Sometimes, they get it wrong.
We all read reviews. They might be movie or tv show reviews, book reviews, concert reviews. We all read them, and often make a decision on whether to read a certain book, see a certain movie, etc. I’ve have said (I’d like to think this is original, but it probably isn’t) Them that can, do; them that can’t, criticize. If I read a movie review by a well-known film maker, or a book review by a well-respected writer, I feel there might be a measure of validity to the review. As is so often the case, however, a reviewer doesn’t know any more about the medium he or she is writing about than I do. I could be wrong, but like the former WBAL radio announcer said, “Often wrong—never in doubt.”
That being said, it’s interesting to see how some of the great pieces of music that we are all so familiar with, and love so much, have been viewed by the critics, and, sometimes, contemporary musicians.
Let’s start with violin concertos. The four most popular concerti in the general repertoire are (in order of composition) are those by Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Brahms, and Tchaikovsky. Of the four, only Mendelssohn’s concerto was a hit right from the start. It has remained one of most popular concert works w listen to in concerts, on the radio, and when purchasing music.
Beethoven, on the other hand, didn’t have the same good fortune. The concerto was composed in 1806 and was one of a number of works in a concert at the Theater an der Wien in Vienna on December 23. The violinist was Franz Clement, and it is said that he didn’t have enough time to learn the piece and actually had to sight read one movement. The concert didn’t fare too well. It wasn’t vilified, but pretty much ignored. Muzio Clementi, by this time a well-known publisher in England asked Beethoven to make a piano arrangement of the work that he would publish with the original, in hopes of generating interest in the work. It didn’t work. In fact, the piece remained obscure until it was performed in 1844 by a 12-year-old violinist named Joseph Joachim, with the London Philharmonic Society lead by Felix Mendelssohn. From there, the rest is history, and the work remains one of the “big 4.”
From here, we go to Brahms. He composed his violin concerto in 1878 (the same year as the Tchaikovsky), with Joachim as the soloist. Much to Brahms’ displeasure, Joachim wanted to open the program with the Beethoven Violin Concerto (by this time, a well- part of the repertoire) and close the program with the Brahms. The premier took place on January 1, 1879. Brahms conducted the premier. Reviews were mixed. It was called a concerto “against the violin” by both Hans von Bulow, and Joseph Helmsberger, who actually gave the work its Vienna premiere, which was well-received. By the time of the London premier in 1879, Brahms and Joachim had had a falling out over Brahms taking the side of Joachim’s wife in their rather unpleasant divorce proceedings. When Joachim played the work, it was said he didn’t put much effort into it, and put off campaigning for the work, and as a result, most of his colleagues registered dislike for the work. The great Polish violinist, Henryk Wieniawski, said the work was unplayable, and the great Spanish violinist, Pablo de Sarasate, refused to play it because he said the only good melody in the second movement was for the oboe. After a few years, Brahms and Joachim “buried the hatchet” when Brahms wrote his famous “Double Concerto” for violin and cello for Joachim as a peace offering. From that time on, Joachim played the work to great reviews.
Now to Tchaikovsky. He wrote his only violin concerto in 1878, the same year as Brahms, but it wasn’t premiered until 1881. Tchaikovsky dedicated the work to Leopold Auer, the leading violin pedagogue in Russia at the time. He probably did this because it was expected of him. Auer gave the concerto roughly the same treatment that Nicolay Rubenstein gave Tchaikovsky’s first piano concerto and refused to play it. The premiere was given by a violinist that the composer admired, Adolph Brodsky. Tchaikovsky rededicated the work to Brodsky. This concerto really got vilified by the critics, particularly the very influential critic, Eduard Hanslick. He called it “long and pretentious,” and went on to say, “it brought us face to face with the revolting thought that music can exist which stinks to the ear.” Harsh. He called the last movement “odorously Russian.” The concerto finally gained some popularity after a violinist named Karel Halir started performing it, with the 1888 Leipzig performance. Tchaikovsky was in attendance and called it “a memorable day.”
A reviewer from the Boston Globe had this to say about Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No. 6 the Pathetique: “The Pathetique Symphony threads all the foul ditches and sewers of human despair; it is unclean as music can well be.” It gets worse from there, believe me.
It’s interesting to note that while Tchaikovsky didn’t deal well with bad reviews, he wasn’t above being harsh about his fellow composers, especially Brahms. He once wrote in a letter, “…was playing though some music by that scoundrel Brahms. What a giftless bastard! Compared to him even Raff is a giant!” Poor Joachim Raff. A long time protégé of Liszt, who went on his own. He was competent, if somewhat uninspired, and prolific, composing operas, symphonies, and numerous other works. One wonders who Tchaikovsky was being harsher to—Brahms or Raff. He also Brahms as some chaotic and utterly empty wasteland. Again, harsh.
This brings us to Chopin. When Robert Schumann first saw Chopin’s score for the “Introduction and Variations on ‘La Ci Darem la Mano’” said, “Hat’s off, gentlemen—a genius.” Just a few years later, he referred to Chopin’s Piano Sonata No. 2 (the famous “funeral march sonata” as structurally inferior, and went on to say, “Chopin could not quite handle sonata form.” Of course, the work is now considered one of the great works in the literature and has been performed by every major pianist. The Polish pianist and composer Juliusz Zarebski, who came almost a generation after Chopin, also died you from tuberculosis, and when he knew his time had come, dressed in his finest clothes, sat down to his piano, and played Chopin’s funeral march, during which, he expired.
There a so many other examples, and one of the most amusing comes from Mark Twain, who reportedly said “Wagner’s music is much better than it sounds.” That became so well known, that Twain had to set the record straight. He made it clear that it was originally said by Bill Nye (no, not the ‘Science Guy’ but a newspaper columnist of the time. Speaking of Wagner, he took his share of criticism as well. Rossini had some very pointed opinions about Wagner. He once said, “Wagner has some lovely moments but awful quarters of an hour.” He also said, “Once cannot judge Lohengrin from a first hearing, and I certainly do not intend to hear it a second time.”
Again, there are numerous examples of reviews that got it wrong. Not just in music but in films, plays, books, and art. We’ll finish this with the words of Jean Sibelius. He was talking to fellow composer Bengt de Torne, who was working on a biography of Sibelius. Sibelius told him, “Never pay attention to what critics say…remember, a statue has never been set up in honor of a critic!”
