Page 242 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2023. Glasbena društva v dolgem 19. stoletju: med ljubiteljsko in profesionalno kulturo ▪︎ Music societies in the long 19th century: Between amateur and professional culture. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 6
P. 242
glasbena društva v dolgem 19. stoletju: med ljubiteljsko in profesionalno kulturo
association, on the other hand, however, expressly granting the corpus the
same status within its midst as the choir of Glasbena matica had enjoyed
it – which was not in any sense an association apart. Was that another de
facto form of a “loose link”? It was perhaps not a mere coincidence, that
the rules of the Orkestralno društvo in comparison to those of Glasbena
matica were always officially referred to as poslovna pravila (Geschäftsord
nung)66 and never a statut, in a much similar vein as in Vienna, where only
after 1908, the rules of the Vienna Philharmonic were called Statuten, dif-
ferent to Geschäftsordnung from the period before that.
The crucial period not very well known to us for the sparsity of the ar-
chival records are the early post-1918 years between 1919 and 1922. From the
point of view of Orkestralno društvo, this period is undeniably marked by
Karel Jeraj’s return to Ljubljana in 1919. He came with a firm conviction of
bringing his fellow compatriots the experience and knowledge gained as a
long-standing member of Vienna Philharmonic, thoroughly committed to
the grand philharmonic idea,67 in pursuit of which the orchestra back in
1842 was first conceived. Jeraj’s passion and commitment to the fostering of
the symphonic music to the greatest of heights possible, is clearly discerned
also from his correspondence with the leadership of Glasbena matica and
with the members of the orchestra itself.
66 An example of poslovni red (Geschäftsordnung) of “orkestralnega društva Glasbene
matice v Ljubljani, društva za gojitev sinfonične glasbe [of an association for foster-
ing symphonic music]” is preserved in NUK, Music Collection, fond GM, Orkestral-
no društvo, Dopisi P. This version contains 17 Articles, one later version from 1927
only six. On the possible significance of its rules not being named Statut, very pos-
sibly for the lack of its status of an association in the sense of the 1867 Act, cf. supra
f. 47.
67 In my view, Jeraj best expressed the very philharmonic idea as a mission for Orkes-
tralno društvo, as well, in his letter, announcing his leaving the post of the conductor
of Orkestralno društvo. Not only did he want to introduce the Slovenian public with
the most important symphonic world literature, and not only was he aiming at per-
fection from the artistic point of view, but also from the technical one. He stressed
that he was convinced that the true grandiosity of these works could only be at-
tained by all the means of the big orchestra that can cater to all the requirements of
the composer. Jeraj further maintained that to this goal, the orchestra must be com-
mitted through its cultural mission. “Predvsem sem hotel seznaniti našo javnost z
najvažnejšimi simfoničnimi deli svetovne literature in to ne samo umetniško, temveč
tudi tehnično popolno, to je z vsemi sredstvi velikega orkestra, kakor to zahtevajo taka
dela v izvirniku. Prepričan sem namreč, da more vso grandioznost teh skladb izrazi
ti le orkester, ki zadosti vsem skladateljevim zahtevam. In to mora storiti orkester, ki
hoče izvrševati kulturno misijo, sicer izgublja na pomenu.” NUK, Music Collection,
fond GM, Okrestralno društvo, Dopisi O.
240
association, on the other hand, however, expressly granting the corpus the
same status within its midst as the choir of Glasbena matica had enjoyed
it – which was not in any sense an association apart. Was that another de
facto form of a “loose link”? It was perhaps not a mere coincidence, that
the rules of the Orkestralno društvo in comparison to those of Glasbena
matica were always officially referred to as poslovna pravila (Geschäftsord
nung)66 and never a statut, in a much similar vein as in Vienna, where only
after 1908, the rules of the Vienna Philharmonic were called Statuten, dif-
ferent to Geschäftsordnung from the period before that.
The crucial period not very well known to us for the sparsity of the ar-
chival records are the early post-1918 years between 1919 and 1922. From the
point of view of Orkestralno društvo, this period is undeniably marked by
Karel Jeraj’s return to Ljubljana in 1919. He came with a firm conviction of
bringing his fellow compatriots the experience and knowledge gained as a
long-standing member of Vienna Philharmonic, thoroughly committed to
the grand philharmonic idea,67 in pursuit of which the orchestra back in
1842 was first conceived. Jeraj’s passion and commitment to the fostering of
the symphonic music to the greatest of heights possible, is clearly discerned
also from his correspondence with the leadership of Glasbena matica and
with the members of the orchestra itself.
66 An example of poslovni red (Geschäftsordnung) of “orkestralnega društva Glasbene
matice v Ljubljani, društva za gojitev sinfonične glasbe [of an association for foster-
ing symphonic music]” is preserved in NUK, Music Collection, fond GM, Orkestral-
no društvo, Dopisi P. This version contains 17 Articles, one later version from 1927
only six. On the possible significance of its rules not being named Statut, very pos-
sibly for the lack of its status of an association in the sense of the 1867 Act, cf. supra
f. 47.
67 In my view, Jeraj best expressed the very philharmonic idea as a mission for Orkes-
tralno društvo, as well, in his letter, announcing his leaving the post of the conductor
of Orkestralno društvo. Not only did he want to introduce the Slovenian public with
the most important symphonic world literature, and not only was he aiming at per-
fection from the artistic point of view, but also from the technical one. He stressed
that he was convinced that the true grandiosity of these works could only be at-
tained by all the means of the big orchestra that can cater to all the requirements of
the composer. Jeraj further maintained that to this goal, the orchestra must be com-
mitted through its cultural mission. “Predvsem sem hotel seznaniti našo javnost z
najvažnejšimi simfoničnimi deli svetovne literature in to ne samo umetniško, temveč
tudi tehnično popolno, to je z vsemi sredstvi velikega orkestra, kakor to zahtevajo taka
dela v izvirniku. Prepričan sem namreč, da more vso grandioznost teh skladb izrazi
ti le orkester, ki zadosti vsem skladateljevim zahtevam. In to mora storiti orkester, ki
hoče izvrševati kulturno misijo, sicer izgublja na pomenu.” NUK, Music Collection,
fond GM, Okrestralno društvo, Dopisi O.
240
