Perhaps he assumed people would know who Messiaen was, given that he's one of the better known modern/contemporary composers of the 20th century (that sounds co

Perhaps he assumed people would know who Messiaen was, given that he's one of the better known modern/contemporary composers of the 20th century (that sounds consecending, but I don't mean it to be). I agree with your general point though, in particular I wish he'd be a bit more specific when talking about these examples of mystical beauty he finds so appealing in mathematics. Unfortunately, as some of the other commentators have mentioned I can see why that kind of thing might be cut by editors - my parents watched the series he presented a while back, and sort-of gave up by the time the last programme was on, saying they didn't really understand a lot of it. Then again, maybe that's the problem! If he explained a bit more instead of briefly touching on the more complicated areas then perhaps they would have followed it better.