" EVERY MAN HIS OWN CRITIC."

Evening Post, Volume LXXV, Issue 23, 28 January 1908, Page 2

" EVERY MAN HIS OWN CRITIC."

3t) THB KDITOH. ■ Sir,— The writer of your topic in this Evening's Post has really gone off on a aide issue in his remarks upon the objootions musicians entertain to criticisms of mv.sical performances by unqualified reporters, and the articles was therefore somewhat misleading-. What we professional musicians absolutely object to is, "Every man bolng his own, critic" — to which it often amounts when even heading netrspapqrs in the Domin : on send men who know almost nothing about, and evidently car© less for, music to "writs up" a recital. These men, by tho way not unfroquonfcly mero novices, often come before a performance to ask what they aro to say, as if the performance had taken place, and what they had noticed, ele. In tho caso of pupils' conceits the tcaohers are even wked to write their otrn reports "in good time," and such "criticism" seems almost to amount to «n advertisement, whidh is altogether unprofessional and quite beneath tho dignity of »ny first-class teacher. ln_ one instance a, leading newspaper, not in IToHington, I must s«-y, sent along quito a boy v a reporter for * recital, and he a«kod for a criticism before tho ovont. _ This vas refined, and our "musical critic" said he wus in a hurry and conld not st*y for the performance. If the information he required was not immediately forthcoming ha pven threatened to altogef&ei' ignore the fiffflir in the important journal he represented. He was politely told thnt if hs could rit giro tha recital any attention, then, simply to say nothing about it. In spite of this, to ths writer's surprise, there appeared in the nest morning's issuo what purported to be a full rei>ort and criticism. This was clearly written by some one who had not attended the performance, and tc< say the least of it did grave injustice to those who had taken part. Trusting that you will correct what otherwise would give tho public a wrong impression of tho ideas and aims of the conference, I am, etc., A DELEGATE. Wellington, 24th January. *O THB EDITOR. Sir, — I was astonished to read in "The Topics of the Day" column in yesterday's Evening- Post such peculiar and misleading comments on the following re«olution unanimously ajreed to by the conference of mumdinns; — "That the societies of m\nie ; ans here represented use til possible influence with newop.per proprietors to induce them to regultrly engage competent muiical critics to criticise concerts and recitals, instead of sending general reporters towrit«i ths notipwof tho same." I clearly nnd emphatically set forth, when addressing the conference, that it i_ particularly desired reports should not be influenced in any way by the muoicinns who promote a concert or recital, and I strongly condemned tho practice of a con- | cort-girer writing up the notice himself. I Fortunately there arc some newspapers whore competent musical critics are employed, but, on tho other hand, 'unforhtnatoly^ the majority of newspapers in the I Dominion, as elsewhere, do nor do »o.— - I am, etc, W. H. WEBBE. Wellington, 27th January. [Our correspondent?, in Broking to corxocl us, havo laid themselvoi open to correction. In open conference they adopted a resolution worded in such a way as to "give tho public a wrong impression as to

the ideas and aims" of re«pcotabl» newspapers. The specific instanoe (not in Welling ton) quoted by "A Delegate" is nlker a matter for an indiridual coßvplaimt than for a sweeping resolution. The motion passed by the conference it tantamount to a proposal by the nevripapwa lo "hsu »U possible , influence" on mutical associations to "induoo them to regularly engage com-" petent mueieal" critnen. W« are glad to learn that "fortunately there are «obiq newspaper! where competent musical eritLca aro employed," but tho wording of the rezolution placed a shadow upon *11, howavor much the subsequent debate may have helped to lift tho pall.]