• Prague Organ School: pupil(s) of institute

Prager Zeitung 29/7/1859 published advance news of these theoretical-practical performance examinations of both first- and second-year pupils of the Organ School. The report stated that they were to be held on 30th July between 9am and 1pm at the rooms of the school in the Konvikstgebäude.

A detailed advance report of this event was published by Prager Morgenpost 27/7/1859. This noted that ‘the public theoretical-practical annual-examinations of pupils of the Organists’ School [Organistenschule] takes place on 30th July from 9am until 1pm at the place of the Institute (Bartholomäigasse, Convictsgebäude 1st floor). The examination of pupils of the first year encompasses elementary principles of harmony with understanding [Inbegriff] of practical Thorough-Bass playing. The examination of pupils of the second class begins with the practice of Modulation; to this is added the teaching of counterpoint, chorale, of imitation and fugue. Thereafter follows performances of exercises in composition by the Institute’s pupils, consisting of preludes and fugues.’ To end the examination were to be performances of five ‘high[-art], classical organ works’, identified by the report along with the pupils who were to play them. First was ‘Ant. Dwořak [Dvořák]’, who gave a ‘Großes Fugue in A-moll von Johann S. Bach’. Dvořák also played in the final item alongside ‘Siegmund Glanz’ performing an arrangement by Schellenberg for four hands of a Fugue in G minor by Bach. The report concluded with enthusiastic praise for the school, the ‘exceptional accomplishments’ of the institute inspiring the correspondent to bring these examinations to the attention of ‘all friends of classical organ playing’. The school was described as possessing an excellent reputation abroad, and was counted among the best managed of institutes concerned with this genre of musical art.

Dalibor 20/7/1859 also published advance news that the ‘Annual theoretical-practical examinations of pupils of the excellent local Organ School will take place on 30th of this month at 9 am in the rooms of the School in the Konvikt.’ The report then listed the students of the second year course and the works they were to perform, beginning with Ant. Dvořák playing the ‘great Prelude and fugue in A minor with obbligato pedal [velká praeludium a fugu do A-moll s obligátním pedalem] by Jan Š. Bach [J.S. Bach]’. Among the other pieces being given, the text noted that the key of the sonata movement by Mendelssohn performed by Bláha was E minor. No work in this genre exists by Mendelssohn in E major or E minor; the composition was identified by Prager Morgenpost 27/7/1858 and by the subsequent Dalibor review as the composer’s Organ Sonata in C minor [i.e. op.65/2]. Except for Seger’s Fugue in E minor all the non-student compositions listed by the Dalibor 20/7/1859 report were specified as being for an instrument ‘with obbligato pedal’. The order of the ‘classical organ’ works listed by this Dalibor text did not represent the order in which the works were performed. The text concluded by listing the performances of second year student compositions.

The Dalibor 1/8/1859 review, signed ‘ý.’, noted that the examinations held on 30th July [given as ‘30. lipna’ - the use of the Slavic-derived name of the month ‘lipen’ was possibly the original source of confusion in certain 20th-century sources of Dvořák literature that referencing the composer’s participation in these examinations specified their taking place in the incorrect month], fulfilled the hopes of the critic that under its new directorship the institute would blossom still more than usual. Of the first year pupils, from their incisive answers about harmony and their skilled playing on the organ, the correspondent enthused how ‘great strides’ could be made in one year ‘if they have as a teacher so thorough a theoretician and pedagogue as Mr Blažek, who for 22 years has worked with untiring assiduity at the institute...’ The text then named V. Čaboun, F. Honys, Jan Hrabánek, and Stretti as being among the most distinguished first year pupils. Attention was then drawn to the fact that in these [first year] examinations the ‘pupils were tested not only in German but also in the Czech language, and we are convinced  that the pupils answered more fluently and sharply in their mother-tongue than in German [žaci v mateřstině mnohem plynněji a bystřeji odpovídali než v němčině].’ Credit for this development was given to Blažek who, the correspondent reported, had begun to teach pupils harmony in Czech in 1848.

The second half of the review text focussed on the second-year pupils. ‘We were no less surprised by the pupils of the second year, who have to thank the very industrious and circumspect director Mr Krejčí for their theoretical and practical education.’ Krejčí, it was noted, continued in the effective tradition of his predecessor Pitsch, but had introduced a revised pedal technique and ‘finally obliged the Czech audience in also issuing the programme of the examinations in the Czech language, which the late Pitsch had laid to rest in 1850. The pupils of the second year also skilfully deciphered the theoretical exercises in the presence of  numerous audience, their efforts notable mainly for their working of tasteful modulations and testifying to their abilities in counterpoint, chorale and the theory of fugue. As concerns practical playing of the organ, Mr A. Dvořák excellently performed a difficult Prelude and fugue in A minor by Bach. No less robustly performed Mr K. Blaha, deftly playing two movments from the Sonata for organ in C minor by Mendelssohn and the very beautiful fugue in E minor by J. Seger, the celebrated Czech contrapuntist; Mr Bruša very skilfully performed the hugely effective Fantasie and fugue in D minor by K. Pitsch. Besides these we heard a greatly interesting work, namely the Sonata for organ by Mendelssohn that Mr Zik. Glanz authoritatively [důstojně] and beautifully performed. However, the highlight [korunou - lit. crown] was the great fugue in G minor by Š. Bach which, performed with rounded nuance and polish by the pupils Z. Glanz and A. Dvořák, made an enormous effect. The performances of the pupils’ own compositions, some of which were excellently worked, also got great applause. Besides that we heard two chorales, which the pupils expressively sang under the direction of the knowledgable Mr L. Zvonař, the teacher of singing. The result of these examinations was magnificent, and for all to see that with the new director a new beautiful epoch commences for the Organ School. And who would want to doubt this? Certainly no-one! For behind them we have the hands of experts, Director Krejčí, Professors F. Blažek and L. Zvonař.’ Krejčí was at this time provisionally appointed as the new director of the Organ School following the death of Karel Pitsch earlier in the year. His position was not made permanent until December 1859, an action which led to resentment in certain quarters of the Prague musical community who preferred the appointment of Zvonař. During 1860 friction obviously developed at the school between Krejčí and Zvonař, culminating in the latter’s resignation. Interestingly, the review of the 1861 examinations that was published by Dalibor 10/8/1861 was vitriolic in its criticism of Krejčí, a startling volte face given his positive reception by the periodical’s critic in 1859.

The event was also reviewed by Prager Morgenpost 2/8/1859. This began by noting that these were the first examinations to take place under the School’s new director Krejčí. The unsigned correspondent expressed great joy from the belief that not only was Krejčí bringing to bear his all energies in continuing in the spirit of his worthy predecessors, but that he was also doing so as an illustrious and proven church-music composer. This was deemed to be evident in the successful results of both the theoretical and practical examinations; in the demonstration of profound contrapuntal knowledge and a rational method and practical mastery of the instrument. Certainly the most noteworthy part of the following text was the observation of the new development that Mr Blažek, the teacher of the first [year] class, had introduced the Czech language into the theoretical examinations. This was perceived to have enabled the Czech speakers to be more articulate and less selfconscious in their answers. The theory examination comprised elements of harmony, modulation, rules of counterpoint, chorales and imitation and fugue, the last of which in the second year was covered by the institute’s director. Whether Krejčí himself used the Czech language was not evident from the source. Following the theory tests the practical examinations commenced with performances of the pupils’ own compositional exercises. Classical organ works were then given, with ‘some of the players belonging to the higher [second] class performed with astonishing proficiency and accuracy’. Manifest in their choice of works was deemed to be both the ‘finest taste in art and deference’, playing two fugues of Bach and the Organ-Fantasie with Fugue in D minor of the immortal [late] director Pitsch. The performance of these pieces by the pupils S. Glanz and A. Dwořak [Dvořák] was especially excellent.’

A short article appeared in Bohemia 2/8/1859 in the wake of this event. It began by noting that ‘This year’s annual examination of the Organ School marks one of the most significant turning points in the history of this institute that is so important for the high-cultural interests of our Fatherland.’ The text did not however proceed with any kind of review of the occasion, nor comment upon the achievements of pupils nor note the works that they played. The focus of the report and the considered turning point to which the correspondent, signed ‘V.’ referred was the replacement of the late director Pitsch with Krejčí. The perforance of the Fantasie and fugue composed by Pitsch inspired the critic to a plaintive eulogy, noting that those ‘who  knew him as so magnificent a performer, academic, pedagogue and person knew what he was to the institute. Here in this modest locale was his house, his family, his rare occupation which he attended to with all his energy. In the musical life of our city Pitsch was a rare phenomenon ...’; the possibility of his replacement was regarded with the greatest anxiety. However, the second half of the text was then balanced by enthusiastic praise for the incoming Krejčí. The success of the examinations ‘we rejoice to be able to describe as surprisingly favourable.’ This was attributed to the new director’s artistic talent, energy and education, and the Organ School was considered by the correspondent to be in good hands.

Lumír 4/8/1859 also published a review, signed ‘F.’, of the Organ School examinations. The event was considered to have been a ‘magnificent success’. Two innovations were noted to have been introduced by Krejčí [whose first name the text mistakenly noted as ‘Jan’], since the examinations of the previous year: programmes were issued not only in German but also in the Czech language; ‘great changes’ had been effected in pedaling. Soon it was hoped that the institute would attain new heights [of renown and achievment] in the hands of the new director with an excellent knowledge of theory and practice. The pupils of the second year under the direction of Krejčí acquitted themselves ‘excellently’ in theory and in performance. Of the compositions that were given, ‘particularly excelled the Fugue by Seegert [Segert], Czech master of counterpoint, then the Fantasie and fugue of ... Pitsch and finally the Sonata of Mendelssohn and the Fugue for four hands by Bach. Already we saw from the programme that Mr Krejčí has a view to the performance of compositions by Czech masters, and we do not doubt that next year we will hear some fugues by Zach, Brixi, Tůma, Koželuh and Zelenka. No less magnificently acquitted themselves the pupils of the first year, where Mr F. Blažek teaches harmony and organ. The pupils answered perfectly and irreproachably in German and Czech languages ...’ This was viewed by the correspondent as a reason to teach the first year wholly in Czech, ‘as pupils entering the Organ School are almost entirely Czechs.’ Blažek was also noted ‘to train the teaching candidates in Czech [at this time the Organ School was also the centre in Czech lands for training school teachers], with the most felicitous results, and pupils make great strides. We recommend this course [of action] to the honourable committee for church music [the Society for the Advancement of Church music in Bohemia], and we are convinced that they will agree.’ The review then named the most notable pupils in the first class: Čabaun [Čaboun], Hrabánek and Stretti; in the second class Glanz, Dvořák, Bruš [Bruša] and Bláha. Finally the correspondent expressed the hope that the reforms of Krejčí and Blažek would continue to bring success to the institute.

The programme order in the database event record has been compiled from the information provided by the various specified sources. From the two specified Prager Morgenpost reports we may ascertain that the performance of student compositions occurred before the performance of the classical organ works. The student compositions themselves were not specifically identified by any of the specified German-language sources, nor by the Dalibor 1/8/1859 review. However, these pieces were listed by the earlier Dalibor report, and these are incorporated into the event record in the order in which they were described by that text. The ordering of the classical organ compositions follows the information given by the two Morgenpost sources; the first of these texts lists the works in a numbered sequence, and that this sequence was followed in the performance is suggested by the review text. The Dalibor 20/7/1860 report describes the works in a slightly different order (the Mendelssohn B-flat Sonata being listed second), but the subsequent review covers the non-student organ works in the same order as the Morgenpost texts. Precisely when during the event the two chorales were sung under the direction of Zvonař cannot be determined, but from the detail of the Dalibor review they may have been performed following the student compositions.

An announcement of this event, noting its time, was published in the Tageskalender of Bohemia 30/7/1859.