Music Trade Review

Music Trade Review -- © mbsi.org, arcade-museum.com -- digitized with support from namm.org
THE
mm
With which is incorporated THE MUSIC TRADE JOURNAL.
VOL. IV.
NEW YORK, APRIL 5TH, 1881.
MATHEMATICS IN MUSIC.
T)ROFESSOR MACFARREN has a great name in England, and his repu-
JL tation is well deserved. He is a fine theoretician, a learned man,
equipped with all the rules and regulations of harmony, thorough-bass and
counterpoint. Unfortunately his ambition induced him to compose choral
and orchestral works, and it happened that at a recent music festival in
England one of his oratorios was performed. Most of the critics did not
dare to attack Professor Macfarren, but one of them, evidently less given to
respecting authority than, the others, said: " I t is not a composer who
wrote it; it is a man who has learned the mechanism of music writing, just
as a man learns spelling and grammar, and who writes a book with perfectly
correct orthography and nothing else."
Let this verdict be published everywhere that every musician, every
young composer may read it and feel the full weight of its meaning. We
do not deny the importance and the necessity of the rules in music; there
are in musical art certain laws which must be respected; but do not give
these laws autocratic power, do not let them oppress the flight of genius.
We have too many composers—to be more correct, we have too many men
and women who consider themselves composers, because they have studied
harmony and counterpoint. We not not speak here of those amateurish
attempts which come now and then to the surface, and are void not only of
talent but of rules at the same time. We have serious labors in view, and
among those who work hard and earnestly, how few can be recognized as
real composers.
We are sure that almost every musician in New York has some manu-
script hidden somewhere in his room; we know that some writers have
volumes ready which wait for the publishing redeemer, or for the conductor,
who shall be willing to bring the works before the public; and out of a
hundred works which could be collected in less than an hour, right here in
New York, there may be found perhaps two which could be accepted as
compositions which show more than the average talent of every musician
who takes a hackneyed melody and harmonizes it in a square manner.
We know a gentleman in New York who calls the style of music in
which Professor Macfarrren writes "Cube music." Professor Macfarren,
as we mentioned above, is a remarkable musician, and undoubtedly an
excellent teacher of harmony and counterpoint. But, after all, he is hardly
more than a musical arithmetician, rules and by-laws have dried up his
fancy, and although he cannot feel the effect himself, his audiences will
become aware of it. We do not consider this state of affairs very strange.
Great theoreticians seldom have been great composers. A. B. Marx, who
can be named among the foremost of theoretical teachers, wrote an oratorio,
which belongs to the most tedious class of musical creations ever pro-
duced. The same may be said of Flodoard Greyer, Dehn, Nottebohm,
Richter and many others. Occasionally they may have succeeded in writing
something in the line of chamber music and some choral music which is, if
not soul-stirring, yet interesting. The more the strict form is demanded,
the better these gentlemen will get along with their task. As soon as they
make the most bashful attempt to conceive a work of broader dimensions
they fail, for they do not possess any traits of genius, and the form alone
cannot satisfy modern audiences. We must not forget that opera houses
and concert halls are not patronized exclusively by musicians, and that the
music loving and musically educated part of the public demands more than
a development of correct writing and strict adherence to theoretical laws.
Goethe, in his "Faust," says: "Gray, my dear friend, is all your theory,
but green the golden tree of life."
A MANLY ANSWER.
T will be remembered that the Inteadant-General of the Royal Theatres,
Berlin, Baron Von Hiilsen, did not favor the performances of the
"Nibelungen " on the stage under his jurisdiction, and that in spite of the
old Kaiser's wish the Tetralogy was finally rejected, owing to impudent
demands on the part of Mr. Richard Wagner. Some musical papers in Ger-
many, siding with the composer, whatever he may do, came out with articles
couched in strong terms against Baron Von Hiilsen, and this gentleman,
although of noble birth and chamberlain to the Emperor, is not to proud to
answer the attack in a lengthy letter. This letter is a pattern of manliness,
and we cannot refrain from making our readers acquainted with the stand-
point the Intendant-General of the Royal Theatre takes. He opens his
defence by stating that the position he has assumed with regard to the
" Nibelungen " is the result of, and has been fortified by circumstances. He
does not deny that the work marks an epoch, but does not believe that the
epoch will last very long. Herr Von Hiilsen has the great advantage of
answering his antagonists with facts and figures; he seems to be aware of this
advantage, for he says in his letter:
"If you will look with me at the actual facts, everywhere repeated, you
will find with me that the sacrifices and trouble entailed by nearly every per-
formance of the work are utterly disproportioned to the ideal or material
success. Most of this is merely apparent. As every impartial person will
to-day without more ado allow, even the model performance at Bayreuth was
by no means successful, because the very large majority of the visitors went
away altogether dissatisfied. It is, moreover, true that the performances at
Vienna, Leipsic, and Hamburg, turned out still more unfavourably; those at
Leipsic were most successful, yet the manager has had all the same to find
out another locality for the purpose of re-indemnifying himself. One
I
No. 5'
manager told me that his ' Nibelungen Cycles ' caused him bitter regrets. I
can believe it."
Herr Von Hiilsen does not forget for one single moment, that he
stands at the head of an opera house, which enjoys Royal subsidies. He says
in plain words that this consideration of pecuniary deficits alone would not
exercise a decisive influence on the opera of the King of Prussia; but he
reminds the Wagnerites that after the fever of novelty had died out, the pub-
lic in Vienna and Leipsic behaved towards the " Nibelungen " in a rather dis-
spirited manner. The Intendant-General shows the impossibility of produc-
ing the work in one season in Berlin, as such course would exclude every-
thing else. That he was not opposed to performing parts of the Tetralogy
is provided by the following lines:
" ' Die Walkiire' excited my enthusiasm and I would willingly have pur-
chased the right of representation for the Royal Opera House, Berlin,
immediately after the first performance in Munich; but at that time the work
belonged exclusively to the King of Bavaria. The composer promised me at
Bayreuth that I should have it, but subsequently retracted his promise.
That very recently he did not reply to a message connected with this, is
something you do not perhaps know, and everything has its limit."
In this regard Baron Von Hiilsen is mistaken. Wagnerites will never
believe that everything has its limit, as far as Wagner and his operas are
concerned. Richard Wagner claims the right to insult any body according
to his whim and caprice, and the insulted party has no right to strike back.
Herr von Hiilsen is a former soldier in the Prussian army, and has an under-
standing of what is wrong and right. He has preserved an impartiality in
all art matters, which we must admire in a man who has been brought up in
an entirely different sphere. What he has done in regard to Wagner's
operas he explains thus:
" Though perfectly well aware that only ' Tannhiiuser ' and ' Lohengrin '
really possess the power of drawing, I did not hesitate bringing out ' Die
Meistersinger ' as well as ' Tristan und Isolde ;' up to the present moment,
the former has never proved completely successful with us, and the latter has
never proved so at all. What trouble we all took with it! In vain! After
the first four or five performances the interest in it was at an end, and could-
never subsequently be revived."
These are facts which can be proved by the ledger of the Royal Opera,
Berlin, and it is useless to fight against figures, although we have no doubt
that the disciples of Wagner are even bold enough to do that. Richard Wag-
ner once reproached Herr von Hiilsen with having been unjust towards him,
because he did not begin and set the example, as he might well have secured
all the best talent at the other court theatres of Germany. Wagner, as long
as it suits his own interests, likes to perform the part of the idealist. Herr
von Hiilsen, although courtier and chamberlain, seems to have become a
very practical man, and laughs at the mere suggestion of Mr. Richard
Wagner in regard to the management of the Berlin Opera House. We hope
that Hiilsen's letter will find a large circulation, as it shows a happy union
of manly expression and practical views about a theme which is so often
ventilated now-a-days by idealists.
THE NEW OPERA HOUSE TOR NEW YORK CITY.
FTER much delay and many deliberations the long talked of site for
the new Opera House was purchased on Monday, March 14th, for about
$600,000. A meeting of the directors was held at eleven o'clock on that day
in Drexel & Morgan's office, in Wall street, and the negotiations which had
been going on for two or three weeks were soon concluded for the posses-
sion of the block bounded by Broadway, Seventh avenue, West Thirty-
ninth and Fortieth streets. The agreement stipulates that the money shall
be paid, if, on examination of the titles, no restrictive clauses are found to
interfere with the erection of the proposed Opera House.
The plans for the new Opera House will be substantially the same, so
far as the interior is concerned, as they were when drawn up in last October
by Mr. Cady for the Vanderbilt property and as they have been described in our
columns, but it is thought that the Broadway front may be extended and
altered to more imposing dimensions, as the lot is larger. The frontage on
the original plan was only 140 feet, while on the new one it may be 200 feet
or thereabout. There will be a spacious covered carriage way extending
through the building from Broadway to Seventh avenue. The lobbies and
" crush rooms " are to be much larger than was first contemplated, but the
stage and auditorium will be of the same dimensions, the latter having a
apacity for seating 3,000 people. The cost of this proposed temple of art
will be about $700,000. It is to be fireproof in the strictest sense of the
word, and the carpenter shop will be entirely separated from the stage.
Thirty or forty well lighted dressing rooms, each separated from the others,
and two galleries over the 112 boxes are to be some of the features of Broad-
way's Grand Opera House. The following is a list of members of the
stock company:
President—Mr. J. N. A. Griswold. Secretary—Mr. C. Goddard. Direc-
tors—Messrs. E. P. Fabbri, James A. Roosevelt, George Henry Warren,
eorge Peabody Wetmore, George G. Haven, Robert Goelet, George R.
Fearing, W. K. Vanderbilt, L. P. Morton, W. H. Tillinghast, Adrian Iselin
and Luther Kountze. Among the other stockholders are Messrs. William
H. Vanderbilt, J. Pierpont Morgan, J. F. de Navarro, R. T. Wilson, William
Rhinelander, George Kemp, James R. Keene, C. K. Garrison, D. vJ. Mills,
S. L. M. Barlow, Edward Cooper, Cyrus W. Field, Jay Gould, Edward
Luckemeyer and J. J. Astor.
A