21
as arising out of a sincere desire to be of help to friends whose interests are dear and close to me.
(Signed) Dr. Francesco X. Sauchelli.
A Personal Experience
A. Wilner Oakes, violin teacher of Sacramento, Cal., tells his own experiences:
To the Musical Courier:
I have been reading with a great deal of interest the numerous articles in the Musical Courier from teachers of music regarding the license, and since it is the wish of your most valuable staff that we teachers air our views in the matter, I will give mine in as few words as possible. I have been a teacher of violin ■for fifteen years, having received my education from conservatories and channels leading direct from the Royal High School in Berlin. During my short experience, I have encountered many teachers who seemed not to have as much equipment as they ought to have. I have seen teachers who had any amount of good education whose inferior teaching I have marvelled at. I have seen teachers whose education was very meager, indeed, but whose application of principles and rare understanding of individualities made them really fine teachers in their grade. I have met teachers who could put many of us to shame by their fine playing, but whose teaching was the saddest kind of a failure. I know of one teacher, who, in twenty years of extensive teaching, has developed but one pupil who can play really well, and this pupil happened to have talent of a high order and the special aptitude for copying. This pupil plays so much like his teacher that one cannot tell them apart. Still this teacher has done a lot of good and is still doing it. The license would not help him. I have seen teachers whose ability was technically and musically splendid, but whose personality and aloofness separated them from their students and formed a sort of barrier over which nothing could pass. You have all seen teachers who spent a major portion of each lesson telling the pupil how great they (the teacher) are and what wonders they have accomplished. Teachers who have been well educated in music, too. There is, too, the teacher who plays beautifully, and therefore must be a good teacher. He admits it. What more conclusive proof is necessary?
Now I believe that my experience in this matter has been the experience of a great many teachers all over the land, and from these facts may be drawn some very pertinent lessons for those who so strongly favor the license, to wit:
1.	Personality of teacher a very large factor.
2.	Ability to understand each pupil’s own peculiarity and ability.
3.	Human qualities which make of the pupil a close friend.
4.	Ability to impart knowledge in such a manner that each individual mind may may be penetrated.
5.	A grasp of principles underlying the art, rather than the development of copyists or parrot players or singers.
6.	Discretion in all matters pertaining to what to study, and when.
7.	A wide knowledge of material.
8.	Willingness to try out new musical works and principles, rather than to run a risk of becoming obsolete.
9.	Broad-mindedness enough to understand that there are many ways of arriving at the same destination.
10.	Honesty toward pupils and parents. Not encouraging study where it is the honest opinion of the teacher that the pupil cannot succeed; honesty with the pupil at lesson hour, giving careful attention to all details and not stinting in time.
But some may say that I have not mentioned having the proper preparation, education, etc. This I take for granted. If.teachers haven’t it, they will not succeed to any great extent; and if they do not have at least a major portion of the above ten points, no amount of education will suffice. What, then, is the cure for the faker? Let every teacher of music take a careful inventory of his or her qualities and see if he or she is doing all that may be done for the betterment of their work, and music in general. Let the inferior teacher alone! He may not be as inferior and incompetent as we think. Rather let the results speak for themselves! Surely we “good” teachers are not afraid to allow the public to judge between our work and that of the inferior teacher. Perish the thought! Good teachers of music have a wonderful opportunity for educating the public to what is really noble and elevating in the art through an army of students. If good music teachers, and all of those who believe that they are good, will bend every effort toward an educational campaign, they will have small time for criticising the so-called inferior teacher, nor will it be necessary to pay any attention to him. He will be eliminated more surely than by any other means. To license teachers of music would be a fatal mistake, for it would stifle musical growth and relegate one of the greatest arts to the level of the mediocre.
(Signed) A. Wilmer Oakes.
-----«>-----
It’s From Wichita
The Wichita College of Music, which has a Phil-harmony Hall, gladdens our heart with the donation of the following communication received by that institution not long ago:
Garber, Okla., December 4, 1922.
Phil Harmony School of Music,
Wichita, Kansas.
My dear Sirs :
lam a senior in high school (18 years old) and am compelled to write and deliver an oration, and I chose as my subject “Paderewski.”
.1 bear he is to appear in that city soon. Could you give me the date, the charge he demands to see him perform?
In fact, I would appreciate it SO much if you could give me a brief outline of his history.
Next year I am going to leave this city and specialize in piano and voice, but have not decided where, and if you will kindly send me a catalog along with some “news” of Paderewski, I am surely thankful to you.
And, OH yes, the most important question—What are some of his pieces that he plays, or does he make them up as he plays? Does he not open his program with Chopin’s Funeral March.
I do thank you so much,
Yours truly,
Mr. Archie Wilkinson.
January 4, 1923	MUSICAL COURIER
LICENSING MUSIC TEACHERS
tutions outside of the profession. Agreement in the profession would be the logical protection for the public (students) and would also automatically work out for the protection of the teacher.
A Plan of Organization
Dr. Francesco X. Sauchelli, a consulting chiropractor, gives his views:
I am taking the liberty of writing this letter, in the hope that it may be helpful and that you will believe my motive to be a sincere desire to be of assistance to all the members of the musical profession.
My excuse for injecting my ideas into the subject is that I number among my list of patients many members of the musical profession—both vocalists and instrumentalists. This should be sufficient to establish my sympathetic interest in their welfare and success.
The question of licensing music teachers seems to be a very vital one. I am of the opinion that something should be done which would, once for all, overcome the difficulties which at present beset members of the musical profession— especially the vocalists; that some protection should be afforded not alone to the artists, but to the public, those who foot the ■bills and, in the last analysis, make possible the success of the artists.
It chances that I am at present working along parallel lines in my own profession, and it occurs to me that the tremendous amount of energy and thought ,1 have given to this subject of licensing members of the chiropractic science in this State could well be used to advantage in connection with the musical world.
The major difficulties in the problem under discussion are,
I am convinced, possible of perfect solution, and, in my estimation, the remedy may be summed up in three forceful words, viz.: (1) Organization, (2) Legislation, (3) Education.
Briefly, my idea of the solution would be as follows: First, to organize a society in New York State, composed of musicians and singers, to be called, perhaps, the New York State Society of Musical Artists, or the New York State Musical Society. The largest possible membership should be enrolled, the talking point being that such an organization is practically unique in that it is to be controlled and governed by musicians from its members, which must insure that its interests will naturally be looked after to the best advantage, and that all undertakings, consequently, must react to the benefit of the members, individually and collectively. In other words, the organization is to be run and controlled by musicians, for the benefit of musicians—a free, independent and democratic institution, beyond the control of outside influences.
After organization has been effected, a bill should be prepared by the members, to be submitted to the legislature, so phrased that the society shall have the power to submit to the Board of Regents a list of names, from which a Board of Examiners may be selected. This Board of Examiners should be fully and legally authorized to conduct examinations. By means of such examinations, it could be determined what applicants are properly qualified to receive licenses to teach. The names of such licensees should in turn, be submitted to the local authorities, who would be authorized to issue the licenses. In other words, licenses would be issued by the local authorities to those approved by the State Board of Examiners, after regular examinations had been held. This method of procedure would place the entire control in the hands of the musicians, where it properly belongs, and ־ the authority vested in the State would be simply a formal carrying out of the mandates of the musicians.
The power of revocation of licenses would also be in the hands of the Board of Examiners, acting under authority of the State authorities, or of the Board of Regents, and all licensees would have the privilege of submitting any grievances they might have to such Board.
Next, the Society should be prepared to go ahead and use all means at its command to push through the legislation outlined above, as this would have the result of licensing worthy applicants and excluding those not equipped to hold such licenses.
As for the matter of education, once the Association ■becomes a going organization, there should be appointed a Research Council, a Publicity Council, and, perhaps also, a Lecture Council, all to be entirely composed of members of the organization. The function of the Research Council is self-evident, giving opportunity for research into all matters affecting and improving everything relating to music—vocal and instrumental—and to the musical artists themselves.
The function of the Publicity Council would be wider reaching in that its scope would embrace the dissemination of information relating to musical subjects throughout its membership; but it would also be charged with the very important work of informing the public—and arousing the interest of the public in music, and of the good which comes through: an understanding and appreciation of things musical. This would, of course, have the best possible reaction upon the musical world itself.
As for the Lecture Council, the benefits to arise from such a body may be left to the imagination; but it would supplement and ■be correlated with the work of the Publicity Council, in spreading education along musical lines, and instilling a knowledge and appreciation of music, with its benefits, in the mind of the general public.
Such a society would serve as a model, which might be copied by other States, and eventually a national organization, embracing the various State organizations, might de-
The above has been hastily dictated. It barely outlines my thought. If it is of any interest, I should be willing to devote the necessary time not only to amplify the above outline, but, perhaps, to assist or co-operate with you to .whatever extent you may desire, in the the preliminary work necessary to put such a project on foot. I feel that my experience with my own Association here would qualify me to be of some help.
Please accept, at any rate, what I have written, not as coming from any desire to be officious at all, but merely
This subject still continues to hold the interest of musicians, not only in New York where the proposed license law is being considered, but also all over the country. Numerous letters have been received dealing more or less directly with the subject, many of them mere protests, some of them taking a humorous view of the situation and asserting that all music teachers ought to be in jail anyway and their pupils with them and then the world would have rest and quiet and a surcease from the howling and screaming and squeaking of the would-bes.
But there is little enough that really adds anything to the sum of our knowledge, and it is significant that those who have worthwhile things to say about this subject are teachers of reputation. It is unfortunate that so many teachers of that sort are silent. Many of them take the attitude, apparently, that music is their •business and that they see no reason to enter into politics. Many of them also assert that discussion is futile, since the politicians will go their own way and pass the license laws if it happens to suit them, being more interested in currying favor with their constituents than with the music teachers—and just now the “protector of the poor” is the dodge that is constantly being worked by the politicians everywhere.
The writer of the letter that follows wishes to withhold his name, but he is a teacher prominent in the profession:
Licensing vs. Standardization.
If you will grant me some space in your valuable columns,
I would like to offer a few thoughts in support of the very interesting and sane observations by William A. C. Zerffi, in your issue of December 14, under the heading of Vocal Methods at the Bar of Judgment. To repeat the exact words of Mr. Zerffi, I wish “before going any further to make clear that I have put myself on record as being opposed to any system of licensing,” ■but no one need be convinced that where there is smoke there_ is also fire. The present agitation concerning the licensing of music teachers is smoke from a fire which has been smouldering a long time.	. ..
The contribution by Mme. Devine, in an adjoining article to that of Mr. Zerffi, proves, in fact, that this is but a revived flame. I believe that her article would have been more correctly classified under the caption of Licensing Impossible, rather than Standardization Impossible. Anyone who has read all the discussion which has appeared in the musical magazines since last summer does not have• even to try to recognize that there are two fires burning side by side In all of the attempts to extinguish the fire of the discussion of licensing, there is an evident hope that the fire of possibilities of standardization will neither go out or be deliberately extinguished. The logical order of procedure for the members of the profession is to tend the fire of standardization, and draw from its embers a realization of some order and consciousness of the possibility of reasonable regulation.
I feel very keenly, with my clear thinking colleague, that, if the voice teacher were dealing only with the artistic achievements of his many students, the question of standardization would remain unsolved^ for all times The voice teacher however, is dealing with fundamental laws of a physical function which must be set in motion, and it is the motion of methods which must ■be regulated and standardized. One physical fact, more generally overlooked than, perhaps, any other, has been very concisely stated by Mr ׳Zerffi, to wit: “That apart from differences in size, all vocal organs are constructed alike and function alike, and the action of the vocal organ is subconscious.”
The possibilities of standardization depend entirely upon how much exact knowledge has been acquired by the members of the profession as to what vocal exercises will induce a normal subconscious functioning of the vocal organs and the other parts of the vocal mechanism necessary to tone production. If there are no differences in the structure, except those stated above, then a vocal exercise which is scientifically correct will apply to all subjects with equal effectiveness. The fundamental, governed by the exercise, would be limited in effectiveness only by the comprehension of the pupil, the peculiarities of the voice itself,־ or by the teacher’s presentation of the exercises. These allowances constitute the much talked of personal equation, but if the student is not allowed to change the fundamental to conform with his limitations, he will realize a maximum benefit according to his possibilities and the extent of his experience.
With these few facts in mind, “the study of singing can be undertaken without placing reliance upon sudden gashes of intuition on the part of the pupil or teacher.” For there are vocal exercises which will produce absolutely normal, accurate and efficient breath taking and_ breath control; others which will produce a flexible articulation and make possible pure enunciation and pronunciation. A vocal method should be built upon scientifically correct exercises which will produce a perfect co-ordination of the entire vocal mechanism composed of the breath (motor section), the throat (producing section), and the resonators of both the body and the head. I firmly believe that a body of competent teachers could, ■by entering into conference and comparing their vocal exercises _ used to induce the above enumerated fundamental principles (providing they would be willing to give and take), work out a plan of standardization which would preclude the possibility of our profession being stigmatized^ as one dealing in a subject containing vagaries, ambiguities, black art and myths.
In the event of such a course of procedure being followed, it could not help but be productive of many benefits. At the conclusion of such an achievement, there would be a natural desire on the part of all conscientious^ professional men and women to be identified as persons holding the truth of their subject and licensing of the profession would never have to be considered by any political body or other msti-