# I Have Received Another Angry E-Mail



## Xavier (Jun 7, 2012)

(Sigh)...... Here is another one regarding _Pelleas_:



> I am shocked that you take exception to anyone who dislikes "Pelleas et Melisande". I am *appalled* by your judgement. Who are you to say which operas one is supposed to like in order to be considered a true "sophisticate"? Besides loving most Italian operas, especially the bel canto operas, as well as Wagner, Strauss, Weber, Massenet, Gounod, and Mozart, I am also a great lover of the German lied and the French chanson. "Pelleas" eludes me completely, and it always has, though I love Debussy's other music.
> 
> "Pelleas" is a highly individual opera for esoteric tastes, and no opera company is going to find a full audience for it. In a small theater, perhaps but certainly it will not ever become a regular standard repertoire item. Lyric Opera of Chicago presented it twice in the last forty years (I was present at both performances), and people were walking out in droves. By the beginning of the second act, the opera house was half full. A good percentage of those who remained slept through it. I did not. I tried, tried, and tried to "get into it", but I failed.
> 
> For me, better five consecutive performances of Parsifal than ONE "Pelleas". If that makes me an idiot then so be it.




Should I just skip this one and not reply back?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

I wholly agree with the writer, and I more than love and admire Debussy.


What I am most appalled by here is the complete disregard of standard social etiquette / protocol in taking an unprecedented liberty in posting a letter sent to you privately, even without attribution as to authorship. 

It is seriously unacceptable to post anything sent you without the author's prior permission, and in so doing you have made a gross social faux pas, for which you owe the author an apology, and you really ought to wipe out the entire post now.


Best regards.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

That's a load of nonsense PetrB. Its an email not a letter. The reality is that you should send every email assuming everyone from your grandmother to your kids to your boss could one day see it, and with attribution.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I suspect that Xavier, who has a blog, means a comment on said blog, but I am not sure.


----------



## Guest (Aug 31, 2013)

Couchie said:


> That's a load of nonsense PetrB. Its an email not a letter. The reality is that you should send every email assuming everyone from your grandmother to your kids to your boss could one day see it, and with attribution.


More nonsense? When I send emails from the office, in my professional capacity, I need to be circumspect about the language I use and the things I say. When I send private emails, I don't need to be so circumspect (though there are the limits of human decency, of course). There is no reason why I should assume that because my _private _communications might be (and, in the case of email, all too easily) published, I should write more carefully.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

On the topic of the thread: I agree with the writer, although _Pelleas,_ from my understanding, is a fairly well known work. I don't really see why it is only for "esoteric tastes......." Still, other than that, I agree that no one should be told what to like and what not to like. I like _Pelleas_ and even lesser known operas such as _El Retablo de Maese Pedro_ by Manuel de Falla (which I believe is an important work in the development of 20th century neoclassical style) in addition to the core of the operatic repertoire.........I don't actually see any problem at all with the email sent to you, Xavier.


----------



## TresPicos (Mar 21, 2009)

I'm appalled by the idea of "five consecutive performances of Parsifal". That would kill you!


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

I think that PetrB is wrong on this occasion as he did not ask for this communication and it appears not to be signed.
If the originator is to EMail all and sundry with his opinions then he can expect some publicity. 
Perhaps that was the whole idea ?


----------



## niv (Apr 9, 2013)

we have a _very _different definition of the word "angry"


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

Xavier said:


> (Sigh)...... Here is another one regarding _Pelleas_:
> 
> [/font][/size]
> 
> Should I just skip this one and not reply back?


I'd ignore it along with those desperate missives from Nigerian princes who need to access their millions locked in US banks.

Although the email is literate it's also a personal insult. As a writer I've received plenty of complaint letters (dutifully passed on to me by my agent or publisher) and if the letter addresses the topic and isn't personal, I've often replied.

If the author of the email simply responded to your opinion without trying to be personal, a well-written response might be okay. Or you might just send back the "I just received this idiotic email. Some jerk has obviously hacked your email address and is sending out stupid and pigheaded emails with your signature. Just wanted to warn you. Thanks"

I'd let it pass. Anyone who is "shocked" or "appalled" over a simple opera opinion is essentially eggbound. I've never heard Pelleas so I've got no dog in that hunt but to take offense at your opinion is childish. To simply disagree is another thing, of course.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Couchie said:


> That's a load of nonsense PetrB. Its an email not a letter. The reality is that you should send every email assuming everyone from your grandmother to your kids to your boss could one day see it, and with attribution.


Dude, E-mail is mail and mail is mail, period. / maybe it was on a blog, but he said "E-mail"


----------



## Xavier (Jun 7, 2012)

PetrB said:


> but he said "E-mail"


Yes it was a private email.


----------

