[A.F.] “What is not Stravinsky who maintained that music cannot express anything but itself?” P.80
[L.A.] “It’s also important to see that he said it at a time when modernism was not as accepted as it is nowadays, and most people thought that the Lieder of Schubert - to give one of the best examples - were the highest musical expression. Specifically, Mahler is a composer where, in their perception of the music, people think of non-musical elements a lot. So, in the context of late romanticism this was a powerful and revolutionary statement. Of course, Stravinsky knew very well also that the structure of a certain aria in Bach’s St Matthew Passion, to take man example, has definitely to do with text. So Stravinsky’s expression was polemical. He was very well aware that the structutural of liturgical or ritual elements of texts are extremely important for a composer. Also for him. Also for me.” P. 81
[A.F.] “I point out that this is well and good so far as word setting goes, but if one removes the verbal text, to what extent is it possible for music to express extra-musical meanings?” P. 81
[L.A.] “I think it does all the time. But it’s totally impossible to make a scientific relationship between certain kinds of harmonies, pitches, melodies or rhythms and specific sentiments like jealousy or whatever. I mean jelousy is a good example: we have some idea about what might constitute sad music or funny music, but it would be very difficult to write jealous music.” P. 81
[L.A.] “Dialectical is a word I like to use very much. I would say that I deal with Bach in a dialectical manner, because I’m a totally different person and I can’t write his music. I use his harmonies sometimes and his attitude towards composing and his ways of thinking about musical material, but in a totally different way.” P. 81