great piece, both provocative and convincing.

Genius has nothing to do with morality. Strauss was a musical genius who happened to be a mediocre time-server morally. Give him his due: he was unobjectionable compared with Wagner, Caravaggio, Villon and even Picasso, who walked all over his women.

Re David Wilson's comment, my take is that Strauss's mother, as a brewery heiress, probably was quite wealthy. In marrying her, Strauss's father was no longer an impecunious musician--in contrast to Wagner, who was constantly dodging creditors. That's what I'm guessing was meant by the "Valhalla" reference--the Strauss family's wealth.

As far as I know, Strauss lost his fortune twice: in WW I and in WW II, and suffered greatly from it. Indeed there is a mystery there of the difference between the artist and the works, as with Wagner and Beethoven. But that mystery seems different, at least on the human level, if we speculate that these artists 'receive' their ideas and imaginative experiences from 'outside'. The oldfashioned idea of 'inspiration', something that is 'breathed into' the artist, who functions as a midwife rather than the ultimate creator, explains this difference better than anything else. Strauss gives the impression of a personality spoiled from the beginning, and thus never developed a personality up to the level of his receptivity. But he learned at the end of his life and acquired the emotional depth he had been lacking often in the past. His Rosenkavalier is, in this article, unjustly seen as 'conventional'. It is a brilliant re-interpretation of tradition, without any orthodoxy, and full of stilistic inconsistencies, but there are marvellous episodes in it which show emotional depth and understanding, like the scene at the end of act I where the Feldmarschallin reflects upon the passing of time, and the entire dialogue with Octavian with its superb mixture of melancholy, resignation and delicate acceptance, beautifully reflected in the music. He had an incredible capacity of entering the inner emotional world of his operatic characters, like the musical depiction of Johanaan in Salome, combining powerful greatness with utter instability (the first fully-exposed theme upon him being led out of the cisterne). It seems that Strauss paid dearly for his achievements, as is often the case with artists.

I'd be grateful if you would explain what you meant by saying that Strauss "must have thought he'd wedded Valhalla."

Interesting piece by Lebrecht on Strauss. Real love Strauss' writing. Who knew he was such a boor?