New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-11-06
STANDARDS FAIL
FOR PADEREWSKI
No Formula Found by
Which Critics Can Meas
ure Pianist
BY II. F. kREHBIEL

CURED VIII arse from the proDleW VI
how he is to satisfy his conscience and
! the public. The artist would enter into
the equation if it were possible 20 bring
him and the reviewer upon the same
platform Of observation; but that is
obvious and confossedly impossible.
The point of view of the artist in
general is that criticism, when 1t con-
tans an admixture OF dispraise, is
proper only in the case Of another fell
( low; when il comes TO himself the real
duty OF the reviewer, which ne natu-
rally knows better than any newspaper
man can possibly know it, is TO praise
unqualifedly or confne himself TO re
porting the facts" as he calls 1t, these
facts being that he gave a concert, that
the hall had lots Of people in II and
that these people provided abundant
applause. If, however, the reviewer,
out of knowledge brought to him by
long and patient observation. should
couple with this tire further statement
of fact that few score of the people
were personal friends DESTROYS TO give
the artist "send-off" and the rest per-
sons on the free list of the manager
whose expression of opinion had no
more significance than the cracking Of
thorns under pot, that would be crit
Cism Of the most Objectionable sort
most tolerable and not TO be endured.
Let US. therefore, put the concert
giver aside. Now, what shall the re-
viewer do 10 convey an idea to the
public Of the characteristic merit OF
each of score of performances, all
of which are worthy of commentator
and which may be as much like each
other as peas in pod?
Music is the most individual, most
subjective of all the arts; it cannot
be compared with the models set by
nature, as is the case in the initiative
arts. Shall the reviewer set up an
ideal standard and measure all per-
formances by it? Who shall say that
the standard is correct? II is only
one mans opinion. And if standardized
tion were possible, how shall the re-
viewer make his readers understand
how nearly or remotely any individual
performance approached it? BY a
mathematical formula, perhaps. That
recalls a true story about one of the
artists who gave a concert yesterday.
A good many years ago, when Mr..
Paderewski was but budding vlrtu-
oso he CHANGED TO attend a concert at
which Pachmann played Schumann's
symphonic variations. The young
artist went TO the greenroom after the
concert to compliment the player.
"Paderewski Paderewski? Oh, yes,
You're the composer of the minuet."
Mr.. Paderewski admitted that he had
composed minuet, and thanked Pach-
mann for his beautiful playing Of the
variations, adding that in his opinion
the virtuoso had played them better
than RubinsteiD.
"Ah, good How much better
twice p"
Eyes" Paderewski thought, twice a
we'll"
"Three times better" pursued Pach-
mann-"four times ?"
Paderewski confessed that it was
difficult to answer such a question
there were so many vague factors in
the sum but finally admitted, good
humoredly. that il might have been
-four times better" And Pachmann
went on raising the ante, as poker
player would say, until Paderewssu
reached the limit and assured Pach-
mann that he had played Schumann's
"Etudes Symphonique" seven and half
times better than Rubinstein.
The absurd element in the incident is
obvious. of course, but il would be
comfort to reviewers and the public Il
such method Of criticism were pos
sible. Then, perhaps, we might make
a calculation, and say how many times
better Paderewski yesterday afternoon
in Carnegie Hall played Chopin's Waltz
in A fat than Carl Friedberg played
Beethoven's c minor concerto IN
IL kn oh or
Of the Beethoven spirit there was IN
the concerto played by Friedberg than
there was Beethoven spirit in the three
Chopin etudes and the Bach Chromatic
Fantasia and Fugue played by Pade-
rewski. But we feel compelled TO
forego the attempt because the method
seems inadequate.
There was hint Of another way in
which the case might be treated,
cleaned from a programme picked up
from a vacated chair. The listener who
had used il had evidently felt an un-
comfortable desire to register an opin-
ion of NJ. Paderowski's playing. After
the Beethoven sonata in minor
| ("Appas sionata") he or she had writ
ten in large letters Wonderful" and
after the waltz in capital letters
"WONDERFUL" That seems to have
summed up the case for one mind, at
least. and perhaps for very many
minds. In fact, il is doubtful if one of
the more than 5000 hearers would have
ouarrelled with the use Of the adjective
unless it might be on the score OF ITS In
adequacy. -,
Mr.. Paderewski's playing was indeed
quite as wonderful as II has been any
| time within the score Of years that we
have known him, and infused, 1t seemed
to us, with even higher degree OF
that quality Of individuality, OF con-
| cepton and expression which has al
ways set him apart from all the other
pianists of his day. The Chopin pieces
seemed like an evocation of the soul of
the composer, an emanation of tonal
| hearty. which made US forget the
agencies through which it became mani
fest.
The concert in Aeolisn Hall, at
which Mr.. Friedberg played Bee
thoyen's Concerto in minor, was a
e,Lscription concert of the Symphony
Society, conducted by Mr.. Walter Dam
roscb. II was a concert of the highest
! dogree of dignity and interest, which
/ hrouobt forward unfamiliar compost
/ ions in the shape of two pieces from
/ tba Incidental music composed by Le-
roux for Eschylus's "Persians,"
bymn. funeral march and ballet ar ana
I Saint Saenss somewhat pompous ana
! strutting c minor symphony, when IS
not heard here oftener than once IN
/ FIVE years. 80 ;.., a..
hall was crowded, a fact which may De
noted as worthy of record. since ooth
audiences were of the genuine kind, ana
ali the music was admirably given.
Tbongb II is a much abused term, 1t is
rroner 20 saw here that the concerto