Get BookHow to become a musical critic

Free How to become a musical critic

Free How to become a musical critic

You can download in the form of an ebook: pdf, kindle ebook, ms word here and more softfile type. Free How to become a musical critic, this is a great books that I think are not only fun to read but also very educational.
Book Details :
Published on: -
Released on: -
Original language: -

How to become a musical critic Critic Define Critic at Dictionary.com Critic definition a person who judges evaluates or criticizes: a poor critic of men. See more. Critic - definition of critic by The Free Dictionary Now as I had no theory of any kind don't believe in Spiritualism and copied my characters from life I don't see how this critic can be right. Cruise News: Latest Cruise Line Cruise ... - Cruise Critic Welcome to Cruise Critic; we're happy you decided to register to become a Cruise Critic Member. Forum Rules. Important: Do Not Use Your REAL NAME as your USER NAME The Critic - Wikipedia The Critic is an American prime time animated series revolving around the life of New York film critic Jay Sherman voiced by actor Jon Lovitz. It was created by ... The Rocky Horror Picture Show Reviews - Metacritic The Rocky Horror Picture Show movie reviews Metacritic score: A newly engaged couple have a breakdown in an isolated area and must pay a call to the bizarr... A Hamilton critic on why the musical isnt so revolutionary. I loved [Mirandas first Broadway musical] In the Heights. I thought it was incredible. So I definitely wanted to see whatever he did next. But I was super ... Best Cruises for Kids - Cruise Critic 4. Disney Cruise Line Ships . Disney Dream Disney Fantasy and Disney Magic. Why . Disney ships are ideal for families with kids ages 4 to 11 as Disney has the best ... Music journalism - Wikipedia Music journalism has its roots in classical music criticism which has traditionally comprised the study discussion evaluation and interpretation of music that has ... Rank: #5409735 in BooksPublished on: 1961Number of items: 1Binding: Hardcover358 pages 0 of 1 people found the following review helpful.Or How to Criticize without Getting SuedBy J. C. LeissringWhereas Ruskin always seemed to get himself into trouble with his diatriabes against performers he did not like--or, if you will recall--painters, too, Shaw owns a genius of painless punishment, meant, I believe, as constructive advice rather than means to advance his own ego. Shaw didn't need that kind of self-puffery, for he remained throughout his long life, steadfastly self assured. How else could one be who created so many masterpieces For those who are unaware of his musical education, he, like all who come to know a subject broadly and deeply, was self-taught and was the product of a highly musical family, where everyone did music. this book puts the lid on the series of Shaw's musical criticism--thee are a total of four volumes including this one.5 of 5 people found the following review helpful.Shaw's Musical CriticismBy A readerThe facetiously titled "How to Become a Musical Critic" does not actually have any instructional purpose; it is a collection of Shaw's music criticism from the 1870s to 1950. As such this book presents a fascinating glimpse into musical and performance culture over that incredibly long span of years. It also provides an interesting perspective on a little-known aspect of Shaw's literary output: his music writing, which served as his entry point into journalism.The introduction to my edition, written by Dan H. Laurence, explains that Shaw's skill as a critic was based on an "extraordinary musical knowledge," the result of "exposure to music almost from infancy." This mastery of the technical aspects of music is manifestly apparent throughout the book, as is Shaw's trademark wit and contrarianism.The book ranges too widely over too many topics -- ranging from composers, to conductors, vocalists, trends in instrument technology, and beyond -- to suggest any theme or prevailing argument in Shaw's criticism, but a few highlights can be noted. First is his advocacy of the music of Mozart, who had died just a century ago, and whose music was largely unplayed in Britain, when Shaw was writing in the 1890s. Second is his adamant praise for Edward Elgar after World War One, when his music had fallen out of fashion. Shaw writes in 1920: "If I were king, or Minister of Fine Arts, I would give Elgar an annuity of five thousand dollars a year on condition that he produce a symphony every 18 months." Unfortunately this proposal was never enacted.1 of 2 people found the following review helpful.Invaluable collection for Shaw buffs and classical music loversBy Alexander ArsovGeorge Bernard ShawHow to Become a Musical CriticRupert Hart-Davis, Hardback, 1960.8vo. xxiii, 359 pp. Edited and with Introduction [xi-xxii] by Dan H. Laurence. Editor's Note [xxiii].First published thus, 1960.ContentsIntroductionEditor's NotePrelude: How to Become a Musical Critic [1894, reprinted 1912]I. Musical Buzzings of a Ghost Apprentice(''The Hornet'', 1876-77)II. The Emergence of Bassetto (The 1880s)Music for the People (1883)Herr Richter and His Blue Ribbon (1885)The Inferno at St James's Hall (1885)The Bach Bi-centenary (1885)English Opera at Drury Lane (1885)Manon (1885)The Marriage of Figaro (1885)A Substitute for Strauss (1885)Art Corner (1885)Musical Instruments at the Invention's Exhibition (1885)Singing, Past and Present (1885)Encores (1885)Fugue out of Fashion (1885)Programs (1885)Palmy Days at the Opera (1886)Liszt (1886)The Redemption at the Crystal Palace (1886)Memoirs of a Famous Fiddler (1886)A Book for Orators and Singers (1886)Wagner on Orchestral Conducting (1887)The Don Giovanni Centenary (1887)Boito's Mefistofele (1888)Such a Thumping of Pianos (1888)Musical Mems: By The Star's Own Captious Critic (1889)The Grieg Concert (1889)The Philharmonic (1889)Bayreuth and Back (1889)The Opera Season (1889)Wagner in Bayreuth (1889)Faust at the Albert Hall (1889)III. The Well-Tempered Critic (The 1890s)Concerts (1890)Mr Henry Seiffert's Concert (1890)Thorgrim (1890)Carl Rosa Opera Company: Lohengrin (1890)Modern Men: Hans Richter (1891)Modern Men: Sir Arthur Sullivan (1891)The Music Season in London (1891)The Mozart Centenary (1891)Brahms, Beethoven, and The Barber of Bagdad (1891)The Superiority of Musical to Dramatic Critics (1892)The Rossini Centenary (1892)The Religion of the Pianoforte (1894)Beethoven's Eight Symphony (1895)Bassetto at Bayreuth (1896)What It Feels Like to be Successful (1897)IV. Old Themes and New Music (The Twentieth Century)Mutilated Opera (1904)Sumptuary Regulations at the Opera (1905)Strauss and His Elektra (1910)The Reminiscences of Quinquagenarian (1910)Causerie on Handel in England (1913)A Neglected Moral of the Wagner Centenary (1913)Gluck in Glastonbury (1916)Mozart with Mozart Left Out (1917)Scratch Opera (1918)The Future of British Music (1919)Sir Edward Elgar (1920-32)Handel's Messiah (1941)Radio Music (1947)Basso Continuo (1948)Music Today (1950)Coda: We Sing Better Than Our Grandparents [11.XI.1950]Biographical IndexGeneral Index---------------------------------------------------------------------------------This exquisitely produced hardback has been my second encounter with the musical criticism of Bernard Shaw but the first one with a volume edited by the legendary Shavian scholar Dan H. Laurence. I use the adjective ''legendary'' deliberately and with good reason. I don't know about the confirmed Shavian buffs, but all Shavian neophytes must be deeply grateful to Mr Laurence for his Shavian dedication for decades which has resulted in his editing the definitive texts of the plays and their prefaces (currently available from Penguin Classics), Shaw's enormous correspondence and, quite to the point for this review, his complete musical criticism in three huge volumes titled simply ''Shaw's Music'' (1981, 2nd rev. edn. 1989). Mr Laurence is unfortunately no longer with us, but his monumental tribute to Bernard Shaw remains.''How to Become a Musical Critic'' was first published more than 20 years before the editor's definitive edition of Shaw's complete musical criticism. It certainly is an excellent introduction to the latter, definitely superior to the first one I read, ''Shaw on Music'' (ed. Eric Bentley, 1955, reprinted in 2000). To be fair, the volume edited by Mr Bentley is fine in its own way for it presents to the reader excellent selection, thematically organised, of Shaw's essays on music written between 1889 and 1935. Yet Mr Laurence has surpassed his colleague in every possible aspect. How to Become a Musical Critic is chronologically organised and its range is truly stupendous: 74 years! It is unbelievable, yet it's pure arithmetic: Shaw first wrote on music when he was a lad of 20; his last pieces came in 1950, the year of his death at the age of 94. Nor is Mr Laurence's selection less impressive in terms of musical history and genre variety. There is everything for everybody here: from oratorio to opera and from piano pieces to symphonies; from Bach and Handel to Elgar and Sullivan, with a good deal of Mozart, Beethoven and Wagner in between. And this book also contain a very useful index indeed; something Mr Bentley's volume conspicuously lacks.An important point to bear in mind is that the selection in ''How to Become a Musical Critic'' is by no means arbitrary. Indeed, it was supposed to supplement the four volumes published in the Standard Edition of Shaw's works - ''London Music in 1888-89 as Heard by Corno di Bassetto'' (1937) and ''Music in London 1890-94'' (1932) which collect only (or almost only indeed!) his professional musical criticism for ''The Star'' and ''The World''. Unbelievable as it may seem - what an energy that man had! - Shaw wrote numerous musical pieces for other periodicals, not only before and after his ''professional years'' but even in the period 1888-94. These are collected for the first time in this volume, as are pieces from The Star and The World which Shaw omitted from the above-mentioned four volumes. Most of the twentieth-century pieces are letters to editors or addresses made on various occasions. Yet, despite the miscellaneous nature of the selection, there is hardly a single piece without interest for the avid music lover; only in the very last one, written literally days before Shaw's death at the of 94, is there any slight sign of failing faculties, literary or mental.Except fine selection and scrupulous scholarship, Mr Laurence is the author of a truly magnificent introduction. It is indeed the perfect introduction, entirely concerned with the very subject of the book and, notwithstanding the limited space, containing an exhaustive discussion written in lucid and amusing style. It is obvious that Mr Laurence knows his subject inside out for he provides, to begin with, a conclusive evidence for that, namely a fascinating list of characters and stage directions showing how often Shaw's passion for music surfaces in his fiction or drama; probably the most impressive of this examples is the protagonist in ''Love Among the Artists'', one of Shaw's early novels, who is ''modern-composer genius of Beethovenesque intensity.'' Mr Laurence also makes a splendid historical overview of Shaw's career as a music critic, professional or not, since his early 20s until his death in his middle 90s. It makes a thoroughly absorbing read and I will reluctantly limit myself with three major points here which must be mentioned simply because they are often badly neglected.Firstly, Bernard Shaw was extremely knowledgeable about music and this was no accident. Shaw's mother was a professional singer and his father played the trombone, though on amateur level; one of his aunts played the cello, another was skilful with harp, and his uncle played the ophicleide. In fact, Bernard Shaw grew up constantly surrounded by music; his insatiable curiosity, fabulous energy and awesome intelligence did the rest. Of course Shaw never studied music formally but, then again, he never studied play writing either, or any writing at all indeed. We would do well to remember, though, that he was intimately familiar with enormous amount of music since his childhood, he had very sharp ears, for he could apparently hear a half-tone difference with ease, and his whole personality was saturated with music since he could remember himself. Indeed, not only did Bernard Shaw had a fine baritone voice, and even entertained an adolescent notion to become a professional singer, but until the end of his long life he kept a shelf of orchestral scores and continued to play on his Bechstein and sung works like Mussorgsky's ''Boris Godunov'' or Strauss' ''Ariadne auf Naxos''.Secondly, Bernard Shaw did make some gross mistakes in his evaluation, but they were comparatively few in comparison with his correct predictions. He may have overestimated Gounod, undervalued Berlioz and misjudged Brahms, but he also passionately defended Bach, Handel, Mozart and Wagner who at the time were far from pedestals they are set on today, in England at any rate. As I intend show a little below, for all his scathing criticism, Shaw also was amazingly perceptive about Franz Liszt.Thirdly, when he came to write his first professional reviews in 1889, Bernard Shaw had already had more than a decade of experience in the field; his first tentative notes appeared in 1876 (the year of the world premiere of Wagner's Ring in Bayreuth!) and since 1883 (the year of Wagner's death!) he was writing steadily for different periodicals until he finally came to accept the official position of music critic for ''The Star''. Indeed, before becoming officially a professional and invent his famous pseudonym Corno di Bassetto, for some half an year in the end of 1888 and the beginning of 1889 Shaw acted as a second-string critic; not before February 15th did his first review under his new nickname appear. His tenure for ''The World'' started in May 1890, barely a week after Corno di Bassetto had call it a day in ''The Star''. As for Shaw's earliest pieces in The Hornet, this is a story within the story. It was the legendary Vanderleur Lee, his mother's lover and something of a conductor himself, who arranged the elaborate deception.The deception lasted for nearly an year - from 29 November 1876 to 26 September 1877 - and this only drawback was that Shaw didn't have the opportunity to correct the proofs of his materials. He later complained that the editor had mutilated his writings and even inserted ''puffs'' here and there. But Mr Laurence takes Shaw at his word and makes a strong case that he was probably wrong in thinking so. The few instances of praise in these pieces have a ring of sincerity and, moreover, they are largely confirmed by Shaw's later criticism; the only suspicious element is his compliments for the completely forgotten today overture to Parisina by Sterndale Bennett (28 March 1877). Apart from this instance, there exists one Wagner article with a strong flavour of ''anti-Wagnerism'' which has been proven not have been written by Shaw at all and for this reason it is not included in the volume. His contributions were of course unsigned and, as Mr Laurence tells us, their authorship had to be confirmed by external sources such as Shaw's correspondence, diaries and especially a large cutting-book which contained his ''critical crimes'' from those times but which Shaw kept for three quarters of a century, until his death after which they were published for a first time in book form. Again Mr Laurence's scholarship is of course highly appreciated, yet in this case it is somewhat superfluous: a brief glance over these pieces is quite enough to be convinced that they might have been written only by Bernard Shaw.These early pieces for ''The Hornet'' are truly remarkable. When I reflect that they were written by a lad of twenty or twenty-one, my incredulity is stretched almost to the point of disbelief. The style is somewhat crude and immature compared with Shaw's later writings, but his biting sarcasm and colossal abilities to put everything in the funniest possible way are here all right. Some of these short notices are also of immense historical interest, such as the one from 6 June 1877 (pp. 23-24) which contains a very important description of Richard Wagner as conductor. Yes, Shaw really was there when the great composer visited London and conducted the Philharmonic in Albert Hall. Far more important thing that emerges from these reviews is the obvious fact that even then - 20/21 years old, if I may remind you - Shaw already had an acute powers of observation and could judge musical excellence with stupendous assurance for his age; his remarks, for example, about Wagner's peculiar fluctuations of tempo can probably be found in every book on conducting written during the twentieth century for it is today generally recognised that a whole conducting tradition stems from that manner. Fascinatingly, even at that tender age Shaw already was the proverbial iconoclast and could criticise mercilessly, but with a good deal of common sense, both the politics behind a performance and such a tricky subject as program music.Now I am coming back to what I merely hinted a little above: Shaw's longevity. It really is difficult to believe that his man lived until the emergence of rock'n'roll, yet he was there when Tchaikovsky, Brahms and Liszt were still alive; to say nothing of Ravel, Debussy, Rachmaninoff and Richard Strauss, who all were younger than Shaw yet whom he outlived all. Indeed, Shaw was there when Liszt, then an old man of 74 with devastated health, made his celebrated visit to the Albion in the spring of 1886; few months later he wrote an obituary for him. When Shaw became a regular music critic for The Star, Tchaikovsky had yet to compose his Pathetique. Such astonishing life span is a phenomenon itself, but what truly makes it compelling and irresistible is the typically Shavian blend of industry, intelligence, irreverence and illumination. He never stopped writing, especially about music. Nor did he ever regard even his musical columns with excessive flippancy. Iconoclast to the bone, burning with curiously intellectual passion, Shaw was fearless almost to the point of irrationality. He never shied away from blunt telling of the truth as he saw it or severe criticism of sacred cows when he was sure they deserved it. To call Shaw opinionated is of course true, but it also is a majestic understatement. Only calling him dull or crass may beat that.[Originally this review included a long discourse on Liszt which is not here the place to include.]On the rest of ''How to Become a Musical Critic'' I have very little to say, because, in fact, there is much too much to be said. Among the highlights certainly is Bassetto at Bayreuth, a relatively longish piece, a set of several pieces actually, in which Shaw describes vividly and amusingly his adventures in Bayreuth where in 1896 he was lucky enough to attend a complete performance of ''Der Ring des Nibelungen''. The pieces are something like a general rehearsal for ''The Perfect Wagnerite'' (1898) and they make a terrific read; especially noteworthy are Shaw's criticisms of many a blunder on the Bayreuth stage in terms of acting and stage designs. Another brutally amusing piece is ''Strauss and His Elektra''. Again these are several pieces that chronicle a most absorbing newspaper debate between Bernard Shaw and Ernest Newman that started with a vicious review of a Strauss' opera by the latter. After what I've said of Newman above, nobody would be surprised to learn that I have relished every Shavian arrow that pierced his sinful flesh; Mr Laurence rose to the occasion splendidly, providing in square brackets short summary of all relevant points in Newman's original review and subsequent replies to Shaw. Last but not least, the two pieces on Edward Elgar make an engrossing read too, especially since this is one of the very few, if not the only one, example of pure partisanship on Shaw's side. (No, the case of Wagner is not. Shaw never really extolled him, as people who know not what they're talking about may tell you, but always judged the great composer with his typical critical acumen.) Since Elgar was his personal friend, this is of course quite understandable, and Shaw could have chosen a lot worse anyway. I am finishing with his delightful reference to Elgar's fine overture Cockaigne:''But if you say that Elgar's Cockaigne overture combines every classic quality of a concert overture with every lyrical and dramatic quality of the overture to Die Meistersinger, you are either uttering a platitude as safe as a compliment to Handel on the majesty of the "Hallelujah" Chorus, or else damning yourself to all critical posterity by uttering a gaffe that will make your grandson blush for you. Personally, I am prepared to take the risk. What do I care for my grandson Give me Cockaigne.''I seldom recommend books. I don't think it's quite right to do that since reading is one of the most intensely personal activities a human being may engage in. Somerset Maugham once compared the freedom of the relationship between a reader and a book with that between a mystic and his God; needless to add, there is no place for third party here. Yet recommendations are sometimes useful and illuminating, especially when somewhat specialised non-fiction is concerned - and in such cases I do make exceptions. Here is one. I have the audacity to strongly recommend to every serious classical music lover (with some basic knowledge of music history) the criticism of Bernard Shaw, and I dare recommend it complete. But since three mammoth volumes constitute considerable investment of time, to say nothing of money, one is perfectly right to demand a book which he can use to sample heavily Shaw's voluminous writing on music. And here I make another exception - second in this paragraph, quite astounding - for I cannot recommend highly enough both this volume edited by Mr Laurence as well as the one edited by Mr Bentley. The former, overall, is certainly the better one, but the latter is excellent too. Unfortunately, How to Become a Musical Critic is perfectly out of print these days, but second-hand copies are easily available and almost indecently cheap. If you love classical music and superb prose, I guarantee you are in for an exhilarating adventure.P. S. Do not be deceived by duplications with the volume edited by Mr Bentley such as ''The Mozart Centenary'' or ''The Rossini Centenary''. The ''titles'', artificially given by the editors for the sake of convenience, are the same but the pieces are entirely different, if obviously written at the same time. Those in Mr Bentley's ''Shaw on Music'' come from the three volumes of his collected criticism in ''The World''. Indeed, since that selection was first published in 1955, Mr Bentley probably didn't know about the existence of the other pieces for they appeared for the first time in book form five years later in How to Become of Musical Critic; neither of them, of course, had ever been published in ''The World''.See all 3 customer reviews... Best Cruises for Kids - Cruise Critic 4. Disney Cruise Line Ships . Disney Dream Disney Fantasy and Disney Magic. Why . Disney ships are ideal for families with kids ages 4 to 11 as Disney has the best ... Music journalism - Wikipedia Music journalism has its roots in classical music criticism which has traditionally comprised the study discussion evaluation and interpretation of music that has ... Critic - definition of critic by The Free Dictionary Now as I had no theory of any kind don't believe in Spiritualism and copied my characters from life I don't see how this critic can be right. Cruise News: Latest Cruise Line & Cruise ... - Cruise Critic Welcome to Cruise Critic; we're happy you decided to register to become a Cruise Critic Member. Forum Rules. Important: Do Not Use Your REAL NAME as your USER NAME The Rocky Horror Picture Show Reviews - Metacritic The Rocky Horror Picture Show movie reviews & Metacritic score: A newly engaged couple have a breakdown in an isolated area and must pay a call to the bizarr... Critic Define Critic at Dictionary.com Critic definition a person who judges evaluates or criticizes: a poor critic of men. See more. The Critic - Wikipedia The Critic is an American prime time animated series revolving around the life of New York film critic Jay Sherman voiced by actor Jon Lovitz. It was created by ... A Hamilton critic on why the musical isnt so revolutionary. I loved [Mirandas first Broadway musical] In the Heights. I thought it was incredible. So I definitely wanted to see whatever he did next. But I was super ...
Download BookDaughters of the Dust A Novel