Page 186 - Weiss, Jernej, ur. 2020. Konservatoriji: profesionalizacija in specializacija glasbenega dela ▪︎ The conservatories: professionalisation and specialisation of musical activity. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 4
P. 186
konservator iji: profesionalizacija in specializacija glasbenega dela
that the same compositions were constantly repeated and that the teach-
ing material was out of date. It appears that criticisms of this kind prompt-
ed a far-reaching overhaul of teaching at the Conservatory a few years lat-
er, when Julij Betetto took over as director in 1933 and called on his teachers
to make changes.36
Up to this time the institution had mainly focused on singing (solo
and choral), while instrumental lessons were centred above all on piano
and violin. The reports of the Glasbena Matica on the work of the Con-
servatory show that, despite the efforts of the board to teach the wid-
est possible range of instruments and thus boost orchestral playing, by
far the greatest interest was in learning the piano; there was practical-
ly no interest in woodwind, brass and percussion. On the other hand, the
range of compulsory theoretical subjects (counterpoint, harmony, musi-
cal form, instrumentation, history of music, aesthetics of music, ensem-
ble rehearsals, etc.) was conceived relatively broadly, to enable students to
acquire the widest possible musical education. After nationalisation, the
higher level course at the Conservatory consisted of four years (previously
three), while the composition and conducting department offered a five-
year course. Teaching at the high level also included piano, violin, cello
and (solo) singing.37
Vurnik’s criticism was unquestionably also directed at the fact that the
Conservatory did not offer master’s level courses. This meant that until the
founding of the Academy of Music, Conservatory students were obliged to
leave the country in order to continue their training at the master’s level.
Almost all of Osterc’s composition students, for example, pursued master’s
studies at the State Conservatory in Prague.
As early as the mid-1920s, then, Vurnik was advocating the introduc-
tion of the highest standards in music teaching, performance and compo-
sition at the Conservatory – something that had not previously been pos-
sible for financial, staffing and other material reasons. Although in many
ways justified, Vurnik’s comparisons with the courses offered by some of
the most important institutions of higher musical education, boasting a
tradition dating back more than a century, appear to be somewhat pre-
mature. It was only with the establishment of the Music A cademy (Glas-
bena akademija) in 1939 – unlike the Conservatory, the new Academy
had university college status – and even more so after the end of the Sec-
36 Cigoj Krstulović, Zgodovina, spomin, dediščina, 172.
37 Ibid., 169.
184
that the same compositions were constantly repeated and that the teach-
ing material was out of date. It appears that criticisms of this kind prompt-
ed a far-reaching overhaul of teaching at the Conservatory a few years lat-
er, when Julij Betetto took over as director in 1933 and called on his teachers
to make changes.36
Up to this time the institution had mainly focused on singing (solo
and choral), while instrumental lessons were centred above all on piano
and violin. The reports of the Glasbena Matica on the work of the Con-
servatory show that, despite the efforts of the board to teach the wid-
est possible range of instruments and thus boost orchestral playing, by
far the greatest interest was in learning the piano; there was practical-
ly no interest in woodwind, brass and percussion. On the other hand, the
range of compulsory theoretical subjects (counterpoint, harmony, musi-
cal form, instrumentation, history of music, aesthetics of music, ensem-
ble rehearsals, etc.) was conceived relatively broadly, to enable students to
acquire the widest possible musical education. After nationalisation, the
higher level course at the Conservatory consisted of four years (previously
three), while the composition and conducting department offered a five-
year course. Teaching at the high level also included piano, violin, cello
and (solo) singing.37
Vurnik’s criticism was unquestionably also directed at the fact that the
Conservatory did not offer master’s level courses. This meant that until the
founding of the Academy of Music, Conservatory students were obliged to
leave the country in order to continue their training at the master’s level.
Almost all of Osterc’s composition students, for example, pursued master’s
studies at the State Conservatory in Prague.
As early as the mid-1920s, then, Vurnik was advocating the introduc-
tion of the highest standards in music teaching, performance and compo-
sition at the Conservatory – something that had not previously been pos-
sible for financial, staffing and other material reasons. Although in many
ways justified, Vurnik’s comparisons with the courses offered by some of
the most important institutions of higher musical education, boasting a
tradition dating back more than a century, appear to be somewhat pre-
mature. It was only with the establishment of the Music A cademy (Glas-
bena akademija) in 1939 – unlike the Conservatory, the new Academy
had university college status – and even more so after the end of the Sec-
36 Cigoj Krstulović, Zgodovina, spomin, dediščina, 172.
37 Ibid., 169.
184
