On Fri, 27 Nov 1998, Nick Sandon wrote:
> a plea for the right to be uncritical about evidence.
Granted, but who is talking about the right to be uncritical about
evidence here? If that is the charge implicit in Professor Sandon's
earlier posting re: The Burgundian Cadence, I would invite him to
elaborate a little on that, as it does seem rather a harsh thing to say.
Specifically, it might be helpful to learn what is the evidence that The
Burgundian Cadence is "uncritical" about.
> Perhaps you have evidence to support this approach;
> otherwise it seems thoroughly misconceived. What is the
> intention?
Why is a musical approach "thoroughly misconceived" when there appears to
be no "evidence to support" it?
Rob C. Wegman
Princeton University
<[log in to unmask]>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|