What to Listen for in Mozart

Rating:
Summary: It hit the right note for me
Review: I found this book useful as a homeschooling mother attempting to expose my children to classical music and make sense, for myself, of a wide world for which I haven't (up till now) been able to find a decent map. I had eight years (years ago) of piano lessons, very little listening experience during the time I took them, and definitely nobody ever sat down and said things like "listen how the piano comes in here, plays for a few bars, and then you expect it to break into the second major theme of this piece--but Mozart plays a little joke here, he starts out playing it in such-and-such a minor key which isn't really substantial enough to go on for too long, so then he gets down to business and changes it back into a major key."  (I'm paraphrasing Harris here.)  Could I say I've been listening-challenged most of my life and I really do need someone to spoon-feed me with some of those details?  Mozart, for me, was nice to listen to and got me through eight hours of labour, but I've never seen one of his concertos written out blow-by-blow.

I also like this book as an introduction to listening to classical music in general.  What to listen for, as the title says.  Why on earth this concerto is supposed to be better than that one.  Why Mozart decided to do this for twenty bars instead of something completely different.  I liked Harris's comment that the Piano Concerto #21 would give you--if you listen carefully enough--enough listening for a whole lifetime.  (The same idea as being able to read Jane Austen repeatedly and enjoy her books more each time even though you already know what happens.)

Maybe some *would* find Harris's descriptions either overly technical (I didn't think so, though I do know some terminology from music theory, like "dominant" and "tonic" which does help with what he's saying) or patronizing (if you naturally know how to listen to what he's doing) as the review says.  However, for me (as the mom and rather ignorant "teacher" here), he seemed to hit the right note.

P.S.  I think the Kirkus Review should have said Harris worked for the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation), not for CBS.