OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 60

60.—HOW TO SECURE A SUCCESSFUL DÉBUT.
We have spoken in another sketch of the incident where Madame Alboni discovered a rascally cabal and averted threatened confusion on the occasion of her début in an Italian city; and also of the efforts of friends to make a singer's first appearance a great success, or of her enemies to make it a fiasco. The Alboni incident was an illustration of the latter. We relate below an illustration of the opposite kind.
Christine Nilsson was introduced to the English people under the auspices of Colonel Mapleson, perhaps the best known of modern opera managers. At that time she was almost unknown, but Mapleson knew that he had secured a jewel, and determined that her English career should be launched with becoming enthusiasm.
He also knew that should the thing be poorly done, should the hired applause be given at a wrong time, or, as has sometimes been the case, before the singer has had time to utter a note, failure instead of success would follow his well-meant plans.
So Mapleson hired some twenty-five boatmen from the Thames and gave them tickets to various parts of the house, with the understanding that they were not to applaud Nilsson,—the lady wearing a pink dress and who appeared in the first act; but, moreover, they were promised a shilling apiece every time they, by their applause, caused the curtain to go up after the first act.
By this arrangement disaster was averted and the rivermen took care to earn five or six shillings apiece that night. Mapleson knew that if he could once get the songstress a fair hearing, her own abilities would carry her through and make her reputation. But if the public did not realize her great talents on the first night, or if, rather, the lack of trumpet blowing in advance of her coming lost her an enthusiastic reception, it would be up-hill work to have her merits appreciated ​thereafter. But from this he was saved by his wit and the boatmen's horny hands.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 64

64.—PERSONAL APPEARANCE.
There is an individuality that shows itself in dress and personal appearance; though to form any concept of what a person may be, musically, by these indications would be work for an expert in reading character by outward manifestations.
The well-groomed and polished gentleman may have as strong a musical personality as the one who would proclaim his descent from Beethoven by his disorderly garments and flying hair. On the other hand, some genius of clumsy walk and slouchy appearance may have the soul of a Mozart or a Chopin.
​We may well imagine that Bach was a methodical man, in dress as well as music, though, to tell the truth, those twenty children must have sensibly reduced the amount the irascible cantor could squander on dress. Both Haydn and Mozart were neat and tidy men in personal appearance, but one could not say the same for Beethoven and Schubert. The matter of externals was of little import to them. Perhaps the fact that they were confirmed bachelors made them less careful of their personal appearance.
Mendelssohn was a pronounced aristocrat in dress as well as music, and the same might be said of Liszt, though, of the two, Mendelssohn had perhaps the more refined appearance and the more elegant bearing. Liszt had less of delicate refinement in his appearance, and more of the mien of a commanding general.
Chopin, in the latter part of his life, must be ranked as a musical aristocrat, although in his earlier days music occupied his mind to the exclusion of matters of dress and appearance. Yet one who comes before the public must concede something to custom, and the manner in which Chopin steered between his indolence and fashion was, to say the least, peculiar. The way in which he reconciled his carelessness in respect to one matter of his toilet with regard for the feelings of his audiences, he tells in a letter sent to his parents from Vienna, in 1831. He says, in writing of some family friends: "When they saw me at Madame Schascheck's, their astonishment knew no bounds at my looking such a proper fellow. I have left my whiskers only on the right cheek. They grow very well there; and there is really no occasion to have them on my left cheek, as I always sit with my right toward the audience!"
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 57

57.—THE GREATER THE COMPOSER THE GREATER THE STUDENT.
The greatest composers have been proud to acknowledge themselves the pupils of the masters with whom they studied. In fact, the only one among "the immortals" who did not have thorough drill in all departments of composition was Schubert; and his music shows this. For, while he has seldom been excelled in melodic inventiveness, his thematic treatment is weak, and he has not been able to make the most of the goods the gods gave him. Recognizing his lack of technical knowledge in the line of contrapuntal treatment, he made arrangements to study counterpoint with one of the best teachers of the day. But illness overtook him, and the grim reaper carried him off ere he could profit by his studies.
While this is true, while the greatest students of music that ever lived and those to whom most genius was given were eager and anxious to study as hard and as long as possible, we have, on the other hand, many who, relying on the mite of talent that has been given them, attempt to strike out for themselves, and who are so blind as not to see that with their untutored splashings ​they do not make the most dignified and successful progress in the tonal sea.
Every one who can conjure up a bit of melody thinks himself a full-fledged composer, though he may know naught of the spelling, grammar, or rhetoric of music. Others who have considerable talent consider that it supplies the place of study properly directed by competent teachers.
The writer was approached not long before penning this sketch by a man who claimed to have written symphonies, operas, string quartets, and dear knows what all else, and who wound up by boasting that he had never taken a single music lesson of any kind whatever. When his claim and list of compositions was made known we felt as though we might be standing in the presence of some unknown and unrecognized Beethoven; when the final statement as to taking no lessons was uttered, we felt as though we were standing in the presence of—a fool.
Perhaps it would be better if we could all be as conscientious as that honest old German teacher, who, when approached by his admiring pupils with the exclamation:—"Oh, Herr Teufelsberg, you know so much about music; why don't you compose; you could write such perfectly elegant pieces?"—exclaimed: "Nein, nein, I vill nod write mine museek. Mein Gott! dere ish genug bad museek in de vorlt, alreadish!"
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 59

59.—THREE CLASSES OF PLAYERS.
Salomon, a London musician, had as pupil King George III. One day, when the king had not distinguished himself by great practice or skill in playing, the teacher gave him the following classification of fiddlers:—
"Fiddlers, your Majesty, may be divided into three classes: To the first belong those who cannot play at all; to the second those who play badly; and to the third those who play well. You, sire, have already reached the second class."
The majority of the players on all instruments reach only this second class. This feature of the matter is bad enough, but a worse feature is that the most of them are willing to stay there and are not willing to put forth the effort necessary for attaining the third. As to those who try to sing, comparatively few graduate from the first class, and as to those who do sing, only a small minority reach the third.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 6

6.—BALFE'S STRANGE ROOM MATE.
The composer of the popular "Bohemian Girl" once had an experience that he did not care to duplicate. Landladies are not supposed to be very sentimental beings, at least toward their lodgers, but have the reputation of being business-like and matter-of-fact; but the one who caused this peculiar occurrence, in which Balfe was an interested party, certainly stood at the head of the procession in her delight in silver rather than sentiment.
Balfe and other musicians were engaged for a short ​time in some musical doings on the outskirts of London, and rather than go back and forth from the city each day, they decided to take rooms for the time in that neighborhood. But apartments were scarce, and the genial Irishman was compelled to take what offered at a house not any too prepossessing in its external appearance. It was quite late. The landlady was uncertain whether there were any spare rooms or not, but left him standing in the hall-way while she went to see if she could arrange a room for him. Finally she returned and told him in a confused way that his apartment was ready.
Tired by the day's labor, he soon fell asleep without examining the room, but early the next morning proceeded to make a tour of his apartment. He had not gone far before he discovered in a closet opening from his room—a corpse, which had evidently been put in its cramped quarters in great haste.
Balfe stopped not on the order of his going, but took his departure, thankful, however, that he had not made the discovery in the moonlight of the night before. The old lady had evidently been unable to withstand the temptation to make a little ready cash, and summarily deprived the body of her deceased relative of its temporary resting place, and Balfe had calmly stepped in and taken its place. He used to joke over the landlady's eye to business, but that experience so impressed him that he never occupied a strange room without making an examination prior to sleeping in it.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 63

63.—A FIDDLER'S TRICK.
Archangelo Corelli was once taken in by a little ruse of a certain German fiddler, named Strunck, who was traveling in Italy. The German called on the great Italian violinist, and after some conversation asked him to play. Corelli did so, and exerted himself to please his visitor. Then, after he had concluded, he asked his visitor if he did not play. Strunck said he did play some. So Corelli, to return the compliment, asked him to play in turn, and when he had finished, complimented him on his use of the bow, although the German had purposely played very carelessly. Corelli told him that he could, with practice become an excellent player.
Strunck smiled, and quietly put all of the strings of the violin out of tune, and then played with amazing brilliancy, correcting the false pitch of the strings by his skillful use of the fingers. Corelli, in amazement, cried out, "Sir, they call me Archangelo, but, by heaven, you must be an Archdiavolo!"
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 56

56.—MUSICAL GRATITUDE.
Liszt was not the only musician that took holy orders. Josquin de Pres, chapel master to Louis XII, of France, was also an officer of the Holy Church. It seems the king had promised him a position which gave an ​increased income, but had forgotten his promise. Josquin reminded the king of his lapse of memory in a peculiar way. He composed an anthem for the chapel service, using the words (from the 119th psalm) as his subject: "Oh, think upon Thy servant as concerning Thy word." His majesty took the hint and bestowed upon the quick-witted musician the promised appointment.
Josquin was equally good at expressing gratitude in a musical way, for soon after he produced, as an anthem of thanks to the king, a composition set to the words from the same psalm: "O Lord, Thou hast dealt graciously with Thy servant."
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 61

61.—A SONG FOR FORTY.
Musical composition may be divided into epochs, each one of which is preparatory to those which follow. That period from 1750, stretching back some three hundred years, was a period of contrapuntal writing in which that composer was considered the best that could produce the best counterpoint,—could combine into a harmonious whole the largest number of independent melodies. In the latter part of the period, however, quantity of parts was not a sine qua non of greatness so much as the most thorough contrapuntal development of a few parts, as witnessed in Bach's and Händel's works.
One English composer, Thomas Tallis, who flourished some three hundred years ago, was a learned contrapuntist; and one of his compositions, written for forty voices, shows his skill at manufacturing music, for there could not have been much musical inspiration in such compositions. In this piece each one of the forty voices had an independent part differing from every one of the other thirty-nine. For 138 bars these forty people are supposed to go "every one to his own way," but not "like sheep," for these mild-mannered animals are supposed to follow one leader instead of forty.
But even this combination was exceeded by a composition in fugal style, written by Raimondi, an Italian composer living in the first half of the present century. This was arranged for sixteen choirs of four voices each, giving a total of sixty-four different parts. This style of composition has been called Gothic. Be that as it may, we may congratulate ourselves that we have passed the day of mathematical composition, and have come to the point where learning is the means, not the end, of a composer's work.
# Anecdotes of Great Musicians/Anecdote 62

62.—THE TEMPLE ORGAN.
Cromwell and his soldiers played havoc with the organs of merry England. These "squeaking abominations," as the old Puritans called the organs, were everywhere torn down and their pipes melted into bullets. The soldiers would go through the streets blowing the pipes from some demolished organ, or perhaps pawned them for cups of ale.
Very few organs escaped the fury of these zealots. But after the restoration a different order of things set in. The Cathedral services were restored and it was a golden time for organ builders. The organ, by the way, had reached a great degree of perfection at that period.
In the reign of Charles the Second, the authorities of the Temple Church, in London, determined to build as fine an organ in their edifice as money would afford. There was a peculiar condition attached to the matter, to the effect that each builder who wished to contest for the honor should set up his organ in the church, and then all were to be given a fair trial.
Two builders, Schmidt and Harris, were the only ones to accede to this condition, but they were the best builders of their day. In nine months they were ready for the trial. Schmidt's organ was first tried, and in the hands of such performers as Purcell and Blow we may be assured it had a fair hearing. Harris secured the French musician, Lully, to show off his instrument, and his playing was on a par with that of the English performers. Trial after trial was held, but no decision could be secured, as the organs seemed to be so equal in value. The builders added new stop effects, but still no decision. Then they descended to malicious destruction. Each maker had his friends in the church and out, and soon pipes were removed and bellows cut, and anything was done that would injure the opponent's chances of success.
​Finally, the matter was placed in the hands of Lord Chief Justice Jeffries, and he decided in favor of Schmidt's organ, and that is the one which still stands in London Temple.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Origen Against Celsus/Book IV/Chapter XLIV

Chapter XLIV.
And erring widely from the meaning of Scripture, he says that “God gave wells also to the righteous.” Now he did not observe that the righteous do not construct cisterns, but dig wells, seeking to discover the inherent ground and source of potable blessings, inasmuch as they receive in a figurative sense the commandment which enjoins, “Drink waters from your own vessels, and from your own wells of fresh water. Let not your water be poured out beyond your own fountain, but let it pass into your own streets. Let it belong to you alone, and let no alien partake with thee.” Scripture frequently makes use of the histories of real events, in order to present to view more important truths, which are but obscurely intimated; and of this kind are the narratives relating to the “wells,” and to the “marriages,” and to the various acts of “sexual intercourse” recorded of righteous persons, respecting which, however, it will be more seasonable to offer an explanation in the exegetical writings referring to those very passages. But that wells were constructed by righteous men in the land of the Philistines, as related in the book of Genesis, is manifest from the wonderful wells which are shown at Ascalon, and which are deserving of mention on account of their structure, so foreign and peculiar compared with that of other wells. Moreover, that both young women and female servants are to be understood metaphorically, is not our doctrine merely, but one which we have received from the beginning from wise men, among whom a certain one said, when exhorting his hearers to investigate the figurative meaning: “Tell me, ye that read the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond maid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bond woman was born after the flesh; but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.” And a little after, “But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.” And any one who will take up the Epistle to the Galatians may learn how the passages relating to the “marriages,” and the intercourse with “the maid-servants,” have been allegorized; the Scripture desiring us to imitate not the literal acts of those who did these things, but (as the apostles of Jesus are accustomed to call them) the spiritual.
* ↑ φρέατα.
* ↑ λάκκους.
* ↑ τὴν ἐνυπάρχουσαν γῆν καὶ ἀρχὴν τῶν ποτίμων ἀγαθῶν. Boherellus proposes: τὴν ἐνυπάρχουσαν πηγὴν καὶ ἀρχὴν τῶν ποτίμων ὑδάτων.
* ↑ Cf. Prov. v. 15–17.
* ↑ Cf. Gen. xxvi. 15.
* ↑ νυμφας.
* ↑ Cf. Gal. iv. 21–24.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Origen Against Celsus/Book IV/Chapter XV

Chapter XV.
And with respect to His having descended among men, He was “previously in the form of God;” and through benevolence, divested Himself (of His glory), that He might be capable of being received by men. But He did not, I imagine, undergo any change from “good to evil,” for “He did no sin;” nor from “virtue to vice,” for “He knew no sin.” Nor did He pass from “happiness to misery,” but He humbled Himself, and nevertheless was blessed, even when His humiliation was undergone in order to benefit our race. Nor was there any change in Him from “best to worst,” for how can goodness and benevolence be of “the worst?” Is it befitting to say of the physician, who looks on dreadful sights and handles unsightly objects in order to cure the sufferers, that he passes from “good to evil,” or from “virtue to vice,” or from “happiness to misery?” And yet the physician, in looking on dreadful sights and handling unsightly objects, does not wholly escape the possibility of being involved in the same fate.  But He who heals the wounds of our souls, through the word of God that is in Him, is Himself incapable of admitting any wickedness. But if the immortal God—the Word—by assuming a mortal body and a human soul, appears to Celsus to undergo a change and transformation, let him learn that the Word, still remaining essentially the Word, suffers none of those things which are suffered by the body or the soul; but, condescending occasionally to (the weakness of) him who is unable to look upon the splendours and brilliancy of Deity, He becomes as it were flesh, speaking with a literal voice, until he who has received Him in such a form is able, through being elevated in some slight degree by the teaching of the Word, to gaze upon what is, so to speak, His real and pre-eminent appearance.
* ↑ Cf. Phil. ii. 6, 7.
* ↑ Cf. 1 Pet. ii. 22.
* ↑ Cf. 2 Cor. v. 21.
* ↑ [Gieseler cites this chapter (and cap. xix. infra) to show that Origen taught that the Logos did not assume a human body. Could words be stronger to the contrary? “He becomes, as it were, flesh,” is used below to guard against transmutation.]
* ↑ προηγουμένην.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Origen Against Celsus/Book IV/Chapter XVI

Chapter XVI.
For there are different appearances, as it were, of the Word, according as He shows Himself to each one of those who come to His doctrine; and this in a manner corresponding to the condition of him who is just becoming a disciple, or of him who has made a little progress, or of him who has advanced further, or of him who has already nearly attained to virtue, or who has even already attained it. And hence it is not the case, as Celsus and those like him would have it, that our God was transformed, and ascending the lofty mountain, showed that His real appearance was something different, and far more excellent than what those who remained below, and were unable to follow Him on high, beheld.  For those below did not possess eyes capable of seeing the transformation of the Word into His glorious and more divine condition. But with difficulty were they able to receive Him as He was; so that it might be said of Him by those who were unable to behold His more excellent nature: “We saw Him, and He had no form nor comeliness; but His form was mean, and inferior to that of the sons of men.” And let these remarks be an answer to the suppositions of Celsus, who does not understand the changes or transformations of Jesus, as related in the histories, nor His mortal and immortal nature.
* ↑ ἄτιμον.
* ↑ ἐκλεῖπον.
* ↑ [The transfiguration did not conflict with his mortal nature, nor the incarnation with his immortality.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IV/Origen/Origen Against Celsus/Book IV/Chapter XLII

Chapter XLII.
In order to show that he had read the book of Genesis, Celsus rejects the story of the dove, although unable to adduce any reason which might prove it to be a fiction. In the next place, as his habit is, in order to put the narrative in a more ridiculous light, he converts the “raven” into a “crow,” and imagines that Moses so wrote, having recklessly altered the accounts related of the Grecian Deucalion; unless perhaps he regards the narrative as not having proceeded from Moses, but from several individuals, as appears from his employing the plural number in the expressions, “falsifying and recklessly altering the story of Deucalion,” as well as from the words, “For they did not expect, I suppose, that these things would come to light.” But how should they, who gave their Scriptures to the whole nation, not expect that they would come to light, and who predicted, moreover, that this religion should be proclaimed to all nations? Jesus declared, “The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof;” and in uttering these words to the Jews, what other meaning did He intend to convey than this, viz., that He Himself should, through his divine power, bring forth into light the whole of the Jewish Scriptures, which contain the mysteries of the kingdom of God? If, then, they peruse the Theogonies of the Greeks, and the stories about the twelve gods, they impart to them an air of dignity, by investing them with an allegorical signification; but when they wish to throw contempt upon our biblical narratives, they assert that they are fables, clumsily invented for infant children!
* ↑ παραχαράττοντες καὶ ῥᾳδιουργοῦντες.
* ↑ Cf. Matt. xxi. 43.