MUSIC EDUCATORS JOURNAL 0 1963 by Music Educators National Conference 1201 Sixteenth Street N.W.. Washington 6, D. C.

Volume 49. Number 5 April-May 1963

Bulletin Board 2 A Look at Textbooks for Education in Music. Befh Latzdis 83 In the News 4 Strings Are on the March in The Changing Scene 10 Michigan. Arfhzrr C. Hills 86 Letters to the Journal 14 The Sound of Arabian Music. 89 Advertisers Index 30 What Makes Music Great? Harold Dart 95 Music Education and National Goals. Max Kaplan 3 3 The 1963 ISME Meeting in Tokyo 105 Current Issues in Graduate Music Music Education in Japan. Education Programs. Nenl E. Glesiz 37 Naohiro Fukrri 103 Ford Grant to Start The Latin-American Music Center. Six-Year Project to Develop Jlmn Orrego-Snlas 105 Music Talent in Schools. Pn~rlHrrnze 40 Organizing a Junior High School The Bennington Approach to Creative Elective Chorus. Normnil Phillips Learning. Herberf Alper 4 1 and Jolm Scott 109 Teach Composition in Your General How Do We Rate in Music Music Class. Doniz Mills 4 3 Education? Will Srhwnrtz 112 On the Cover 44 James L. Mursell. Harry R. Wilson 116 Rhythm in Music. Karl W. Gehrkens 45 The Critic at Harvard. Ronald C. Perera, Gerald 0. Grow, The 1963 MENC Interim Meeting 46 Joel E. Cobeu 118 More Than Conducting. Keith Wilson 47 Collegiate Newsletter 126 Can Perfect Pitch Be Learned? Summer 1963: Festivals, Workshops, Robert W. L~nJin 49 Schools 129 The Creative Arts Symposium. Listening Develops Musical Taste. Gerard L. Knieter 62 Frank J. Gerzina 133 The Schulwerk-Its Origin and Aims. Awards and Competitions 134 Carl Orfl 69 Worth Looking Into 136 What America Taught Me About Music. Philip 1. Britton 79 New Books 138 IDEALS IN COLLEGE MUSIC CRITICISM / Joel E. Cohen

EOPLE who read music reviews, the review to find out what they ideals, his life would be much simpler Plike nlost people who read any- heard and what they ought to think than it actually is. But the undergrad- thing, like to feel good when they're about it. uate music critic is ;II\V;IYS collscious through reading. In the undergradu- Finally, most people, who didn't that he is part of the college com- ate community, there ore at least go to the concert, look to a review for munity. That status adds difficulties. four different ways to make people entertainment. The clever slash, the If the college music critic constant- feel good in a music review-and they happy turn of phrase, and slick writ- ly pans a student musical organiza- :ill displease somebody. ing, regardless of how true or appro- tion, which even by some mythical To satisfy the musician as a student, priate, make a review their ideal. student standards deserves to be ., the review should be a kind of private The critic faced with writing a re- panned, he runs the risk of driving lesson. The critic ideally acts as a view to match all four ideals will ob- away all the audience but the music teacher, as a musician of knowledge viously fail. So the critic must choose. faculty, and doing the organization and taste, examining the concert and Whichever he chooses, he loses. in. That's carrying criticism too far. suggesting improvements. The pub- Student musici:lns don't want a On the other hand, the critic has a lished criticism carefully dissects the critic who pretends to teach them certain responsibility to his audience; performance and illumines the musi- something in public print, without his put in the crudest terms, he ought not cian's path to greater artistry. saying how good they were in the to recommend a concert likely to be Such a dissection could well be first place. But uncritical praise is so less enjoyable than, say, three hours painful, however, and the musician close to uncritical panning that the in a drunken stupor. His only hope can hope for a review that will help musician, just for his protection, wants of getting out of this dilemma rests him in his other world, that of the ca- the critic to be at least minimally in seeing the musical organiza t'ions reer artist: the ideal review should be perceptive. The critic who adheres to improve-especially if, like this col- a free advertisement. It will be full the ideal either of education or of ad- lege music critic, he actually likes of quotable phrases which look ap- vertisement gets musiciall's anathema. music and is happy, is grateful, is propriate when printed in the paid ad- ~onmusici;?nsare jilst as easy to well nigh deliriously joyous, at the vertisements for the next concert. please. Many people who go to a con- sound of a good concert. With the musical sensitivity of a pneu- cert want a critical analysis in the A second additionill problem of the

matic drill, the reviewer ideally cri- review:, other- readers couldn't care undergraduate music critic is that ticizes nothing and praises everything. less. Both musicians and members of some of his best friends may be mu- He lets the reader know just enough the audience usually forget that the sicians, and after a few reviews, that to make him look forward to sharing critic works on a newspaper, and most some of his best enemies are mu- the ecstasy of the performer's next of the rest of the newspaper's staff is sicians. He cannot criticize musicians concert. neither musically trained nor inter- in the abstract the night after the The member of the audience so- ested in musical analysis; his co-writ- concert, when he will see them in phisticated enough to form an opinion ers are interested in his writing. Thus the dining hall the next morning. of his own wants a review that will the critic himself is subject to a pecu- There are two easy ways out of this confirm it. He wants to know that he liar kind of intramural criticism which passel of dilemmas. was right. The review may supply finds the ideals of the student musi- The first is impregnable egotism. more facts or jargon to support him, cian and the critical audience simply When rats are faced with a choice, hut its essential function is to mirror dull. and get punished for selecting either ':.is feelings. Other, less sophisticated If the critic's only problem were to i~lternative,they refuse to leave the &members of the audience may look to effect :I compronlise among these four starting box. Similarly, critics aban-

APRIL-MAY. NINETEEN SIXTY-THREE 1 re don all four ideals and all responsi- bilities. They use reviews to slay en- emies, reward friends, and display their towering genius with the writ- ten word. The other way out-and a very at- tractive 'one-is not to write music re- views at all. Let word of mouth help or hurt undergraduate musical organ- izations and musicians. Abdicate. But both egotism and abdica t'ion are solutions that work only for the individual critic. As I~ublic ~olicies they are not viable. For newipapers always can, and will, find mediocre hacks to write on music, when no one better is available; and in a college, as anywhere else, overly bumptious hacks are intolerable. The best the responsible critic can hope for is a successful compromise that leaves everybody grumbling, but quietly.

Joel E. Cohen '64 reuiews student mu- sical performances for the Crimson. He receritly was named Editorial Chairman of the Crimson as well. Mr. Cohen was the author of "Some Rela- tionships Between Music and Mathe- matics," which appeared in the Septem- ber-October 1961 issue of the Music Educators Journal. These three short articles are re- printed with special pennission from the December 7 issue of The Haruard Crim- son. Originally they were part of a sym- posium including undergraduate theatre, music, and writing.

MUSIC EDUCATORS JOURNAL