What is the point? Why write new music? I do not think there is a satisfactory answer to the question. During John Corigliano’s residency last Spring, he talked about not wanting to write something if the medium is already saturated. Since there are already so many great pieces for orchestras, why write more? His answer was that when he has something important to say, he says it through his compositions. On the other end of the spectrum, there are composers who compose non-stop in order to get their voices heard. With that mentality, the rule is: if you write enough music, someone will appreciate some modicum of it and will perform it. The argument has been put into two camps: the “Beethovens” versus the “Mozarts.” The “Beethovens” produce less music, but with more highly regarded pieces, while the “Mozarts” produce copious amounts of music with a smaller percentage regarded as “great” works.
There is validity in both approaches. On the one hand, waiting to create a masterpiece that helps redefine a genre is a noble effort. It certainly seems the more focused of the two extremes. If we wait until we have groundbreaking ideas, it will be easier for us to justify to performers and ourselves the merits of performing and exposing the work. The quantity approach, on the other hand, focuses more on the volume of ideas a composer can put down on paper. Among the pieces produced, something is bound to interest and intrigue some performer or group. We can easily justify this approach by saying that the more we write, the more experienced we will be with creating masterpieces in the future.
In practice, I think most of us prefer a middle ground. The Beethoven versus Mozart argument is not one that should dictate our output today. As composers, we should look critically at our work, but not limit our output or push ourselves to create. If a composer can think of a reason that a musical idea should be heard, then he or she should work to create something worth listening to. Others can judge if it is output is relevant to what they believe new music should be.
It is not enough to sit back and ponder the merits of our work. There are always people who will argue that our music is too new, too old fashioned, or not groundbreaking enough. There is no way to please everyone. Ideally we should be happy when people are willing to listen to and think about our work. In reality, a part of each of us wants to be the next big name in the music world. The only way to achieve anything is to write. Once we can convince ourselves that new music is worth writing, we can begin to convert others.
Discussion: 
Daniel Tressel presented a bit about 
