Page 271 - 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. 271
what is happening to music criticism?
nal conclusion of the study is that there is no valid theory. Nevertheless, all
five authors have a number of views in common.
Although many studies and books have been written on criticism, in-
corporating presentations of the methods of critical evaluation, it is not
possible to talk about any generally accepted rules of the discipline. Ernest
Newman, a British music critic writing in the first half of the twentieth cen-
tury, offered the following reflection:
If there hadn’t been a science of composition, if each composer had had
to discover everything on his own (harmony, counterpoint, orchestra-
tion etc.), things would not have come so far. Perhaps that is why criti-
cism has made no considerable progress, because every critic had to dis-
cover its basic principles by learning from his and from other people’s
mistakes.34
All the authors agree that the critic should possess broad knowledge
encompassing philosophy, aesthetics, literature, history and various other
fields, and that formal musical training is a sine qua non for the critic. The
critic must win the trust of the public. The reason for this is simple: would
you rather be operated on by an untrained quack or a trained surgeon?
Would you rather be tried by a reader of the crime section in the newspaper
or by a professional judge? Oscar Thompson was of a similar view:
Trained criticism is more likely to work for good than untrained crit-
icism; disciplined judgement promises more of what is sound and fair
than undisciplined judgement; the professional is more to be trusted
than the amateur.35
A survey conducted at Columbia University in New York found that
the majority of classical music critics are highly educated, while at the same
time almost half of them have performed music themselves.36 Almost all
the authors in the study likewise emphasise the importance of experience.
The next question we need to consider is the eternal question of wheth-
er, and to what extent, criticism can be objective. It is not unusual for crit-
ics to have diametrically opposed views on the same subject. The Britanni-
ca article on music criticism makes a similar point.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to show that a value judgment can stand for
anything that is even remotely true about music, as opposed to stand-
34 Şuteu, “Is there a theory of musical criticism?,” 99.
35 Ibid., 106.
36 The Classical Music Critic (New York City: Columbia University, 2005), 48–9.
271
nal conclusion of the study is that there is no valid theory. Nevertheless, all
five authors have a number of views in common.
Although many studies and books have been written on criticism, in-
corporating presentations of the methods of critical evaluation, it is not
possible to talk about any generally accepted rules of the discipline. Ernest
Newman, a British music critic writing in the first half of the twentieth cen-
tury, offered the following reflection:
If there hadn’t been a science of composition, if each composer had had
to discover everything on his own (harmony, counterpoint, orchestra-
tion etc.), things would not have come so far. Perhaps that is why criti-
cism has made no considerable progress, because every critic had to dis-
cover its basic principles by learning from his and from other people’s
mistakes.34
All the authors agree that the critic should possess broad knowledge
encompassing philosophy, aesthetics, literature, history and various other
fields, and that formal musical training is a sine qua non for the critic. The
critic must win the trust of the public. The reason for this is simple: would
you rather be operated on by an untrained quack or a trained surgeon?
Would you rather be tried by a reader of the crime section in the newspaper
or by a professional judge? Oscar Thompson was of a similar view:
Trained criticism is more likely to work for good than untrained crit-
icism; disciplined judgement promises more of what is sound and fair
than undisciplined judgement; the professional is more to be trusted
than the amateur.35
A survey conducted at Columbia University in New York found that
the majority of classical music critics are highly educated, while at the same
time almost half of them have performed music themselves.36 Almost all
the authors in the study likewise emphasise the importance of experience.
The next question we need to consider is the eternal question of wheth-
er, and to what extent, criticism can be objective. It is not unusual for crit-
ics to have diametrically opposed views on the same subject. The Britanni-
ca article on music criticism makes a similar point.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to show that a value judgment can stand for
anything that is even remotely true about music, as opposed to stand-
34 Şuteu, “Is there a theory of musical criticism?,” 99.
35 Ibid., 106.
36 The Classical Music Critic (New York City: Columbia University, 2005), 48–9.
271
