21
MUSICAL COURIER
best sort, put at the disposal of those who should have it. This is what Music Week will do, before everything else. We feel that it is the greatest musical educational program ever offered in this country, and it is such a very big thing that we estimate it will take five years to work it out in all its details and to get it running completely. Its first fruits will not be for this year’s Music Week, though the work will be started at once. By next year we hope to have much accomplished in this particular direction.”
-----־*>---
CAN’T BEAT THE DUTCH
It’s a very old slang phrase, “You can’t beat the Dutch,” and once more its truth has been proved. The New York Philharmonic Orchestra, the oldest orchestra in America, with an unbroken record of nearly eighty years, will next season be under the direction of two Hollanders, Willem Mengelberg and Willem van Hoogstraten, the latter just chosen as the successor to Josef Stransky. This appointment, by the way, shows what a good bookmaker the Musical Courier is, Mr. van Hoogstraten having been quoted last week in the advance book of the great International Philharmonic Handicap at “2-5, overwhelming favorite, based on the reports of observing railbirds, early morning dockers, and shrewd tonal tipsters.” As a matter of fact, close observers have felt ever since the spring of 1922 that Mr. van Hoogstraten was being groomed for the post. He had practically no experience in Europe as a conductor, but proved that he had the stuff in him by directing a concert with the Philharmonic early in 1922. This gave his friends and supporters a chance to put him into the Stadium concerts last summer, when he directed half the season with decided success; and only a few weeks ago, as guest-conductor of the Philharmonic in a single concert, he again gained the approval of both critics and audience.
Mr. van Hoogstraten will have a hard test before him. The preparation for and actual directing of half a Philharmonic season means a prodigious amount of work, especially for a man of decidedly limited experience. But in the concerts he has so far directed here he seemed to possess to a considerable degree that ability to command, that personality which makes the men play with interest under his baton and goes so far to replace any lack of long technical preparation. (Witness the case of Leopold Stokowski ! )
It would be interesting to know a bit more about the inside Philharmonic politics which led to the exit of Mr. Stransky after eleven years of faithful service. Whatever one may have thought of his ability as a conductor—and opinions ranged from the aureolic admiration of a Henry T. Finck to the absolutely unflattering judgment of some other critics just as well known—it cannot be denied that the box office showed results when he conducted, due probably to the fàct that he was a good program maker from the standpoint of the audience. He played favorites ■—■Wagner and Tschaikowsky in particular-^-and when he ran some heavy numbers, spiced them with something light to balance. It was a rule that worked. Will Mr. van Hoogstraten be able to show the same results out in front? We’ll wager that that is very much in his mind at present, for after all it is money that makes the mare go.
And what is to become of Mr. Stransky? Without doubt he will tell the world himself before long, for it is not like him to have what he doubtless regards as a great injustice done him and to keep quiet about it. One hears that he is to conduct a special series here next winter; but with what orchestra, where, when—and why? There is one orchestra in town (also with a conductor from Holland!) which could stand a lot of box office support. Perhaps Mr. Stransky will be invited to become one of its conductors. Perhaps—but why speculate? It’s better and easier to wait and observe and learn. In the meantime, victory is once more to the Dutch.
----<S>---
AN UNKNOWN CHOPIN PRELUDE
It seems funny to hear, of an unknown Chopin prelude having been performed in Paris the other day. Emil Blanchet, the Swiss pianist and composer, played it at a recital there. The story is told that it was written in Paris in 1834 and the manuscript presented to Pierre Wolff, then professor in the Geneva Conservatory, who later presented it to one of his pupils, a Mile. Forget, among whose family papers it was discovered in 1918. The work is in A flat minor, not very difficult technically, in lyric style and decidedly melodic. Blanchet was called upon to replay it.twice at his recital. It has been printed by a Swiss publishing firm.
and assisting your Committee, and recommend that we be discharged from further consideration of the subject.
Respectfully submitted, .
Philip Berolzheimer, Chamberlain, Chairman of the Committee.
Geo. P. Nicholson,
Corporation Counsel.
John F. Gilchrist,
License Commissioner.
Willis Holly,
Secretary to the Committee.
—-----«-----
OPERA STARS IN PICTURE THEATERS
One of the most important announcements which has been made within the last few weeks is that Marcus Loew, owner of the vast chain of Loew theaters which extends throughout the country, had engaged operatic artists for his two magnificent theaters,‘the Warfield in San Francisco and the State in Los Angeles. They are among the handsomest theaters in the country, both worth several million dollars apiece. The policy of the Loew theaters has always been a feature picture, surrounded by from three to four vaudeville acts, and the fact that Mr. Loew is branching out into the broader field is of great significance. It is understood since the announcement of this change in policy the attendance at these two theaters has jumped to capacity, which has caused vaudeville and other interests to look on the move quite seriously and to plan a move of competition.
Orville Harrold, tenor of the Metropolitan Opera, has been engaged at the Warfield for four weeks, and at the State in Los Angeles for two weeks, for which, reports claim, he is to receive $3,000 a week. Dorothy Jardon, soprano, formerly of the Chicago Opera Association, has been signed for six weeks, three at both the Warfield and the State, for which it is said she is to be paid $2,000 a week. There are other artists engaged who will be announced later.
Now comes the statement that another big factor in the motion picture industry is going to introduce music of a very superior quality in its string of theaters which extends from coast to coast. Its idea is to give the public which patronizes the picture theaters the same artists found in the concert halls. If these projects are developed to the extent which the first plans would indicate, it is food for serious thought, perhaps much more serious than is on the surface at this moment. The millions behind thè industry, the possibilities of the most beautiful theaters in the United States, a presentation superior to anything that the concert hall can offer, and thirty week bookings, are something to be reckoned with, and when one considers the money that will be paid, any singer would be unwise not to consider this opportunity seriously.
One of the New York papers recently printed a dispatch from Los Angeles which stated that Luisa Tetrazzini had been offered $15,000 a week for six weeks to sing for a motion picture corporation. The dispatch further stated that Mme. Tetrazzini was forced to decline the offer on account of previous engagements and also that the famous diva was not at all averse to accepting the proposition. This is of great importance and it is hoped that within the next few issues of the Musical Courier we will be ׳able to print some special interviews regarding this new activity.
-----<S>—--
ANNUAL MUSIC WEEK
Organizers of the annual New York Music Week, which will take place April 29 to May 5, have incorporated this year, with the following board of directors : Thomas L. Leeming, George Crowell, Ray Palmer, Albert Goldman, W. Rowman Fay, Isabel Low-den (director of Music Week), Paul D. Cravath, Dr. Eugene Noble, Martin Conboy. (One more director, to act as chairman for Manhattan Borough, will be named later.) It is understood that the financial strength of this year’s Week has been well guaranteed through Felix Warburg, Otto H. Kahn, and a contribution by the Julliard Foundation. The programs for the week will be more numerous and on a larger scale than ever before. As heretofore, schools, music clubs, musical societies, the city government, private individuals, churches, and other organizations will participate. Last year there were over 3,000 separate events and this year will doubtless bring more. The educational side of music will be especially stressed. Isabel Lowden, director, said in an interview: “In addition to all that Music Week did last year we have plans ahead that will mean an infinite amount in musical education to those that deserve it and are well worth while, a series or rather a system of contests city-wide, in which everyone may compete, and the prizes or awards for which will be scholarships. No money prizes whatsoever are to be given. What will be given is training of the very
February 22, 1923
LICENSING MUSIC TEACHERS
The letter which follows was sent by City Chamberlain Philip Berolzheimer to the Honorable John F. Hylan, Mayor of the City of New York. It is a moderate and generally unbiased statement, and the fact that the report of the committee of music teachers, headed by Dr. William C. Carl and Dr. Frank Damrosch, was attached to it, should make' easy the task of the Mayor in determining what action to take in the matter. The report of the committee of music teachers was not attached to the copy of Chamberlain Berolzheimer’s letter that was furnished the press, and we have so far been unable to get a copy. We are assured, however, that the report was unanimously opposed to any form of license for music teachers.
What further action will now be taken in the matter remains to be seen, but what has been said before by the Musical Courier is now said again: the music teaching profession should organize! it should organize non׳, and not wait for organization to be forced upon it. If it does not organize, it will surely be licensed sooner or later. Chamberlain Berolzheimer, moderate as he is in the wording of this statement, is obviously determined to see that something is done. It is up to the music teachers to do it first.
CHAMBERLAIN BEROLZHEIMER’S RECOMMENDATION
February 15, 1923.
Hon. John F. Hylan, Mayor City of New York.
Dear Mr. Mayor:—On August 22, 1922, you appointed us a Committee to investigate the question of licensing music teachers because of complaints which had come to you from citizens who had been defrauded by incompetents, who pretended to be able, not only to teach music, but also to place their pupils on the operatic or concert stage.^ Instances were reported to you, where people, unable to judge of these pretensions, but sincere in their purpose to study the art, took lessons, paid big fees and worked hard only to find that their money and effort had been wasted. They had either fallen into the hands of men who were simply obtaining money under false pretenses or into the hands of incapable teachers whose self-delusion and conceit brought dire results that even entire good faith cannot palliate.
You directed a survey of the whole music teaching situation to determine how, if possible, the public could be protected against such abuses and the great majority of the music teaching profession made secure in its proper practice and in their good repute before the people. Public hearings were held in the Chamber of the Board of Estimate, City Hall. The attendance of music teachers of standing was gratifyingly large. The press featured the utterances of all the speakers and our investigation was followed with much interest all over the country.
We then appointed an advisory committee under which the inquiry could be continued by the profession among themselves. At their meeting of December 11, 1922, in Magna Chordia Chambers, 10 East Forty-fourth street, the subcommittee made a voluminous report, which we have the honor to attach to ours. Dr. William C. Carl, director of the Guilmant Organ School, was chairman of this committee and Dr. Frank Damrosch, director of the Institute of Musical Art, was vice chairman. This committed- received, as we did, letters testifying to the widespread interest in the question and expressing opinions for and against the proposition of licensing. Eminent artists and teachers from all over the United States volunteered to come here if they could assist in solving the problem. Buffalo, New Orleans, Butte, Los Angeles, San Diego, Philadelphia and other cities were thus heard from.
Your Committee is of the opinion, especially in view of the keen interest evidenced in music by Your Honor during your five years’ administration, that it might be well to go one step further in this interest and make an attempt^ to protect both the public and the music teaching profession. It could take the concrete form of a recommendation to the legislature that some law be passed for this purpose. In fact, we believe,, with many others, that eventually we shall come to the State licensing of music teachers under the auspices of recognized leaders of the profession acting in an advisory capacity to the authorities. This would put them in the same attitude toward the public as the members of the legal and medical professions.
The full operation of any such system is obviously a good way off. The consensus of opinion among the teachers of unimpeachable standing is not in favor of plunging into such regulation in spite of the fact that there are admittedly numbers of those who profess to be teachers who are devoid of even the most rudimentary elements of knowledge of the art of teaching.
The opponents of licensing plans believe that the utmost promise for beneficial regulation is held by the promotion of some movement from within the profession. Your Committee and our Advisory Committee also share largely in this belief. Dr. Damrosch in all that he has had to say at the public hearings and in the committee meetings, has strongly favored this course and supported it with very convincing arguments. The movement could take the form of an incorporated society of teachers who would take up the matter seriously. This suggests the continuation of the Advisory Board and, while we are without authority to continue it indefinitely, we wish to express the hope that it will do so. It is admitted that the discussion given to it under your action has had beneficial effect on the public and on the profession. It has had a salutary effect upon some incompetents. The knowledge that so much attention was being focussed on their activities was bound to do some good.
A suggestion to investigate the registration system as practiced in Australia was urged upon the Committee, but we had no facilities to do so. Some plan of registration might be the very best beginning in the effort to find a solution to the licensing problem.
We hereby tender our thanks to the members of the Advisory Committee for its prompt action in holding meetings