Page 254 - 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. 254
sbena kritika – nekoč in danes | music criticism – yesterday and today
Author Publication Sentiment Author Publication Sentiment
Peter Kušar Dnevnik 0 Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1
1
Pavel Mihelčič Delo 1 Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1
0
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Bogdan Delo 1
Učakar 1
0
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1
1
Pavel Mihelčič Delo 1 Tomaž Rauch Delo 1
0
Pavel Mihelčič Delo 1 Peter Kušar Dnevnik
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Marijan Delo
Gabrijelčič
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Franc Križnar Dnevnik
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Franc Križnar Dnevnik
Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1 Marijan Delo
Gabrijelčič
Franc Križnar Dnevnik
As Table 3 demonstrates, most JMS performances were rated as positi-
ve, both in terms of performance as well as programming. In total 49 per-
formances were positively received, 19 were neutral (or had both, positive
and negative things to say about the performance), and no more than three
performances were received negatively by the critics.
This means that almost 70% of the performances received critical ac-
claim. The authors summarise the reviews in the following words:
I consider it very important that the first concert of the Youth Sym-
phony did not fall behind the regular concerts in terms of quality. I
am convinced that young listeners ... will overwhelmingly love serious
music.12
12 “Ugotovitev, da prvi koncert mladinskega simfoničnega abonmaja po kvaliteti ni
zaostajal za rednimi abonmajskimi koncerti, se mi zdi nadvse pomembna. Prepričan
sem, da bodo mladi poslušalci … v veliki večini vzljubili resno glasbo.” “Simfonični
koncert za mladino [A Symphonic Concert for Youth],” Pavel Mihelčič, “Simfonični
koncert za mladino [A Symphonic Concert for Youth],” Delo, November 10, 1970, 5.
254
Author Publication Sentiment Author Publication Sentiment
Peter Kušar Dnevnik 0 Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1
1
Pavel Mihelčič Delo 1 Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1
0
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Bogdan Delo 1
Učakar 1
0
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1
1
Pavel Mihelčič Delo 1 Tomaž Rauch Delo 1
0
Pavel Mihelčič Delo 1 Peter Kušar Dnevnik
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Marijan Delo
Gabrijelčič
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Franc Križnar Dnevnik
Franc Križnar Dnevnik 1 Franc Križnar Dnevnik
Peter Kušar Dnevnik 1 Marijan Delo
Gabrijelčič
Franc Križnar Dnevnik
As Table 3 demonstrates, most JMS performances were rated as positi-
ve, both in terms of performance as well as programming. In total 49 per-
formances were positively received, 19 were neutral (or had both, positive
and negative things to say about the performance), and no more than three
performances were received negatively by the critics.
This means that almost 70% of the performances received critical ac-
claim. The authors summarise the reviews in the following words:
I consider it very important that the first concert of the Youth Sym-
phony did not fall behind the regular concerts in terms of quality. I
am convinced that young listeners ... will overwhelmingly love serious
music.12
12 “Ugotovitev, da prvi koncert mladinskega simfoničnega abonmaja po kvaliteti ni
zaostajal za rednimi abonmajskimi koncerti, se mi zdi nadvse pomembna. Prepričan
sem, da bodo mladi poslušalci … v veliki večini vzljubili resno glasbo.” “Simfonični
koncert za mladino [A Symphonic Concert for Youth],” Pavel Mihelčič, “Simfonični
koncert za mladino [A Symphonic Concert for Youth],” Delo, November 10, 1970, 5.
254
