in Wiley’s narrative. Again, there is an lives. Scholars of Russian culture and society apparent justification of this approach to can fill in for themselves the relevant details of Tchaikovsky’s life. As Wiley suggests, ‘he was the historical context, but for the kind of an avid reader and yet said so little about the general readers at which Oxford University issues of his day. He lived in momentous times; Press’s ‘Master Musicians’ series is explicitly what was he thinking about beyond his imme- aimed, it is something of a shame that more diate preoccupations? ...Tchaikovsky, an im- space was not devoted to a more integrated portant figure in the culture of his day, is diffi- portrait of the composer in his age (although cult to place within that culture’ (p. 449). that would surely have put yet more pressure This would appear to be the key to why on a book that is already long on detail).

Wiley’s biography reads as it does. By basing Part of Wiley seems to long for Tchaikovsky’s Downloaded from its biographical chapters so relentlessly on missing letters to be released, restored, or redis- Tchaikovsky’s accessible letters, and by looking covered, for speculation and censorship to be outward from the composer’s own point of replaced with facts and corroboration. Yet he view, it naturally enough begins to take on also knows that deep down, ‘a sense of the inward, egotistical, domestic, or everyday not-knowing will remain’ (p. 449). Perhaps it is qualities of Tchaikovsky’s own concerns. There this sense of not-knowing that continues to is little here of Glenda Dawn Goss’s striking inspireçand might even account forçour ml.oxfordjournals.org recent attempt to situate the significance of Si- sense of Tchaikovsky’s elusive and paradoxical belius’s life and works at the very heart of genius. Finnish cultural self-realization and political PHILIP ROSS BULLOCK self-determination (Sibelius: A Composer’s Life Wadham College, University of Oxford and the Awakening of Finland (Chicago, 2009)). doi:10.1093/ml/gcq071 There is, of course, a decided advantage in refusing to make Tchaikovsky into anything at University of California, San Diego Libraries on December 17, 2010 like a symbol of his age or nation; Tchaikovsky The Socie¤ te¤ des Concerts du Conservatoire, 1828^1967. the man (and to some extent the composer) is By D. Kern Holoman. pp. xvi þ 620. (Univer- kept to the fore as a real, complex, contradict- sity of California Press, Berkeley, Los ory, enigmatic, and troubled individual. And Angeles, London, 2004, »63. ISBN 0-520- in a field such as Russian cultural history, 23664-5.) where the search for overarching explanations often becomes the pretext for banal and reduc- Only a conductor could write a book such as tive assertions of a crudely essentialist nature, The Socie¤ te¤ des Concerts du Conservatoire, 1828^1967, Wiley’s measured and judicious prose refuses and only a first-rate scholar would have the per- to give glib answers to trite questions. Yet severance to plough through thousands of docu- where there is a commendable restraint when ments from one hundred and forty concert it comes to unwarranted speculation (particu- seasons, the ability to see historical significance larly when it comes to questions of the com- in the smallest of details, and the imagination poser’s love life), this sense of moderation none- to bring them to life. D. Kern Holoman knows theless leads to a concomitant impoverishment how orchestras work. He understands their as- of context. To what extent does it matter that pirations and the mythologies constructed Tchaikovsky commented so little on, say, the around conductors; the work demanded of per- emancipation of the serfs or the Balkan formers as well as the fights over promotions question, or that one cannot be sure whether and recording contracts; what’s needed to keep his comments on realism (p. 450) allude to con- subscribers and the press happy; and the chal- temporary Russian debates on the nature of aes- lenge of generating enough financial resources thetics? Wiley rightly notes that by 1885, ‘Tchai- to repair instruments, hire soloists, fund kovsky’s professional status ...was higher than pensions, and balance their budget. Holoman that of any other Russian composer’ (p. 284), can also tell a story. Quoting from minutes of and surely it is in the knotty relationship their meetings, transcriptions of real conversa- between privately led life, mysteriously intuited tions, and interviews with still-living orchestra artistic inspiration, and publicly staged persona members, he makes us feel almost like we’re that much of Tchaikovsky’s significance is to there. With an engaging and accessible style, he be found. Few of us probably record our own re- seeks to recreate the excitement their perform- actions to the social and public discourses of ances generated, events ‘not to be missed’ the day, yet surely equally few of us would also (p. 3). This orchestra and chorus were the most deny their interaction with, and indeed their important in Paris for decades, their performers very influence on, important aspects of our the city’s finest, and their audiences from 593 among the political, economic, social, and intel- The founder Francois-Antoine Habeneck sets lectual elites. Through historically sensitive and the tone, responsible for the ‘artistic vision and evocative analyses, Holoman shows how the or- personal intervention’ that in 1828 transformed chestra evolved into one of the world’s great student concerts into ‘a lasting association of philharmonic societies. the most accomplished artists in the land’ The book is organized in five parts. The first (p. 12). Beginning with him, we get a sense of focuses on the orchestra’s musicians, their com- the ‘collective mission [that] took precedence mittees, and their relationship to the Conserva- over any one member’s essentially transitory toire; its original hall, known for superb acous- membership’ (p. 9). The members’ solidarity, tics and for seating only 800; and the concerts, based on ‘mutual esteem, travail, and talent’,

from audience reception and the mechanics of derived from three organizational characteris- Downloaded from putting together a concert season to how much tics. For many years, they shared some relation- money was made over the years. Next comes a ship to the Conservatoire, most of them as its three-part chronological analysis of the orches- graduates or professors. Many remained with tra and its concert seasons, organized by the orchestra for decades, with some, such as period and conductor. Holoman analyses each Delvedez, Taffanel, and Gaubert, becoming of the twelve conductors’ background and its conductor. And the orchestra functioned musical preferences. He follows the orchestra’s in a democratic manner, with effective self- ml.oxfordjournals.org responses to political turbulence, personnel governance ruled by some fifty statutes and a crises, and changing tastes, and explains their constitution. There were competitive auditions evolving ambitions, showing it to be ‘as flexible for vacancies, elections for conductors, an as it was strong’ (p. 14). The fifth part, on a administrative committee of twelve elected website for the book (5http://hector.ucdavis members who met weekly, and annual general .edu/sdc/4), transcribes the orchestra’s adminis- assemblies. Performers behaved like a special trative archives. Clearly organized and a model kind of worker, competing to get their jobs at University of California, San Diego Libraries on December 17, 2010 for scholars working on musical organizations, and negotiating with one another over their it includes complete programmes (searchable disputes as well as the right to perform else- within each year), personnel lists, subscription where. At the end of the season, earnings were prices, statutes and decrees, discography, add- pooled and each socie¤ taire given an equal part, itional illustrations, comments by famous com- less any fines he might have incurred. Begin- posers, and bibliography. The programmes ning in 1838, members put aside 20 per cent of make possible almost endless inquiry. One can their earnings into emergency and retirement trace not only the evolution of their repertory, accounts. but also the careers of pianists, violinists, and The Socie¤ te¤ ’s administrative committee was singers who performed with them. (Under more powerful than any conductor. Through Andre Cluytens’s leadership in the 1940s and their minutes, which Holoman mines with con- 1950s, soloists were featured on almost every siderable skill, we watch the orchestra endeav- concert. I was fascinated to see Debussy’s Jeux ouring to balance audience taste and performer on their programmes twice in the 1960s. Was preferences, considering who could use their this interest in the ballet coming from Boulez, hall and for what purposes, pondering ‘options Stockhausen, and German scholars who had for dealing with compositeurs vivants’(p.254), begun analysing the work, or did the Socie¤ te¤ ’s facing the competition from other orchestras performances help stimulate renewed attention (see below), and struggling with the inevitabil- to it?) Unfortunately, the programme notes for ity of market pressures. We hear committee these concerts, which began in the late 1880s, members discussing ongoing problems, such as were far too extensive to include on the website. aging members and the need to retain choral The text itself reads like a kaleidoscope. singers, especially females. We follow their Holoman holds in his reader’s mind many debates on whether to accept women as elements at once, shifting his focus every few socie¤ taires, forbidden by an amendment passed pages. This facilitates experience of the orches- in 1843. (There was only ever one woman in- tra’s complex organizational life and diverse strumentalist, the harpist Alys Lautemann. She issues that rose to dominate their attention. became the orchestra’s soloist in 1942, but was Continuity thus is somewhat elusive in this never made a full socie¤ taire.) And, when conduct- book, but nonetheless assured by certain ors retire or die, the committee’s minutes recurring issues: membership, the organiza- document their anxieties and the process of se- tion’s finances, their repertory (old and new), lecting a successor. government relations, tours, recordings, and Each conductor, of course, had his own style. the orchestra’s sound. Whereas Francois-Antoine Habeneck con- 594 ducted with the violin and bow and seemed to ors also prioritized the composer, most begin- have ‘supernatural powers’ (p. 140), Delvedez, ning their autumn season with one of his even if groomed by Habeneck, was more con- symphonies. In their first fifty years, they templative, theorizing orchestral practice ‘with featured 287 performances of Beethoven’s an eye toward identifying the ways of greatness’ music (Haydn following with sixty-six perform- (p. 240). Some were very restrained. Paul ances, Mendelssohn with sixty, and Mozart Taffanel was known for his ‘sobriety of gesture’ with thirty-six). Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony (p. 297) and Andre¤ Messager his ‘studied was long considered ‘the traditional measure elegance’, cultivating ‘a sense that the orchestra of a new conductor’s inaugural year’ (p. 279). was largely independent of its conductor’ Wagner first heard it in Paris in 1839,

(p. 331). Others injected their own personalities. performed by the Socie¤ te¤ des Concerts, and Downloaded from While Georges Marty’s presence at the podium Holoman suggests that ‘the confluence of was known for its ‘imperial’ authority (p. 314), stimuliçHabeneck, Berlioz, the Ninth, and Philippe Gaubert was beloved for his ‘earthy, most of all the quality and force of the Paris almost peasant-like orientation toward his playersçrepresents a turning point in life and work’ (p. 391) and Charles Munch Wagner’s conception of what an orchestra for ‘unusual compassion’ with his performers, could do’ (p. 169). With their extraordinary giving some ‘pet names’ (p. 446). Each chorus and its many professional singers who ml.oxfordjournals.org contributed to the history of the organization. performed on every programme for decades, Marty was ‘modest to the point of reluctance’ the Missa Solemnis also became closely to perform music by living composers, associated with the Socie¤ te¤ des Concerts. First preferring Baroque oratorio (p. 315), whereas introduced to audiences in excerpts beginning Jules Garcin and Charles Munch enthusiastic- in the 1830s and the subject of a clash between ally promoted it. Andre¤ Messager, among Garcin and his musicians over who should others, used tours and recordings to transform perform it and how, the Socie¤ te¤ was the first to at University of California, San Diego Libraries on December 17, 2010 the Socie¤ te¤ into an international orchestra ‘for perform it complete in France in 1888 and the prestige of the institution and the nation’ reprogrammed it for decades thereafter. In its (p. 434). Some were ‘star’ conductors who com- final years, besides performing individual manded real money, such as Munch, who in works in many concerts, the Socie¤ te¤ dedicated the 1940s received up to seven times what in- entire concerts to Beethovençsix in 1964, one strumentalists made. But lest one think that in 1965, and two in 1966. conductors dominated, a critic once pointed Another major work the Socie¤ te¤ loved to out that ‘the orchestra is itself the virtuoso’, the perform was Bach’s B Minor Mass. When the conductor secondary in importance to ‘the trad- concertmaster Charles Lamoureux was on the ition, innate so to speak’ (p. 359). In the 1960s, administrative committee in the early 1870s, he the position of first conductor was eliminated argued for performing the St Matthew Passion, in favour of guest conductors, including but was voted down and later left to create his Manuel Rosenthal and Pierre Boulez. own choral society. The Socie¤ te¤ performed the What bound socie¤ taires and conductors was Credo from the Mass five times between 1875 their commitment to ‘their me¤ tier as guarantors and 1885, but the reader should be aware that of the great classics in long-perfected interpret- amateur choral societies introduced Parisians ations’ (p. 236). Most important, there was to most of Bach’s larger choral works, especially Beethoven, ‘mastered systematically by the mu- the cantatas, the two Passions, and other move- sicians and their conductors in a disciplined ments of the Mass (the Gloria in 1883 and the approach for which there was no precedent in whole second half in 1887). In 1891 and 1892 the history of concert music’ (p. 136). We’re not the Socie¤ te¤ finally performed the complete told exactly what underlies Beethoven’s allure, Mass, for the first time in France, earning their but week after week they worked on his music, highest receipts to date. In 1908 the Mass took movement by movement, the major works even more than Wagner, and in 1966 they were ‘rehearsed for years before being presented’ still performing it. Their first complete St (p. 107). In a local newspaper, Berlioz helped Matthew Passion was not until 1928, but audiences understand this music. (His analyses chosen to introduce the Socie¤ te¤ to radio audi- of Beethoven’s symphonies were also re- ences. To understand why it took them so long produced in the programmes of the Concerts to perform these works as well as why the Mass Colonne on 29 November 1885, 24 October then became such a success, one should note 1886, and 10 November and 8 December 1895.) the complicated role religion played in By 1832, the Socie¤ te¤ had performed all Beet- nineteenth-century France, the importance of hoven’s symphonies. Successive Socie¤ te¤ conduct- the Pope’s acceptance of the Republic in 1891 595 and 1892, and the Catholic revival that have given to this music in performance? Were followed. (On the French taste for Bach, see Ravel’s classical tendencies what later made his Joe« l-Marie Fauquet and Antoine Hennion,La music so popular with the Socie¤ te¤ ? Grandeur de Bach: L’Amourde la musique en France The twentieth century brought changes in au XIXe sie' cle (Paris, 2000).) their relationship to the state, the advent of The Socie¤ te¤ ’s history of performing new concert tours, and significance given to radio music was complicated and I would have and recording. Not until they folded in 1967 enjoyed reading more about the orchestra’s and re-emerged as the Orchestre de Paris were relationship with living composers. Since they ever fully subsidized, with funding from Habeneck, some have insisted that they were the state, the city of Paris, and the de¤ partement

devoted to encouraging a French symphonic de la Seine. In 1838 Habeneck and others Downloaded from tradition, or at least committed to providing, proposed becoming the ‘official orchestra of the ‘with prudent reserve, access to modern works state’ with a permanent subsidy in return for both French and foreign’ (p. 253). Except for a performing at state ceremonies (p. 170). They few years, the administrative committee gave did long enjoy certain privileges through their readings to new works by living composers. association with the Conservatoire and the use Berlioz, fashioning himself as a disciple of Beet- of its hall, while making their own decisions hoven, was so popular he once hoped he would and supporting themselves through ticket sales, ml.oxfordjournals.org succeed Habeneck as their conductor. Delvedez and many of the Socie¤ te¤ ’s performers were also championed Bizet and Massenet, and later part of the orchestras of the Ope¤ ra and Munch did the same for Messiaen. Some Ope¤ ra-Comique, both state-supported. Some- unusual works made it into their programmes, times the government expected them to such as by Augusta Holme' s and little-known perform for official ceremonies, such as celebra- winners of the Prix Rossini. (These awards, tions for the visiting Russian Navy, the centen-

from the Acade¤ mie des Beaux-Arts, went to nial of Michelet, and the funeral of President at University of California, San Diego Libraries on December 17, 2010 young composers and librettists for the best Fe¤ lix Faure. During the Second World War, the cantata. Between 1885 and 1911 the Socie¤ te¤ Reich Ministry ordered them to give gala performed six such prize-winning works.) After concerts for the 150th anniversary of Mozart’s 1904 the government required such prem- death. But their role at the Universal ieres in return for a modest subsidy. Still, Exhibitions, when they might have served as the musicians themselves were not always emblems of the nation, was limitedçColonne convinced. ‘It isn’t the society’s role to welcome conducted the official concerts in 1878çand musicians who are not already classed among they themselves declined to do benefit concerts, the masters’, explained one of them in 1897 including for war victims, unless ‘politically un- (p. 303). Their favourites tended to be those avoidable’ (p. 243). Before the 1950s and 1960s, whose careers and reputations were already Holoman cites only the Swiss and American established, such as Gounod (especially in the tours as relying on direct government support. 1880s and 1890s), Franck (but only after he The concerts in Belgium and Lyon (1907), died in 1890), and Debussy (well after Pelle¤ as). Barcelona (1924), and tours of Switzerland In some ways, Saint-Sae« ns benefited most from (1917), the United States (1918), and Japan the Socie¤ te¤ . Taffanel put on thirty-one perform- (1963) transformed the image of the Socie¤ te¤ ,as ances of his works in the 1890s and, in 1896, did their residence with the festivals of given how many of his works it had premiered Aix-en-Provence beginning in 1947 and Besan- since the 1860s, the press pointed out that ‘the con in 1950. Reviews beyond Paris were gratify- Socie¤ te¤ des Concerts is becoming the Concert ing and the extra money appreciated, even if Saint-Sae« ns’ (p. 304). Having an organ in the their successes were marred by personnel hall made possible the premiere of his Third problems and disputed accounting (Messager Symphony, one of the only works of the time to resigned upon their return to France in 1919). be accompanied by a long analytical pamphlet In New York they recorded for Columbia with dozens of music examples. Saint-Sae« ns Gramophone and in the 1930s their reputation may have done well with the Socie¤ te¤ because grew through recordings for the Compagnie he understood the classics, having toured as a Franc aise du Gramophone. During the 78 era, pianist of Mozart and Beethoven even in they recorded some three thousand minutes. Germany and written Variations on a Theme Most of their LPs were produced by Pathe¤ - of Beethoven. This raises interesting questions: Marconi/EMI. In 1958 they were the only did the tastes reflected in the Socie¤ te¤ ’s ‘tradition’ Parisian orchestra to have recorded the influence what new music they were willing to complete Beethoven symphonies. With Ravel promote? Even the style and shape they may in the 1960s becoming ‘as strong a pillar of the

596 society’s traditions as Beethoven had been’ (p. If there are downsides to this remarkable, 493), Holoman considers their best recordings beautifully written analysis of an individual or- the complete Ravel from 1961^2, remastered on ganization, its ideals, and its music-making CDs in 1987. Perhaps not surprisingly, he practices, this is because it is primarily an observes that over time the performers became internal study, based largely on internal per- ‘greatly more engaged by the recordings than spectives as recorded in the minutes of their by the Sunday concerts’ (p. 495). Radio broad- meetings. If another volume were possible, I’d casts of their dress rehearsals beginning in the love to read about this same story from more early 1930s also cut into the successes of their outsiders’ perspectives. Most important would live concerts. Audiences would hear them on be comparison with the Socie¤ te¤ ’s rival orches- the radio on Sunday mornings and then attend tras. It’s true that the Concerts Pasdeloup was Downloaded from concerts of a competitor on Sunday afternoons. a sort of ‘interloper’ (p. 204), founded in 1861 Orchestra managers will learn much here to perform very similar repertory, albeit to a about how to run their affairs productively and much less sophisticated audience. Its success successfully for many years, while musicians was such that a Socie¤ te¤ member once cut re- will be fascinated with how this orchestra hearsals to be a featured soloist with Pasdeloup, forged a certain sound for which it became causing a huge uproar with his cohorts. And, known. Holoman helps the reader imagine like the Socie¤ te¤ but more committed to new ml.oxfordjournals.org what attracted full houses for decades and music, both Pasdeloup and later Colonne assured its distinction at home and abroad, devoted rehearsals to reading young composers’ regardless of its repertory. We are not told if work, some of which was chosen for concert per- the performance of so much Beethoven helped formance. However, this ‘imitation’ should not shape this sound, nor how they may have be overstated since in many cases these other negotiated between what was needed for the orchestras performed works well before the German classics and music more specific to Socie¤ te¤ and, as Holoman acknowledges, ‘would at University of California, San Diego Libraries on December 17, 2010 French taste. In any case, the language used to take the lead in out-of-town appearances, describe their sound suggests quintessentially recordings, and broadcasts’ (p. 257). After the ¤ ¤ French values. Some characterized it by its Societe had achieved ‘a runaway success’ with fragments of Berlioz’s Damnation de Faust in grace, suppleness, subtle nuances, and ‘such 1875, it was the Concerts Colonne, from whom perfect unity of timbre’ (p. 358). Others the Socie¤ te¤ later tried to ‘reclaim Berlioz’ (p. referred to ‘refined good taste, an intimate 259), that would use its superlative perform- understanding of the French style, respect for ances of the entire two-and-a-half hour work to tradition, sensible and sensitive interpretations, make their mark in the concert world. I have flawless technique, and an unrivaled richness of thus argued that we should not think of sonority’ (p. 119). In comparison with German concert societies in late nineteenth-century orchestras before the First World War, France as independent, but rather as organiza- Holoman describes the Socie¤ te¤ ’s playing as ‘rela- tions with blurred boundaries that functioned tively thin, narrow of vibrato, and free of the as part of an interconnected network. (See my sentimental elements increasingly to be found ‘Building a Public for Orchestral Music: Les in post-Romantic technique’ (p. 333). This ‘gou“t Concerts Colonne’, in Le Concert et son public: francais’ results from a‘kind of purity of expres- Mutations de la vie musicale en Europe de 1780 a' 1914 sion’, ‘a clipped, almost matter-of-fact perfec- (Paris, 2002), 209^40, and ‘Democracy, Ethics, tion of the pitch content’, unusually short and Commerce: The Concerts Populaires staccati, minimum vibrato in both the wind Movement in the Late 19th-Century France’, in and string playing, and ‘scrupulous avoidance Hans Erich Bo« deker, Patrice Veit (eds.), Les of bel canto phrasing’ (p. 491). The Socie¤ te¤ was Socie¤ te¤ s de musique en Europe, 1700^1920: Structures, also known for the ‘unusually high pitch to pratiques musicales et sociabilite¤ s (Berlin, 2007), which the orchestra tuned in the late 1940s and 455^79.) Holoman assumes that because the 1950s’ and the ‘biting’ tone quality of the winds Concerts Pasdeloup was reborn in the twentieth (pp. 120^1). Analysis of their recordings, one of century and still performs today, it had a con- the highlights of this book, allows Holoman to tinuous history, whereas it folded when dig into the details, while tracing subtle Pasdeloup’s original orchestra went bankrupt in changes in their sound over the years, especially 1884, surpassed by Colonne in the quality of when it came to the use of string portamento in their performances and popularity with the Ravel’s La Valse. All this makes one yearn to public. Comparative study would also reveal hear those old recordings, perhaps if they that, although the Socie¤ te¤ discovered a new could be made available on the book’s website. form of income after the First World War by

597 admitting listeners to Saturday morning dress their performances almost entirely sold out rehearsals, Colonne began this tactic in 1875, through advance subscription sales (unlike for not charging for tickets, but requiring paid their competitors, who depended largely on honorary membership to attend. To understand sales at the door), the Socie¤ te¤ was relatively the Socie¤ te¤ ’s full significance, scholars will now free of market concerns. Subscriptions tended want to compare not only the repertory of to remain in families for generations and it was other orchestras in Paris and abroad, but also extremely difficult to procure a seat if one were the strategies they and their competitors used not a subscriber except through a small ‘black to stay afloat under ever-evolving conditions market’ for tickets (p. 97). Only in 1903, after and to handle the demands of star soloists and the Socie¤ te¤ suffered ‘vacillating receipts and in-

contemporary composers. exorably rising expenses’ (p. 319), did it make Downloaded from A case in point: without taking into ac- available single ticket sales. Yet this apparently count competition by other local orchestras, did not result in any less resistance. One Holoman’s characterization of Garcin’s em- listener was seen reading the newspaper when brace of Wagner risks misleading as well as they performed Debussy. Even in 1933, sidestepping the onus of the Socie¤ te¤ ’s conserva- Gaubert noted, ‘We can play Saint-Sae« ns tive tastes. When the Socie¤ te¤ first performed without fear, but then things heated up when Wagnerian excerpts from Tannha« user and Lohen- we tried L’Apprenti sorcier [by Paul Dukas] for ml.oxfordjournals.org grin in 1866 and 1869, this was after Pasdeloup the first time: subscribers demanded their had earlier demonstrated their popularity with money back’ (p. 435). The issue of subscriber audiences. Garcin’s ‘premieres’ of the prelude to tastes, however, needs analysis of more than Tristan und Isolde in 1891 and the religious scene correspondence cited in the administrative from Parsifal in 1892 (pp. 293^4) were long committee’s minutes. Why would audience after other Parisian orchestras had performed loyalty necessarily encourage ‘retrogressive’ them. Colonne first conducted the Tristan tastes? Was it merely that the audience was at University of California, San Diego Libraries on December 17, 2010 prelude in 1881, giving it again in 1889, 1890, aging along with the performers? Or was the and 1891, only weeks before the Socie¤ te¤ ’s f irst sound cultivated by the orchestra antithetical performance. Colonne’s orchestra gave its to modernism? Or the genres most associated premiere of the religious scene from Parsifal in with the Socie¤ te¤ , such as large works for chorus 1884 and had performed it nine times, including and orchestra? (Related to this, were the twice in 1892, before the Socie¤ te¤ did it that Socie¤ te¤ ’s fortunes ultimately tied too closely to March. Lamoureux first conducted the first act the taste for such music as it declined substan- of Tristan in 1884 (and numerous times there- tially after the wars?) Holoman tells us that the after) and the religious scene from Parsifal in patrons included not just wealthy families and 1886. As such, one should understand the government bureaucrats, but also many profes- Socie¤ te¤ as following rather than leading the sional musicians and families of the socie¤ taires. emerging public taste for Wagner. Moreover, What about the latter would necessarily make the Socie¤ te¤ was less interested in new Wagner- them so resistant to the new and the progressive ian works. Just after Parsifal’s premiere in in music? Was there ever a claque that would Bayreuth in summer 1882, all three of the other have promoted a certain point of view, thereby major Parisian orchestras, Pasdeloup, Colonne, potentially influencing audiences? Beyond these and Lamoureux, gave their premieres of the concerts, were all subscribers truly ‘music- prelude of Parsifal on the same Sunday that lovers’ or, increasingly, social elites, there to October, whereas the Socie¤ te¤ , which started assert family ties and make connections its season in November, ignored Wagner alto- with the city’s other elites? Was the status gether that year. When Taffenel took over in associated with being a subscriber ever capable the autumn of 1892, defying the competition of challenging, even dominating, conflicting that sometimes dedicated entire concerts to musical concerns? If audiences played a role in Wagner’s music, he decided almost to eliminate the music that became associated with the Wagner from the Socie¤ te¤ ’s programmes for a Socie¤ te¤ and, indeed, in the emergence of a decade. His reason: Wagner’s ‘excessive certain canon of musical masterpieces, it is im- sonority doesn’t lend itself to performance in portant to know much more about them, who our little hall’ (p. 271). sat where for how long, and what these perform- The Socie¤ te¤ ’s audiences may have con- ances meant to them. tributed to its ‘retrogressive’ tendencies well As this book is not primarily a study of public into the twentieth century. Holoman suggests taste, most of the reviews cited are also from that ‘most of the subscribers were openly the committee minutes. But how rich and hostile to aggressive modernism’ (p. 111). With useful would be a substantial study of the 598 critical reception of the Socie¤ te¤ from 1828 to (1955) and two volumes of theoretical works 1967. This would allow us to comprehend more (1968 and 1974). Both were soon seen as inad- fully the meaning of their ‘tradition’ and how equate: incomplete (most of the unpublished this may have evolved over time. I’d be writings were ignored), and, in the case of the curious, for example, how Beethoven was theoretical works, not even indexed. Jana¤ cek’s› understood when performed under the baton of remaining writings, known not always helpfully their twelve conductors. How was each of their as his ‘literary works’, had not been brought Beethovens distinct from those conducted by together in this way, although some could be Pasdeloup, Colonne, Lamoureux, and their suc- found in specialist articles devoted to pieces cessors? Critics could help us address this. And that he published in particular newspapers.

what did Beethoven mean to them when per- The most prominent partial collection was Downloaded from formed next to a wide range of other music? from the Brno newspaper Lidove¤ noviny, collected Listening to Beethoven in the context of Men- first in the 1930s, and published again in a delssohn and Haydn is far different from censored form in the 1950s. For everything else, hearing his music juxtaposed with that of one had a hard time seeking out obscure Wagner, Debussy, or Shostakovitch. Moreover, journals and newspapers. if the Socie¤ te¤ represented a certain standard, Today the position is quite different. There one would see this in the discussions and are five handsome, uniform volumes, com- ml.oxfordjournals.org debates. After 1903, when the Socie¤ te¤ began to prising the literary works (two volumes, 2003), advertise, engage a press service, and give the theoretical works (two volumes, 2007^8) away up to sixty tickets per performance to and the folkloristic works (one volume, 2009, critics, the increase in reviews offers an ideal with more to follow). The literary works had opportunity to examine the meaning and been planned for years, part of the Jana¤ cek› col- impact of its performances, not just for those lected edition initiated by Supraphon in the privileged to be able to attend, but also for 1970s. After regime change in Czechoslovakia at University of California, San Diego Libraries on December 17, 2010 other orchestras and other musicians near and in 1989 Supraphon was broken up and its more far. profitable publishing activities were taken over D. Kern Holoman’s The Socie¤ te¤ des Concerts du by Ba« renreiter. This included the Jana¤ cek› Conservatoire, 1828^1967 has laid a magnificent Complete Collected Edition, but, as far as foundation for the study of all orchestras, im- writings were concerned, the only sign of mensely valuable to anyone who wishes to progress was that a salaried editor had been know how one works. It is to be savoured and assigned. But once Jana¤ cek› ’s royalties returned returned to frequently, especially the pro- from a central state source to a newly formed grammes on the website. There is much to ‘Jana¤ cek› Foundation’, its funds began to be admire in ‘the history and principles’ of an or- used not to support and accelerate the ganization that survived ‘even the harshest of Ba« renreiter complete edition (based in crises with some dignity ...to re-emerge on Prague), but instead to create a rival ‘Editio Sunday afternoons in an almost relentless per- Jana¤ cek’› (based in Brno), which with huge manence’ (p. 387) for one hundred and forty energy began pouring out volumes of music years. and writings that had so far been neglected by JANN PASLER Ba« renreiter. It could be argued that the new University of California at San Diego publisher has been rather too hastily product- doi:10.1093/ml/gcq078 ive. While it is helpful to have all these volumes of writings available, more attention given to the status of the texts would have made these Teoreticke¤ d|¤ lo.ByLeos› Jana¤ cek.› Edited by Leos› volumes much more valuable. Faltus, Eva Drl|¤kova¤ , Svatava Pr› iba¤ n› ova, In the theoretical volumes under review here, and Jir› i Zahra¤ dka. pp. 716. Theoretical for instance, volume 1 comprises, with a couple Works, ser. 1, vol. 1. (Editio Jana¤ cek,› Brno, of exceptions, all of what was in the two 2007^8. ISBN 978-80-904052-0-2.) volumes edited by Zdeneˇk Blazˇek published in Teoreticke¤ d|¤ lo.ByLeos› Jana¤ cek.› Edited by Leos› 1968^74, and seemingly without any reference Faltus, Eva Drl|¤kova¤ , and Svatava Pr› iba¤ n› ova. to Jana¤ cek’s› original versions. To take a brief pp. 489. Theoretical Works, ser. 1, vol. 2. example, an article ‘O dokonale¤ pr› edstaveˇ (Editio Jana¤ cek,› Brno, 2007^8. ISBN 978- dvojzvuku’ [On the perfect concept of 80-904052-1-9.) two-note chords], JW XV/44, was originally published, like so many of Jana¤ cek’s› earlier the- Not long ago, collections of Jana¤ cek’s› writings oretical writings, in instalments (1885^6) in the consisted of a volume of folkloristic works journal he edited, Hudebn|¤ listy. Blazˇek repub- 599