Scan 6
Musical Courier 1907-10-02: Vol 55 Iss 14, 1907
26 lines. Read by computer on 24 September 2026. Printed page 7. See the scan on archive.org.
1mention his name, but I could put my hand upon him if he were near enough. Dr. Muck will be here this week from Europe.
3The plan of doing away with soloists may be made financially successful, and the finances are always the chief question in music, for without money no music. If it should be followed by other orchestras it would become interesting for the soloists, particularly if those few selected were to come from the ranks of the opera artists. Then the American artist would be what we call in politics "down and out" for good so far as appearances in orchestral concerts go. I see on the official bulletin of the Boston Symphony Orchestra that it says: "Dr. Karl Muck, conductor (of the Royal Opera, Berlin)," which means that the doctor is still a part of the personnel of the opera in Berlin. He has not resigned that position. He will return thither, and the recent Musical Courier item, which has never been contradicted officially by any one, and which is in cold storage at present, will then become a verification of itself.
5The Loeb Endowment.
7It may not be fully understood, and therefore it should be explained, that the Institute of Musical Art endowed by the Loeb family is a public institution controlled by a set of trustees operating under a charter granted by the State of New York through the Regents of the University. It belongs to the people. It is not any one's property. The trustees hold it in trust, and no one can withdraw the trust fund. It is held perpetually by trustees, any vacancy being filled by the remaining trustees forever.
9This is one reason, sufficient to itself, why an itemized financial statement will be forthcoming, showing exactly how the Institute is managed by those to whom the trustees have delivered the control. The people—the musical people in this instance—will demand that statement when the proper time comes, because it is unhealthy, wrong, unjust and contrary to the spirit of our institutions for any set of men to conduct a chartered institution and not issue annually an itemized statement of the financial condition. There is no particular hurry about it, especially when the reluctance to pursue such a straightforward course must necessarily place those whose duty it is to issue the statement in an unenviable light.
11To show how impolitic the management is in engaging the services of critics of daily papers on its staff, I will repeat a phrase recently printed in the New York Tribune, whose critic is one of the faculty of the Loeb Institute. It refers to the School for Young Singers at the Metropolitan Opera House, saying, "Its influence is apt to be pernicious morally as well as artistically." This statement is published by a member of the faculty of the Loeb Institute about another school where singing is taught, as singing is also taught at the Loeb Institute. Without prejudice, as Zangwill would say, I would like to ask how this can be tolerated by the trustees of the Loeb Institute? Here is a member of their faculty who happens to enjoy the privilege to write for the Tribune, attacking a rival singing school and going so far as to question the moral influence of a competitor. What has Mr. Whitelaw Reid to say to such a handling of the columns of his paper? What have the trustees of the Loeb fund to say, and what have the owners of private conservatories in New York to say, any one of the latter being subject to similar treatment at the hands of the Tribune critic at any time while he is a member of the faculty of the Loeb Institute?
13This is a serious matter. But there are other aspects of that situation equally serious. The director of the Loeb Institute conducts concerts for four or five choral organizations here during the season, and these concerts are criticised by the critics of the Tribune and the Sun, both of whom are members of his faculty. That is to say, the members of his own faculty publicly criticise his performances. If they disagree with his methods and his interpretations of great compositions, can they say so and yet retain their places on a faculty of which he is the director and call themselves men? Would they be so thoroughly perverted as to cooperate with him in the conduct of a musical school when, as they might then view it, he proved to be incompetent? Very naturally, should they praise his work as the conductor of great compositions, why, it would be understood, as it will be understood (and they need not flatter themselves for a moment that they will be exempted from public criticism) that their favorable criticisms were connected with the places they occupy under him, being his appointees. Certainly that will be the attitude of the public, and the simple and natural attitude.
15If they criticise him unfavorably they show that he is incompetent, and they certainly must then resign or be dismissed by him, if he has a spark of honor in him. If they criticise him favorably everybody will associate the favor with the faculty—every one must, for it is an inevitable conclusion from a premise—a perfect syllogism. How can the Tribune and Sun endure this, and how can the trustees of the Loeb Institute tolerate it?
17One other question is apropos. The latest general statement of the Institute says that there is $17,000 worth of sheet music on hand. Was that sheet music purchased after estimates had been asked for, or was it purchased from one of the trustees who happens to be in the sheet music business? These are all matters that must be elucidated; things cannot go on in this fashion in an endowed, chartered institution without publicity, because the public must know. It is taken for granted that there is no dishonesty and no graft, but there may be incompetency and mismanagement based upon it. I should advise the trustees to take the public into their confidence and put the Loeb Institute on a basis that will establish it firmly as a healthy adjunct of the musical life of the community.
19And the last word for this time. The critics of the Sun and Tribune receive salaries as members of the faculty. Those two daily papers should not permit these men to write any criticisms on the performances directed by the man who appointed them to their positions in the Loeb Institute. They receive their salaries through him. They have no moral right to criticise any of his performances. They are not only under direct obligations to him for the salaries they receive, but they are under him in the sense of employees, because he can dismiss them.
21Henrik Ibsen.
23The Sun of Sunday last contained an inspiring article by Walter P. Eaton on the present production at the Bijou Theater of Ibsen's "The Master Builder." It is no doubt the most profound comment ever published on this subject in New York, and it gives evidence of the existence here of a deep seated and even passionate regard for the genius of Ibsen. The play itself, as given by Nazimova and her associates, stands pyramially above any public production and distinguishes her as an intellectual force far in advance of the contemporary actress, not only in the power of her acting and the subtle charm of her analysis, but also in the very fact of her recognition of the cosmic influence and grandeur of the Ibsen mind and the character she possesses that induced her to place him properly before the public, particularly considering the state of the drama in America. Every intellectual musician should attend that symphony, for the play, structurally considered, can be programed by a musical intelligence into a symphony, thus reversing the mental action that enables us to program a symphony or symphonic poem. And as to Nazimova—well, New York has rarely seen a greater dramatic manifestation, if ever. She is one of the powers of the stage today.
25BLUMENBERG.
The computer misreads some letters and numbers. Where a name matters to you, read the scan.