IAIN HAMILTON

A REMARKABLE feature of Swiss music is its lack of insularity.
This is interesting in the music of such an independent and proudly in-
dividual people. The country's linguistic division into three may in part
be responsible for the influence exerted by the trends of French and
German music in this century but Italy has, on the other hand, had very
little influence. Nationalism of any kind it is almost impossible to trace.

Is this a lack of strength and individuality in a country's music, or a
sign of open-mindedness in its artists? The question of nationalism in
art is always a problem, and such elements of it which may have helped
to enliven one country's music may have most successfully deadened
that of another.

Hungary is immensely the richer for Bartók's national influences. His
individuality was great enough to transcend the weakening powers
which national traits can have on an artist. Would Nielsen be worse or
better for national trends in his work? Is it not just the subtle imprint
of Italian lucidity and a superb national sense of vocal writing which
raises Dallapiccola's cosmopolitan style far above that of others? Is
Valen better for the lack of any Norwegian elements? It is so often this
very national flavour which keeps Grieg and Dvořák alive today. A
certain Russian element hardly ever leaves the most classically moulded
works of Stravinsky -- it is indigenous to his style. Whereas in the highly
conscious political-nationalism of Shostakovich it is so sadly lacking.
And what of the deadening 'Englishry' which lies so heavily on our
music as compared with Britten's subtle assimilation of the finest and
most enduring of English national traits? These are fascinating and
paradoxical questions.

-152-