Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 14:43:04 -0500
From: James Jordan 
Subject: Re: (urth) Vancean  influence on Wolfe

At 02:30 PM 5/20/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Nutria wrote:
> > Vance in general is a Mozart to Wolfe's Bach, stylistically;
>
>Care to expand on that?  It rings true to me, but I'm not sure why. :)
>Perhaps just because Wolfe's writing is quite fugal in nature?  Is there a
>quality judgement in that statement?
>
>Thanks,
>Jason Voegele

         'Twas just a thought. Mozart is transparent compared with Bach's 
density. Mozart is more sunny; Bach more serious. Mozart more 
straightforward; Bach more complex.
         The comparison works for me and you; maybe not for everyone here.
         Not a quality judgment. Two different geniuses. I love Vance. I'm 
a subscriber to the Compleat Vance.

Nutria


--