MUSICAL REVIEW CRITICIED

In the major article of the Harvard Musical Review for January Mr. Sessions contributes a mature and remarkably important discussion of "Our Attitude Towards Contemporary Musical Tendencies". So impartial is Mr. Sessions that one does not quite know where to place him though there is the suspicion that he belongs to the "conservative radicals". One gathers this from the frequent emphasis upon constructive criticism for which might well he substituted "conservative radicalism" but in inverse order for it is the radical who by his receptivity to new impressions is today contributing most helpfully to the progress of the art; and the conservative who by his carping narrowness, is most seriously hampering it.

One is led to expect, from the introduction, some discussion of standard by which to value present day tendencies, but Mr. Sessions barely ventures on this dangerous ground, suggesting merely, in the course of the article, three critiria--a sensuous appeal, unity of conception, and a harmonic scheme that gives enjoyment. Instead he sets before us the radical, the conservative, and the partisan, counsels us to be none of them, and leaves us with excellent but vague advice. A "radical conservative" would, in all possibility, have ventured further.

In Mr. Burke's plea for the adoption of the rhythm of ragtime by the musician he writes: "A queer accusation against it is that of monotony," and proceeds to show in disproof that several hundred different combinations of eighth notes are possible in a measure of four beats. True, doubtless, but there is in practice, very little variety in the grouping of these combinations in the phrase--often a constant repetition of a two measure group--and practically none in the arrangement of the several phrases. The insistency of the syncopation only aggravates the obviousness of the phraseology and the resulting monotony. The musician has no need to adopt the syncopated rhythm of ragtime; he has been using it freely since Bach, but he has been using it with variety and restraint and he will doubtless continue to do so, for the few cases where it has been handled otherwise have proved for the most part, trivial or unconvincing.

Mr. Moderwell relishes his refutation of an article on Wagher's sociology in a recent number of the Review, in the course of which the writer makes the statement, rather incomprehensible at this date and especially in connection with mentally energetic tireless Wagner, that "An artist merely lives and loves; he does not have to think." Mr. Wright writes briefly on Beethoven's relation to his time and Mr. Austin makes some helpful suggestions to aid in memorizing.