Loesser’s Men, Women and Pianos continues to be an invaluable source for the piano’s social history in America. The chapter “The American piano takes its own shape” confirmed many of my hypotheses from the previous blog. At the beginning of the 19th century, those who could afford pianos preferred the European imports to American-made. This fact is supported by the Franklin Music Warehouse, which prided itself at its opening upon its two Viennese grand pianos, each for sale for $750. ($750 was equivalent to one year’s salary for an upper middle class family.) The extreme exoticism and price of these pianos implies that Americans idealized European products. Charles Albrecht, a piano salesman, advertised his pianos as a “consignment of patent pianofortes from London.”[1] Loesser deduces, “The word ‘London’ represented, as theretofore, a presumption of superior excellence.”[2] American pianos were not even associated with their maker because they were not held in as high esteem. In advertisements, these American-made pianos were simply listed as “American,” without any person or company, as if this qualifier covered all bases.
American-made pianos became more popular as people realized that European imports did not always hold up to America’s extreme weather conditions. American piano companies used this issue as a main vehicle for advertisement. There was a great amount of piano innovation in America at this time: John Isaac Hawkins of Philadelphia developed the first upright piano, Alpheus Babcock constructed the first one-piece cast-iron frame, and Jonas Chickering further developed the cast-iron frame and used it in many of his pianos. Also, in 1816, a 30% duty on all imported items made of wood made the imported piano much less economically feasible for many families. By 1830, American-made pianos were preferred to imported pianos.
With these developments came a change of thought in America. New Englanders began to view music as more than just a young woman’s social activity. Loesser writes,
It was characteristic that in New England the elevation of music’s value should take a religious form. The moral earnestness, as well as the respect for learning, of the original Calvinists persisted; and when many of the richer and more educated among their descendants evolved into Unitarians, it was natural that some of them could see something divine in music. It was not really paradoxical that the great great grandchildren of those who had all but forbidden music in church services should now become enthusiastic promoters of a kind of sacred music. Both the negative and the positive point of view implied an appreciation of the power of music.[3]
Just as I suspected, America’s initial hesitance toward and rejection of music resulting from religious belief eventually transformed into a zealous appreciation of the art. In 1815, the Handel and Haydn Society formed, a choral society that still exists today. Loesser notes that it is interesting that Handel and Haydn were both known for their nonliturgical sacred music, a concept that New England seemed to embrace at this time.
No comments:
Post a Comment