theory teacher in college used to compose pieces for my piano teacher to play at recital. the composer/theory teacher's name was george belden. it impressed me only then - because i could see the interaction between composer/pianist. and, sometimes inside jokes or impressions of this or that that meant something personal in such impersonal music.
also, not to copy - but to create new ideas. new music symbols (to explain or write out for pianists interpretation). to fully be in charge of the situation. almost as if the composer has a hand around the pianists neck and only lets them down from the ceiling when the piece is played correctly.
and, yet - where would pianists be in expressing their highest pinnacles of memorization finesse except with newer music. i tend to see ives as one of my loves, too, as ted does. he expresses the same appreciation for tonality as poulenc - by remaining IN keys - whilst totally avoiding the tonic and usually replacing the tonic with somekind of emphasis elsewhere. (i hope i am correct on this). he never really changed the 12 note structure of chromaticism - to a limit of 10 notes or 8 or 5 did he?
now, what i dislike is limitations. to be limited to a tone row for instance. though it may include all twelve notes - it is so 'flat,' imo, to have to be so rigid in ones' composition style as to only follow tone rows. i never much liked webern either. he had this horrible opera - and the first time i heard it - i realized i would never like women haters such as he.
Topic: Your first experience with atonality