New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-12-16
A SUNDAY SYMPHONY
Songs and French Music
Franck and DebusSy-A
Comparison.

First, there came Cesar Franck's SYM
/ phony in d minor. after which Nine.
Cahier sang the air, "Parto, ma tu ben
mic, with clarinet obblisato. from Mo
zart's opera La Clemenza di Tito" This
was followed by Debussy's "Rondes de
! Printemps," which Mr.. Damrosch pref
aced with a few words of exposition, very
graceful in expression and no doubt help
| full to many II the hearers IL not conylnc-
| ing TO all. After two songs, Berlioz's La
| Captive" in French, and LISTS "Drei
/ Zigeuner." in German (also sung by Nine.
! Cahier), an afternoon Of a most pleasur-
! able and profitable character came TO an
end with Tschaikowsky's group Of orches-
| trial prescriptions OF instrumental and
! vocal pieces by Mozart, which the Russian
! composer called ."Mozartiana."
| Conductor orchestra, solo performer
and listeners were all in a sympathetic
mood. the givers giving Of their best and
| the receivers accepting the gifts gracious
| ly and gratefully and though there may
be a critical note I'm the retrospect. ii
ought not to be heard as a dssonant one.
They are generally poor affairs which are
exhausted by few laudatory generaliza-
lions.
Cesar Francks symphony has been on
the local list for more than a decade.
| Originally produced here by the Boston
Orchestra, IL threatened to become some
| thing Ike an obsession in the last two
seasons, when IL was performed half
dozen times by the Philharmonic, Sym
| phOny and Volpe orchestras. IL is a
fri To ffg nd ho hn on
dured frequent repetition so well.
dozen years ago The Trioune's reviewer
set it down as the finest contribution TO
symphonic literature which France had
made since Berloz, and the characterize
ton may be permitted 10 stand H. spite
OF the doinGs OF its composer imitators
and SUCCESSORS since then. There Is
no reason why clear view OF
Franck's virtues should be obfusticated
because Of what has been written I'm YER
bal phrase about him with the too obvi-
Gus purpose OF trying TO make capital for
those who profess TO be following IN his
footsteps. II is pleasant 10 note the reve-
rental attitude OF VI. d'Gndy toward his
master; but the fact does not make NJ.
dIndys symphonic music any more pald-
table. IL Is working an old device 20
point out that the much condemned Aca-
demicians Of France who refused 10 kow-
tow 10 the genius of Debussy when they
were professors al the Conservatoire w'fc
also In doubt about the superlativo
grandeur Of Franck's creative talent Tl'
truth TO be kept In view Is that esseu-
TALLY the younger men OF to-day have
nothing in common with Franck's mus
cal principles or artistic morality We
have said II before but II was UNI
der different circumstances and long
ago. and there can be no harm IN
reiterating IL now when our minds
are still echoing with music Of such
diametrically different types as Franck's
symphony and Dcbussys tonal decoc-
ton called "Rondes de Printemps.'
Cesar Franck was 70 the whole extent OF
his ability and 10 the fun measure OF his
zeal musician. pure and simple The
picture which his affectionate biographers
present OF him IS lovable-a modest man,
a reyerent artist, a mystical nature,
plous devoted, smple-mindcd church
man, who probably found as much hap
piness IN his self-imposed task Of writing
one hundred settings Of the canticle OF
the Blessed Virgin Mary. even though he
did not live 10 finish II, a those who pro-
fess 10 be his disciples In art have found
In witnessing the production Of their
works-a contamination granted 10 him In
but few cases We do not hear that he
rallied against fate because ne never
heard his "Beatitudes" any more than he
~. Ia
sixty-third Of his "Magnihcats' 10 a con-
clusion. He was content with such ma
terial rewards az his labors received. and
IL Is not given 20 any Of us 10 measure .
what may have been his spiritual recon-
pense In expectancy and realization. Pro-
fessor Lavignac strove hard 10 put
him among the immortals. and
though there is good deal
OF hyperbole in his Characterization we
would not quarrel violently with IL: "He
is the descendant Of Bach by reason OF
his scientific knowledge; Of Gluck by his
power Of lofty expression. and OF the
German Romanticists by his harmonic
methods; while he is French I'm the clear
ness, purity and simplicity OF his work"
For such praise the symphony in d
minor offers much Justification. The loss
OF BerliOz's Harold in Italy" and the
Symphonic Fantastique" could better be
endured by French art, or the art mus
cal. than the loss Of this work OF
Francks And one reason r. because il
is all music, not one half music and one
half fantastic notions inspired by non
musical sources, like the Debussy music
which came back 10 us again yesterday
after an absence OF a little more than a
year Take away the title the motto and
the rhapsodic imaginings which they and
the impressionistic spashes of orchestral
color have inspired, and how long would
this allegedly yernal phantasmagoria
survive in comparison with any single
page OF the symphony?
Franck's symphony is itself music De-
bussy's Image" dhe epithet is his own
is chiefly a cause of music I'm others
verbal music A French critic finds a
hint Of n children's dance song in It's
theme-a theme which by no courtesy
could be called a melody, still less a tune
such as children's dance-songs are the
world overland though II isn't quite clear
what IL is unless one is Informed I'm nd
vance" IN It's TRANSPORTATION it becomes
Qn the critics eye) an aerial dance
which only Corot's nymphs could follow
with their yaporous bodies sudden
caprices, resistless sallies; dance wholly
,,,usicaI which has its movement I'm itself