21
MUSICAL COURIER
March 15, 1923
CULTURE IN THE MAKING
[We are assured that the following is an actual record of answers made in Missouri musical history tests.—The Editor]
SOME ANSWERS TO A TEST ON MUSICAL FORM FROM AN EIGHTH GRADE CLASS.
Q.—Why do composers make use of form?
Ans.■—To avoid matrimony (monotony) and so it will show clearness. Composers make use of form in order to make the music correctly so as when it is played it is correct. If they had to form they could compose music.
Q.—What is rhythm and how shown?
Ans.—It is shown by the swinging of the voice.
Rhythm is a recurring of accidents.
Rhythm is regular repairing accents.
Rhythm is anything that rhymes when playing, like playing a piece two or three different parts are played alike.
Q.—What is a melody?
Ans.—Melody is a secession of notes.
EXTRACTS FROM PAPERS WRITTEN ON THE LIVES OF HANDEL AND HAYDN FROM A FRESHMAN CLASS IN MUSICAL HISTORY.
Handel.
1—	George Handel was born at Westminster Abbey in 1685.
2—	He was not allowed to go to public school for fear he would learn to gamble (the gamut).
3—	Bach and Handel were born in a month apart.
4—	Handle married from Europe.
5—	There are fifty well known paintings of Handel, some of them by extinguished artists.
6—	Like most musicians he went blind but his music or thoughts were wrote by his wife.
7—	He had a passionate, fiery temper which often resulted in a frenzy, and a large heavy body.
8—	Most of Handel’s music flowed from his pen.
9—	Handel was the second child. He was very much like his father in phisics.
10—	Bach was the outcome of a long ancestry, while Handel was the only one of his race.
11—	Each was born within a month of each other.
12—	The memory of Handel did not die with him but his memory lasted.
Haydn.
1—	Haydn’s mother was a pheasant’s daughter.
2—	His mother had such an insignificant voice in singing that she helped earn the living.
3—	It was said that Haydn could sing like a raven.
4—	Haydn polished wigs during the day.
----$-----
STADIUM NOVELTIES
The announcement made last week by the committee in charge of the Stadium Concerts that it is in search of new orchestral works by American composers for performance at those concerts next summer, is a thoroughly interesting one, and shows a step forward in constructive thought on the part of the committee. However, there are one or two points that might be strengthened. In the first place, no matter how good weather conditions, an orchestral work cannot be heard to full advantage in the open air. Why not guarantee a performance of the successful work or works in the Philharmonic concerts next winter, since it is a Philharmonic conductor who is to lead, and practically the entire Philharmonic Orchestra which is to play, at the Stadium Concerts ? Certainly if the work comes up to the high standard which the committee sets for itself, it is worth performance indoors as well as out.
Again, the composer, or composers, whose works are selected must furnish orchestra parts for the performance. Those who have had orchestra parts of symphonic work of any length copied will realize what this expense means. The committee states that “there will either be a cash award to the composer or publication of the best manuscript presented.” Surely there should be a substantial cash award, at least more than sufficient to pay the composer for the expense of having his orchestra parts copied. The idea in itself is an excellent one. It will he interesting to see how many manuscripts the offer atrtacts. -------------------------<$>---
GERMAN OPERA CONTINUES
To the surprise of many, that good ship, The Flying Dutchman Opera Company, which had been tossed about terribly upon disturbed financial waters at the Manhattan Opera House, finally found the way to a quiet harbor and came safely to anchor on Monday evening at the Lexington Opera House, where it began life anew with a performance of Die Meistersinger before a house that paid over $4,000 to hear it and got its money’s worth. It was the fine Italian hand of Melvin H. Dalberg, now general director of the reorganized company, that discovered the hidden barrel of golden oil that quieted the storms. Mr. Dalberg was seen by a representative of the Musical Courier. “Is it true,” he was asked, “that you intend to abandon the law to become an impresario?” “If you print that,” said the young director, with a winning smile, “I shall sue you for malicious slander.” Three German operas that have not been seen here since before the war are promised-—Fidelio, Der Freischütz and Hansel und Gretel.
than its reputation and that some of his most successful productions had been his best works of a decidedly high grade.
Can the producers of musical comedies learn anything from this? We hear musical productions condemned right and left by musicians and the musically cultured public, and we know that many managers think success can only be achieved by appealing to the greatest and most vulgar public.
Why not try the Gilbert and Sullivan type of light musical productions for a change? Those works succeeded at once and have remained in favor in spite of being good literature and artistic music without vulgarity. Think about it!
----<s>---
WHO MET A PIEMAN?
The other day a person signing himself “Simon Bucharoff” wrote us from Chicago. It was a heated sort of a letter. Mr. “Bucharoff” appeared to be annoyed at an editorial printed in the Musical Courier of November 22, 1922, in which it was gently hinted that he had been rather assiduous in his efforts to awe the Berlin Staatsoper into accepting and producing an opera of his. When the rejection came Mr. “Bucharoff” wrote on the margin of it: “I cannot accept this letter, for reasons which Mr.
------ (a high official) will explain to you. An
opera house that will perform such rubbish as Palestrina and Mona Lisa and refuses my masterwork, does not exist for me.”
At first we racked our brains to recall a “Simon Bucharoff” on our calling list. But, rereading the editorial referred to, which was written by Cesar Saerchinger, the Musical Courier’s European general representative, and signed with his initials, we remembered him. It was nearly a quarter of a century ago when we first saw him. Just arrived from Europe, he came into this office with a letter of introduction. His name then was Simon Buchalter, and he was no American.
Now, at the end of the heated letter we have just received from Mr. Bucharoff-Buchalter, he says: “I therefore demand that Mr. C. S. apologize for his ungentlemanly conduct and un-Americanism or resign as correspondent of your paper.” As we read those lines, an incident of Mr. Bucharoff-Buchalter’s first visit to us flashed into our mind. Our office boy said or did something that was not to the taste of Mr. Bucharoff-Buchalter. He loudly demanded that we should fire the office boy. We did not fire the office hoy. We shall not fire Mr. Saerchinger. In fact, if Mr. S., suddenly and unexpectedly stricken with remorse and contrition over his cruel, cruel remarks about Mr. Bucharoff-Buchalter, should offer his resignation on that ground, we should firmly refuse to accept it.
----<S>---
DE PACHMANNIA
Maurice Lena, writing to Le Menestrel from London, says: “Taking advantage of his age and his talent, the pianist De Pachmann, one of the sacred idols of the English concert platform, takes fatherly liberties with his audience. For instance, while he is playing he often accompanies the composition with expressions and comments on it, spoken in full voice.
“At Chesterfield a member of the audience who sat in the front row and did not seem to De Pachmann to be sufficiently in communion with the soul of Chopin, which he was interpreting at the moment, was requested very politely by the pianist to take a seat somewhere else. At Mansfield the applause began too soon, so he took the precaution for the rest of the program to indicate to the public wherever its applause would be appropriate.
“The Chopin Mazurka in G goes, as all know, at a rapid tempo. At his last recital he felt himself so moved by the joyous effect which he created with it that when it was finished, despite his seventy and more years, he jumped up from the stool and executed several extremely juvenile dance steps.”
Well, there ought to be a good time here next winter.
---—®-----
VICARIOUS NOTICES
Said the American on Wednesday morning, March 8, concerning a recital by Colin O’More scheduled for the previous evening: “Mr. O’More repeated the favorable impression made at his former appearances. His Irish folk songs proved naive and charming; his other contributions by English, German and French composers were polished and artistic, while his diction was at all times crystal clear.”
Now all of this would have been eminently true had Mr. O’More been able to sing, but he was ill with the. grip. and the concert was called off at the last moment. After all, why give recitals when you can get just as good notices by not giving them?
PIERROT LUNAIRE
Much has been said about the Schonberg’s “offensive” Pierrot Lunaire and its performance and a whole Sunday page of a New York newspaper was devoted recently to accusing the audience of “artistic unrighteousness and affectation,” because it applauded. Some of the “unrighteous,” however, have something to say on the side of the defense. Each new work is regarded as a possible philosopher’s stone and its composer often is taken too seriously. There are insufficiencies even in the classic composers, yet cold perfection is the procrustean bed on which new writers are stretched. After five great schools of painting the moderns are driving themselves into lunacy trying to capture the third side of a building. Histories are conspicuously empty of the facts regarding the experimentalists in the younger art of music who have laid the frame-work and sharpened the tools which the master builders used. Yet each of these had to consider himself a genius of the first rank else he could have accomplished nothing. Audiences are also needed to encourage these minor efforts, thus preserving the fragments for the real genius. Is this misguided applause not just compensation for those who struggle with matter too large for their full comprehension? The attitude of many critics cramps the production of radical experiments and encourages lukewarm dilutions of outworn materials. Regarding Pierrot Lunaire as experimental, does it embody any significant developments which stimulate new ideas in the listener? Time is accepted as a criterion for the classics; let it decide the place the Schonberg work will eventually hold. An intelligence of the German text in Pierrot Lunaire must be taken for granted; the appreciation of all objective music is conditioned by knowledge of the program. The rhythmic score is of great interest, especially. the novel ways of fitting the words into the measure. The composer probably felt that a definite, melodic line tends to draw the attention away from the text. Indicated alternate registers kept the recital from being monotonous and the emotional tension produced was comparable to the addition of a violin backstage in dramatic climaxes. Future experimentation with this device seems practical to those who may have suffered during opera recitatives. Anyone who reads Jurgen, or any symbolistic piece oi literature or drama, is prepared to seek the unexpressed meaning. If this is legitimate, why not symbolistic music? What the violin played did not matter, it was a sound that only the violin makes (i. e., the color and spirit of sound) that was utilized. So with all the instruments and combinations. It was the use of such grotesque symbols that set a background typical of the poetry. The text has been accused of decadence. In spite of attempted individualism most creators do little more than reflect the age they live in. A period which tolerates cockroach racing ought not to complain. Perhaps, as Hamlet says, “The times are out of joint.” Yet the fact that Shakespeare wrote that over three hundred years ago leads one to wonder.
■--------
ANGEL 3892
. Now and then one sees the words “by request” on a program. Sometimes they doubtless appear “by request” of some interested auditor; oftener perhaps “by request” of the artist himself. Last Sunday night at the Metropolitan Josef Hofmann got a real request. As he finished one of his numbers a gentleman with large sun-glasses and a derby hat stood up in one of the boxes and shouted “Play Chopin’s Funeral March.” Mr. Hofmann and the audience looking up in surprise were astonished to hear the following words, also issuing from beneath the spectacles and the derby hat: “God Almighty sent me down to see that the Funeral March was played, and I am going to see that it is done.” Transferred to the nearest police station, the gentleman refused to say anything about himself until he had been allowed to play the Funeral March on the station piano, adding the Berceuse from Jocelyn as an encore. Thereupon he described himself as Angel No. 3892, and was׳ allowed to go to Bellevue, where he will be given an opportunity to prove the correctness of his own identification. Too bad that most of the Metropolitan excitement is confined to Sunday nights.
---<S>---
AD CAPTANDUM VULGUS
When Manager Rothafel, of the Capitol Theater, New York, was in London not long ago he told his fellow diners at a film convention that he tried to produce good works with character, and originality rather than pieces which were.supposed to be what the general public wanted. He thought it was a mistake to aim for the low level of what public taste is considered to be. He found that the public taste was better