Re: a provocative question

 --- Jonathan Knibb skrzypszy:

> If Zamenhof was the J. S. Bach of conlangers ...
> (founding father of modern conlanging, created for use as well as
> beauty, high value on logical structure)
>
> ...and Tolkien was the Mozart of conlangers...
> (appeal to technical and lay audiences, elevated common features to
> high art)
Hahaha. Fascinating question! I must admit that I have thought of this myself
more than one time, but your question made me realize that I never got to a
conclusion.

Anyway, I don't think I fully agree with the qualifications you give above.
Bach's music is extremely complex and difficult to perform, and Bach must
rather be considered as the culmination a previous era than as the beginning of
a new one. No, I would rather link Zamenhof to Mozart or Beethoven (completely
a posteriori, simple structures, easy communication, etc.)

Linking Tolkien to a composer is even more difficult. I don't think Mozart
works here, but it is not easy to find an alternative. After all, Tolkien's
musical equivalent ought to be a Romantic, whose music is basically a priori,
even though he allows himself to be influenced by the exotic, and mellifluous.
Therefore, I would hesitate between Robert Schumann, Claude Debussy, and
Olivier Messiaen.

> ...with which composer would you identify yourself?
Somewhere in the middle between:

* Igor Stravinsky (Structuralism, cameleontic nature, changing old stuff into
something completely new);
* Einojuhani Rautavaara (A certain "thickness", that I find extremely
appealing);
* Sergej Prokofjev (Lyricism);
* Alfred Schnittke (Polystylism, humour, absurdism);
* Louis Andriessen (Dutch, the rest is hard to describe in one sentence).

Jan

=====
"Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones

__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer