I know how to respond to this: point by point!
Thank God someone answered the original question.
You guys need to find Richters recording of Das Wohltemperierte Klavier book 1
There is no ad hominem argument
(interesting comment for someone who dismissed an objection as "stupid".
On the other hand, gay musicologists just don't have interest in him. There is anything wrong about that? No. Do I think they are nuts? No. Do I hate gay people? No. It's just an observation: Bach is not the object of any gay research, and he is not influential in gay analysis. It's a complete different interpretation of western music, and I find it very cool indeed. On the other hand, I don't think there is no hard feeling from gay musicology towards Bach: he just is of no interest.
That would be Van Swietan. Bach's popularity is really the result of people like Griepenkerl and Forkel spinning him as the founder of the German keyboard school.
Yes, there is one. You are dismissing a composer (or saying that it is perfectly acceptable to do so based on his sexual orientation) because of something which has nothing whatsoever to do with his compositional craft.There is no ad hominem attack, because I actually dissected your argument.No offense meant, but if you take this seriously, then you have been brainwashed by the postmodernists. Musicologists analyze music, they do not publish crap like "Schubert's C Major Quintet - A Manifestation of Schubert's Repressed Homosexuality". We are talking about Bach's importance as a composer. Got that? Good.
I don't think Deconstruction can so easily be dismissed.
what did I just read
[Pianists] are just utterly clueless of anything outside of piano music.