of fact, in the period we are discussing the phenomenon of
modern music seems to detach itself from nationalism and be-
come European and American. Neither can we speak of schools.
There no longer exist groups comparable to the German post-
romanticists or French impressionists. There are a few dominant
personalities who shape certain currents of thinking. Others
group around them, drawn to them through a natural affinity.
And finally, there are some composers who create a musical world
which cannot serve as a basis for anyone else. Even if one can
speak of a Schoenbergkreis or a group around Erik Satie, the
same cannot be said about Stravinsky, Milhaud, or Bartók. Only
the surface of their thought can be imitated by other composers.

Webern and Berg have been able to use the idiom created by
Schoenberg, for example, without limiting in the least the matur-
ing of their respective personalities. This is so because these
composers share the same basic concept and a common viewpoint
on the content and role of music. Satie's general principles and
philosophy have nurtured works very different from his own in
substance. The resonant world of Stravinsky, in its true objec-
tivity, is independent of any specific expressive need. Its super-
ficial aspect can be imitated, but it cannot serve as a rallying
point for a group united by a particular kind of spiritual kinship.

EMMANUEL CHABRIER: Le Roi Malgré Lui.

ERIK SATIE: Sarabandes.

ERIK SATIE: Gymnopédies.

CLAUDE DEBUSSY: Prélude à l'Après-midi d'un Faune.

-18-