MUSICAL TOPICS.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 233, 31 August 1929, Page 7

MUSICAL TOPICS.

CRITICISM. (By ‘‘Semibreve.’*) Criticism, the act of forming a judgment on things heard and things seen, *s a right belonging to the community which is invariably asserted, and rightly so. Criticism applied to music is of two forms, but of many grades.* There is first of ail the judgment of tho unitiated except as Ji&teaiers, a- judgment which usually amounts to tho statement, “I like it,” or “I do not like it,” a criticism which is perfectly honost and 6traight-forward. After all, music is provided for the delectation of all people, of whom tho unitiated listeners form the vast majority, and, while tho form and style of music can only be criticised by tho initiated, practical musicians, the performance of all musical works can be and is criticised by people with no knowledge of music whatever, but still having what is known as a critical ear. The statement often mado, “I don’t know much about music, and therefore 1 cannot say,” is justly made when it becomes a question of the judgment of the build of music, but it is unjust wheti it is but a question of whether a performance was good or bad. The habit of English people of applauding a performance whether it be good or bad is not nearly so good for the performer as the Italian method, where an audience signifies approval or disapproval on the merits of tho performance, a proceeding by i which it is possible for a single performer ito receive approval at ono time and disI approval at another from the same audiI ence. Not that one would advocate a I change in the English methods; it would be a custom impossible to. change even if ■ one wished to do so. But, all the same, i performers do improve on performances when a strictly honest criticism is given. To use an analogy, a person may find a house very comfortable to live in and be very happy there, but an architect, with all his knowledge of construction, might express disapproval on . many technical points, which the occupier would not trouble about. So it is with music. If the listener is happy .and contented with the music heard, then that is all that matters. The chances are that a little knowledge picked up here and there might help the intellectual appreciation of _ music aa against the purely sensual, but it can never do more for the listeners’ enjoyment of music than when entirely ignorant of form in music. The following story will illustrate the point: —A controversy as to which of the arts was greatest was being held among musicians and other people in London many years ago. To settle the argument sculptors, painters, novelists, etc., were invited to a concert. Joseph Conrad’s comment was interesting. He said: Music is obviously a lesser art than writing, because where a novel is self explanatary, the meaning of a piece of musio had to be printed on the programme. The musicians present, promptly pointed out to him that the explanation was pointed because of the the knowledge the student has acquired m The point of course is debatable for a novel is for the eye, whereas music is intended not for tho eye but tho ear. Therefore, it is not necessary to have a knowledge of the construction of music before one can enjoy it. If this were so, then folk music would never have happened

(that was of the ear only) and if there had been no folk music there would never have been any other music. Then there is the student’s criticism, a. judgment which can be based only on the knowledge the student has acquire in the course of his studies. Too often mere beginners presume to criticise finished performers according to their own limited standards, only to find that, when their knowledge of technique is greater, their judgments have been entirely at fault. Technique, generally speaking, is first a matter of tradition and custom, and secondly a personal quality. It would bo a fatal thing if eveiyono did exactly tho same thing in exactly the 6ame way as every other person. That would destroy art aa completely as a world catastrophe might. No! the personal equation counts all the time and therein lies the beauty of art. Another form of criticism, which oan scarcely he called criticism at all, is that which generally actuated by bias against a performer for personal reasons. This is a criticism which is entirely destructive, does a whole lot of harm, and nothing good. Finally, thero is tho community criticism of a fellow townsman which, when of the right kind, has discovered to the world many a great artist, who otherwiso might never have been known. It is a mistake to think that tho truly great can como only from the world’s largest centres. A study of musical history disproves that theory entirely; _in fact, small villages have been tho birthplaces of a large number of tho world’s greatest men and women. MUSIC IN LONDON. The Russian is now drawing large and enthusiastic audiences to Uovenl Garden, London, Mr Serge Diaghileff being responsible for the production. There is a great musical interest in the Diaghileff ballet lor the music is certainly very strong and very good. Time was when the music written for ballets was almost the first consideration of notable composers. Indeed, many eminont composers, are best remembered by their ballet music. Ponchielli, Delibes, Massenet, all gave us some excellent ballet music. It was only tho degeneration of tho ballet itself towards the end of the nineteenth century that caused composers of repute to despise it and refuse to write for it. We may date the commencement of the revival of ballet music with Stravinsky’s “Fire Bird, which was the first of his contributions in tho new ballet form. French composers were quick to follow in the new movement inaugurated by Stravinsky, mafiy of them composing music for Mr Diaghileff. Many of their wors, such as ‘‘The Cat,” had striking merit and novelty. But Stravinsky etiil remains supreme ns the world’s greatest living composer of ballet music.