It is almost fifty years since Anton Webern was shot and killed in a
freakish accident in the aftermath of World War II. From
this vantage point, Webern now seems one of those profound and
original artists (James Joyce is another) whose work remains not only
valuable but, for many of us, positively essential, yet whose
influence has been baleful and sometimes ruinous to the numerous
young artists who have attempted to follow in his steps.

Has any great composer ever been done so much harm by disciples and
admirers? Here is Paul Griffiths, far from the worst of them,
writing on Webern’s use of serialism in
The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians:

Linking serial forms through common terminals is a frequent practice
in Webern from Opus 21 onwards, but the shared notes are most usually
one or two in number; this technique may limit, of course, the range
of serial statements that can be chosen to follow a given form …
It should be noted that the three serial forms there shown are in the
relation of prime tetrachordal combinatoriality: i.e., a 12-note
aggregate is formed by all of the first or second or third
tetrachords. However, Webern did not normally make explicit use of
the combinatorial relations in which his symmetrical series are rich
…

Sexy stuff—makes you want to run right out and buy all the Webern in
the shop, doesn’t it? It is not to Griffiths’s