Reactions to Nikolai Malko's program with the Boston Symphony last week were remarkably consistent in one respect. Almost everyone thought the program as a whole was badly planned.

A concert like this brings to one's mind the whole problem of program-planning. The complete dependence of the public on the executive artists in this matter puts these artists in a very difficult position. They are attacked on one hand for playing too many new and untried works, and on the other hand for being unsympathetic to anything but old favorites and hackneyed war-horses.

Whatever else one feels about this problem, one has a right to expect that a majority of the music in a symphony orchestra's concert will be substantial works which one can take seriously. Light works like Rossini's La Gazza Ladra and Tchaikovsky's Italian Caprice are expected occasionally, for they add a great deal to the attractiveness of a concert and serve as "breathers." However, when this type of music makes up half of a program, and the Reger variations weigh down the other half, one suspects that whoever planned the concert did not think much of his audience.

Boston Symphony concert-goes are not exposed to this kind of program very often, for Koussevitsky's concerts are usually substantial and well arranged.

One has only to compare his programs with those of other leading conductors to see that Koussevitsky is also outstanding in his bold and frequent digressions from the traditional orchestral repertoire. It is easy for established artists to fall in completely with conservative section of their public and get into a repetitions rut as the Metropolitan Opera Company has done, Koussevitsky is criticised plentifully, especially for favoring contemporary composers so strongly, but a concert like Malko's and a look at the work of other conductors in America are enough to remind us that the repertoire of the Boston Symphony is one of the most varied and progressive in this country.