INSTRUMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
The New York Philharmonic Society and other New York
orchestras--Orchestral organizations in Boston--The
Theodore Thomas orchestra of Chicago; Orchestral music in
Cincinnati--The Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra--Orchestral
music in the West; the Philadelphia Symphony
Orchestra--Chamber music ensembles--Visiting orchestras.
I
In spite of the work done by the Euterpean Society, the Musical Fund
and the Sacred Music Society, New York in the first decades of the
nineteenth century did not possess an orchestral organization capable
of interpreting adequately the compositions of the great masters. As we
have already pointed out, the city was suffering from musical expansion
when it really needed concentration. It was suffering also from too
much amateurism. Many clear-headed New York musicians realized the
needs of the situation and eventually there arose a healthy agitation
in favor of a strong permanent orchestra of professional musicians. The
agitation found an energetic leader in Uriah C. Hill, conductor of the
Sacred Music Society, and chiefly through his efforts the Philharmonic
Society was formed in 1842. In many respects the Philharmonic differed
from all the societies which preceded and most of those which have
followed it in America. It was simply a coöperative association of
professional musicians organized for the purpose of giving concerts
of the highest class. Amateurs were excluded and the society enjoyed
neither patronage nor guarantee. Its first concert took place at the
old Apollo Rooms on December 7, 1842, with Beethoven's Fifth Symphony
as the _pièce de résistance_. The list of symphonies performed by it
during the first ten years of its existence illustrates the consistence
with which it carried out its dignified purpose. Among them were
Beethoven's Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth;
Mozart's 'Jupiter,' G minor and E flat; Haydn's Third and B flat;
Mendelssohn's Third and Fourth; Schubert's C major; Schumann's First;
Spohr's D minor, _Die Weihe der Töne_ and Double Symphony; Kalliwoda's
First; Gade's in C; and Lachner's Prize Symphony. Among the other
interesting features of its early seasons were Mendelssohn's 'Fingal's
Cave,' Sterndale Bennett's 'The Naiads,' and Berlioz's _Francs Juges_
overtures.
But the Philharmonic, in spite of its splendid efforts, failed to
win unanimous endorsement from musical New York and in 1854 there
was a revolt of several of its own members, headed by G. Bristow and
by Fry, musical critic of the 'Tribune.' The grievance was that the
Philharmonic had made 'a systematic effort for the extinction of
American music.' Mr. Bristow was especially wroth. During the eleven
years of its existence, he complained, the society had played only one
piece of American composition, preferring to devote itself to the works
of German masters, 'especially if they be dead'--meaning Haydn, Mozart,
Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Schubert, and others. By these and similar
remarks we may gauge the mental calibre of Mr. Bristow. Whatever grain
of justice may have been in the movement which he headed, it could not
possibly succeed under his leadership and, after threatening for a time
the very existence of the Philharmonic, the American revolution petered
out. It was not the last time, however, that the society suffered from
the pernicious activity of stupid and bigoted incompetents.
The orchestra of the Philharmonic during its first season numbered
fifty-three performers, divided as follows: seventeen violins,
five violas, four violoncellos, five contrabasses, three flutes,
one piccolo, two oboes, two clarinets, three bassoons, four horns,
two trumpets, four trombones, and one pair of kettle drums. In the
beginning there was no permanent conductor, but at different times
between 1842 and 1849 the orchestra was led by Uriah C. Hill, H. C.
Timms, W. Alpers, G. Loder, L. Wiegers, D. G. Etienne, and A. Boucher.
Theodore Eisfeld was conductor from 1849 to 1855 and from the latter
year until 1866 he alternated with Carl Bergmann. From 1866 until
1876 Bergmann was sole conductor and his services to music in New
York during those years were of the highest value. He was especially
instrumental in bringing before New Yorkers the compositions of Liszt,
Wagner, Raff, Rubinstein, and the romanticists generally. Dr. Leopold
Damrosch conducted the orchestra in 1876-77, and then came Theodore
Thomas, who signalized his entrance by performing the First Symphony
of Brahms. Thomas probably did more to cultivate the taste of New York
concert goers than any other orchestral conductor who ever worked in
that city. Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms, over and over again, formed
the burden of his musical message, and for variety Tschaikowsky,
Wagner, Liszt, and Rubinstein. He was an idealist--an uncompromising
idealist--and, as he would not descend to the concert-going public,
the concert-going public perforce ascended to him. His work was of
incalculable value. In 1891 he was succeeded by Anton Seidl, another
big figure and the best possible successor of Thomas. Seidl was more
tolerant than Thomas and more modern in spirit. He laid less emphasis
on the classics and more on Liszt, Wagner, and Tschaikowsky. And
he was much more generous of novelties, which included the first
performance anywhere of Dvořák's 'New World' symphony. Admirably did
he build on the solid foundation his predecessor had laid. After his
death in 1898 Emil Paur succeeded to the bâton and reigned until 1902,
when Walter Damrosch conducted for a season. Then for three years the
society presented a series of guest conductors, including Édouard
Colonne, Wassili Safonoff, Gustav Kogel, Henry Wood, Victor Herbert,
William Mengelberg, Max Fiedler, Ernest Kunwald, Fritz Steinbach,
Richard Strauss, Felix Weingartner, and Karl Panger. Safonoff was
then engaged for three years and after him came Gustav Mahler, one of
the greatest and most individual conductors of recent times. Mahler's
interpretations and technical innovations stirred musical New York to
its depths and aroused a storm of critical commentary both favorable
and otherwise. His sudden resignation in 1911 was wrapped in a cloud
of mystery, not free from a black tinge of scandal, the onus of which,
however, did not rest upon him. He was succeeded by Josef Stransky, who
still remains (1915).
In 1912 the Philharmonic was the fortunate recipient of a bequest
of $500,000 from Joseph Pulitzer, late owner and editor of the New
York 'World.' Under the conditions of this bequest the society
was reorganized from a coöperative association into a membership
corporation. The results in many ways have been advantageous. While the
coöperative idea had some good features, it had the great drawback that
in unprofitable seasons the members sought more lucrative engagements,
with a consequent reduction of rehearsals and loss of homogeneity in
the work of the orchestra. Under the new system a stricter discipline
is possible and in consequence the orchestra shows a great improvement
in technique.
[Illustration: The Philharmonic Society of New York, with Joseph
Stransky conducting.]
_From a photograph (1914) taken in Carnegie Hall, New York_
The Philharmonic, of course, was never long without a rival in New
York. Brooklyn made the first serious effort at competition when its
own Philharmonic was established in 1857 with Theodore Eisfeld as
conductor. During its initiatory season it produced Beethoven's Third
and Seventh Symphonies, Mendelssohn's Fourth, and Gade's C Major.
Carl Bergmann succeeded Eisfeld and after him came Theodore Thomas.
The early history of the Brooklyn Philharmonic was brilliant with
achievement and promise, but unfortunately that achievement was not
sustained nor that promise fulfilled. The indefatigable Theodore Thomas
maintained a lively rivalry with the New York Philharmonic off and on
between 1864 and 1879. He gave annual series of what he called symphony
_soirées_, and for a few years he also gave garden concerts in summer.
In 1879 he went west as director of the newly established Cincinnati
College of Music, but two years later he returned as conductor of the
Philharmonic.
Meanwhile Dr. Leopold Damrosch in 1878 founded the Symphony Society of
New York with the avowed purpose of breaking away from the established
conservatism of the Philharmonic and exploring newer fields of
musical composition. Dr. Damrosch conducted the orchestra until his
death in 1885, when he was succeeded by his son Walter. At first the
society gave only twelve concerts yearly but its activities gradually
increased until it was giving about one hundred--its average for the
last ten years. These include extended tours throughout the United
States and Canada. The career of the Symphony Society has not been
without vicissitudes. For many years after the death of Dr. Damrosch
it had to fight a discouraging struggle against lack of interest and
of financial backing. In 1899 Walter Damrosch retired from the fight
and devoted himself to composition; but in the following year he went
to the Metropolitan as conductor of German opera, and apparently the
experience revived his ambitions as a conductor. After he retired from
the Metropolitan he succeeded in obtaining a subsidy for the Symphony
Society from a number of prominent New York citizens. Since then the
fortunes of the organization have been in the ascendant and they were
definitely assured in the spring of 1914 when its president, Mr. H. H.
Flagler, announced 'that in order to further its artistic aims, he was
prepared for the future to defray any deficit of the society up to the
amount of one hundred thousand dollars annually.'
Though the prime purpose of the New York Symphony is to produce
important novelties, it has always rested its program on the foundation
of the classics. Dr. Damrosch was a devoted lover of Beethoven, and it
was entirely in accordance with his ideals that the society, in 1907,
gave the first Beethoven festival in America. Many of the symphonic
works of Brahms, Tschaikowsky, Sibelius, and Elgar were given their
first performances in America by the Symphony Society and the first
Brahms festival in this country was given by it in 1912. As if to
complete the society's identification with the trio of immortal 'B's,'
Mr. Damrosch has shown lately a large devotion to the works of Bach.
Since 1907 the society has given much attention to the modern French
school and has introduced New York to many compositions of Debussy,
Dukas, Enesco, Chausson, and Ravel.
The popularity of 'guest' conductors, due to the experiment of the
Philharmonic Society, led Mr. Damrosch in 1905-06 to hand over the
bâton for several concerts to Felix Weingartner; but, as Mr. Henderson
says, Weingartner's 'refined scholarship and intellectual subtlety
escaped the notice of all save the connoisseurs' and his engagement
failed to arouse much public interest. Except for this brief interim
Mr. Damrosch has been the society's only conductor since 1885. In
addition to its regular activities the orchestra is employed to play
the programs of the Young People's Symphony Concerts given originally
under the conductorship of Frank Damrosch but latterly under that
of Walter. These concerts were planned as an educational series for
juveniles, but they have come to make a much wider appeal and attract
audiences which consist more of adults than of children. Their
educational value is considerable.
Of even broader educational value, perhaps, is the work of the
People's Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Franz X. Arens--though it
is handicapped by lack of sufficient endowment. The object of the
orchestra is to provide good music for working people of small means,
and it would seem that such an object is sufficiently laudable to
attract generous support from those wealthy music-lovers who profess
a sincere interest in the promotion of the art. In spite of handicaps
the People's Symphony has existed since 1900, but insufficient funds
have spelled little rehearsal and few concerts, with a consequent
circumscribing of its efforts.
When musical cultivation in any community reaches a certain stage
it tends to specialize. That stage has long been passed in New York
and during recent years there has been a notable outcrop of societies
devoted to the study and performance of the compositions of different
nations, periods or schools. In the symphonic field the most notable of
these is the Russian Symphony Society, founded in 1903. The orchestra,
under the direction of Modest Altschuler, is composed largely of
Russian musicians and is devoted almost exclusively to the performance
of works by Russian composers. Since its foundation it has introduced
New York to new compositions by Tschaikowsky, Glinka, Napravnik,
Rimsky-Korsakoff, Glazounoff, Rubinstein, Ippolitoff-Ivanoff, Davydoff,
Gretchaninoff, Taneieff, Moussorgsky, Arensky, Borodine, Kallinnikoff,
Rachmaninoff, Dargomijsky, Afanasyeff, César Cui, Glière, Scriabine,
Balakireff, and others.
There remains to be mentioned the Volpe Symphony Orchestra founded by
Arnold Volpe in 1904, the Italian Symphony Orchestra, formed in 1913
by Pietro Floridia, and a number of temporary orchestras got together
for special purposes, such as park concerts. For several years New York
has maintained a high standard in its open air free concerts in Central
Park. These have been so extensively patronized that it has been found
desirable to give as many as seven a week, from June to September.
II
Until the last quarter of the nineteenth century Boston lagged
considerably behind New York in the matter of orchestral music. After
the demise of the Boston Philharmonic Orchestra in 1824 the city was
without any permanent symphonic organization until 1840, when the
Academy of Music established an orchestra. During its existence of
seven years the Academy orchestra varied in size from twenty-five to
forty performers, many of whom were amateurs. It introduced to Boston
most of the standard symphonies and some other works of importance,
but its ambition seems to have been greater than its ability. It was
succeeded in 1847 by the Musical Fund Society, founded in imitation of
the Philadelphia society of that name, by Thomas Comer. Comer leaned
emphatically to the popular in music and there was little value to the
performances of the Musical Fund until George J. Webb took over the
leadership during the last few years of the society's life, which ended
in 1855. In the meantime Boston had been enjoying good music through
the agency of the Germania Orchestra, a body of young German musicians
who had come to America during the revolutionary troubles of 1848. The
Germania was a travelling orchestra, but it gave a large proportion of
its concerts in Boston. Its conductors were successively Carl Lenschow
and Carl Bergmann and there seems to be little doubt that it was by far
the best orchestra America had yet heard.
In 1855 Carl Zerrahn, flute player of the Germania, founded an
orchestra which became known as the Philharmonic and which gave
regular concerts in Boston until 1863. He was invited, in 1866, to the
conductorship of the orchestra newly formed by the Harvard Musical
Association. This was really the first permanent orchestra of value
that greater Boston possessed, and during the twenty years of its
existence it clung with remarkable consistency to the highest musical
ideals. Included in the works performed by it were the nine Beethoven
symphonies; twelve Haydn and six Mozart symphonies, Spohr's _Die Weihe
der Töne_; Schubert's B minor (unfinished) and C major; Mendelssohn's
'Italian,' 'Scotch,' and 'Reformation'; the four symphonies of
Schumann; Gade's First, Second, Third, and Fourth; two of Raff and
two of Brahms; Rubinstein's 'Ocean'; Berlioz's _Fantastique_; the
Second of Saint-Saëns; two of Paine; one of Ritter; Liszt's symphonic
poems, _Tasso_ and _Les Préludes_; Lachner's first suite and Raff's
suite in C; Spohr's _Irdisches und Göttliches_ for double orchestra;
and overtures by Gluck, Mozart, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Cherubini,
Schubert, Weber, Schumann, Gade, Bennett, Bargiel, Buck, Goldmark,
Paine, Chadwick, Parker, Henschel, Rietz, and others. Nevertheless the
Harvard Orchestra did not receive very warm support from the people
of Boston. Among musicians, too, there grew up gradually a certain
impatience at its undoubted conservatism and finally a rival was
started which was organized as the Philharmonic Society in 1880.
There was not room enough in Boston for two orchestras, but there was
room and need for one good orchestra which would cater fully to the
city's musical tastes. Such an orchestra needs a sponsor in the shape
of heavy financial backing and the _deus ex machina_ in this case
was Henry L. Higginson, the banker, who founded the Boston Symphony
Orchestra at his own risk and guaranteed its permanency. Under the
leadership of George Henschel the orchestra opened its first season
in 1881 with Beethoven's 'Dedication of the House.' It gave twenty
concerts that season and twenty-six in the third season. Since then the
regular number has been twenty-four, in addition to public rehearsals.
Regular visits are made to New York, Philadelphia, Washington,
Providence, and other large cities, bringing the total number of
concerts each season to the neighborhood of one hundred.
George Henschel returned to Europe in 1884 and Wilhelm Gericke came
over from Vienna as conductor. To Gericke must be awarded the chief
credit for making the Boston Symphony Orchestra what it is to-day--the
finest in America and one of the most perfectly balanced and finished
symphonic ensembles in the world. Gericke was a disciplinarian of the
most rigid type and under his iron rule practically all the technical
weaknesses of the orchestra were eliminated. Musically, like Theodore
Thomas, he was an ardent devotee of Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms, and
he was more concerned with strictly traditional interpretations of
the classics than with incursions into new and untried fields. Just
as Thomas in New York had an ideally suitable successor in Anton
Seidl, so Gericke had an ideally suitable successor in that remarkable
orchestral virtuoso, Arthur Nikisch. Perhaps musical America has never
known anything like the four seasons during which the temperamental and
fiery Nikisch performed on the perfect instrument which Gericke had
left to his hand. He was succeeded by Emil Paur, a decided modernist
in his tendencies, who made Boston familiar with Tschaikowsky, Richard
Strauss, and lesser post-Wagnerians. Gericke returned in 1898 and in
the following year Symphony Hall was built. Max Fiedler was the next
conductor, and after him came the present incumbent of the post--the
scholarly and immaculate Dr. Karl Muck.
III
When Theodore Thomas left the New York Philharmonic he accepted the
musical directorship of the American Opera Company, to which we have
already referred in a previous chapter. When he got back to New
York after an absence of two seasons he attempted to revive his old
orchestral organization, in spite of the fact that there were three
competing orchestras in the field. His attempt was a dismal failure
and he found himself stranded without money, engagements or prospects.
At this ebb-tide of his affairs he met Mr. C. N. Fay, of Chicago, who
inquired whether he would be willing to go to that city if he were
given a permanent orchestra. 'Oh,' said Thomas, 'I'd go to hell if you
would give me a permanent orchestra.' So he went to Chicago.
Before the fire of 1871 Chicago had an orchestra of its own, conducted
by Hans Balatka. Then it was without one until Mr. Fay issued his
invitation to Theodore Thomas in 1890. Fay succeeded in getting fifty
men to guarantee $1,000 each for a season and formed the Orchestra
Association. After taking a year in which to organize his players,
Thomas started the career of the orchestra that bears his name in
1891. A most instructive essay might be written upon the succession
of difficulties, financial and other, which the Theodore Thomas
Orchestra was compelled to surmount before it reached the position of
solid permanency which it now occupies. That it did surmount those
difficulties is due chiefly to the iron obstinacy of Thomas himself
and to the persistent optimism of Mr. Bryan Lathrop, who steered the
enterprise through many critical situations. Shortly before his death
on January 4, 1905, Thomas succeeded in realizing his desire to secure
for the orchestra a home of its own. Had he failed in that object it
is quite probable that the orchestra would have been disbanded after
his death, but in succeeding he raised the orchestra to the position of
an institution in which Chicago has since taken an increasingly great
pride.
Thomas was succeeded in the conductorship by Frederick A. Stock, who
still holds the post. We have had occasion to point out before that
Thomas was very fortunate in his successors. In Chicago, as elsewhere,
his conservatism held him more or less closely to the classics and his
interpretations of these established a high and dignified standard
which was of incalculable value in educating the public taste.
Accepting this standard as his own, Mr. Stock ventured gradually into
new paths and, while still maintaining the classic tradition, he led
his public into greater intimacy with the moderns. César Franck,
d'Indy, Debussy, Chausson, Glazounoff, Gretchaninoff, Balakireff,
Borodine, Sinigaglia, Max Reger, Richard Strauss, Gustav Mahler have
all figured on his programs, together with Bach, Beethoven, and Brahms,
with Haydn and Mozart, with Schubert, Schumann and Mendelssohn,
with Wagner, Liszt, and Tschaikowsky. Like the other big American
orchestras, the Theodore Thomas organization makes an annual tour,
bringing to the smaller cities their meed of musical entertainment and
to the larger ones an opportunity of comparing notes.
In spite of the great strides made by Chicago in musical culture during
recent years, its importance in the musical history of the Middle
West is second to that of Cincinnati. From the beginning the elements
composing the citizenship of the latter city were such as to introduce
musical activity at a very early stage. The first _Sängerfest_ in the
West was held at the old Armory Hall there about 1842, and in 1878
the Cincinnati College of Music, equipped to teach all branches, was
founded by Miss Dora Nelson.
The Cincinnati College of Music, which has since become the College
of Music of Cincinnati, became the vibrant centre of musical growth
in the Middle West. It was never without its own orchestra, string
quartet, chorus and school of opera and expression. Through its faculty
concerts, lectures, and other forms of educational entertainments the
people of Cincinnati became interested and discriminating auditors.
Theodore Thomas was the first musical director of this school, and it
was from Cincinnati that he first exercised the influence which has
since resulted in such remarkable advance in all musical centres of the
Middle West. The first May Music Festival to be given in America was
organized and performed under his direction in 1873. Five years later,
during which time the Cincinnati Festival had become an established
institution, the Springer Music Hall was erected for the future use of
the May Festival Association.
The May Festivals were given loyal public support and were successful
from the beginning. Choral societies were numerous and the cause of
advanced musical education found sincere support in every section of
the city. The first orchestra to give public concerts was organized and
operated by Michael Brand, a 'cellist of considerable local fame. He
had gathered about him the more advanced of the local musicians and in
1894 an orchestra of forty men was giving concerts under his direction.
In 1895 public spirited women, interested in the advancement of music,
conceived the idea of establishing a regular symphony orchestra on a
substantial basis through public subscription. This movement was led by
the Ladies' Musical Club, of which Miss Emma L. Roedter was president
and Mrs. William Howard Taft, wife of the later President of the United
States, secretary. The conception of the plan that was followed is
accredited to Miss Helen Sparrman, at that time honorary president
of the Ladies' Musical Club. As a result, the Cincinnati Orchestra
Association Company was organized and nine concerts were given under
its direction during the season 1895-96.
The season was divided into three series of three concerts each, and
three prospective conductors, all of them men of wide experience, were
engaged to conduct a series each.
Following the performance of these trial concerts ten thousand dollars
was secured by public subscription and the succeeding fall an orchestra
of forty-eight men, with Frank Van der Stucken as permanent conductor,
was established. The first regular season in 1895-96 consisted of ten
pairs of concerts given in Pike's Opera House, on Friday afternoons
and Saturday evenings, from November 20 to April 11, inclusive. The
orchestra was increased to seventy men during the season 1896-97 and
the concerts transferred to Music Hall, where they were given until
the winter of 1911. About this time Mrs. Thomas J. Emery had begun the
construction of a building for the use of the Ohio Mechanics Institute
and the auditorium was so constructed that it could be made the home
of the orchestra, which at this time was being operated under the
corporation title of The Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra Association
Company.
Mr. Van der Stucken's incumbency as conductor of the orchestra ended in
1906. The concerts given by the association during the season 1907-08
were given with orchestras from other cities and in 1908 no concerts
were given. During the summer of 1909, however, the association, under
the leadership of Mrs. Holmes, placed the orchestra on a permanent
basis by raising a subscription fund of fifty thousand dollars a year
for five years. Mr. Leopold Stokowski was installed as conductor and
ten pairs of concerts were given the following year. The orchestra
numbered sixty-five men.
The season 1911-12 was marked by an increase to seventy-seven men. On
the retirement of Mrs. Holmes as president, the orchestra had been
brought up to a membership of eighty-two men and Mr. Stokowski had been
succeeded by the present conductor, Dr. Ernst Kunwald, for five years
an associate of Arthur Nikisch in the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra.
The orchestra's sphere of influence began to extend beyond the environs
of Cincinnati in 1900. Since that time it has made annual tours,
visiting Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Cleveland, Columbus, Toledo, Detroit,
Grand Rapids, Indianapolis, Louisville, Terre Haute, Oberlin, Akron,
Dayton, Springfield, Kansas City, Omaha, Wichita, St. Louis, Milwaukee,
Chicago, and other cities of the Middle West and South.
Pittsburgh, like all other cities preëminently industrial, has
developed but slowly that side of its civic life in which the arts
find important place, and not until 1873 did it possess a musical
body that might properly be called an orchestra. This was known as
the 'Germania' and was founded and conducted by George Toerge. It
consisted of from thirty-five to forty-two instruments and its programs
were made up chiefly of symphony movements, overtures, and lighter
music. There was nothing very ambitious in its aims or achievements,
but undoubtedly it was not without its influence in preparing the way
for others. Later Carl Retter organized what was known as Retter's
Orchestra, which, under his leadership and that of Fidelis Zitterbart,
continued valiantly the pioneer work done by the Germania. Its first
concert was devoted to Gluck, Beethoven, Boccherini, Johann Strauss,
and Keler-Bela. Retter was succeeded in 1879 by Adolph M. Foerster, who
conducted the orchestra for the next two years.
As yet there was not sufficient interest in musical affairs in
Pittsburgh to support a permanent orchestra worthy of the city, but
there were a number of valuable musical organizations, such as the
Gounod Club, the Symphonic Society, the Art Society, and the Mozart
Club, which, singly or together, did excellent work in providing
orchestral concerts. Then came the twenty-eighth National Saengerfest,
which was held in Pittsburgh in 1896 and which inaugurated an epoch in
the musical affairs of the city. This festival, to quote Mr. Adolph
Foerster, 'aroused the first impulse of bringing order out of the chaos
existing at that time. It was to create an orchestra for this great
event and thus lay the foundation for a permanent organization to give
concerts at Carnegie Hall, then nearing completion. Though concerts
were begun a few months after the dedication of the hall, the orchestra
was not, however, engaged, since the elaborate programs designed
excluded the possibilities of adequate interpretations by the orchestra
as then equipped. Perhaps to no other one man than to Charles W. Scovel
is due the credit of solving the intricate problem of establishing the
guarantee fund, bringing the different elements into harmony, and thus
making the orchestra a possibility.'
The Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra gave its first concert on February
27, 1896, with Frederic Archer as conductor and with a program that
included compositions of Mendelssohn, Beethoven, Rameau, Saint-Saëns,
Massenet, Liszt, and Wagner. In 1898 Archer was succeeded in the
conductorship by Victor Herbert, whose brilliance, verve, and
tendency toward the picturesque in music appealed strongly to the
Pittsburgh public and established for his orchestra of sixty-five men
a popularity which a more severe and conservative leader might have
failed to attract. Theodore Thomas always took his position firmly on
the heights and compelled his audience to climb up to him; Herbert
adopted the reverse method, starting in the pleasant, flower-decked
plain and cheerfully leading his public by his hand to more stimulating
altitudes. Possibly his plan was not the best sort of educational
discipline, but it seems to have been productive of good results.
Emil Paur, who succeeded him in 1910, paid more respect to the great
gods on high Olympus, bowing down with especial reverence before the
shrine of Brahms. 'It must be recorded,' says Mr. Foerster, 'that ever
since Mr. Paur has conducted the orchestra the non-local financial as
well as artistic successes have been much increased. The orchestra is
a regular visitor each season to many large cities.... Each season
the demand for the orchestra has increased, and thus it has become a
national educator, a notable benefactor in the musical development
of this country, probably traversing a larger area than any of the
great symphony orchestras.' In addition to its regular conductors the
orchestra has at various times played under the leadership of guest
conductors, including Richard Strauss, Eugen d'Albert, Walter Damrosch,
and Edward Elgar.
IV
Perhaps the most striking feature of recent musical history in the
United States is the remarkable growth of musical culture in the West.
So rapid has been this growth, so widely has it spread, so numerous and
varied are the activities it has brought in its train that it would
be impossible to follow it in any detail. The number of musical clubs
and organizations which have sprung up in recent years in the vast
territory between the Mississippi and the Pacific is too great even to
be catalogued in a general sketch of this nature. In many of the large
cities, however, some of these organizations have reached a position of
national importance and rival the best products of the older cities of
the East. Notable among those is the Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra,
which is generally conceded to rank with the Boston Symphony, the
Theodore Thomas Orchestra, and the New York Philharmonic. It owes its
inception entirely to Emil Oberhoffer, who started it as a support
for the chorus of the Philharmonic Society of Minneapolis, of which
he was conductor. He succeeded in obtaining a guarantee of $30,000
for three years, then one of $90,000 for three years, and finally one
of $65,000 annually for three years. With that backing he was able to
organize and perfect an orchestral body which has few equals in America
and of which he still remains conductor. During its first season the
orchestra gave six concerts. Since then the number has increased to
forty annually. After its regular season the orchestra makes a spring
tour extending from Winnipeg in the North to Birmingham, Ala., in the
South, and from Akron in the East to Wichita in the West. St. Paul also
has an excellent orchestra, organized in 1905, which gives a season of
ten concerts, seventeen popular Sunday afternoon concerts, and three
children's concerts--so that, on the whole, the twin cities are very
generously supplied with orchestral music.
San Francisco, curiously enough, has been somewhat tardy in orchestral
matters and it was not until 1911 that it organized an orchestra of
any importance. So far the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra, under
the leadership of Henry Hadley, has done excellent work. During its
three seasons it has given five symphonies of Beethoven, three of
Brahms, one of Dvořák, one of César Franck, two of Hadley, one of
Haydn, three of Mozart, one of Rachmaninoff, two of Schubert, one of
Schumann, and three of Tschaikowsky, besides compositions by Bach,
Berlioz, Bizet, Borodine, Chadwick, Debussy, Elgar, Goldmark, Gounod,
Grieg, Victor Herbert, Humperdinck, Lalo, Liszt, MacDowell, Massenet,
Mendelssohn, Moszkowski, Nicolai, Ravel, Reger, Rimsky-Korsakoff,
Rossini, Rubinstein, Saint-Saëns, Sibelius, Smetana, Johann Strauss,
Richard Strauss, Svendsen, Coleridge Taylor, Verdi, Wagner, Weber, and
many others--it would be impossible to conceive of a more catholic
assemblage.
Seattle has a fine symphony orchestra of its own, and in the Southwest
Denver shines as the possessor of an ambitious symphonic organization.
Since 1907 St. Louis has had a good orchestra under the leadership
of Carl Zach. In 1911 The Kansas City Musical Club, a women's
organization, succeeded in promoting an Orchestra Association to
guarantee the losses of an orchestra which is doing good work under the
leadership of Carl Busch. Los Angeles, Wichita, Cleveland, Detroit, and
other Western and Middle Western cities also have creditable orchestras
of their own.
Returning East we note the orchestra of the Peabody Institute in
Baltimore and the symphony orchestras of Atlanta, Washington, New
Haven, and Buffalo. These are all relatively modest organizations, but
they supplement excellently the work of the large visiting orchestras.
Philadelphia, however, possesses an orchestra which has now definitely
taken its place among the greatest in the country. It is the outgrowth
of about fifty amateur and semi-professional musicians who, between
1893 and 1900, gave a few concerts each season at the Academy of Music
under the leadership of Dr. W. W. Gilchrist. These men formed the
nucleus of a permanent orchestra of seventy-two players, which was
organized in 1900. Fritz Scheel, then conducting an orchestra at one
of Philadelphia's summer parks, was appointed conductor. Under him
the important formative work was solidly accomplished and when Carl
Pohlig, first court conductor at Stuttgart, came over as conductor in
1907 he found at his disposal a finished ensemble. Pohlig was succeeded
by Leopold Stokowski in 1912. The latter's knowledge of American
traditions and artistic needs, gained at first while conductor of the
Cincinnati orchestra, served to put him in sympathy with the musical
desires and ideals of his public and the success of the orchestra under
his leadership has been very marked. Besides its regular season of
fifty-one concerts (season of 1913-14) the Philadelphia orchestra gives
a number of popular concerts, fills many engagements in nearby towns
and cities, and makes two tours of a week each in the Middle West and
New England.
'Believing that a great orchestral organization should have
an educational influence'--we quote from the prospectus of the
Philadelphia orchestra--'he (Mr. Stokowski) chooses the compositions
to be played from all periods and all schools and arranges his
programs in the manner which he considers most likely to prove both
pleasure-giving and enlightening. The list of programs for the past
season (1913-14) included two devoted wholly to Wagner, one of which
was made up of excerpts from the four operas of the "Ring," presented
in their natural sequence. From Bach to Richard Strauss, from Gluck
to Erich Korngold--the repertory, though kept always up to his high
standard, is inclusive and comprehensive. It touches upon all fields
of music, faltering before no technical requirements--there is nothing
in the most modern range of the most complicated orchestral works
that the orchestra has not at one time or another essayed, one of its
achievements being the entirely successful performance of Richard
Strauss's tremendous _Sinfonia Domestica_.'
Altogether, in orchestral matters America has sufficient reason to
be proud of her attainments. Of course, one cannot argue from the
existence of good orchestras the coincidence of a high or widely
diffused state of musical culture. They are to some extent the joint
product of money and civic pride. But their educational influence is
beyond question and thus we may at least argue from the increasing
number of good orchestras in America a bright promise for the future.
V
Aside from purely orchestral organizations there has been in recent
years, especially in the larger cities, an increasing number of
societies devoted to the study of special phases of musical art and
which give occasional illustrative concerts with orchestra. As these
are quasi-social in their activities and somewhat restricted in
their appeal, their influence on the musical culture of the country
generally is not of much account. Quite the opposite, however, is
true of the large number of important ensembles devoted to the
performance of chamber music. The growth of public interest in the
smaller instrumental forms promoted by these ensembles is not the
least interesting and significant feature of musical conditions in
present-day America. It might not, perhaps, be extreme to say that a
real appreciation of chamber music is the identifying mark of true
musical cultivation, and the ever-increasing public which patronizes
the concerts of chamber music organizations in this country is one of
the most encouraging signs patriotic American music-lovers could wish
to see.
Probably we must go back to our charming old friends, the cavaliers
of Virginia, with their 'chests of viols' and their compositions of
Boccherini and Vivaldi, to find the beginnings of chamber-music in
America. Undoubtedly small private ensembles antedated orchestras in
this country as they did everywhere else. We know that at Governor
Penn's house in Philadelphia Francis Hopkinson and his friends met
together frequently for musical entertainment, and such gatherings must
have been numerous in New York, Boston, Charleston, and other colonial
centres of culture. However, we must grope along until well into the
nineteenth century before we find a public appearance in America of a
chamber music ensemble. The pioneer, as far as we can discover, was
a string quartet brought together in 1843 by Uriah C. Hill, founder
of the New York Philharmonic. Samuel Johnson, an original member of
the Philharmonic, writes about this quartet as follows: 'A miserable
failure, artistically and financially. It would be gross flattery to
call Mr. Hill a third-rate violinist; Apelles was a good clarinet, but
a poor violinist.... Lehmann was a good second flute; Hegelund was a
bassoon player and naturally best adapted to that instrument; he was
a very small-sized man, with hands too small to grasp the neck of the
'cello. The whole enterprise was dead at its conception.' But perhaps
Mr. Johnson did not like Mr. Hill. Richard Grant White said that the
_soirées_ of the Hill Quartet 'were well attended and successful.'
In 1846, however, New York was treated to a quartet headed by the
great Sivori. 'This was something like a real quartet' according to
Samuel Johnson. Three years later Saroni's 'Musical Times' arranged a
series of four chamber music concerts in which the best artists in New
York appeared. The program of the first concert included Mozart's D
minor string quartet, Beethoven's B flat piano trio, and Mendelssohn's
D minor piano trio--rather a choice dish. Then came Theodore Eisfeld,
who, in 1851, established a string quartet that set a very high mark
for its successors to shoot at. At its first concert it presented
Haydn's Quartet, No. 78, in B flat, Mendelssohn's trio in D minor, and
Beethoven's quartet No. 1, in F major. Eisfeld maintained that standard
for several years, clinging religiously to Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven,
Mendelssohn, and Spohr. And, furthermore, his _soirées_ were well
patronized. Beyond question he created a real demand for that sort
of thing, so that in 1855, at the suggestion of Dr. William Mason,
Carl Bergmann instituted a series of _soirées_ for the performance of
chamber music and organized a quartet consisting of himself, Theodore
Thomas, Joseph Mosenthal, and George Matzka. Mason was pianist. These
concerts, known first as the Mason and Bergmann and then as the Mason
and Thomas series, were continued every season (except that of 1856-57)
until 1866. They improved considerably on the work done by Eisfeld,
adding to the names of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven on their programs
those of Schumann, Rubinstein, Brahms, Raff, and other contemporaries.
Boston in the meantime had been initiated into the beauties of chamber
music by the Harvard Musical Association, which gave a regular series
of _soirées_ there every year between 1844 and 1850. Stimulated by
the success of these affairs, five professional musicians--August
Fries, Francis Riha, Edward Lehman, Thomas Ryan, and Wulf Fries,
to wit--organized the Mendelssohn Quintet Club. This was the first
important chamber music ensemble in America and for nearly fifty years
it continued to cultivate its chosen field, not only in Boston, but
all over the United States. Its first concert included Mendelssohn's
Quintet, op. 8, a concertante of Kalliwoda for flute, violin and
'cello, and Beethoven's Quintet, op. 4. The Mendelssohn Quintet Club
was an active and progressive organization, keeping well up with
contemporary composition and frequently augmenting its members so as to
give sextets, septets, octets, nonets, and other larger chamber-music
forms.
The next noteworthy chamber music organization in the East was the
Beethoven Quintet Club formed in Boston in 1873. Then came the era of
what we might call the Boston Symphony graduates, viz., the Kneisel
Quartet, the Hoffman Quartet, the Adamowski Quartet, and the Longy
Club (wind instruments)--all offshoots of the same great orchestra.
Of these perhaps the most notable is the Kneisel Quartet (founded in
1884), which has won a deservedly high reputation as well for its
splendid interpretations of standard compositions as for its frequent
presentation of interesting novelties. Since 1905 the Kneisel Quartet
has made New York its headquarters and like the Flonzaleys and other
organizations tours the entire country every season. In 1904 Mr.
Kneisel's successor as concertmeister of the Boston Symphony Orchestra,
Prof. Willy Hess, founded the Boston Symphony Quartet, which has since
then given concerts of very high standard in Boston and elsewhere. The
Longy Club of wind instruments (founded in 1899) is also a noteworthy
organization and does work of the highest artistic excellence in a
field but slightly exploited. Among other chamber music ensembles
which have seen the light in Boston may be mentioned the Theodorowicz
Quartet, the Olive Mead Quartet, the Eaton-Hadley Trio, and the
Bostonia Quintet Club, composed of string quartet and clarinet.
New York is not quite so well favored in this respect, but it
possesses several chamber music organizations of some distinction.
Chief of them is the Flonzaley Quartet, which in point of individuality
has probably no peer in America. The Barrère Ensemble of woodwinds,
headed by George Barrère, first flutist of the New York Symphony
Society, is also an organization of exceptional excellence, though it
does not possess the perfect balance and all-round finish of the Longy
Club. Among others, the Marum Quartet, the Margulies Trio, and the New
York Trio are worthy of note.
In Chicago the principal chamber music organizations are the Heerman
Quartet and the Chicago String Quartet. Practically every other city of
importance in the country has one or more such ensembles, some of them
professional, some of them semi-professional and some of them amateur.
While the private performance of chamber music in any community usually
precedes the institution of public concerts, regular professional
bodies follow as a rule the establishment of large orchestras; hence it
would be futile to look for good chamber music ensembles outside the
principal cities.
The activities of the musical clubs all over the country include in a
majority of cases the occasional performance of chamber music works.
In the small towns these are usually private, social affairs; in the
large cities they often succeed in reaching a wide public. There are
literally thousands of such clubs in the United States and their
influence in the promotion of musical appreciation is very great. Of
course, many of them are namby-pamby pink tea gatherings, leaning
languidly toward the Godard's Berceuse style of composition and
conversational clap-trap touching art and artists. But the majority of
them, we are inclined to believe, are serious in aim and accomplish an
amount of good in their immediate environment. It is worthy of remark
that a very large proportion of them are composed exclusively of women.
W. D. D.