely) and review of concert, Boston's Jordan Hall, Boston Globe, 3 February 1993.

2. Philip Gossett, preface to Jean-Philippe Rameau, Treatise of Harmony, trans. Gossett (New York: Dover, 1971), vi.

3. Milton Babbitt, “Past and Present Concepts of the Nature and Limits of Music,” report of the Eighth Congress of the International Musicological Society, New York (1961): 398.

4. See “Conservation of Quantities and Invariance of Wholes” in Jean Piaget, The Child's Conception of Number, ed. C. Gattegno and F. M. Hodgson(London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1952).

5. Berger, “Problems of Pitch Organization in Stravinsky,” in Perspectiveson Schoenberg and Stravinsky, ed. Boretz and Cone, 123–54. First publishedin PNM 2, no. i (fall-winter 1963): 11–42.

6. Music was part of the medieval quadrivium, the higher studies of the seven liberal arts along with arithmetic, astronomy, and geometry.

7. Babbitt, “Some Aspects of Twelve-Tone Composition,” Score and I. M. A. Magazine (June 1955): 53–61, rpt. in Twentieth Century Views of Music History, ed. William Hays (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1972), 359–74.

8. Rene Leibowitz, Schoenberg and His School: The Contemporary Stageof the Language of Music (New York: Philosophical Library, 1949).

9. I am indebted to Martin Boykan, highly accomplished composer, theorist, and pedagogue of Brandeis University, for calling to my attention the possibility that in considering the numbering of o to 11 a matter of counting intervals I could be construed as taking sides with Lev Kobalnykov in a view heexpressed in his book on Pierre Boulez to downgrade the importance of pitchrelation in Schoenberg. I have no such thing in mind. The individual pitch retains its primacy while functioning to define intervals.

10. Edward T. Cone, “A Budding Grove,” PNM 3, no. 2 (spring-summer1965).

11. Ernst Krenek, “Some Current Terms,” PNM 4, no. 2 (spring-summer1966): 82.

12. Berger, “New Linguistic Modes and the New Theory,” in Perspectiveson Contemporary Music Theory, ed. Benjamin Boretz and Edward T. Cone(New York: W. W. Norton, 1972), 22–30. First published in PNM, 3, no. i (fall-winter 1964): 1–9.

13. Theodore Chanler, from an unpublished sketchbook (1940), quoted in Edward N. Waters, “Reports on Acquisitions—Music,” Quarterly Journal of the Library of Congress 23 (January 1966): 13.

1. Stravinsky and Craft, Conversations with Igor Stravinsky (Garden City, N. Y.: Doubleday, 1960), 145; (rpt. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980).

2. Stravinsky and Craft, Memories and Commentaries, 117.

3. Quoted by Anthony Tommasini, “Boulez Gets a Chance to Make Converts,” New York Times, 14 November 1999.

4. Stravinsky and Craft, Retrospectives and Conclusions (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1969), 196.

5. Aaron Copland, “Fantasy for Piano/Composer Explains Its Particular Problems,” New York Times, 20 October 1957.

6. Jay S. Harrison, “Talk with Stravinsky: Composer Discusses His Music,” New York Herald Tribune, 21 December 1952.

7. “In its emphasis on registral differentiation and intricacy of ensemblethe [Cello] Duo has been justifiably characterized as ‘diatonic Webern,’” : Babbitt, “Musical America's Several Generations,” Saturday Review, 13 March 1937, 36.

8. Eric Salzman, “Gunther Schuller's 3 B's Rate an ‘A,’” review of a concertin Twentieth Century Innovation series, Carnegie Recital Hall, Times, 2 February 1964. The Los Angeles concert referred to was presented by Evenings onthe Roof, i February 1960. Stravinsky would surely have been present since Robert Craft conducted and furthermore the composer had a piece of his ownon the program. Chamber Music was completed in 1956, but Stravinsky, whohad employed serial elements much earlier, started moving toward a more evident serialism in works like the Cantata of 1952.

9. P. Glanville-Hicks, “Arthur Berger,” American Composers Alliance Bulletin 3, no. i (spring 1953): 2.

10. Milton Babbitt and Charles Wuorinen, “In Search of the Ideal Listener,” in Musically Incorrect: Conversations about Music at the End of the Twentieth Century, ed. Hayes Biggs and Susan Orzel (New York: C. F. Peters, 1998), 26.

11. Rene Leibowitz, “Two Composers: A Letter from Hollywood,” Partisan Review 15, no. 3 (March 1948): 361–65.

12. Nicolas Nabokov, “The Atonal Trail: A Communication,” Partisan Review 15, no. 5 (May 1948): 580–85.

1. The locution seems to have made more inroads in the pop field. See, for example, Andrew Dell'Antonio, “Florestan and Butt-head: A Glimpseinto Postmodern Music Criticism,” American Music 17, no. i (spring 1999):65–86.

2. Bernard Holland, “Strings: Rochberg Premiere,” New York Times 9 February 1982.

3. Rockwell, All American Music, 87.

4. David Huntley, liner notes for David Del Tredici LP, In Memory of a Summer Day: Child Alice. Part I (New York: Nonesuch Records, 1983).

5. Donoghue, “The Promiscuous Cool of Postmodernism,” New York Times Book Review, 22 June 1986.

6. Ibid.

7. Fluxus was a somewhat underground postmodern movement thatemerged in New York among devotees of Cage around 1960. Its existence and aesthetic were not at all well known at its inception and are still consideredrather offbeat. See Peter Frank, “Fluxus Music,” in Breaking the Sound Barrier: A Critical Study of the New Music, ed. Gregory Battcock (New York: E. P. Dutton, 1981), 14.

8. See Berger, “Is There a Postmodern Music?” Boston Review 12, no. 2(April 1987): 7–9, 23.

9. Jencks, The Language of Postmodern Architecture, 5n.

1. T. S. Eliot, Collected Poems: 1909–1935 (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1930), 32.

2. Berger, “Community of the Arts in Hartford,” Boston Evening Transcript, 17 February 1936.

3. Thomson, The State of Music (New York: William Morrow, 1939), 26.

4. Thomson, The State of Music, rev. ed. (New York: Random House, 1961), 35.

5. Rorem, Knowing When to Stop, 217.

6. My review, which appeared in the New York Herald Tribune on 8 March 1949, two days after the concert was presented by the League of Composers atthe Museum of Modern Art, will be found in the appendix, p. 233.

7. Thomson, “Fine New Works,” review of League of Composers concert, New York Public Library, Tribune, 16 February 1942.

8. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Biographia Literaria, ed. John Calvin Metcalf(New York: Macmillan, 1926), 40.

9. Kyle Gann, “It's Sound, It's Art, and Some Call It Music,” New York Times, 9 January 2000.

10. Stravinsky and Craft, Conversations, 14.

11. Berger, “New Music Society,” review of concert of music by John Cage, McMillin Theater, Columbia University, Tribune, 4 May 1951.

12. As late as 1979 when Harold C. Schonberg was senior critic at the Times, he talked about the “terrible spectre” of the deadline which he describedas a “half-hour rush” and explained: “journalists have their talents just as Musicians have theirs. Musicians can sight-read to beat the band. We can play the typewriter or computer channels just as expertly”: “Some Shop Talk of Critics,” Times, 20 May 1979.

13. This was precisely the rationalization I received from Vladimir Horowitz

1. I sometimes think I accomplished more at a luncheon I had with Walter W. Naumburg, head of the foundation that bears his name, than in any singlereview. (I should add, by the way, that it was lunch at the kind of establishment that I do not normally patronize: the Bankers Club in the Wall Street district.) It seems that the foundation's award concerts were held Tuesday afternoons at Town Hall, and I remarked in a review that it was unusual to fill a hall on weekday afternoons as these concerts did. He invited me to lunch to show his appreciation of my review and especially to tell me that his wife worked hard toachieve such excellent attendance. I thought I would take the occasion to put ina plug for contemporary music. I told him I felt a contestant should be requiredto have at least one twentieth-century American work on every program, and to my surprise and delight this became a convention for the contest and one that is still followed.

2. See Berger, “Bernstein Takes Walter's Place,” review of concert of the New York Philharmonic, Leonard Bernstein, conductor, Carnegie Hall, New-York Sun, 15 November 1943.

3. Concert of the New York Philharmonic, Dimitri Mitropoulos, conductor, William Kapell, pianist, Carnegie Hall, 11 April 1953.

4. Humphrey Burton, Leonard Bernstein (New York: Doubleday, 1994), 195.

5. Berger, “Stadium Concert: Yaysnoff Sisters Soloists/Smallens Con ducts,” review of concert at the Lewisohn Stadium, Alexander Smallens, conductor, Yaysnoff sisters, duopiano soloists, New York Herald Tribune, 30 July 1952.

6. Current periodicals like Fanfare attempt to fill the same need, not alwaysvery successfully, being addressed to a less literate public than that of the old"little" magazines.

7. Quoted by Harold Schonberg, “Some Shop Talk of Critics,” New York Times, 20 May 1979.

8. Berger, “Substitute Sings Opera Until / Train-Stalled Barytone Arrives,” Tribune, 22 February 1947.

9. Olin Downes, “Alban Berg's ‘Wozzeck’ in Philadelphia,” Times, 15 March 1931.

10. Downes, “Rake's Progress of Stravinsky / Makes Season's Debut at ‘Met’” Times, 28 January 1954.

1. Stravinsky and Craft, Conversations, 120.

2. Boretz has rethought things again and has been pursuing quite a different path from the one he pursued when we founded PNM. His present thinking allows him to cope with the most innovative ideas that are current now atthe beginning of the twenty-first century. In all fairness I should point out, though it may be immodest of me, that when what has probably been his chefd'oeuvre, his controversial Meta-Variations: Studies in the Foundations of Musical Thought, first published in PNM serially, vols. 8 to 14 (1969–74), wasreprinted as a book (Red Hook, N. Y.: Open Space, 1995), it not only had minorrevisions and corrections but a new preface with credits, including the tribute, “To my teacher Arthur Berger is due my first explicit realization of the possibility, scope, and nature of musical intellection, and an impressive exemplification of the ‘examined traditionalism’ that still seems to me the heart of my-music-intellectual concerns…”(p. 9).

3. The other periodicals I had edited were not at all in the same league as PNM but they did give me experience. Musical Mercury has been mentioned, and Listen has been cited as the source of one of my articles. There was also one that I'm not particularly proud of: Record Retailing for the trade, which I edited to earn some cash.

4. Charles Rosen, “The Proper Study of Music,” PNM i, no. i (fall 1962):89–98.

5. Boretz, “Meta-Variations,” first installment, PNM 8, no. i (fall-winter1969): 1–74.

6. Berger and Boretz, “A Conversation about Perspectives,” PNM (doubleissue) 25, nos. i and 2 (1987): 597.

7. J. K. Randall, “Compose Yourself—A Manual for the Young,” PNM 10, no.2 (spring-summer, 1972): 1–12; 11, no. i (fall-winter 1972): 77–91; 12, nos. i and 2 (1973–74): 231–81; (rpt., Red Hook, N. Y.: Open Space, 1995).

8. Randall, I strongly suspect, was the scapegoat for some of the antagonisms and aggressions that had been building up. Unfortunately PNM was notthe optimum place for his challenging experiment. It should be read and judgedby people in literature as well as by musicians. I think the problem was it wassomething of a completely new conception that was sprung upon us withoutour being prepared for it. Some effort should have been made to prepare us.

9. In addition to myself, those who resigned were Elliott Carter, Lukas Foss, Andrew Imbrie, Leon Kirchner, George Perle, and Mel Powell. (I rejoined.)

10. Berger and Boretz, “A Conversation about Perspectives,” 607.

1. Musical Impressions: Selections from Paul Rosenfeld's Criticism, ed. Herbert A. Leibowitz (New York: Hill and Wang, 1969), xv.

2. Ibid., 225.

3. Ibid., 81.

4. Paul Rosenfeld, “Concerning Schoenberg's Music,” New Republic, 22 January 1916: 309.

5. Rosenfeld, “New German Music,” in Musical Chronicle (1917–192}) (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1923), 311.

6. Ibid., 311–12.

7. Ibid., 312–13.

8. Ibid., 313.

9. An Hour with American Music (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1929).

10. Charles L. P. Silet, review of False Dawn: Paul Rosenfeld and Art in America, 1916–46 by Hugh M. Potter, American Music 2, no. i (spring 1984):105.

11. Paul Rosenfeld: Voyager in the Arts, ed. Jerome Mellquist and Lucie Wiese (New York: Creative Age Press, 1948).

12. B. H. Haggin, Music on Records: A New Guide to the Music, the Performances, the Recordings, 3d ed., rev. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1943).

13. Berger, review of Music for the Man Who Enjoys “Hamlet,” by B. H. Haggin, New Republic, 4 December 1944, 758. The book was published by Alfred A. Knopf.

14. Haggin, Music on Records, 33–34.

1. Donald Francis Tovey, A Musician Talks: 2. Musical Textures (London: Oxford University Press, 1941), 68.

2. Ibid., 69.

3. Edmund Gurney, The Power of Sound (London: Smith/Elder, 1880), 77;(New York: Basic Books, 1966), 79.

4. Hans Gal, Johannes Brahms: His Workand Personality, trans. Joseph Stein (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1963), 209.

5. The first of several volumes of August Wilhelm Ambros's monumental history of music appeared in 1862, the whole vast project commissionedand published by Leuckart in Breslau. However, in the course of writing The fourth volume the author died. Another edition was published subsequentlyand preparation of the fourth volume, which appeared in Leipzig in 1909, fellto Leichtentritt.

6. Alexander Tansman, Igor Stravinsky: The Man and His Music (New-York: G. P. Putnam, 1949), 187.

7. Ernst Krenek, Music Here and Now (New York: W. W. Norton, 1939), 72.

8. See David Prall, chapter III, “The Discrimination of Surface Qualities and the Intuition of Specific Beauties,” in Aesthetic Judgment (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1929).

9. Milton Babbitt, review of Structural Hearing by Felix Salzer, Journal of the American Musicological Society 5, no. 3 (fall 1952): 261.

10. Gilbert Ryle, The Concept of Mind, 3d ed. (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1961), 143.

11. Anthony Tommasini, “Repeat, Repeat, Repeat, Repeat, Minimally,” New York Times, 20 July 1999.

12. Tommasini, “The Warming of a Lucid Intellect: Boulez at Seventy-Four,” Times, 13 June 1999.

13. I take it this is the type of musical event that David Epstein would have characterized as “ambiguous,” on the order of the C-sharp in bar 5 of Beethoven's “Eroica” Symphony, surprising us by acting in the relation of D-flat and being notated as such in the recapitulation. “Ambiguity” has been rather over-worked, and while Epstein made excellent use of the notion at the time hewrote, nowadays it would be better to avoid it and realize the C-sharp is ambiguous only if it is reified. It is not the note itself we are talking about but the two different relationships in which it is heard, and each of them is perfectlyclear and definite. See Epstein, Beyond Orpheus: Studies in Musical Structure (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1979), m, 162.

1. William Poland, “Theories of Music and Music Behavior,” Journal of Music Theory (winter 1963): 164–65.

2. Glen Haydon, Introduction to Musicology: A Survey of the Fields, Systematic and Historical, of Musical Knowledge and Research (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1941), 1–5.

3. See Rudolf Reti, The Thematic Process in Music (New York: Macmillan, 1951).

4. Quoted by Delmore Schwartz, “Poetry as Imitation,” in Perspectives on Musical Aesthetics, ed. John Rahn (New York: W. W. Norton, 1994), 301. Originally published in PNM, 24, no. i (fall-winter 1985): 102–6.

5. Paul Valery, “Variete, a propos d'Adonis,” Nouvelle revue frangaise, 1924: 158.

6. Hugo Riemann, History of Music Theory, trans. Raymond H. Haggh(Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1962), 125.

7. Arnold Isenberg, “Critical Communication,” in Aesthetics and Language, ed. William Elton (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1959), 141.

8. Dewey, Art as Experience, 52.

9. Isenberg, “Critical Communication,” 141–42. Note that when this textwas quoted originally in PNM I deleted the sentence starting with “scientific explanation” and the one right after it because, as Kerman was keen to recognize, it was a “quiet article” and I was just starting to “bore from within,” not

10. Ibid., 139.

11. Stuart Hampshire, “Logic and Appreciation,” in Aesthetics and Language, ed. Elton, 167.

1. I doubt whether anyone has to be reminded of the sound of the pentatonic since it is the mainstay of kitschy Oriental imitations in Western music. But if a reminder is needed the black keys of the piano can provide it. Incidentally, the division of the keys into seven white and five black was prescribed bytonality which dealt in seven-note scales. In a way, it is an anachronism withthe advent of twelve-tone music since the latter is concerned with a dozen equalnotes and does not separate out the seven of a diatonic scale.

2. Berger, “Problems of Pitch Organization in Stravinsky,” PNM 2, no. i.

3. Olivier Messiaen, Technique de man langage musical (Paris: Leduc, 1944), 52–53.

4. Roman Vlad, Stravinsky, trans. Frederick Fuller and Ann Fuller (London: Oxford University Press, 1960), 7–8.

5. Rimsky-Korsakov, My Musical Life 5th ed., trans. Judah A. Joffe (New-York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1942), 78. He said it replaces Glinka's whole-tone scale.

6. Pieter C. van den Toorn, The Music of Igor Stravinsky (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983).

7. Taruskin's thoroughgoing and scholarly treatise in its 1, 756 pages gets nofurther than the period of Mavra (the early twenties).

8. Robert Craft, Stravinsky: Glimpses of a Life (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993), 303.

9. Berger, “Problems of Pitch Organization,” 136–38. Although C is the tone center of the tableau, the scale that I consider to be the basis of thePetrushka chord starts on A-sharp (or B-flat) because it is more consistent withthe important registral distribution locally.

10. “I had conceived of the music in two keys in the second tableau as Petrushka's insult to the public….” Stravinsky and Craft, Expositions and Developments, 156.

11. Berger, “Problems of Pitch Organization,” 148.

12. The “referential” scale, a concept often misinterpreted, is an abstraction deduced from the pitch relationships of a concrete musical work. As ananalytic device it allows us to assign more than one scale to a musical work orpassage. Stravinsky's interpretation of his Petrushka chord was not wrong. Butto my way of thinking the C-major chord is not enough to establish the key of C major, or the F-sharp chord, the key of F-sharp major. The leading tone ismissing.

13. Taruskin, Stravinsky and the Russian Traditions, 269.

14. Berger, “Problems of Pitch Organization,” 137–38.

15. What I had to say about the octatonic in “Problems of Pitch Organization” was essentially introductory. For further discussion see van den Toorn,The Music of Igor Stravinsky. There is also an interesting approach on a moremodest level by a former graduate student of mine, Joel Eric Suben, in “De-bussy and Octatonic Pitch Structure,” Ph. D. dissertation, Brandeis University, 1979. Suben presents a neat diagram showing the absolute pitch contentof the three possible octatonic collections available as segments of the totalchromatic. If we call the three diminished seventh chords I, II, and III, the collection of pitches of any given octatonic scale will consist of I and II, II and III, or I and III.

16. Joseph Straus, “Stravinsky's Tonal Axis,” Journal of Music Theory 26, no. 2 (fall 1982): 264.

17. When I referred to four possible pitch priorities that could be tone centers of equal weight perhaps I should have made it clearer that I didn't mean that they all functioned necessarily in the same piece. What I meant was thatthey stood in symmetrical positions like G and C in the major which have symmetry in that each note is, intervallically, in the same position as the first notein a tetrachord which has the form tone-tone-semitone. As far as symmetry isconcerned, nothing is changed by the fact that the diatonic tetrachords are discrete and the octatonic trichords are conjunct (overlapping).

1. Berger, “Spotlight on the Moderns,” Saturday Review, 25 November 1950.

2. Berger, “Bing Wins a Test Case,” New York Herald Tribune, 6 January 1952.

1. Leonard Bernstein, The Unanswered Question (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975). The title is borrowed from Ives, who used it for an orchestra piece.

2. Fred Lerdahl and Ray Jackendoff, A Generative Theory of Tonal Music (Cambridge: M. I. T. Press, 1983).

3. Moses Smith, Koussevitzky (New York: Allen, Towne, and Heath, 1947), 256.