Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T05:19:29.965Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Classicism and False Values

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Get access

Extract

I would like to say a few words on a subject that may appear, at first consideration, to be highly controversial. To those whose appreciation of the classical in music is perfectly sincere, who feel that a large proportion of it is irrevocably established as a fully adequate expression of the beautiful, with the beauty that brooks no denial, my view of the matter may possibly savour of the irreverent, not to say impertinent. I desire to be neither irreverent nor impertinent, but merely venture to suggest that we place an unduly high value on much musical work that has come into the category of the classical, either by reason of its remoteness from our current thought and methods, or by reason of its historical position in revealing definite points of development and expansion in an art that is still seeking an approach to maturity.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Musical Association, 1917

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Read, in the author's absence, by Mr. Edwin Evans.

References

May I add here what I omitted to say at the time? The author of the Paper spoke rather contemptuously of the small and simple orchestra employed by Mozart. Surely the power of producing great work with simple means is exactly the proof of a high order of genius. The severest test to which you can put an orchestral composition is to strip it to the condition of a pianoforte arrangement, and ask the question, Does it still remain great and interesting music? If not, it is evident that orchestral effect has been used as a screen for poverty of invention and imagination.—H.H.S.Google Scholar