EXTRACTS FROM THE DIARY OF A DILETTANTE.

[Resumed from [page 135].]

June 8th. The following facts, which appear in the Court Journal of this day, are so correct, as far as they relate to Sig. Paganini’s recently advertised concerts, and the remarks are so just, that I shall beg leave to transfer them to my Diary:—

‘An extraordinary change seems to have taken place in the public mind with respect to Paganini: his concerts, on his first visit to this country, were so well attended that frequently his receipts exceeded 1000l., and on one occasion 1400l. were received, of which he had two thirds, leaving M. Laporte to pay the whole expenses out of the remaining third. On his arriving here, about two months ago, he was advised to defer giving any concert until the anger, caused by his refusal to play for the distressed English actors in Paris, should have blown over. It being supposed, however, last week, that this affair had been forgotten, and that there was every prospect of obtaining full houses, Paganini announced a concert for yesterday (Friday, the 7th June) evening. On Thursday, so few boxes and stalls had been taken, that Paganini, despairing of an attendance that would compensate him for his trouble, and dreading, perhaps, that there would be some disturbance arising out of the Paris affair, yesterday advertised that there would be no performance! M. Laporte cannot, we imagine, regret the disappointment, for if his agreement with Paganini be similar to the former one, he would have had all the expenses to pay out of a third, which would hardly have covered the charge of the musicians.’

21st. This evening Sig. Paganini had his first concert this season in the King’s Theatre, when he performed nearly the same pieces that he has so often repeated in London. The pit was not half full, the gallery not one-third, and the boxes almost empty. He advertises two concerts as the number he has determined to give. These will both be too many, if his second is no better attended than his first.

24th. The Globe of this evening has the honesty to point out the discordance in the account given of Paganini’s concert, in two Sunday papers of yesterday. Such things will happen so long as free tickets are accepted by our journals, beyond the number necessary for the actual use of the reporters. It is charitable to suppose, that the writer of the article, who filled the house so overflowingly full, was himself never for one moment within its walls. In this case he may have guessed wrong. But let us hear the Globe:—

‘PAGANINI’s CONCERT. We find the following discrepancies as to a mere matter of fact, in the account given by two of the Sunday papers, in Paganini’s concert on Friday. We, not, however, having been present, cannot decide between these two differing “doctors:”—

‘“Sig. Paganini had his first concert for the season on Friday evening, at the King’s Theatre. The excitement—probably by the delay in the Signor’s appearance, as well as in the novelty of the performances—produced an overflowing house.”—Observer. “The Modern Orpheus was employed on Friday in enchanting the empty boxes and trenches of the Opera House: never was there a greater appearance of desolation within its walls.”—Sunday Times.’

29th. A weekly paper of this date makes a great flourish in an article most unluckily headed ‘critical blunders,’ in which the writer himself commits a couple of choice and entertaining étourderies, much resembling certain small paragraphs, served up for the public amusement in a daily paper, on Monday mornings, and probably from the same goose quill. The learned article runs thus:—

‘Critical Blunders. Certain journalists, our contemporaries, have been somewhat severe upon the “extravagant trash” forming the original libretto of “The Magic Flute,” being, we conclude, unaware that the opera of [the] Zauberflöte is one of the early works of Goethe. The character of Papageno is, in fact, one of the most elegant of his fantastic creations.’

Now it happens, that the drama in question—if such a farrago of nonsense is to be dignified by such a title—was written by Emanuel Schickaneder, proprietor of a suburb theatre at Vienna, who, pleading his embarrassed circumstances, persuaded Mozart to set the opera, and was saved from ruin by the success of the piece. But to saddle the character of Papageno, the bird-catcher, on Goethe, would be ‘too bad,’ were it not so vastly comical. ‘One of his most elegant creations,’ too! Who has now been hoaxing the unhappy victim of many a joke?

—I think I trace the identical pen that wrote the above, in the annexed, which appeared in the very some paper:—

‘Titled Opera Singers. It might be inferred that Louis XIV., in founding the French opera, was gifted with second sight, or had anticipated an era when Count de Rossys, Count Giustinianis, and other high mightinesses, would bestow their titles upon the play bills. By the letters patent of the foundation in 1672, it was enacted, that “all gentlemen, and other distinguished persons, might sing at the said opera, without forfeiting their titles of nobility, places, rights, or immunities.” Louis XIV., and his successor, Louis XV., were frequently performers in the court masques and ballets.’

Here are other blunders, by implication! Paul ought to have known, because he knows every thing, that no Count Rossi (not Rossy), no Count Justiniani, ever appeared on any stage. Madame Camporese, the actual wife of the latter, and Madlle. Sontag, who became the wife of the former, were performers, no doubt; but the one suppressed her title, and the other had none to suppress.

July 1st. Legitimate music, it is to be feared, is in danger of suffering the fate of the legitimate drama; both are becoming the victims of freshly-imported foreigners, who, whatever their other knowledge may be, are well acquainted with the weak side of our West-Endians. On Saturday last, at a concert for the benefit of Madlle. Pixis, two instances of egregious folly were displayed: the one a performance of the overture to the Zauberflöte, on three piano-fortes, by twelve hands; the other, a Quatuor Concertante, for four piano-fortes! The ‘confusion worse confounded,’ thus produced, may be imagined, not described. Some such piece of foolery was exhibited at Vienna last year, and justly reprobated by the good, uninfluenced German critics; but as it would not do a second time, even in the Austrian capital, the exploit was repeated in a country which, having paid upwards of 20,000l. to hear an Italian play on one fiddle-string, it was reasonably supposed would encourage any other kind of musical nonsense.

July 3d. Sunday the 30th of June was a high festival day at Tadcaster, says a Yorkshire paper, on ‘account of the opening of a large organ, built by Elliott and Hill, of London, who erected the stupendous instrument in York Cathedral. The fact having been publicly announced, occasioned a great influx of visiters from York and the surrounding country, and Tadcaster has not presented so lively a scene for some time. Dr. Camidge performed on the instrument with the greatest ability, and the numerous congregation, which crowded every part of the church, were highly gratified by hearing the full harmony of the organ, which possesses vast richness of tone, peal forth in that grand melody, the Old Hundredth Psalm, with which the morning service commenced.’

There is now hardly a church of any importance which does not boast an organ, and generally one of large dimensions. This alone is a proof of the advance of music in Great Britain; for of all instruments the organ is the noblest, the most capable of producing great effects, in the hands of a good harmonist, of a performer of sense, who feels that he himself is appearing to advantage only when in solemn or in sober music he is displaying the best qualities, exhibiting the real character, of an instrument that is absolutely desecrated by any attempt at what is called brilliancy of execution.

4th. This morning a concert was given at Willis’s Rooms, by Mr. Osborne, a native of Ireland, I believe, but who has passed much of his life on the Continent, in which he, for the first time, exhibited his talents as a piano-forte player, before a London audience, and was very favourably received. His sister, also, Miss Saunders Osborne, made her débût, and appears to have studied in a good vocal school.

12th. In a work very lately published (The Infirmities of Genius Illustrated, &c. by R. R. Madden, Esq.) the author has given lists of twenty persons of different professions, with the ages at which they died, for the purpose of showing the influence of various intellectual pursuits on longevity. In his selection of musical composers he might have been more successful as regards the eminence of the individuals, though the result would not have differed very widely. The following are the names he has chosen, and the ages at which they died:—

Arne, Dr.

Seb. Bach

Beethoven

Burney, Dr.

Bull, Dr.

Cimarosa

Corelli

Gluck

Gretry

Handel

Haydn

Kalkbrenner

Keiser

Martini

Mozart

Paisiello

Piccini

Porpora

Scarlatti, A.

Weber, C. M.

Total

1289

Giving an average of 64 years.

But Dr. Burney cannot be classed as a great musical composer; and Mr. Madden has omitted names of infinitely more celebrity, as well as real merit, than some he has inserted; I would therefore propose the following list.

Arne

S. Bach

Beethoven

Boyce

Cherubini

80 [81]

Cimarosa

Corelli

Clementi

Gluck

Gretry

Handel

Haydn

Lully

Marcello

Mozart

Paisiello

Pergolesi

Purcell

Scarlatti

Weber

Total

1116

Giving an average of 60⅘ years.

Mr. Madden gives the following as the general result of his inquiry:—

Aggregate
years

Average
years

Natural Philosophers

1504

Moral ditto

1417

Sculptors and Painters

1412

Authors on Law and Jurisprudence

1394

Medical Authors

1368

Authors on Revealed Religion

1350

Philologists

1323

Musical Composers

1284

Novelists and Miscellaneous Authors

1257

62½

Dramatists

1249

Authors on Natural Religion

1245

Poets

1144

In relation to composers, he remarks,—‘musical composition demands extraordinary sensibility, an enthusiastic imagination, an instinctive taste, rather than deep thought. The same qualities differently directed make the poet. Is it, then, to be wondered at, that we should find the poets and the musical composers shorter lived than the followers of all other learned and scientific pursuits, whose sensibilities are not exercised by their studies, whose imaginations are not wearied by excessive application and enthusiasm?’ But Mr. Madden overlooks other causes quite as operative as those he enumerates.