In proudly asserting his cloth-eared philistinism, Bernard Ingham exhibits a very British trait but seems a little confused (Letters, 6 August). The Rite of Spring, which he claims to have “sat through … at Glyndebourne … waiting in vain for a recognisable tune”, is not an opera but a ballet. Not even Sir Bernard could have mistaken Glyndebourne for anywhere else, so perhaps he meant to refer to The Rake’s Progress? In any case, I expect he was asleep.
Michael Pyke
Lichfield, Staffordshire
• As another northerner living in the south, I sympathise entirely with Bernard Ingham. What’s more, when I saw The Rite of Spring, t’buggers didn’t even try to sing, but just jumped about a lot.
Denis Brogan
Bures, Suffolk
• Bernard Ingham’s struggles with Stravinsky and Britten reminded me of Sir Thomas Beecham’s remark that “the English may not like music, but they absolutely love the noise it makes”.
Bill Hawkes
Canterbury, Kent
• Bernard Ingham misses the point when he says that politicians avoid going to the opera because there are no recognisable tunes. Many operas are full of tunes, as are many symphonies, choral works and string quartets, yet politicians still don’t go to them. The fact is that even our politicians are victims of education policies that treat music as a negligible subject instead of mining its rich history and harnessing its transformative power. If they don’t become familiar with music and attending musical performances when they’re young, they are unlikely to do so in later life. After all, a “recognisable tune” can only become so if you’ve had the opportunity to meet it before.
Susan Tomes
Edinburgh
• Is there any better illustration of the philistinism of our political leaders than Bernard Ingham’s claim to have sat through Stravinsky’s “opera” The Rite of Spring waiting in vain for a good tune? Is he still waiting for the fat lady to sing?
Jim Watson
Stroud, Gloucestershire
