Test Bank for Psychology in Modules

Eleventh Edition
Go to download the full and correct content document:
http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-psychology-in-modules-eleventh-edition/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Psychology in Modules 12th Edition Myers Test Bank

https://testbankbell.com/product/psychology-in-modules-12th-
edition-myers-test-bank/

Test Bank for Psychology in Modules 12th Edition Myers

;

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-psychology-in-
modules-12th-edition-myers/

Test Bank for Exploring Psychology Eleventh Edition

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-exploring-
psychology-eleventh-edition/

Test Bank for Psychology in Modules, 10th Edition:

David G. Myers

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-psychology-in-
modules-10th-edition-david-g-myers/
Test Bank for Exploring Psychology in Modules, 10th
Edition, by David G. Myers, C. Nathan DeWall

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-exploring-
psychology-in-modules-10th-edition-by-david-g-myers-c-nathan-
dewall/

Test Bank for Sociology in Modules, 5th Edition Richard

T. Schaefer

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-sociology-in-
modules-5th-edition-richard-t-schaefer/

Test Bank for Microeconomics in Modules, 4th Edition,

Paul Krugman Robin Wells

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-microeconomics-in-
modules-4th-edition-paul-krugman-robin-wells/

Test Bank for Macroeconomics in Modules, 4th Edition,

Paul Krugman Robin Wells

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-macroeconomics-in-
modules-4th-edition-paul-krugman-robin-wells/

Test Bank for Introduction to Genetic Analysis Eleventh

Edition

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-introduction-to-
genetic-analysis-eleventh-edition/
 Test Bank for Psychology in Modules
Eleventh Edition
Full download chapter at: https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-
psychology-in-modules-eleventh-edition/

1. When your best friend hears that you are taking a psychology course, she asserts that
psychology is simply common sense. Explain why your awareness of both the limits of
everyday reasoning and the methods of psychological research would lead you to
disagree with your friend's assertion.

1. In contrast to explicit, conscious reasoning, an effortless and immediate automatic

judgment is best described as a(n)
A) hindsight bias.
B) chance-based explanation.
C) intuition.
D) evidence-based conclusion.

2. Mark meets briefly with applicants for positions in his company and relies on his
immediate gut-level first impressions in deciding whether to offer them a job. Mark's
employment decisions are most clearly guided by
A) critical thinking.
B) an empirical approach.
C) hindsight bias.
D) intuition.

3. The hindsight bias refers to people's tendency to

A) dismiss the value of skepticism.
B) reject any ideas that can't be scientifically tested.
C) exaggerate their ability to have foreseen an outcome.
D) overestimate the extent to which others share their opinions.

4. The perception that psychological research findings merely verify our commonsense
understanding is most clearly facilitated by
A) critical thinking.
B) hindsight bias.
C) the scientific attitude.
D) curious skepticism.

5. Giving half the members of a group some purported psychological finding and the other
half an opposite finding is an easy way to demonstrate the impact of
A) risk prediction.
B) skeptical scrutiny.
C) hindsight bias.
D) an empirical approach.
1. After the horror of 9/11, many people said the CIA and FBI should obviously have
foreseen the likelihood of this form of terrorism. This perception most clearly illustrates
A) overconfidence.
B) hindsight bias.
C) an empirical approach.
D) critical thinking.

2. Political officials who have no doubt that their own economic and military predictions
will come true most clearly demonstrate
A) hindsight bias.
B) curious skepticism.
C) overconfidence.
D) an empirical approach.

3. Hindsight bias and overconfidence often lead us to overestimate

A) the value of an empirical approach.
B) how often random sequences fail to look random.
C) the need for critical thinking.
D) the accuracy of our intuition.

4. The tendency to perceive meaningful patterns in random sequences of outcomes often

leads us to underestimate the extent to which outcomes result from
A) curious skepticism.
B) psychic powers.
C) hidden values.
D) chance.

5. When Leanne read a newspaper report that drinking orange juice triggers hyperactivity
in children, she questioned whether the children's behavior had been assessed using
scientifically appropriate methods. Leanne's reaction best illustrates
A) the perils of intuition.
B) hindsight bias.
C) critical thinking.
D) overconfidence.
1. Hindsight bias leads people to perceive psychological research outcomes as
A) unpredictable.
B) inexplicable.
C) unlikely.
D) unsurprising.

2. Jamie and Lynn were sure that they had answered most of the multiple-choice questions
correctly because “the questions required only common sense.” However, they each
scored less than 60% on the exam. This best illustrates
A) chance-related explanation.
B) critical thinking.
C) hindsight bias.
D) overconfidence.

3. If someone were to flip a coin six times, which of the following sequences of heads (H)
and tails (T) would be most likely?
A) H H H T T T
B) H T T H T H
C) T T H H T H
D) All of these sequences would be equally likely.

4. By testing their predictions with the observational methods of science, psychologists are
most clearly relying on
A) intuitive hunches.
B) an empirical approach.
C) chance-related explanations.
D) inevitable events.

5. Considering the credibility of one's sources of information is most indicative of

A) overconfidence.
B) critical thinking.
C) intuition.
D) hindsight bias.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
a serenade for string orchestra, he has written two operas. The
second of these, “Genesius,” was produced in Berlin in November,
1892, but, as might have been expected, it was not warmly received
by the public. Weingartner, like Strauss, is extremely modern in his
musical tendencies, and his works, although interesting to
connoisseurs and lauded by certain critics, will not at once find
public recognition.
It would far exceed the limits of this article to give a complete
account of pianoforte playing and composition in Germany since
Beethoven’s time. The influence of the piano on modern music has
been greater than that of any other single instrument. It is not only
the favorite of the amateur, but is par excellence the composer’s
instrument. As almost every modern German composer has written
for the piano, its literature is far more voluminous than that of any
other instrument, and piano players are as countless as the sands of
the sea.
Modern representatives of piano style may be classed as follows:
1. Composers with whom technical execution is held subordinate
to musical thought and feeling, perfect form, and poetic beauty.
Beethoven, Schubert, Von Weber, Mendelssohn, Schumann,
represent this class. 2. Piano specialists who have brought manual
execution into the foreground and have carried it to an extreme,
chiefly for its own sake; as for example, Kalkbrenner, Herz, Henselt,
Döhler, Thalberg, Dreyschock, Litolff and Liszt in the earlier period
of his career. 3. Remarkable teachers of technique and style, like
Czerny, Moscheles, Kullak and Wieck. 4. Virtuosos who unite great
technique with remarkable powers of interpretation, like Tausig, Von
Bülow and others. 5. Composers who are likewise great virtuosos and
interpreters, like Liszt and Rubinstein.
 FRANZ ABT.

(See page 597.)

Between 1830 and 1840 piano virtuosity as regards mere technical

execution was at its height. Kalkbrenner, Herz, and other “finger
knights” created furore everywhere by their pyrotechnic feats. This
was the era of the “opera fantasia.” Let us be thankful that audiences
nowadays demand a different kind of musical pabulum. Thalberg
(1812–71) marks the highest attainment of this style. He was pre-
eminent for his finished execution and rich singing quality of tone.
His scales, octaves, arpeggios, trills, and every detail of technique
were of marvellous perfection. His style influenced a number of
pianists, as for example, Leopold de Meyer, Goria, Döhler, Willmers
and Prudent.
Under Thalberg, Liszt, Tausig, Rubinstein, Paderewski, etc., piano
virtuosity has reached its apex. Mr. Ernst Pauer, the noted pianist
and editor of “Alte Clavier Musik,” justly observes: “With regard to
rapidity, force, ingenuity of combinations, and dazzling effect, it is
not too much to assert that the highest point has been gained, and
that with respect to quantity of notes and effects our present players
are unrivalled; whether the quality is as good as it formerly was may
be questioned.”
The world-wide influence of Chopin and Liszt on piano style is
discussed in special articles of this work.
In the time of Bach and Handel the organ was the foremost
instrument as the exponent of musical ideas even more than the
pianoforte is during the present century. To-day it has its own high
place in the temple of art, and counts among its devotees artists of
great repute and dignity. During the present century German
organists have followed the school of Sebastian Bach, of whom the
most prominent are Rink, Johann Schneider, Hesse, Fischer, Thiele,
Haupt, Ritter, Becker, Merkel, Herzog, Faisst and Rheinberger.
August Haupt and Johann Schneider were remarkable interpreters
of Bach’s organ works. The former was also a rare teacher, beloved
and venerated by his American and German pupils. The most
important organ compositions of modern German masters are the
difficult and massive concert pieces of Thiele, and the noble sonatas,
etc., of Mendelssohn, Schumann, Ritter, Merkel and Rheinberger.
In solo violin playing Germany at first followed the lead of Italy.
Mention has been made of the most noted German violinists of the
last century. About the beginning of the present century Paris was
the centre of violin playing under Viotti, Rode, Kreutzer and Baillot.
These masters laid down the principles of violin playing as practised
to-day. They were followed by Alard, the modern French teacher,
and the so-called Belgian school of De Beriot, Vieuxtemps,
Wieniawski and others. As regards finish, brilliancy of style, and
purity of tone these Franco-Belgian masters have had a strong
influence on Germany. In violin playing Spohr is considered as the
direct heir of Rode and Viotti. The contemporaries of Spohr in
Germany were Schuppanzigh, Mayseder, Maurer, Molique, Lipinski
and others, all of whom contributed to violin literature. Spohr’s most
distinguished pupil was Ferdinand David (1810–73). He was eclectic
and many-sided in his taste and knowledge. As regards technique
and style he set high value on the French masters of the violin. He
was the first to play Bach’s difficult violin solos in public. Among his
numerous pupils was the famous virtuoso, Wilhelmj, who is
unsurpassed for his wonderful tone and execution. Joachim also
benefited by David’s advice.
The violin school, of Vienna, founded by Joseph Boehm (1798–
1876), has had a wide influence in training virtuosos. Ernst, G.
Helmesberger, Ludwig Strauss, Joachim, J. Helmesberger, Auer and
Neruda were trained in this school. Pupils of Pixis at Prague were the
renowned violinists Kalliwoda and Ferdinand Laub (1832–74). The
latter was a wonderful quartet player, and stood in the front rank as a
virtuoso.
Joseph Joachim (born 1831) is the most eminent of living
violinists. He has had the widest influence of any violin master as an
interpreter of the great masters. Perfect technique, a rich and full
tone, purity and elevation of style, and fidelity of interpretation are
the leading characteristics of Joachim as a violinist. It may be said of
Joachim, as of Liszt, that he not only interprets but recreates the
music of the great masters. He is equally great as a quartet player
and as a soloist. Joachim’s compositions are chiefly for the violin.
His style is grave and earnest, and suggestive of Schumann. His most
important work is the “Hungarian Concerto,” which has noble
characteristics.
The most noted masters of the violoncello are Bernhard Romberg
(1767–1841), Kummer (1797–1879), and his successor in the Dresden
orchestra, Grützmacher (born 1832), and the virtuoso composers,
Popper, Davidoff and De Swert.
 PETER CORNELIUS.

From a photograph by Albert, of Munich.

(See page 600.)

Among the many fine solo players on wind instruments were the
renowned clarinetists, Joseph Baermann (1784–1847) and his son
Carl (1811–1885). Von Weber was intimately associated with the
elder Baermann, and wrote for him the fine clarinet concertos and
concert pieces which have become classical. The high artistic
character and ability of this family of musicians is exemplified in the
person of the thorough musician and gifted pianist, Carl Baermann,
Junior. He was formerly professor at the Munich Royal
Conservatory, and is now a resident of Boston, where he exerts a
noble influence as concert pianist and teacher. Germany has not
produced so many singers of world-wide fame as composers or
virtuosos, yet during the last half-century, and especially in
connection with the Wagnerian drama, the number of celebrated
singers has increased. As dramatic artists these German singers are
surpassed by none, though in pure vocalism they may not rank as
high as those of the Italian and French school. Among the most
renowned are Sontag, Milder, Tichatschek, Pauline Lucca, Gerster,
Unger, Wachtel, Formes, Stockhausen, Staudigl, Henschel,
Wranitzky, Loewe and Schröder-Devrient (1804–60). This last-
named singer was one of the most highly gifted artists who ever
appeared on the operatic stage. She created the part of Leonore in
Beethoven’s “Fidelio.” In later years she appeared in Wagner’s earlier
operas, and was of great assistance to him in realizing his ideal of
dramatic singing. In his writings Wagner eulogizes her. The musical
dramas of Wagner have not only been the high school for orchestral
virtuosos and conductors, but above all for dramatic singers. The
most famous German singers of the present day have been associated
with Bayreuth and the established opera houses of Germany where
Wagner’s works are performed. The most noteworthy of these
Wagner singers are Frau Materna, Marianne Brandt, Malten,
Lehmann-Kalisch, Mallinger, Dietz, Kindermann, Ludwig, Schnorr
von Carolsfeld, to whom Wagner pays such a tribute of praise in the
eighth volume of his collected writings; Winkelmann, Vogl, Gura,
Niemann, Scheidemantel, Van Dyck, Alvary, Betz, Scaria and Emil
Fischer.
 RICHARD STRAUSS.

From a photograph from life by

Hanfstaengl, of Munich.

(See page 601.)

One of the results of Germany’s high development in music, and

consequent “division of labor” in the executive part of the art, has
been to give great importance to the conductors of orchestras and of
large musical societies. Until recently there have been but few cases
of really great conductors who were not at the same time prominent
composers. Weber, Wagner, Spohr, Mendelssohn, Marschner,
Lindpaintner, Rietz and Hiller were all Kapellmeister-composers.
The remarkable advance in orchestral technique and the increased
work demanded of conductors have given rise to the necessity of
training men exclusively for this exacting profession. There are at
present in Germany a half-dozen specialists in this branch who are
particularly distinguished. Foremost among them is the gifted Hans
von Bülow (born 1830). Great as are this master’s merits as a piano
virtuoso, it is chiefly as a conductor that he has had important
influence upon the musical activity of his time. His long connection
with the Meiningen orchestra, at a period when it made frequent
concert tours through Germany, was of great service in raising the
standard of orchestral interpretation throughout the country.
Hans Richter (born 1843) also enjoys an international reputation
as a conductor. He is chief conductor of the Imperial opera and
Philharmonic concerts of Vienna. He has also frequently conducted
the concerts of the London Philharmonic Society. Richter was
intimately associated with Wagner, and directed the first Bayreuth
performance in 1876.
A conductor of perhaps even greater ability, but of less extended
reputation, is Hermann Levi (born 1839), the chief conductor of the
Munich theatre. He also was intimately associated with Wagner, and
conducted the first performance of “Parsifal” at Bayreuth in 1882. He
is at present the conductor-in-chief at Bayreuth. His principal claim
to superiority lies in the fact that he conducts equally well the
daintiest Haydn symphony and the most complex Wagner music-
drama. He is as a conductor what Liszt was as a pianist, universally
sympathetic in his interpretations.
Felix Mottl (born 1856) of Carlsruhe, and Ernst Schuch (born
1848) of Dresden, are worthy to be grouped with Germany’s great
conductors. The former is one of the Bayreuth conductors. The
young composers, Strauss and Weingartner, are also able
Kapellmeister.
Any consideration of the history of music in Germany would be
incomplete without some mention of her great achievements in
musical criticism, history, theory, philosophy and æsthetics. In these
departments of literary and scientific work, Germany has
accomplished infinitely more than any other nation. We have already
had occasion, in speaking of certain composers, to mention their
literary works. But the majority of writers on music have left no
record as artists.
During the eighteenth century the most noted German writers on
musical history and criticism were Forkel, Gerbert, Mattheson,
Scheibe, Reichardt and J. A. Hiller; on musical theory and
instruction, Fux, Albrechtsberger, Marpurg, Kirnberger, Sorge,
Knecht, Quantz, Em. Bach and Leopold Mozart. During the present
century the principal writers on the general subject of musical
history have been Brendel, von Dommer, Reissmann, Naumann,
Langhans and August Wilhelm Ambros (1816–76). For original
research, profound learning, and remarkable critical insight the
“Geschichte der Musik” by Ambros ranks first among all works on
the subject.
R. G. Kiesewetter (1773–1850), the uncle of Ambros, shows equal
thoroughness in treating the special subjects of musical history. His
monographs on the Netherland masters, on secular song, on Arabian
music, etc., are sources of important information. Carl von
Winterfeld is the great authority on German church music. His “Der
Evangelische Kirchengesang” is a work of great learning.
In the field of musical biography the list is a long one, and includes
Marx, Schindler, Nohl, Nottebohm, Lenz, Bitter, Chrysander, Jahn
and Spitta.

HANS von BÜLOW.

From a photograph from life by Bieber,

of Hamburg.
 Otto Jahn’s “Life of Mozart,” and Philipp Spitta’s “Life of Bach,”
are masterly biographies, which are an honor to the authors and the
nation that produced them. They are monuments of exhaustive
research and profound critical analysis. Mention should be made of
the biography of Beethoven by Alexander W. Thayer, which was
published in Germany as the fruits of many years of patient and
thorough investigation. The author is an American by birth and
education, but has long been identified with German musical
literature, and is considered as the authority in all that pertains to
the life of the great composer.
Musical criticism has been well represented by Friedrich Rochlitz
(1770–1808), the founder of the “Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung”
of Leipsic; Adolf Bernhard Marx (1799–1866), one of the most
broadly educated musical writers of his time; Gottfried Weber (1779–
1839), editor of the musical periodical, “Cæcilia”; Thibaut, whose
“Purity in Musical Art” is a highly esteemed essay; Schumann, the
composer, who gave a new and higher direction to musical criticism
in his “Neue Zeitschrift für Musik.” Schumann’s gifted poetical
nature is revealed in his critical reviews as well as in his music, and
he set an example followed by others, though at a distance, among
whom Eduard Hanslick, of Vienna, is perhaps the most worthy of
mention; Wilhelm Tappert, the editor of the “Allgemeine Deutsche
Zeitung,” is a zealous partisan of Wagner. His “Wagner Lexicon” is a
curious compilation of all the slang and abuse that have been hurled
at the composer and his friends.
Among the imaginative writers on musical subjects, the most
remarkable was Ernst T. R. Hoffmann, whose romantic tales have
given him a prominent place in German literature. He was composer,
poet, singer, teacher, conductor and theatrical manager; he was
especially gifted as an improvisator. Everything this eccentric genius
did, he did well. Among his works are eleven operas and two
symphonies. Schumann was much influenced by the fantastic tales of
Hoffmann. His “Kreisleriana” was suggested by Hoffmann’s
fragments of the imaginary “Kreisler the Kapellmeister.” Beethoven
wrote a humorous canon addressed to Hoffmann, and Weber loved
him.
 VIENNA OPERA HOUSE

From a photograph.

Germany, during the present century, has produced almost

endless works on musical theory and speculation. The most
prominent representatives are G. Weber; Hauptmann, whose
“Harmony and Metre” is a profound work; Marx and Lobe, whose
general systems treat of all branches of musical composition,
including instrumentation, and are valuable as books of reference; E.
F. Richter and Jadassohn, whose treatises on harmony, counterpoint
and fugue are excellent text-books. Other well-known theoretical
writers are Weitzmann, Paul, Sechter, Riemann, Friedrich and
Heinrich Bellermann and Westphal.
 THE CONCERT HALL IN THE GEWANDHAUS IN LEIPSIC.

From an engraving published about 1860.

The æsthetics of music have been extensively treated by the

foremost German philosophers. Hegel and his followers Vischer and
Kahlert, laid the foundation of a comprehensive consideration of the
subject. The philosophers outside the Hegelian school, Krüger,
Schelling, Krause, Carriere, Karl Köstlin, Fechner, Wundt and Lötze,
have included in larger works more or less extensive treatments of
musical æsthetics, and the interest which Wagner felt for the theories
of Schopenhauer is well known. In addition to these, several writers
—Schubart, Hand, Schilling, Heinrich Köstlin, Reissmann, Riemann,
Kullak, Stumpf, Engel—have written large treatises devoted
exclusively to the subject. The object has been to establish, if
possible, the psychological relations of music, and to deduce the
raison d’être of the various musical forms; but no one has yet
established conclusions which have been generally accepted.
Opposed to these writers are a small number of advocates of a purely
formalistic theory of music,—Herbart, Zimmermann and Hanslick.
The last-named is the author of a book entitled “Concerning the
Musically Beautiful,” which has been perhaps more generally read
and commented upon than any other single work on musical
æsthetics. It is safe to assert that this work of Hanslick does not solve
the mystery of the power of music on the soul. Certainly it seems to
be a superficial idea of Hanslick that music has no inward meaning
(or Inhalt), and is only a mere play of form (Formspiel). But this
interesting little book is so brilliantly written and so carefully
considered that it still holds its own, and is known throughout the
musical world.
In this connection mention should be made of “The Sensations of
Tone,” published in 1863 by Hermann Helmholtz, the great Berlin
physicist. This work is not only one of the greatest achievements of
German science, but is also unique among all works published on the
subject of music. It embodies the results of exhaustive research into
all phenomena connected with the production of tone and its
perception by the human consciousness. In a word, it establishes a
firm physical foundation for all future philosophical speculations
concerning music.
It is commonly and truly said that the time is not yet ripe for an
exhaustive history of music. An enormous amount of material, it is
true, has been collected, but in most divisions of the subject the
sources of information have not yet been thoroughly explored. At
present Germany is distancing all other nations in the contributions
made to the sum of historical knowledge concerning music. Not to
mention the numberless treatises and monographs which are
continually appearing, the regularly published musical periodicals
are numerous and excellent, and frequently make important
contributions to musical scholarship.
Although the present article is far from professing to present a
complete account of all that Germany has accomplished in music, it
may serve to show the many-sided character of musical culture in
that land. Not one of the many branches of musical activity has failed
to feel the influence of Germany, and in only a few branches does she
hold any other than the leading position. In our own day her musical
zeal remains unabated. The number of musical compositions and
books published year by year in Germany is enormous, and the
proportion of her young men who enter on the career of teacher or
performer seems to be increasing rather than diminishing. While it is
true that there are very few great composers now living in Germany,
and that they are rivalled by the living composers of other
nationalities, and even though in the latest music of over-cultivated
Germany there is a want of freshness, naturalness and naïveté that
belong only to musical youth, yet there is no reason for supposing
that any other nation will, in the near future, usurp Germany’s well-
merited title of “laureate amongst all musical nations.”
 JEAN BAPTISTE LULLY

Reproduction from the rare folio print

engraved by Roullet, after Mignard.
 JEAN BAPTISTE LULLY

Lully is justly considered the founder of opera in France, although he

was not the first to compose operas in the French language. Several
of his biographers assure us that he was of noble birth, supporting
their statements by the letters of naturalization granted him by Louis
XIV., in December, 1661, in which the composer is called the son of
Laurent Lully, a man of quality, and Catherine del Sarte. It is,
however, more probable that he was the offspring of an obscure
country miller who dwelt near Florence, as stated by Guichard in a
celebrated memoir which he drew up at the time of his lawsuit for
dissolution of partnership with Lully, who had co-operated with him
in the management of the Opéra.
By chance it came to pass that the Chevalier de Guise, when
travelling in Italy, discovered young Baptiste Lully in Florence, his
native place. The nobleman was impressed by the precocious
intelligence that sparkled so brightly in the boy’s eyes. He who was
destined to become the founder of lyric tragedy in France was
singing popular songs, accompanying himself upon the guitar, from
instinct rather than training, for he had never been taught to play
that instrument, and possessed, as yet, only the most primitive ideas
regarding music. He was then about twelve years of age.
At that time, people were not very musical in France, Italy being
much more advanced in that respect. In the era of Le Grande
Monarque, “Le Roi Soleil,” there were neither orchestras nor singers
in the true sense of the words, and opera was, so to speak, quite
unknown.
The first musical play ever seen in France was produced on the
occasion of the marriage of Mlle. de Vaudemont, Marguerite de
Lorraine, sister-in-law of King Henri III., to the Duc de Joyeuse. It
was performed on the 15th of October, 1579, at the Château de
Moustier, in presence of ten thousand spectators, and the Italian,
Baltazarini, fulfilled the duties of impressario. He was ever
afterwards known by the name of Baltazar de Beaujoyeuse, and in
this way the Duc de Joyeuse may be said to have ennobled him.
This Italian had been brought to France by the Comte de Brissac,
and Catherine de Médicis appointed him musical director, with the
dignity of valet, to her court. He played the violin after the manner of
a virtuoso—for his time. It was this same Baltazarini who composed
the dance music in the opera-ballet “Cérès,” of which Claudin wrote
the vocal score.
Cardinal Mazarin was fond of musical plays, and in 1644 he caused
to be brought from Italy dramatic singers who, in the hall of the
Petit-Bourbon and in presence of the king, Louis XIV., gave a
representation of the “Festa della finta pazza,” a melodrama in five
acts interspersed with comic interludes. Two years later, the Abbé
Mailly organized a representation of a lyric tragedy entitled “Akebar,
Roi du Mogol,” which was given in one of the halls of the episcopal
palace of Carpentras.
The taste for music was gradually extending in the ranks of
cultivated French society, and Mlle. de Montpensier had asked the
Chevalier de Guise to bring for her from Italy—the cradle of opera
—“a young musician to enliven my house.”
“Will you come with me to Paris?” asked the Chevalier, addressing
the little singer and guitarist: to which the lad, without a moment’s
hesitation, and as if impelled by his destiny, joyfully answered, “Yes.”
Thereupon the twain set out for the French capital, and the Chevalier
gave his Italian musician to “Mademoiselle.”
The grand-daughter of Henri IV. received Baptiste as she would
have received a pug dog,—an animal then very fashionable. For a few
days she amused herself with her little musician, then wearily cast
him aside, finally relegating him to her kitchens, where he was
enrolled among the scullions. It was thus that the nobility and clergy
of that day were wont to treat musicians, great and small. It must not
be forgotten that the Archbishop of Salzburg, who kept the divine
Mozart in his service for a certain time, made him wear livery and
sent him to take his meals in the kitchen with the servants.
While washing the dishes or stirring the kitchen fire, and possibly
while tasting the sauces, unknown to the chef, the little Florentine
lifted up his voice in song. In his spare time he played the guitar or
practised the violin, upon which instrument he is said to have
become an accomplished player.
Occasionally he was given verses, which he set to music with great
facility. To Lully is attributed the air which became so popular and
which is still sung, more particularly in the country districts, to the
words “Au clair de la lune, mon ami Pierrot.”
One day were sent to him some couplets that were far from
laudatory of the proud princess, his mistress. The verses greatly
diverted Baptiste, who composed a pretty air to the words, and sang
it to every one. This afforded much amusement in the kitchen of
haughty “Mademoiselle,” who, hearing of the insult, caused her
audacious and disrespectful scullion-composer to be expelled from
her house.
In his secret heart, the great musician, that was to be, felt glad
when thus disgraced. He was free; penniless, it is true, but
courageous and full of hope in the future. He began to study
harmony under Gigault, the organist of St. Nicolas-des-Champs, and
ultimately succeeded in gaining admittance to the Grande Bande des
Violons du Roi, which consisted of forty performers. Some few airs
which he wrote for the violin were favorably received and rendered in
the presence of the Le Grande Monarque himself. His Majesty was,
indeed, so pleased with the young artist (Lully was then nineteen),
that he appointed him Inspector of the violins. And this was not all,
for the king organized for Lully’s satisfaction another band of
musicians, called Les Petits Violons, in order to distinguish them
from the “Grande Bande.”
From that moment a brilliant future awaited the composer. His
agreeable manners, docile spirit, and a certain wild audacity, that did
not diminish his profound deference for his benefactor, the king,
won and retained the royal favor; genius did the rest.
 The little band of violinists, thanks to their skilful training under
the direction of Lully, achieved wonders, far outstripping the original
band in regard to both time and accuracy of execution.
Being now in high favor at court, Lully was authorized to compose
dance tunes for the ballets that Louis XIV. caused to be performed
nearly every year, and in which his Majesty himself participated.
Later he composed the entire musical portion of these
entertainments, which were sometimes called “Mascarades.” He was
uniformly successful, and Fortune had evidently chosen him for her
own.
Enterprising and full of confidence in his talent and savoir-faire,
Lully, having formed a friendship with Molière, did not hesitate to
appear as a comedian and to perform in the pieces that were
represented in the great dramatist’s theatre. In 1669, he took the rôle
of Pourceaugnac in the piece of that name, and the Mufti in “Le
Bourgeois Gentilhomme.”
Certain writers, contemporaries of Lully, foremost among whom
must be mentioned the great Racine and the no less illustrious La
Fontaine, have passed a somewhat harsh judgment on the
composer’s character. It is true that he sometimes showed himself a
most abject sycophant in presence of the nobility at court, and
especially before the king. But what courtier was not humble in
presence of the sovereign of that court? Still, in spite of his humility
before the great, Lully did not completely lose his dignity. On certain
occasions his retorts to influential persons at court, and even to the
king himself, were characterized by remarkable boldness. Two
examples may be given to show the droll and daring humor of the
celebrated composer.
It happened, one day, that the Marquis de Louvois, the powerful
minister of Louis XIV., taunted Lully with having secured the king’s
friendship solely by his talent for buffoonery. To this the musician,
drawing up his head proudly, made the fearless reply, “Zounds! you
would do as much if you could!”
Again, at the first performance of “Armide” at Versailles, Félix
Clément tells us, some unforeseen difficulties prevented the raising
of the curtain at the appointed time. The king, becoming impatient at
the delay, sent one of the officers of his guard to inform Lully of his
dissatisfaction. The words, “The king is waiting,” elicited from the
composer a reply as sharp as it was wanting in respect. “The king,”
said he, “is master here, and nobody has the right to prevent him
waiting as long as he likes!”—a quip more witty than prudent. The
courtiers believed that the man who dared to make such a reply was
irretrievably lost; and when “Armide” was given at the Royal
Academy of Music on the 15th of February, 1686, the audience,
fearful of compromising themselves if they applauded the work,
received it in a depressingly frigid manner. Convinced of the merit of
his score, Lully had it executed a few days later for his own
satisfaction (as did the king of Bavaria, recently, with Wagner’s lyric
dramas at the theatre of Bayreuth). Louis XIV. hearing of this, and
feeling that a work which had been pronounced good by his musician
could not be otherwise, set the seal of his praise on the score of
“Armide,” which immediately obtained a signal success and was even
proclaimed the best work that Lully had written.

JEAN BAPTISTE LULLY.

From an engraving by Bonnart at the

British Museum.