Page 176 - 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. 176
glasbena kritika – nekoč in danes | music criticism – yesterday and today
a general way (“the music was beautiful,” “the music amazed,” “it was per-
formed with the greatest accuracy”) or the focus is on whether the choice of
music was in accordance with the general cultural climate (e.g. whether the
choice of repertoire was sufficiently “national”). Attendance at the musical
event is often commented upon, but we also get information on who had ac-
cess (members, guests or a larger ticket-buying audience).
The writings about the concert that the young Czech pianist Ludmi-
la Zadrobilkova (1844–1872) gave in Karlovac on 22 December 1861 can be
highlighted as an example of the highly personal approach that a report-
er might take. This performance was made possible thanks to the person-
al acquaintance from Vienna of the artist with the editor of Glasonoša Abel
Lukšić and his wife, with whom Zadrobilkova and her mother stayed in
Karlovac. The newspaper Glasonoša followed almost every step the art-
ist took – from the announcement of her arrival, the reception, the con-
cert, and the farewell, and several occasional songs were also published.
The description of her appearance and character is full of admiration, even
idealization:
The public papers described our artist with the greatest emotion, mind,
and all-powerful skill of their pen: for the time being, nothing else can
be said about her except that her dear mother carries her as a gentle bud
of a pure Czech rose, a bud we say, who, even at its tenderest age, appears
to its observer full of kindness, clarity, personal self-control and burn-
ing love for the Slavs, to whom she is proudly associated everywhere.19
Regarding the repertoire we only find out the last names of the com-
posers, and the review of the performance is very poetic in accordance
with the earlier description and with a certain reserve due to writer’s own
“inexperience” in relation to the writing in other papers that are “strict-
ly critical:”
She played seven pieces by herself and by famous composers: Dreišok,
Schulhof and Chopin, with so much skill, power, tenderness, fire and
poetic levity, that we can’t say a word more about her skill, except sol-
19 “Javni listovi opisaše umjetnicu našu največjim čuvstvom, umom, svemožnom vješti-
nom pera svojega: nama pako za sada neda se ništa drugoga o njoj izreći, već da joj
mila majka u povodu svojem vodi nježan popoljak[!] čiste ružice česke, pupuljak[!] ve-
limo, koj se već u najnježnijoj dobi svojoj ukazuje motritelju svojemu pun milja, mi-
loduha, bistrine, osebne samovlade i goruće ljubavi za Slovjenstvo, kojemu se svagd-
je ponosno pribraja.” ***, “Dne 18. t. m. prispje nam u grad […],” Glasonoša 1, no. 19
(22 December 1861): 4.
176
a general way (“the music was beautiful,” “the music amazed,” “it was per-
formed with the greatest accuracy”) or the focus is on whether the choice of
music was in accordance with the general cultural climate (e.g. whether the
choice of repertoire was sufficiently “national”). Attendance at the musical
event is often commented upon, but we also get information on who had ac-
cess (members, guests or a larger ticket-buying audience).
The writings about the concert that the young Czech pianist Ludmi-
la Zadrobilkova (1844–1872) gave in Karlovac on 22 December 1861 can be
highlighted as an example of the highly personal approach that a report-
er might take. This performance was made possible thanks to the person-
al acquaintance from Vienna of the artist with the editor of Glasonoša Abel
Lukšić and his wife, with whom Zadrobilkova and her mother stayed in
Karlovac. The newspaper Glasonoša followed almost every step the art-
ist took – from the announcement of her arrival, the reception, the con-
cert, and the farewell, and several occasional songs were also published.
The description of her appearance and character is full of admiration, even
idealization:
The public papers described our artist with the greatest emotion, mind,
and all-powerful skill of their pen: for the time being, nothing else can
be said about her except that her dear mother carries her as a gentle bud
of a pure Czech rose, a bud we say, who, even at its tenderest age, appears
to its observer full of kindness, clarity, personal self-control and burn-
ing love for the Slavs, to whom she is proudly associated everywhere.19
Regarding the repertoire we only find out the last names of the com-
posers, and the review of the performance is very poetic in accordance
with the earlier description and with a certain reserve due to writer’s own
“inexperience” in relation to the writing in other papers that are “strict-
ly critical:”
She played seven pieces by herself and by famous composers: Dreišok,
Schulhof and Chopin, with so much skill, power, tenderness, fire and
poetic levity, that we can’t say a word more about her skill, except sol-
19 “Javni listovi opisaše umjetnicu našu največjim čuvstvom, umom, svemožnom vješti-
nom pera svojega: nama pako za sada neda se ništa drugoga o njoj izreći, već da joj
mila majka u povodu svojem vodi nježan popoljak[!] čiste ružice česke, pupuljak[!] ve-
limo, koj se već u najnježnijoj dobi svojoj ukazuje motritelju svojemu pun milja, mi-
loduha, bistrine, osebne samovlade i goruće ljubavi za Slovjenstvo, kojemu se svagd-
je ponosno pribraja.” ***, “Dne 18. t. m. prispje nam u grad […],” Glasonoša 1, no. 19
(22 December 1861): 4.
176
