Phonograph Monthly Review, Vol. 5, No. 4 (1931-01)

114 The Phonograph Monthly Review Two Sibelius Symphonies Embodying a review of the Columbia recordings* If these symphonies prove anything, it is that the vision of Ezekiel in the Valley can be perpetually re-enacted in the world, that the forms which appear to each succeeding gen- eration as the dry bones of academical tradition, can be re- articulated and live again, in beauty and flexibility, if only the breath of genius passes through them.—Rosa Newmarch in Jean Sibelius: A Finnish Composer. I T is with very considerable diffidence that I set about writing a review of these records. From the earliest days of the P. M.R. I have lost no opportunity to point the need of Sibelius recordings, and now that the first versions of his symphonies have actually been put on discs with un- dreamed of effectiveness, I am left at a loss for words eloquent enough to express my feelings. There are so many fine re- cordings of great music made available in the last few years, to each of which one must strive to respond appreciatively, that one’s verbal armory is exhausted when its fullest re- sources are most needed. And with Sibelius in particular there has been so much written in a general way, so many references to his nationalistic qualities, so much flossy em- broidery on the Kalevala epic, such earnest belaboring of the terms “gaunt”, “bleak” “austere,” and yet so little of his major work given consistent and adequate performance, that one realizes the crying need is not for more appreciative studies of the man but for more hearing of his music itself. For all the earnest endeavors of the critics (who have labored long and well to give Sibelius his just due of understanding), the musical public in general is like that of Germany, where as Sibelius himself has said, ‘There they lift their hat to me and bow respectfully, but pass by; they speak well of me, but they do not perform me.” His native Finland does things better. Polite encomiums and honorary degrees are not sufficient expression of the Finns’ admiration of their national musical spokesman. The government granted Sibelius an annuity that permitted him to devote his entire energies to composition, free from the gnawing canker of monetary necessity. On his sixtieth birthday his pension was increased to 100,000 marks, and a popular subscription of 270,000 marks was raised. These national activities have not stopped even there. Realizing that music lives and grows only through performance and hearing, the Finnish government subsidized the phonographic production of Sibelius’ larger works, co-operating with the Columbia Company in the issue of the first two symphonies— a release which already is leading to the issue of other of his works on discs. Government officials in this country and in England are so supremely oblivious of the need for spon- soring their native art that Finland’s noble example will not so much as penetrate their toughened skins, but the influence of these discs will be illimitable among the average listeners, to whom all the critics’ ecstacies over Sibelius are meaning- *Sibelius: Symphony No. 1 in E minor, Op. 39, played by a Symphony Orchestra conducted by Robert Kajanus. Columbia Masterworks Set No. 151 (5 D12s, Alb., $7.50.) (To be released around January 10th, 1931.) Sibelius: Symphony No. 2 in D major, Op. 43, played by a Symphony Orchestra conducted by Robert Kajanus. Columbia Masterworks Set No. 149 (5 D12s, Alb., $7.50.) (On the 10th record side of Set 151 Dr. Kajanus conducts the Alla Marcia from Sibelius’ Karelia Suite, Op. 11; and on the 10th side of Set 149 the Intermezzo from the same suite.) less if the music itself is not conveniently available for frequent hearing, digestion, and real assimilation. At present one has Finlandia, the Valse triste, occasional pretty piano pieces and songs—the product of an intelligent highly national- istic composer—but separated from an amazing gulf from the greater Sibelius. Such an abundance of excellent biographical and critical material is obtainable that there is no need to rehearse any of it here. For those who are not yet familiar with it, I suggest Rosa Newmarch’s book, and the Studies in Cecil Gray’s Survey of Contemporary Music and Paul Rosenfeld’s Musical Portraits; also the fine recent articles in the Novem- ber and December issues of The British Musician (Sydney Grew) and Disques (Laurence Powell). Of unusual interest in the interview with Sibelius by Cecil Gray (in the London Daily Telegraph for January 11, 1930, reprinted in the Bos- ton Symphony program book for December 12, 1930). I have already quoted Sibelius’s words on the attitude toward his music in Germany. One relishes also the observation that although Beethoven managed to express the whole gamut of artistic experience in three styles, it is possible that Strawin- ski needs six. And again, that when Sibelius was questioned concerning the International Society for Contemporary Mu- sic, he was discovered never to have heard of it! Concern- ing contemporary musical movements he observes: “When you have lived as long as I have, and have seen so many new movements come and go for over forty years, you will not attach overmuch importance to them as such, but will recog- nize nevertheless that in each of them there is an element of truth; that each draws attention to and stresses, sometimes un- duly perhaps, some valuable aspect of musical art, some vital principle which might otherwise be forgotten. . . . The mu- sic of Schonberg, for example, is not sympathetic to me per- sonally, but I freely recognize that such high aims, such sin- cerity, and such incontestable gifts can only result in gain, in some valuable addition to the sum of music.” Again (I cannot resist quoting, for Sibelius’ words seem to me to cast so illuminating a light upon his own work): “Foi me, orchestration as a thing in itself simply does not exist; the music has to be as it is, it could not possibly be other- wise.” And even a comment on prohibition (which is opera- tive in Finland) limns the character of the man: “My only consolation in witnessing such lamentable specimens of im- becility lies in my unalterable belief that, in spite of them all, humanity, however gradually, continues to progress.”