THOUGHTS ABOUT MUSIC

Evening Star, Issue 23677, 10 September 1940, Page 3

THOUGHTS ABOUT MUSIC

[By L.D.A.J

Music gives tone to the universe; wings to the mind; (light to the imagination; a charm to sadness; gaiety and life to everything.—Plato. Every year we have visits from more or loss eminent British music examiners, who come hero primarily to put our budding young musical students through their paces, 1 say “ primarily ” because of late these gentlemen have developed a habit of widening their official scope in a manner which must inevitably provoke the thought that they are exceeding their duties. This takes the form of public comment on musical affairs in New Zealand, or of remarks of general musical import, which are bound to excite controversy and even resentment. I 1 or instance, the other day Dr Edgar Ford made the sweeping statement that “ radio music in this country is hopelessly mismanaged.” Nothing could be further from the,truth at least in so far as the National Broadcasting Service is concerned. Ever since Professor .Shelley took control four years ago 'there 'has been a gradual improvement in the YA musical programmes—-so gradual as to be scarcely perceptible to the naked ear as it were, but nevertheless positive and undeniable.

This proves that the management of our chief radio service is in excellent hands and under wise guidance. Immediate and drastic purging of musical programmes would only have excited loud public; outcry and widespread dissatisfaction. Not by such arbitrary methods can the tastes of the vast listening audiences be educated. , That might bo Hitler’s way, but it is not Professor Shelley’s, whose motto seems to be “ Suaviter in modo, fortiter in re.” No doubt the Director of Broad-casting-would be the first to admit that, as alleged by Dr Ford, “ much had music ” is heard from our radio stations, but if a comparison ho made of YA programmes broadcast four ; years ago with those of to-day it will ho found that' the improvement is quite remarkable. Professor Shelley has one of the most difficult jobs we can imagine, and no more need be said than that, in the opinion of those best qualified to judge, ho has fully justified the trust reposed in him. As regards bad music, nobody need listen to it unless, like Sairey Gamp, they are “so clispoged there are always good alternative programmes available—or nearly always. On the few occasions when this is not the case what’s wrong with a spot of complete silence for a change? The disconnecting switch is one of the best things with knobs on that I know. • * » * In the ‘ Star ’ of August 31 appeared a letter voicing complaint of another portentous musical judgment. The correspondent took exception to a pronouncement by Dr J. F Staton, the London musician who officiated as adjudicator at the recent Wellington Competitions. The learned doctor is alleged to have cast aspersions upon instruments such as the ukulele and banjo, which, according to Dr Staton, have a musical range of only “three chords.” This, as the correspondent pointed out, is frankly absurd. I myself don’t profess to know much about the banjo, but the little knowledge I possess is enough to refute Dr Staton’s statement. Under competent fingers the banjo can be surprisingly musical, and it is still more astonishing what can be achieved on its sister instrument, the guitar, in the hands of a master. This will be evident to anyone who listens to the recordings of the renewed guitar virtuoso, Andrea Segovia. I am quite prepared to believe that this great performer could, an be would, give just as good an account of himself on banjo or ukulele as lie does on the guitar. Dr Staton will have to revise bis estimate of those who strum their “ fretted ” hour upon the stage.

It'happens that I, too, have crossed swords, or pens,'with Dr Staton. After listening to a broadcast of the final demonstration concert in Wellington, in which the winner of the open piano contest fno reference to the lid is hero intended) played that excruciating Debussy composition, ‘ Masques,’ .[ wrote to the adjudicator, expressing my disappointment at the choice of such an ugly work and at his failure to condemn it. In the course of my letter I said: “Debussy will have much to answer for at the bar of final judgment. because he was the originator of all that is,hideous in modern music,” or words to that effect. Dr Staton replied very courteously, and I hope he will forgive me if T quote from his letter. as I consider it a matter of public interest. He wrote; “ I do not entirely agree with your opinion of Debussy. He has,'Written much sensitive music—‘ Pelleas,’ two Arabesques. * L’Apres-Midi d’nn Faune,’ chamber music, ‘ La Demoiselle elue,’ etc., etc. ‘ Masques ’ is not one of my favourites. . . . I do not share your opinion of Walton’s symphony. I am Sony, but though there is much T deplore in modern music, 1 still thiuk Debussy and Walton groat artists.”

Well, it* is something to find an accepted authority like Dr Staton “ not entirely ” in agreement with my estimate of Debussy, since that implies complete agreement, with exceptions And in this instance the exceptions are so few that they do not disprove the rule. Young pianists have been brought up in the belief that compositions such as 1 Jardius Sous la pluic,’ ‘ Cathedrale Engloutie,’ ‘ Golliwog’s Cake Walk.’ ‘ Minstrels,’ ‘ Reflets dans I’eou,’ etc., are musical masterpieces, and constant repetition of them lias so debauched the ear that to assess these atrocities at their true value is a matter of impossibility to many people. In every dictionary of music, Debussy is described as “ the founder of modern musical impressionism.” Wo know what “impressionists” have done to other forms of art. Distortion, contortion, exaggeration, and cari.cnt.ure are the corner stones of modern music, and the blame for laying them must be apportioned chiefly to Debussy, In my opinion his musical philosophy

was rotten to the core—symbolical of that decadence which France’s recent collapse has so graphically and pathetically illustrated. If I had the power I would sweep ont o!’ existence all manifestations of musical disease, and the first to disappear would be the pages of Debussy.

In regard to William Walton, iny disparagement of whom evoked Dr Staton’s allusion, I feel sure that the majority of impartial people will agree with my criticism of his so-called symphony. I say “so-called,” because the actual meaning of “ symphony ” is a. collection or aggregation of harmonious sounds. But Walton’s aggregation is an aggravation. From first to last his composition offends the ear and the understandingit is an insult to musical intelligence, and I am not afraid to proclaim this from the housetops. If Dr Ford had such a work in mind when he referred to the broadcasting of bad music he will be heartily supported by all genuinely musical people. The latter are far more numerous than is commonly supposed, but are rendered largely inarticulate by diffidence and a reluctance to engage in controversy. Visiting ex nminers, whoso job it is to foster idealism in musical youth, should not be afraid to speak the truth and shame the devil. If they really think, with Dr Staton, that there is much to deplore in modern music,” it is surely their duty to say so and to discourage its practice.