heritage, the main repository of humanernwisdom, and be ready to learn all thatrncan be learned from it for the good ofrnmankind, himself or herself included. Irndo not know what we will call this newrnbreed of critics, but I hope we will notrnforget that what once was called NewrnCriticism upheld old values, and that wernforsake these values at our peril, for theyrnare the basic values of civilization, andrnthey are threatened today, as much as atrnany time in history, w ith being discardedrnand forgotten. I am an optimist, and so 1rnbelieve these old values can and will bernrenewed, but it will take the most exactingrnkind of criticism to renew them. Irnknow that such criticism, which takes literaturernseriously as literature and tries tornlearn all that can be learned about humanrnvalues from it, is not currenth’ fashionable,rnnor is the religious faith that undergirdsrnit, but I also know that bothrnwere once respected and they could bernrespected again, just as they were in therntime of the old New Critics—which,rnafter all, was not so ery long ago.rnWilliam Pratt is a professor of English atrnMiami University in Ohio.rnMUSICrnRememberingrnCasalsrnby Ralph de ToledanornTalking to musicians or composersrnhas its values, but it seldom addsrnmuch to what we know of music.rnMozart’s letters to his father give you arnfew insights into the creative process, butrnBeethoven’s are merely a peep into hisrnpsyche. Of all the composers who havernwritten about their v’ork and that of others,rnonly Berlioz, and perhaps Stravinsky,rncould impart with an penetration an internalrnsense of music—and Berlioz’s bestrncommentary was on the art of conducting.rnSo I was not particularly stirredrnwhen Newsweek’i music editor, a bustyrnTexan whose idea of criticism was tornshout obscenities ocr the phone at thernMet’s Rudolf Bing, said to me, “If ourncan take time out when ou’re in SanrnJuan from the story you’re doing onrnPuerto Rico, why don’t you go talk tornPablo Casals? lie’s giving a concertrndown there.” The “concert” was the FestivalrnCasals—after the Prades Festival,rnhis second major break of a long selfexilernfrom public performance.rnMy lack of enthusiasm had nothing torndo with what I felt about Pablo Casals asrna musician. The cello is a cruel and inhumanrninstrument, and as a boy I hadrnwatched a friend’s father—a cellist forrnthe Philharmonic—at practice, his face arnreflection of both pain—”the torment,”rnCasals called practicing—and patience.rnCasals was then, and in my judgment alwaysrnwill be, Mr. Cello, and in listeningrnto him play it is difficult to separate thernman from tlie instrument. Perhaps, Irnthought, he might say something memorable,rnthough hardly what might exciternNewsweek’s music editor. But getting tornsec him, once I was in San Juan, seemedrnlike an impossibility. He had categoricallyrnrefused to talk to anyone from thernpress, ble changed his mind vben he wasrntold that I was a friend of Luis MuhozrnMarin, the first elected governor of PuertornRico, who had invited Casals to the islandrnand treated him with respect andrngcnerosit”. “If Toledano is a friend ofrnDon L.uis,” Casals said, “I will speak tornhim.”rnWhen Spain fell to the forces of FranciscornF’ranco, Casals had vowed never tornplav in public until the Nationalistrnregime was overthrown. But a dozen orrnso years later, he had agreed to performrnonce more—and those of us who lovedrnmusic were joved by his decision. He wasrnapproaching 80, and though a man ofrniron constitution, he was not imper iousrnto the treason of time. New recordingrntechniques offered him the opportunityrnto put on vinyl his own great brand ofrnmusicianship and his superlative mastery,rnboth technically and interpretively,rnof his instrument. He could bringrnwarmth and vitality and empathy tornscores that frequently defeated others—rnthe proof to be found in his interpretationrnof the six Bach Suites for CellornUnaccompanied. These suites arerndemanding—taxing instrument, performer,rnand audience. But if it is not lesernmajeste to say it, they can sometimesrnbe great room-emptiers. Casals couldrntriumph over this Baroque obstaclerncourse—perhaps because Catalans andrnGermans haxe much more in commonrnthan either would care to admit.rnCasals was living in a small house offrnthe beach at Punta las Arenas, neighborrnto San Juan—as a guest of Munoz andrnthe Puerto Rican government. He wasrnplaying the piano as I knocked on hisrndoor—a passage from The Well-TemperedrnClavier, a daily exercise, he toldrnme, to “refresh the spirit”—and herncalled out to me in Spanish to enter. Butrnhe insisted on speaking to me in English,rnthough he commented on my Spanishrnname and asked if my famih’ came fromrnToledo. I was struck by how much thisrnstocky, balding man with a small pot belly,rneyes shining through rimless glasses,rnreminded me of one of my cousins. Irnasked him, my first question, what hadrnbrought about a change of heart—whyrnhe was performing once more. “It is alwa’rns a sacrifice for an artist not to pla’,”rnCasals said. Then he looked at the smallrnyellow-and-red Catalan flag on his uprightrnpiano and added. “But there arernmore important things in the world.rnWhat right did I have to prosper whilernmy people were persecuted in Spain?rnAnd when the war ended, the Spanishrnpeople could not understand why theyrnshould not be masters of their own destiny.rnI said this to whoever I thoughtrnwould listen, even to the King of England.rnNo one listened.” What was morernimportant to Casals, or had been, was hisrnpassionate opposition to Francisco Prancornand the Nationalists in Spain, and hisrnsorrow^ that the United States had recognizedrntheir government.rnSounding like a character out of I lemingway’srnFor Whom The Bell Tolls, hernsaid, “The United States should havernmore dignity. These dictators do terriblernthings. They kill. And to kill has no dignity.”rnThough he was full of admirationrnfor what the British and their governmentrnhad done during the war to keeprnalive what he called the “flame of civilization,”rnhe could not forgive Churchillrnor the Labour government which followedrnhim for not bringing about the fallrnof Franco—and even speaking well of ElrnCaudillo. “What became of Churchill’srngreat promises to put an end of fascismrncvervwhere—or to vour President Roosevelt’s?”rnI wanted to talk about music,rnfor I had my own personal and famih’rnfeelings about Spain which might notrnaccord with his. I respected his assertionrnthat “I possess a moral independence, Irnam no politician, but an artist who triesrnto keep faith with his human principles.”rnBut I ventured somewhat into the politicalrnwhen I asked him about Wilhclmrn46/CHRONICLESrnrnrn