MUSICIANS AND COMPOSERS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3019, 24 January 1912, Page 81

MUSICIANS AND COMPOSERS.

A MUSICAL* CENTENARY

The comprehensive article on the history of the Philharmonic Society, which appears in the sumniuous double Christinas number of the’ Windsor Magazine, tells the story of the hundred years’ work of that bodv, which this season celebrates its centenary. The article is accompanied by many interesting portraits of the great composers, musicians, and vocalists who have made the annals of the society historical. In the course of the article the writer says: — “ The Philharmonic Society, oldest of the orchestral organisations in this country, is about to enter upon its hundredth annual season, and it is interesting to compare the existing musical conditions and those that obtained when George 111 was King and the battle of Trafalgar was only a few days old, when Wellington and Napoleon had still to face each other upon the field of Waterloo. London then cared, and knew very little about good music ; the mood of the years did not favour the arts Oil jpeaoe, and the closing decade of tho 'eighteenth century had witnessed little of musical interest save the appearance of Havdn in the Hanover square rooms, where lie "conducted 12 symphonies he had composed for the concerts given by Mr Salomon, works known as tho ‘ Salomon Symphonies ’ to this day. Before the century closed even these concerts had been discontinued for lack of adequate support; but Haydn was received with some approach to enthusiasm in London. Though the great composer, then approaching his sixtieth year, spoke no word of English, his reputation was great enough to bring him, by tjh-o additional aid of a benefit concert, over a thousand pounds for the first six symphonies and a score of smaller pieces. “ Fourteen years had passed since tho last of the Salomon concerts, when Messrs J B. Cramer, P. Corri, and W. Dance gathered a small company of friends to a meeting, and formed a society ‘ to promote the performance in the most perfect manner possible of the best and most approved instrumental music.’ At the same time, it was decided that tho society should consist of 30 members and a limited number of associates, from whom the ranks of tho members should bo recruited as occasion arose The members were to elect seven directors. No member was to receive any emoluments, even for assisting at tho concerts, all moneys received being reserved for 1 the public purposes of the society.’ It was intended that tho concerts should bo given by tho members themselves. The paid orchestra was then undreamt of.'" “ The latter-day constitution of tho society is peculiar to itself. It is under the immediate patronage of their Majesties the King and Queen and her Majesty tho Queen-Mother; it is served by honorary directors (seven in number), honorary treasurers and trustees, honorary auditors, honorary standing counsel, honorary solicitor, and an honorary secretary, Mr Francesco Berger, corni>oscr and professor of music, who, in spite of tho fact that the Philharmonic Society had only just come of age when he was horn, contrives to conduct its business with an energy and discretion that many a middle-aged man would envy. It is, perhaps, upon him that the burden of the society’s business falls most heavily. Tho society’s 60 members are reinforced by about 2£o associates, of whom nearly 100 aro ladies. Tho Fellows of the .Society, in whose ranks aro found Lord Alvorstone and Mr A. J. Balfour, are limited to 250, and honorary membership of tho society has been conferred upon nearly a score of distinguished musicians, including Nikisch, Paderewski, Yeaye, Pugno, Richter, and Haint-ftaens. There is an annual guarantee fund of nearly £2OOO, and in the list of those who give active support to the society will be found the best-known musical amateurs in the country. “ The Philharmonic Society knfew no rivals in the early years; It could disregard competition in its brilliant middle period. To-day it is faced by tho Queen’s Hall, London Symphony, New Symphony, and Beecham Orchestras, to say nothing of many powerful choral societies, and, in the

interest attaching to these modern ventures, many people are apt to overlook the obligations under which—one and all —the new combinations stand to the parent organisation that is about to celebrate its centenary. The generation that can recall the time when, but for the Philharmonic Society, the musical life of London -would rmve been of small account, is passing. It must be difficult; for the society to maintain a certain conservative tradition very becoming in a centenarian, and at the same time to keep abreast of the years; and most people will confess that the difficulty is handled with skill, sympathy, and discretion by directors who spare neither time nor pains to maintain the society’s repu-t-alcra, and labour only for the honour o! their task. For example, the centenary will be marked by the production of worki composed expressly for the happy occasion by the following composers, who will conduct their own compositions:—Bantoclc, Sir F. Cowon, Dr Watford Davies, F. H. Dunhill, Arthur Hervey, Sir Edward Elgar. Edward German, Sir A. C. Mackenzie, Si? 0 Hubert Parry, Mr Landon Ronald, and Sir Charlog Yillicrs Stanford, all of whom, bo it noted, aro British; while the Ninth Symphony, composed by Beethoven for th< society, will ho given under the direction of Herr Nikiech. The society that can project such a programme as this may rightly claim that age has done nothing to impair its activities.

“ Another point to be noticed, in connection with the centenary of the Philharmonic Society, is that the invitation i{ extends to soloist or conductor is still th« highest honour within the musical gift or this country, and sought eagerly by Continental musicians. To play before the Philharmonic Society, or to bo asked to conduct its orchestra-, is an honour reserved only for the finest artists of our time; and this recognition of the society’s eminence is even more generally admitted (on the Continent than it is in England, where other fine orchestras are heard far more often than the Philharmonic in th« course of the year.” ROSSINI’S MUSIC. That Rossini was a man of astounding genius those who dislike his' music moss will bo least willing to deny. His ‘‘Barber of Seville ” is an astonishingly brilliant* tour do force, full of fun, sunlight, and honest good nature, a work a Mozart need not have been ashamed of. But what an outrageously pretentious and insincere thing is “William Tell”! I do not mind its being based on a historical lie, for it is long since I observed that all the beet stories in history are pure lies; but we aro all bound to resent tno w r ay in which the( librettist treated this particular lie. The men of Switzerland fought grimly for their freedom ; they took up their arms and laid down their lives rather than pay taxes to be spent on the dissipations of an Austrian. Court. There were frightful doings, and later on came Signor Rossini’s librettists, and turned the thing into a ballet.. From beginning to end “ William Tell ” is a ballet. Eighty years have passed since it was written, and w© must bear in irwind that w r hat our great-grandfathers applauded was not an opera hut a music-hall entertainment. The best of the music is well adapted to the music hall. It is sparkling, full of merriment —lull, too, of genuine tune. A tragedy it is not; it is not even a fine serious opera; everything in it is degraded dowm to the level of what would have been the music hall had there been o. music hall In Rossini’s day.—J. F. Runciinan, in the Saturday Review.