Page 119 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2024. Glasbena kritika – nekoč in danes ▪︎ Music Criticism – Yesterday and Today. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 7
P. 119
e. b. lvovský or who was the harshest viennese cr itic of antonín dvoř ák’s music
His name is found in texts marked either as Dopis z Vídně (A Letter
from Vienna) or Původní dopis z Vídně (An Original Letter from Vienna).
It seems that he also supplied the editorial staff with material for the entry
Vídeň (Vienna) in the sections Činnost našich spolkův a ruch náš hudební
(Activities of Our Societies and Our Music Events) and Různé zprávy (Mis-
cellaneous Reports). The sections include the programme of the Court Op-
era, various short reports from musical Vienna, but often also reports on
the activities of Czech and Slavic societies in Vienna and the performanc-
es of the Czech repertoire in general. From Volume XVIII onwards, there
are no longer reports signed by Lvovský in Dalibor, but it cannot be ruled
out that Lvovský contributed factual reports from Vienna to the unsigned
sections.
In his letters he analysed philharmonic concerts, the programme of
the Court Opera, the activities of musical societies and concerts of various
kinds. It is logical that he informed Dalibor’s readers about performanc-
es of Czech compositions in Vienna and Vienna performances of Czech
soloists (ensembles) from Bohemia and Moravia (e. g. F. Ondříček, Czech
Quartet) and Czech-Vienna musicians (A. Nováková, F. Simandl and oth-
ers). There are also reports on the activities of Czech and Slavic societies in
Vienna (concerts of the Slavic Singers’ Society, Slovanská beseda, Lumír,
Tovačovský, Slavoj, Tyrš) – he reproached his compatriots for the low in-
terest in concerts of stars from Bohemia and Moravia in Vienna, criticising
their renegadeism.
He took a harsh tone quite often (e. g. when defending Brahms, when
criticising Berlioz’s overture King Lear, when criticising the work of his col-
leagues in the German press in Vienna, e. g. Max Graf of the Musikalische
Rundschau). Among Czech composers, he paid particular attention to the
trio of Smetana, Dvořák and Fibich. He returned several times to the per-
formance of The Bartered Bride at the Theater an der Wien, monitored the
promotion of Smetana’s operas in Vienna, and was episodically involved in
the “absolute/programme music” dispute. He had no serious reservations
about Antonín Dvořák’s works, with the exception of the String Quartet in
E Flat Major and the opera Dimitrij. In several parts he described in detail
(especially the Czech) events at the International Music and Theatre Ex-
hibition. It is obvious that Lvovský devoted a considerable amount of at-
tention to the activities of the performers with whom he performed and
who played his compositions, etc. For example, to the aforementioned F. Si-
mandl, T. Krečman [Kretschmann] and the singer Anetta Nováková.
119
His name is found in texts marked either as Dopis z Vídně (A Letter
from Vienna) or Původní dopis z Vídně (An Original Letter from Vienna).
It seems that he also supplied the editorial staff with material for the entry
Vídeň (Vienna) in the sections Činnost našich spolkův a ruch náš hudební
(Activities of Our Societies and Our Music Events) and Různé zprávy (Mis-
cellaneous Reports). The sections include the programme of the Court Op-
era, various short reports from musical Vienna, but often also reports on
the activities of Czech and Slavic societies in Vienna and the performanc-
es of the Czech repertoire in general. From Volume XVIII onwards, there
are no longer reports signed by Lvovský in Dalibor, but it cannot be ruled
out that Lvovský contributed factual reports from Vienna to the unsigned
sections.
In his letters he analysed philharmonic concerts, the programme of
the Court Opera, the activities of musical societies and concerts of various
kinds. It is logical that he informed Dalibor’s readers about performanc-
es of Czech compositions in Vienna and Vienna performances of Czech
soloists (ensembles) from Bohemia and Moravia (e. g. F. Ondříček, Czech
Quartet) and Czech-Vienna musicians (A. Nováková, F. Simandl and oth-
ers). There are also reports on the activities of Czech and Slavic societies in
Vienna (concerts of the Slavic Singers’ Society, Slovanská beseda, Lumír,
Tovačovský, Slavoj, Tyrš) – he reproached his compatriots for the low in-
terest in concerts of stars from Bohemia and Moravia in Vienna, criticising
their renegadeism.
He took a harsh tone quite often (e. g. when defending Brahms, when
criticising Berlioz’s overture King Lear, when criticising the work of his col-
leagues in the German press in Vienna, e. g. Max Graf of the Musikalische
Rundschau). Among Czech composers, he paid particular attention to the
trio of Smetana, Dvořák and Fibich. He returned several times to the per-
formance of The Bartered Bride at the Theater an der Wien, monitored the
promotion of Smetana’s operas in Vienna, and was episodically involved in
the “absolute/programme music” dispute. He had no serious reservations
about Antonín Dvořák’s works, with the exception of the String Quartet in
E Flat Major and the opera Dimitrij. In several parts he described in detail
(especially the Czech) events at the International Music and Theatre Ex-
hibition. It is obvious that Lvovský devoted a considerable amount of at-
tention to the activities of the performers with whom he performed and
who played his compositions, etc. For example, to the aforementioned F. Si-
mandl, T. Krečman [Kretschmann] and the singer Anetta Nováková.
119
