Mozart's Music Suffers from Having Too Many Notes

Sorry to be so late in posting this one - my excuse is less impressive than Pro's and I thank you for bearing with me. First, I would like to counter a few lines of argument that have been running through the debate. Firstly, about PG Wodehouse - I have no idea what stories of his pro has been reading, but they are not conservative in the word count. I am not proposing that one must exult in the language to catch a reader's attention. I would merely suggest that some writers do so, with wonderful results. The same is true for some composers. It is interesting that Beethoven has appeared so frequently in both our arguments. I think this may have something to do with the fact that it is really rather easy to mention both he and Mozart in the same breath - in many ways, Beethoven finished what Mozart began, something anyone who has played or listened to Beethoven's early works in particular cannot fail to appreciate. They are both collusi not only in music, but in European culture as a whole. Though I must admit a slight preference of Beethoven, I think it is highly selective of Pro to use his 5th symphony as an example of successful development of a theme. That particular work is a textbook in the art and it represents one of the high points of Beethoven's work, much as the Jupiter symphony does for Mozart. If one looks, for example, at the third movement of his 6th, or the Scherzo from his 9th, it is clear that Beethoven is as much a slave to a single theme as Mozart is. Mozart occasionally overuses a single theme, as does Beethoven, or for that matter any other composer you might care to mention. Then there are Pro's seemingly contradictory complaints that Mozart manages, at one and the same time, to include too many melodies and yet is too repetitive. Were such a claim true, I think it would serve to establish Mozart as some sort of anti-genius. Sadly, it isn't. In any case, excessive repetition would appear to constitute a case for more notes, something I cannot see Pro keen to promote. Pro's assertion that Mozart "reinforces a stereotype" in some of his arias is an interesting one, though somewhat tangential to this actual debate. I would suggest, however, that Der Holle Rache, or many of his other arias, are both more popular and accessible than the minimalism he extols. Pro's argument has been based on a very narrow selection of Mozart's works (how many times has the word "Jupiter" appeared in our debate?) and I think it most unfair to rule out the entire corpus of one of Europe's most brilliant and prolific composers on such a slender basis. I have recently been learning Mozart's Piano Sonata No. 16 and the opening movement is indeed almost as overblown as Pro would have you believe - its based on a line of exquisite melody followed by two of scales. The second and third movements, however, contain no such pointless prevarication, nor does the vast majority of those pieces of his which I have studied or listened to. Shall we dismiss Mozart without considering his operas, still among the most popular ever written, or his revolutionary string quartets, or his beautiful concertos and sonatas? Every great artist has days when they fall short of their usual standards of perfection (is it any wonder that we had to wait until Kenneth Branagh for an uncut version Hamlet? Even Shakespeare frequently benefits from editing). Mozart had his off days, like everyone else. Such days were not characterised by "too many notes". To suggest that there is such a thing as "too many notes" and that such a thing is quantifiable is ludicrous in the extreme! It is indeed true to say that in Mozart's music, as in the music of all other great composers, there are as many notes as are needed, neither more nor less. I hope you will join with me in opposing this motion. Thank you for your time and attention.