Klarinet Archive - Posting 000410.txt from 1998/08

From: "Kevin Fay (LCA)" <kevinfay@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Haydn Clarinet Concerti
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 15:21:10 -0400

Of course, Haydn also cannot defend himself, being dead and all.

Now, I don't mean to besmirch Mr. Kloecker. Never met him. Heard a
recording but once, and didn't like it--personally, I find most Haydn deadly
boring, so really don't care if this particular piece is genuine or not.

I will make the observation, however, that if what others have said is
true--that he will not allow publication and/or independent study of his
discovery--then his scholarship sucks, and he is bringing this derision on
himself. (Essentially, getting what he deserves).

In every other academic discipline, the first thing a scientist will do
(after filing the patent, perhaps) is publish so that others can replicate
his/her experimental results. Indeed, in the hard sciences a "discovery" is
not deemed to take place unless another team of researchers independently
experiments and gets the same results--anyone remember cold fusion?

Mr. Kloecker's crime isn't that he is trading on the Haydn name improperly,
but that he won't allow the independent scholarship to determine the
authenticity of the piece. Some folks are inferring the first offense from
the second--given the rigors of the scientific method, this is a fair
inference. The remedy for Mr. Kloecker is quite easy--publish it and show
his sources. This is not only the best way to quash his critics; it's the
right thing to do.

kjf

<snip>
So let's just besmirch the reputation of anyone you like - especially on the
internet and in English so the person concerned can't read it! In any other
medium these remarks as to Klocker's integrity would be libelous.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org