I think that there are several issues with this perspective. Firstly, it presupposes that the music and the ‘concept’ are distinct. I love say Mahler 2 and the

I think that there are several issues with this perspective. Firstly, it presupposes that the music and the ‘concept’ are distinct. I love say Mahler 2 and the Rite of Spring but I love those pieces as a collection of notes and a concept together and trying to separate the ‘concept’ from the notes is impossible - when I listen to them the concept is an essential part of the experience. In this case I can imagine listening to the notes in the knowledge of the wider context and being profoundly moved by the experience. I don’t see this as any different to music that is highly repetitive (and so not ‘interesting’ musically), for example, but still elicits an emotional response from many listeners. Finally, if the classification is of composers into two camps, with Cage being in the wrong camp, then I’m afraid that the idea that Cage’s music won’t survive long isn’t backed up by the evidence as most of it is still doing really well many years after it was composed.