MUSICAL CRITICISM.

Southern Cross, Volume 27, Issue 23, 13 September 1919, Page 9

MUSICAL CRITICISM.

1 (To the Editor). ; Sir, —Why will people like “Psychic” nut apply ordinary eommonsense to the every-day occurrences of life? It needs no Sherlock Holmes to unravel the mystery of the incident he relates, viz., a reporter stating that a horn soio was delightfully done, where there was neither soloist nor horn in the orchestra. **. One of the two following reasons will account for this: Either the criticism was written before the performance of the programme (of course the horn-player ought to have been there, but lie wasn’t, and up goes the donkey). Or, in the second place, the report was written by a critic who was not present at the concert, but drew on his imagination with, perhaps, the judicious,' or injudicious, help (as you like to take it) of some other person who was. .

Whichever way you look at it, the incident shows how little value rnav be placed on the critique as a whole. The same remark applies to most of the musical reports published in Invercargill fulsome flattery characterises these. Items are stated to have; been splendidly performed, when to anyone with the veriest scrap of musical knowledge the very opposite was the esae, and the performers, instead of being musically smacked for bad and ill-prepared work, are thereby encouraged in the belief that they are budding Carusos. Kubeliks, or Sir Henry Woods, and there is not a hat in town that will fill their heads. A musical critic is badly wanted in Invercargill who will not give praise indiscriminately”. If the things are good, say so; if not. point out the defects in a kindly helpful manner. Such reports would in a measure tend towards raising the musical standard of the town. Yours, etc.. MUSICUS.