Page 216 - 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. 216
glasbena kritika – nekoč in danes | music criticism – yesterday and today
bljana ensembles of the day. The first concert was performed by the choir
of the Glasbena Matica and the chorus of the Ljubljana Opera, directed by
Matej Hubad, a symphony orchestra consisting of members of various in-
strumental groups, and prominent soloists from the National Theatre in
Ljubljana. The ensemble was led by the director and artistic director of the
Ljubljana Opera, Mirko Polič. Before the concert in a full-to-capacity Un-
ion Hall, the expectant audience was addressed by Josip Mantuani, a figure
of considerable note and a musicologist with wide-ranging interests, on the
importance of Beethoven and his works. While Škerjanc praised the per-
formers, he had harsh words to say about Polič’s interpretation and about
the sense, or otherwise, of performing older musical works:
“I cannot agree with Mr Polič’s interpretation: it was too modern, per-
haps even a little theatrical, and too little grounded in the spirit of Beethoven
and his age.”11 The conductor’s approach to the symphony evidently irritat-
ed him enough to prompt an additional comment the following day:
It seems necessary to me to emphasise at the outset that I do not con-
sider any musical work to be ‘eternal’, as people are wont to call major
works of the musical repertoire. For this reason, I cannot agree with the
claim of the introductory speaker [Josip Mantuani] that in music Bee-
thoven is, for the whole world, what Prešeren, say, is in our literature. I
believe that the expressive possibilities of the poet are, from the outset,
provided by the language in which he expresses himself, and that this
matter is more or less constant. [...] Music, like no other art, is close-
ly tied to the period in which it is written and is only understood in re-
lation to that period. The expressive possibilities of music are so varia-
ble that over time they become incomprehensible. [...] I therefore believe
that Beethoven’s ‘immortal’ Ninth is mortal, and that what was gigantic
a hundred and more years ago is today only understandable with regard
to Beethoven’s era and surroundings. [...] What I mean to say is that
Beethoven’s work cannot have the true effect of an emotive work of art
on a historically unprepared listener and that every modern, contem-
porarily emotional interpretation of his works is misguided. [...] Even
Beethoven has his faults and it is high time that we abandoned the pop-
ular schoolroom assertion of his infallibility. His symphony is unques-
tionably the greatest symphonic work from the start of the past centu-
ry; it is not, however, to be considered a model and an example worthy
of imitation, since this would be to direct our gaze backwards. I there-
fore believe that it was pointless to invest so much effort and work into
11 L. M. Š., “Beethovnova IX. Simfonija v Ljubljani,” Jutro 8, no. 60 (11 March 1927): 3,
http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:doc-BVR65K4V.
216
bljana ensembles of the day. The first concert was performed by the choir
of the Glasbena Matica and the chorus of the Ljubljana Opera, directed by
Matej Hubad, a symphony orchestra consisting of members of various in-
strumental groups, and prominent soloists from the National Theatre in
Ljubljana. The ensemble was led by the director and artistic director of the
Ljubljana Opera, Mirko Polič. Before the concert in a full-to-capacity Un-
ion Hall, the expectant audience was addressed by Josip Mantuani, a figure
of considerable note and a musicologist with wide-ranging interests, on the
importance of Beethoven and his works. While Škerjanc praised the per-
formers, he had harsh words to say about Polič’s interpretation and about
the sense, or otherwise, of performing older musical works:
“I cannot agree with Mr Polič’s interpretation: it was too modern, per-
haps even a little theatrical, and too little grounded in the spirit of Beethoven
and his age.”11 The conductor’s approach to the symphony evidently irritat-
ed him enough to prompt an additional comment the following day:
It seems necessary to me to emphasise at the outset that I do not con-
sider any musical work to be ‘eternal’, as people are wont to call major
works of the musical repertoire. For this reason, I cannot agree with the
claim of the introductory speaker [Josip Mantuani] that in music Bee-
thoven is, for the whole world, what Prešeren, say, is in our literature. I
believe that the expressive possibilities of the poet are, from the outset,
provided by the language in which he expresses himself, and that this
matter is more or less constant. [...] Music, like no other art, is close-
ly tied to the period in which it is written and is only understood in re-
lation to that period. The expressive possibilities of music are so varia-
ble that over time they become incomprehensible. [...] I therefore believe
that Beethoven’s ‘immortal’ Ninth is mortal, and that what was gigantic
a hundred and more years ago is today only understandable with regard
to Beethoven’s era and surroundings. [...] What I mean to say is that
Beethoven’s work cannot have the true effect of an emotive work of art
on a historically unprepared listener and that every modern, contem-
porarily emotional interpretation of his works is misguided. [...] Even
Beethoven has his faults and it is high time that we abandoned the pop-
ular schoolroom assertion of his infallibility. His symphony is unques-
tionably the greatest symphonic work from the start of the past centu-
ry; it is not, however, to be considered a model and an example worthy
of imitation, since this would be to direct our gaze backwards. I there-
fore believe that it was pointless to invest so much effort and work into
11 L. M. Š., “Beethovnova IX. Simfonija v Ljubljani,” Jutro 8, no. 60 (11 March 1927): 3,
http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:doc-BVR65K4V.
216
