THOUGHTS ABOUT MUSIC

Evening Star, Issue 25673, 22 December 1945, Page 10

THOUGHTS ABOUT MUSIC

[By L.D.A.]

Despite the strictures often made in this column regarding the shortcomings of much modern music, I am decidedly not' one of that type of critic that bemoans the decadence of present-day music-making as compared with the performances of byegone times. In other words, I do not think my most rabid detractor can justifiably accuse me of being " laudator temporis acti." I believe there are to-day just as many, if not more, great singers and instrumentalists as in previous generations—though perhaps fewer outstanding musical personalities. Modern composers may appear for the moment to be struggling towards a coherent manner, of expression, but I have little doubt that the line that seemingly ended with'Elgar will, in due course, renew itself by producing a fresh generation of genuine musical creators. • '• • • These reflections came to me as I read, the other day, the musical.reminiscences of Lord-Mount Edgcumbe, a sincere lover of music—especially of o p er a pretty shrewd critic. This record of his experiences and opinion, written between 1773 and 1823, makes interesting and amusing reading nowadays, particularly in view of his gloomy prognostications concerning the future of music. Whatever his talents may have been, that of accurate prediction was not among them. Lord Mount Edgcumbe had, every opportunity of gratifying his tastes, for he began to frequent the opera at an early age, and subsequently travelled all over Europe in order to visit the famous Continental opera houses. He lived in what he calls "the golden age" of opera, and. his book is a long lament for tho past. "Tastes," he says, "are always various, generally fluctuating: mine, which were formed nearly half a century ago, have not wavered in the slightest degree down to the present moment 1 "

Who were the composers and singers whose genius was such as to occasion this' intelligent music-lover to write so wistfully about the past? He says: "As the good singers disappeared and remained unreplaced; as the style of the compositions changed, and as their execution deviated more and more from what I had been accustomed to in the 'golden age 'of the opera, my curiosity diminished with my pleasure, and though both have latterly been occasionally revived, yet I never expect to'hear again what I have done, or any new music - or new singers that ■will make me amends for those which are gone." Surely, one would imagine, coroßosers of such excellence would be remembered to-day, and the names of Buch singers would have become legendary? Alas! time has dealt very heavily with most of them. A few melodious fragments excepted, the works of the composers then popular -—Paer,. Pergolesi, - : Paesiello, Sarti, Tarehi, (Bertohi, Sacchini, and Salieri—'Eire.quite forgotten. True, Pergolesi's delightful little operetta, 'La Serva Padrona,' is sometimes played in Italy, as is also the charming ' Matrimonio Segreto ' of Cimarosa. Gluck, too, survives^—our author had an admiration for; his melodic genius—but his lovely Operas are very seldom performed. Of the operas popular in Lord Mount Edgcumbe's day, only those of Mozart and Rossini are still heard. We shall see presently what he thought of Rossini. -'■ ■,. »■• •' -•■ • .

Certainly he Jived in an age of great singers; exactly how' great we cannot say, for it is the tragedy of the actor, the singer, and the orator that his message is a personal one, and it dies with, the passing of the messenger and those of his generation. But as society went to the opera solely to hear the 6irigers, and composers wrote for them alone, we can safely say that sifch sopranos as Banti, Mara, Vestris, and Catalini, and such male singers as Marches!, Guadagni, and Pacchierotti, were very good indeed. The qualities chiefly demanded, from them were, in addition to beautiful voices, a fine " eantabile " and great ability in the execution of " floritura " and " bravoura " passages, ft was the age of the male soprano. Of Pacchierotti we read: "Decidedly, in my opinion, perfect singer it has ever been my- lot to hear.' His voice was "an extensive soprano, full and sweet in the highest degree; his powers of execution were very great." And the author fills two or three pages with enthusiastic praise of Pacchierotti's art. It is curious to note that at that time no female was permitted to appear on the stage at Rome in any character whatever, operatic, dramatic, or dancing. ,The youngest and bestlooking of the " castrati " were employed as their substitutes.

The bass voice was apparently very little appreciated; Lord Mount Edgcumbe has no use whatever for it. " A bass voice is too unbending and deficient in sweetness for single songs, and fit only for those of inferior character or of the 'buffo ' style," he writes. In speaking of Mozart he says: "It has always surprised me that the principal characters in two of operas should have been written for basses, namely, ' Count Almaviva ' and ' Don Giovanni.' ... I can account for it .no otherwise than by supposing they were written for some particular singer who had a bass voice." . Lord Mount Edgcumbe intensely disliked concerted'music. " No opera choruses.are good," says he, and he attributes their growing use as " decadence set in," to the fact that "in these. levelling days, equalisation has extended itself to the stage and musical profession and a kind of mediocrity of talent prevails." So the composer, had to give everyone a chance. He did it by means of "finales." "Noisy crashes of voices and instruments, each person engaged op the scene having to express a. different passion, and the whole overpowered by so loud and busy an accompaniment that the voices themselves are nearly lost."

In the latter days of his operagoing career a new star aros& —Rossini,, whom he criticised with keen penetration. " His (Rossini's) music is alone liked in Italy," he writes. " That he is possessed of genius and invention cannot be denied, but they are not guided by good taste: neither are they inexhaustible, for he is so rapid and so copious a writer that his imagination Beems already to be nearly drained, and no one is so great a plagiarist of himself." He complains of the importance he gives to the orchestra, of his triviality and his " mannerisms." It is interesting to note that his ' II Barbiere di Seviglia ' was far less successful than a dozen other of his operas which ar,e now forgotten. One is glad that Lord Mount Edgcumbe recognised the genius of Mozart; True, he thought his style not quite so agreeable as that of some of the " excellent Italian masters " who had held the stage in his early days. It

was a trifle heavy; too German, perJjaps. But he says that of his beauty, originality, infinite variety, and scientific excellence there can be but one opinion, and he cannot understand that, " though he has been so long dead, his works should have been but so lately known and performed in this country." Says he: "1 think 1 may venture to predict that Rossini will not long have ceased to write before he will cease to be remembered While the name of Mozart, with those of his two great countrymen, Handel and Haydn, will live for over, and his compositions, like theirs, descent as sterling gold to posterity." Lord Mount Edgcumbe ends in the same minor key in which he begun. " 1 now close these remarks with little hope and no great desire of ever seeing another opera." he writes sadly.

But how surprised Lord Mount Edgcumbe would have been could ho have known that when he penned his concluding words quite a number of clever little boys were growing up—Verdi, Wagner, Mendelssohn, Chopin, Schumann, and Liszt, for example. And the world had yet to hear Jenny Lind, Patti, Melba, Jean de Reszke, and Caruso. It seems that in music, as in other spheres, it is always unsafe to prophesy unless you know.