This would be completely unbelievable if it weren’t true. I wonder if there’s some larger historical context here, maybe of attempts to separate artistic works from their reputations – haven’t people sent off manuscripts of books already thought to be great only to have them consigned to the rejection bin? – or, going in another direction, of demonstrating how much taste and the appreciation of taste is shaped by background and context (or of making fun of people for lacking taste).
2 comments
Comments are closed.
I am just startled to see that the original story won a Pulitzer Prize. I remember reading it at the time, and thinking how naive the writer was.
It was a sweet and loving story, to be sure, but I definitely came away thinking the writer and his editor (who he mentioned in the story) were significantly lacking in practiality. I can’t imagine what life experiences would have led them to think that a classical musican would have been likely to be mobbed under the circumstances they set up. Possible, sure, but not likely.
This probably should not be more ammunition for my prejudices about journalists, but oh well.
I remember it being an interesting story – albeit with a poor premise and some poor writing (of the “overwritten” type) in places – but you’re right in that it didn’t seem like a Pulitzer piece. On the other hand, I don’t know what does, outside of the serious investigative journalism.