Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-03-17
M u S &c
w ': !: e
BY HELEN FETTER.

endeavors jointly an
nounce their coming upon the
scene with startling SuddenneSs.
Also with the Winter of important
professional events fairly conclud-
ed, the music critics throughout
the country seem simultaneously
struck with the thought of dis
cuSsing their own profession in
either a search for freedom from
ennui or as contrasting relief
after the strain of the long sea-
son in which they have attempted
to mirror the musical events in
the pages of the press. Few hui
man beings, critics or otherwise,
are not inspired with gypSy-like
longings for the open at this time
of year. Some persons take it out
on their families and Office forces.
Critics seem to turn to writing
about their work.
After all, there is a great deal
about the actual work of review
ing musical events, as well as its
possible value to the public, to in
vite discussion. To the superficial
observer it seems "juSt grand to
have nothing to do but go to con-
certS and operas and write about
them; hear and meet all the great
musical folk, ETC., etc" However,
rather than take the time here to
talk of the diSilluSioning grind
and gloomy rutS, not to mention
the uninSpiring 40 out of every so
So-called concerts" that the
critic has to attend, whether so
inclined or not-the angle to be
discussed here will be that of the
reason for such an arduouS task as
music criticism. From the purely
local point of view, the music
critic is valued to local music en-
deavors as a combination employ
ment agency and information bu-
reau. In the larger sense, the
only thing that keeps a music
critics ambitions anywhere near
true pitch is the hope that he may
intelligently entertain and per-
hapS occasionally inject a note OF
educational value for the public
who read his paper and have even
a glimmering of interest in events
musical. There are those who
question his value at all. OF
course, a critic is generally con-
coded to be a person who, accord
ing to the dictionary, expresses a
reasoned opinion" as opposed to
an individual who only expresses
a reaction to the tune of II know
what I like when I hear it."
There have been so many re-
cent articles. published on this
subject that the writer of this
column is presenting herewith a
choice collection of thoughts
gathered from several Of these
various sources, and also includ-
ing comments that are amuSingly
similar which were made in some
of the excellent papers written
about 200 years ago by Addison, of
that admirable group which made
1.-THE Spectator" immortal.
In paper No. 20, published in
Volume I of 1.-THE Spectator" Mr..
Addison has stated when writing
of italian Opera and Recitative,"
the following interesting deflni-
ton of music and its purpose:
Music is not designed to please
only chromatic ears, but all that
are capable of distinguishing
harsh from disagreeable notes. A
man Of ordinary ear is a judge
whether passion is expressed in
proper sounds, and whether the
melody of those sounds be more
or less pleasing"
This is not unlike what the
American critic w. j. Henderson
said recently, when he stated:
A music critic must perforce promul-
gate through the columns Of his news
paper his own views about musical
works and musical performance. No
one can decide whether he Is right or
not That he has studied such mat
tiers and thought about them entities
him to respectful consideration. But IL
after such consideration another man
can say that he does not agree with the
critic and can give reasons showing
that his disagreement is not whimsical,
but q product of his individuality
shaped and controlled by his music !
culture, he should have his innings.
The ultimate object Of criticism
should be to evoke such expressions Of
opinion, to arouse an intelligent inter-
est in music to the end that people will
think about it and not repeat the VEN
cradle parrot formula, II know what I
like" when they cannot tell why they
like it. And no one has to be must
clan or a musical scholar to tell why.
he likes or dislikes certain piece. It
would. indeed, be calamity II the art
was closed to discussion except by prac-
titioners. It would be q greater calam-
ity II no one could enjoy any one Of the
seven arts unless thoroughly acquainted
with its technic.
ON the other hand, the present.
~ day dominant figure in Brit
ish music critic circles, Ernest
Newman, does not think at all
highly of the profession of music
criticism, a profession which he
has served for practically a life
time. In the lengthy first para
graph of an article recently print
ed in the London Sunday Times
he states his views quite definite
ly, saying:
practice it. is simply naive expression
of AS individual reaction to work or a
composer, coupled with the equally
naive assertion that any one, from B
to z, who does not react precisely as
he does to that particular work or COM
poser, is wrong" I am not for mo-
ment denying that the mere expression
of personal opinion-which is all that
so-called criticism amounts to today
may occasionally be quite interesting;
not, however, for the light it throws on
the composer or the work, but for the
light it throws on the critic" But
whether this sort of thing Is interest
ing or not depends entirely on the style
of the writer; 1t has nothing whatever
to do with the work of art per Sc. The
late John F. Runciman, for example
was always readable, whether we