Page 257 - 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. 257
symphonic matinees of jeunesses musicales slovenia: the first two decades
The programme of the Friday concert was quite interesting: two Bach
works, a concerto and a cantata, then Strauss’s ‘Death and Glorifica-
tion’ and Mahler’s ‘Songs for Dead Children’ ... I like to praise Hauschild
and the philharmonic orchestra very much for the Strauss, because they
were even better in the Mahler.19
I could not find a suitable explanation for Kušar’s change of heart, but
I can definitely say that from his writing, we can presume that his first neg-
ative judgement certainly changed at the beginning of the 1980s and also
after that, I could not sense that there was any negative concerning music
programme with more modern music.
Conclusion
Music criticism is important in the context of researching musical prac-
tice. It gives us insight into the performance and programming practices
of either a period or a particular ensemble or institution. In my case, it was
possible to use existing records to establish the beginning of the sympho-
ny matinees in 1970, because although they had not yet been known un-
der this title, the sources certainly testify to their existence, and the mu-
sic criticism confirms it. The 1980s, in terms of the incidence of criticism of
symphony matinees or concerts linked in performance and programme to
matinees, far outstrip the 1970s, which is, of course, linked to the fact that
existing sources on the programme performed are only available from the
1980s onwards.
The concerts themselves, however, were for the most part positively re-
ceived, both in terms of programming and performance and as can be seen
not only from the writers’ own words but also from the reactions of listen-
ers at the time.
Last but not least, it is important that there were many reviews that
most of the writers covered most of the concert events, and that these val-
ue judgements were published in the daily newspapers of the time, both in
Delo and Dnevnik. It was thus possible to spread awareness of the existence
of art music and concert events at the same time through their publication
19 “Spored petkovega koncerta je bil kar zanimivo sestavljen: dve Bachovi deli, koncer-
tantno in kantatno, potem Straussova ‘Smrt in poveličanje’ in Mahlerjeve ‘Pesmi za
umrle otroke’… Hauschilda in filharmonični orkester zelo rad pohvalim za Straussa,
zato ker sta bila pri Mahlerju še boljša.” Peter Kušar, “Mahlerjeve pesmi,” Dnevnik,
April 16, 1985, 5.
257
The programme of the Friday concert was quite interesting: two Bach
works, a concerto and a cantata, then Strauss’s ‘Death and Glorifica-
tion’ and Mahler’s ‘Songs for Dead Children’ ... I like to praise Hauschild
and the philharmonic orchestra very much for the Strauss, because they
were even better in the Mahler.19
I could not find a suitable explanation for Kušar’s change of heart, but
I can definitely say that from his writing, we can presume that his first neg-
ative judgement certainly changed at the beginning of the 1980s and also
after that, I could not sense that there was any negative concerning music
programme with more modern music.
Conclusion
Music criticism is important in the context of researching musical prac-
tice. It gives us insight into the performance and programming practices
of either a period or a particular ensemble or institution. In my case, it was
possible to use existing records to establish the beginning of the sympho-
ny matinees in 1970, because although they had not yet been known un-
der this title, the sources certainly testify to their existence, and the mu-
sic criticism confirms it. The 1980s, in terms of the incidence of criticism of
symphony matinees or concerts linked in performance and programme to
matinees, far outstrip the 1970s, which is, of course, linked to the fact that
existing sources on the programme performed are only available from the
1980s onwards.
The concerts themselves, however, were for the most part positively re-
ceived, both in terms of programming and performance and as can be seen
not only from the writers’ own words but also from the reactions of listen-
ers at the time.
Last but not least, it is important that there were many reviews that
most of the writers covered most of the concert events, and that these val-
ue judgements were published in the daily newspapers of the time, both in
Delo and Dnevnik. It was thus possible to spread awareness of the existence
of art music and concert events at the same time through their publication
19 “Spored petkovega koncerta je bil kar zanimivo sestavljen: dve Bachovi deli, koncer-
tantno in kantatno, potem Straussova ‘Smrt in poveličanje’ in Mahlerjeve ‘Pesmi za
umrle otroke’… Hauschilda in filharmonični orkester zelo rad pohvalim za Straussa,
zato ker sta bila pri Mahlerju še boljša.” Peter Kušar, “Mahlerjeve pesmi,” Dnevnik,
April 16, 1985, 5.
257
