Hello everyone,

Re Larry's request,

It may take me a while to find. I know that I did read about the
viola concerto controversy last year as it was published on the net
but whether it was mentioned on the Bartok list, I am now not certain
as I often surf all over the place and I do not bookmark everything
that I see. I will take a look.

Christine Gleeson
Sydney, Australia

--- In belabartokclub@yahoogroups.com, LarryLemer <ljlwpb@y...> wrote:
> Could you direct me to the messages that discuss the
> controversy? Presumably the controversy is over
> whether Bartok himself wrote enough of it to call it
> his own?
> I'm interested in the bottom line: is it a bartokian
> masterpiece? The better it is, the more likely it is
> to reflect Bartok's intentions. Otherwise, a Bartok
> clone and the master himself would be interchangeable.
>
> --- Christine Gleeson aka OGliasain
> <ogliasainc@y...> wrote:
>
> Colin mentioned that the work was controversial
> > because apparently
> > all that Tibor Serly had to go by to finish the work
> > was a manuscript
> > of unnumbered pages with some of the script being
> > very hard to read.
> > Colin also mentioned the letter that Bartok wrote to
> > William
> > Primrose, two weeks before Bartok's death, stated
> > that the work was
> > finished in draft form and all that Bartok had to do
> > was what Bartok
> > called 'the mechanical bits'. Colin then mentioned
> > that there could
> > be the proper draft of the work lying under
> > newpapers etc waiting to
> > be discovered and he suggested that the work could
> > be worth a lot of
> > money if found. The controversial nature of the
> > viola concerto
> > has been fully discussed in previous posts.
> >
> > Happy New Year
> >
> > Christine Gleeson
> > Sydney (Mt Druitt) Australia
> >
> >
> >
> >