Omaha daily bee., 1905-07-30

touches upon the problem of program MAX
ing as applied to the understanding of
various communities. Part of what he says
seems to fit our own case so well that I
have put together the paragraphs which
seem most to the point. Here they are:
The only criterion by which pianist like
myself can gauge the musical taste of a
him in the various cities he visits But this
after ALL
A virtuoso makes up his program in ad-
vance and usually makes II ito measure" /"
TO mt his audience, less severe for the
smaller than the larger cities, taking It for
granted that In the former musical culture
not be blamed for this. / for one am con-
WINGED that the educational value of a con-
cert Is utterly lost upon an audience II the
program transcends its power of appreciaI
tion.. While never would stoop to play
anything unworthy of an artist, l see, on
the other hand, no reason why the simpler
and perhaps more brilliant works of a mas
ter should not be played TO an audience
which cannot follow him in his loftier
flights. Art must please, It must. of
course go much further; II must move
edity, uplitt-but II must please first.
Pleasure, as distinct from mere amusement,
is the gate through which art has TO pass
In order to reach the finer sensibilities Of
the audience. Hence programs must
within reason, be made to measure"
But in accepting the size of a city as a
standard Of its musical taste l have met
with some wonderful experiences Some
times l have found small cities capable OF
appreciating musical works which would
have tested the capacity of a metropolis.
Cities l never had heard OF before were
extremely appreciative OF high-class music,
while some places with an established
reputation as musical towns" were sore
disappointments, This was not the rule
either way, but II occurred too often not to
challenge attention. The reason is perhaps
that town with the reputation Of being
musical ceases to work on its own culture,
"a Will
bilious TO acquire musical standing.
What l have said about the standard u
musical appreciation in various cities is not
mere talk; Il is the result OF my own per-
sonal experience. In some cities an artist
faces audiences who are fully conversant
with his career. There he does not feel as
II he were playing "on appreciation" The
mysterious and yet undeniable current
which connects the artist with his audience
waiting for his touch when he enters the
stage. There Is no warming up" needed
neither for the audience nor for him. he
feels that the best he has to give will be
understood. And then he gives-gladly, and
gives generously lavishly, like prince.
The next night he plays elsewhere. The
audience knows the artists name from the
advertisements, but his career, his persons
ality, what he stands for in the musical
world, are as sealed book TO his hearers.
He appears, and feels the gaze of mere curl
osity upon him, curiosity mingled with an
almost disconcerting, critical, inquisitoral
yesterrght2 II arrogant Of disposition he
scorns his audience and assumes that they
are not up 20 him. But II well bred. he
will look into himself for the reason OF
this drastic difference. In many instances
he viii be unjust TO himself-but he feels
like a pauper just the same.
The audience thus Is a powerful factor In
the artists psychic relations, but Il is by
no means the only factor. There are many
others. Foremost among them are he
acoustic properties OF the hall. IL they are
bad, the artist Is mercilessly put upon the
rack OF torture. He gropes for a way 10
adjust his playing to the hall: he tries 10
decrease the volume OF sound or to Increase
Il, he experiments with the pedal; he re-
sorts 10 this, that and the other mode OF
accommodating the touch-and he keeps
on TO the end OF the program-and vet An
In vain. substantial toothache is far
preferable to such an experience.