‘Brightening the Lives of the People on Sunday’

Simon McVeigh
{"title":"‘Brightening the Lives of the People on Sunday’","authors":"Simon McVeigh","doi":"10.1017/9781108628778.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There were few overt restrictions on concert promotion in Victorian Britain, a laissez-faire attitude towards regulation and an international free trade in music that apparently represent archetypal liberal positions. Yet social and cultural barriers of all kinds were hidden assertions of power, and one glaring obstacle still remained. \n \nSunday concerts were a social, political and religious issue to the end of the century. The National Sunday League – an anti-sabbatarian alliance of working-class radicals with social reformers, secularists and Unitarians – regarded music as an essential tool. ‘Intellectual and Elevating Recreation’ was offered through oratorio selections at Sunday Evenings for the People, while free band concerts in the parks allied music to the philanthropic open-air movement. \n \nFree Sunday concerts of a different kind – serious chamber music – were offered by the South Place Ethical Society, and towards 1900 the cause was taken up by Queen’s Hall, leading to a flood of commercially-oriented orchestral concerts on Sundays. The issue became intertwined with debates about public subsidy of national culture and working-class ‘improvement’, whether through permanent orchestras on the rates or subsidized outdoor band concerts: a striking example of the transition from Victorian voluntarism to the statist interventions of New Liberalism.","PeriodicalId":199006,"journal":{"name":"Music and Victorian Liberalism","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Music and Victorian Liberalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108628778.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There were few overt restrictions on concert promotion in Victorian Britain, a laissez-faire attitude towards regulation and an international free trade in music that apparently represent archetypal liberal positions. Yet social and cultural barriers of all kinds were hidden assertions of power, and one glaring obstacle still remained. Sunday concerts were a social, political and religious issue to the end of the century. The National Sunday League – an anti-sabbatarian alliance of working-class radicals with social reformers, secularists and Unitarians – regarded music as an essential tool. ‘Intellectual and Elevating Recreation’ was offered through oratorio selections at Sunday Evenings for the People, while free band concerts in the parks allied music to the philanthropic open-air movement. Free Sunday concerts of a different kind – serious chamber music – were offered by the South Place Ethical Society, and towards 1900 the cause was taken up by Queen’s Hall, leading to a flood of commercially-oriented orchestral concerts on Sundays. The issue became intertwined with debates about public subsidy of national culture and working-class ‘improvement’, whether through permanent orchestras on the rates or subsidized outdoor band concerts: a striking example of the transition from Victorian voluntarism to the statist interventions of New Liberalism.
“照亮星期天人民的生活”
在维多利亚时代的英国,对音乐会宣传几乎没有公开的限制,对监管的自由放任态度和国际音乐自由贸易显然代表了典型的自由主义立场。然而,各种各样的社会和文化障碍都是隐藏的权力主张,一个明显的障碍仍然存在。直到本世纪末,周日音乐会一直是一个社会、政治和宗教问题。全国星期日联盟——一个由工人阶级激进分子与社会改革家、世俗主义者和一神论者组成的反对安息日的联盟——将音乐视为必不可少的工具。“智力和提升娱乐”在周日晚上为人民提供清唱剧,而公园里的免费乐队音乐会则将音乐与慈善露天运动结合起来。南地伦理协会提供了另一种免费的周日音乐会——严肃的室内乐,到1900年,女王大厅开始了这项事业,导致了周日大量以商业为导向的管弦乐音乐会。这个问题与关于国家文化和工人阶级“进步”的公共补贴的争论交织在一起,无论是通过永久的管弦乐队还是补贴的户外乐队音乐会:从维多利亚时代的自愿主义过渡到新自由主义的中央集权干预的一个显著例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信