After German opera began at the Metropolitan Opera House it endured

seven years. It was only at the outset that it had the opposition of

what had been the established régime of Italian opera at the Academy of

Music, but it was pursued throughout its career by desultory enterprises

and hampered greatly by the fact that the stockholders were never

unitedly and enthusiastically in favor of it or the principles of art

which it represented. Throughout the period there was a hankering for

the fleshpots of Egypt in the region of the Metropolitan boxes. It seems

desirable, therefore, that, though it is my purpose more specifically

in the next few chapters to tell the story of the seven years of German

opera, I should turn the light occasionally on the doings at rival

institutions. The first of the seven years at the Metropolitan Opera

House was the seventh year of Colonel Mapleson's tenancy of the Academy

of Music. He opened his season on November 10, 1884, but before then

James Barton Key and Horace McVicker experimented with Italian opera

for three weeks at the Star Theater. The organization was composed of

operatic flotsam and jetsam, such as is always to be found plentifully

in New York after operatic storms in South America or Mexico, and was

neither better nor worse than scores of other companies heard here

before and since. Like most of these, too, it had a mouth-filling

name--the Milan Grand Opera Company--but, like few of them, it had a

capital tenor, Signor Giannini, who at a somewhat later period we shall

find in Colonel Mapleson's forces. Other members of the company whose

names are worthy of preservation were Maria Peri (soprano leggiero),

Signora Damerini (dramatic soprano), Signora Mestress (contralto), and

Signor Serbolini (bass). The experiment resulted in financial failure,

but it introduced to New York the South American opera, "Il Guarany,"

by Señor Gomez. In Colonel Mapleson's company were Mme. Patti,

Signora Ricetti, Mme. Emma Nevada, Signor Nicolini, Signor Vicini, and

Signor Cardinali (tenors), Mme. Scalchi, Mme. Fursch-Madi, Signori de

Pasqualis, Cherubini, Caracciolo (bassos), Signor de Anna (barytone),

and Signor Bassetti (tenor), otherwise Mr. Charles Bassett, like Mme.

Nevada, an American singer. The subscription ended on December 27th, and

in the following week he gave four extra performances, at two of which

he reduced the prices, though they were of a higher artistic order than

the others. The relations between Mapleson and the stockholders of the

Academy were becoming strained, and in a speech which he made at his

annual benefit he remarked upon their absence sarcastically. It was

plain that their patience had given out and that they were weary of

extending to him the financial support which had helped him through

the season. In my review of the season I find this remark, which is

indicative of their indifference to the fate of their lessee: "The

condition of the house gives evidence of an unwillingness to sink money

in an unlucrative enterprise. It is somewhat discouraging to the patrons

of the house to sit in ramshackle chairs which threaten to deposit them

incontinently on the floor at any moment, and the collapse of a stall

has frequently accentuated a musical or dramatic climax in the season

just ended."

The season ended with many promises unfulfilled, for which the

impresario placed the blame upon the directors, who, he said, had not

given him sufficient use of the Academy stage. His explanations were not

always wholly ingenuous, however. Thus he had announced that "Lakmé"

would be given, with the composer, M. Delibes, in the conductor's

chair. Now, in the season before, Mme. Gerster had been so desirous to

create the part of the heroine in America (it being one which afforded

fine scope for her lovely powers, and which she had studied with the

composer) that she had bought the performing rights. But nothing came of

her ambition, and it was an open secret that Heugel, the publisher, had

quarreled with Mapleson because of unwarranted practices with his scores

in London. In the midst of his troubles Colonel Mapleson announced that

he had engaged Mme. Nilsson for the season of 1885-86. There was as

little foundation for this announcement as for the promise of "Lakmé."

With ruin staring him in the face, Mapleson concluded the season. He

bettered his fortunes a trifle in Boston and Philadelphia, but failed

again in New Orleans and St. Louis. Then he went to San Francisco,

where the fact that Mme. Nevada was a native of the Pacific Slope was

a helpful factor. After the close of the season at the Metropolitan

Opera House he gave a "spring season" of six performances in one week,

beginning on April 20th. He repeated the performance in Boston and then

sailed for Europe, stopping in New York only long enough to institute

two suits at law--one against Signor Nicolini to recover $10,000 for

failing to sing, and one against Mme. Nevada for $3,000, alleged to

have been overpaid her. The suits, in all likelihood, were merely moves

in the managerial game which he was playing in London and New York. In

the seventh of these "Chapters of Opera" I described as the crowning

achievement of Colonel Mapleson in the season full of noteworthy

incidents the circumstance that he had succeeded in owing Mme. Patti

some $5,000 or $6,000. Nicolini was Patti's husband.

More than ever it looked in the spring of 1885 as if Italian opera had

received its quietus. The demoralization of the Academy of Music was

complete. In London there prevailed a state of affairs so anomalous and

startling that the newspaper critics were cudgeling their brains in a

vain effort to find an explanation. For the first time in one hundred

and fifty-eight years the British metropolis was without opera; for

the first time in thirty-nine years (except in 1856, when fire made it

impossible) the Royal Italian Opera at Covent Garden had failed to open

its doors on Easter Tuesday. Mr. Gye and his backers refused to venture

their fortunes again, and the lease of Her Majesty's was also going

begging. In New York Colonel Mapleson had held one good card which he

did not seem to know how to play: the season compassed the twenty-fifth

anniversary of the operatic début of Mme. Patti. There ought, for

excellent and obvious reasons, to have been a fitting celebration of

the event; but there was not. On November 26th, two days after the date,

Colonel Mapleson gave a performance of "Martha," with Mmes. Patti

and Scalchi in the principal women's parts. After the opera a rout of

supernumeraries, choristers, and other boys and men engaged for the

purpose, carrying torches, followed the diva's carriage to the Windsor

Hotel, where she was serenaded. That was all. It was so undignified and

inadequate that it provoked some of Mme. Patti's friends to arrange the

banquet in her honor which I have described in Chapter VI. Had Signor

Brignoli, who was the Edgardo to Adelina Patti's Lucia at the Academy on

November 24, 1859, been spared in life and health a few weeks longer

(Signor Brignoli died in October, 1884), his friends would probably

have urged an association of the two artists in a gala performance

of Donizetti's opera. This would have provided an appropriate and

delightful celebration, and it would not have been difficult to marshal

a number of interesting relics of the period which saw the operatic

advent of Mme. Patti, though all of them would have appeared much worse

for the wear of a quarter-century than she. Of the valiant champions

who were leading the contending operatic armies of the time, Arditi,

Maretzek, and Strakosch were still with us. The first was filling, as

of yore, the leader's chair at the Academy and doing yeoman's service

in the unobtrusive and modest manner which always characterized him;

the second, withdrawn from all connection with operatic management, was

watching the boiling and bubbling of the caldron with amused interest

and spicing his comments with capitally told reminiscences of opera a

generation before; the third was still chasing the fickle goddess with

fugitive essays as impresario. There were even remains of the critics of

those days still active in the world of letters--Richard Grant White,

for instance, and George William Curtis, one of my predecessors on The

Tribune--and they would undoubtedly have grown young again and been

warmed into enthusiastic utterance by eager memories of the dainty

débutante and the singers who had preceded her--Grisi, Bosio,

Piccolomini, and the rest.

A vast amount of reminiscences would have been justified by such

a celebration, for it would have thrown a bright sidelight on the

marvelous career of Mme. Patti, a career without parallel in the history

of the last half-century. Within three years after she made her first

essay "our little Patti," as she was then fondly spoken of, had achieved

the queenship of the lyric stage; and, now, twenty-two years later, her

title had not suffered the slightest impairment. Within the time singers

who had won the world's admiration had been born, educated, and lifted

to the niches prepared for them by popular appreciation, but all far

below the place where Patti sat enthroned. Stars of great brilliancy

had flashed across the firmament and gone out in darkness, but the

refulgence of Patti's art remained undimmed, having only grown mellower

and deeper and richer with time. Truth is, Mme. Patti was then, and is

still, twenty-five years later, a musical miracle; and the fact that she

was in New York to sing in the very spot in which she began her career

twenty-five years before should have been celebrated as one of the

proudest incidents in the city's musical annals. For the generation of

opera-goers who grew up in the period which ought to be referred to

for all time in the annals of music as The Reign of Patti, she set a

standard by which all aspirants for public favor were judged except

those whose activities were in a widely divergent field. Not only did

she show them what the old art of singing was, but she demonstrated

the possibility of its revival. And she did this while admiring

enthusiastically the best results of the dramatic spirit which pervades

musical composition to-day. Her talent was so many-sided and so

astonishing, no matter from which side it was viewed, that rhapsody

seems to be the only language left one who attempts analysis or

description of it. Her voice, of unequaled beauty, was no more a gift

of nature than the ability to assimilate without effort the things

which cost ordinary mortals years of labor and vexation of soul. It was

perpetually amazing how her singing made the best efforts of the best of

her contemporaries pale, especially those who depended on vocal agility

for their triumphs. Each performance of hers made it plainer than it had

been before that her genius penetrated the mere outward glitter of the

music and looked upon the ornament as so much means to the attainment of

an end; that end, a beautiful interpretation of the composer's thought.

No artist of her time was so perfect an exponent as she of the quality

of repose. So far as appearances went it was as easy for her to burden

the air with trills and roulades as it was to talk. She sang as the

lark sings; the outpouring of an ecstasy of tones of almost infinite

number and beauty seemed in her to be a natural means of expression.

Her ideas of art were the highest, and it was a singular testimony

of her earnestness that, while educated in the old Italian school of

vocalization and holding her most exalted supremacy as a singer of

Rossini's music, her warmest love, by her own confession, was given, not

to its glittering confections, but to the serious efforts of the most

dramatic writers. This must be remembered in the list of her astonishing

merits now when her voice can no longer call up more than "the tender

grace of a day that is dead"; mine was the proud privilege and great

happiness of having heard her often in her prime. But I must get down

to the real business of this chapter.

The first German performance at the Metropolitan took place on November

17, 1884. The opera was "Tannhäuser" and the distribution of parts

as follows: Elizabeth, Mme. Krauss; Venus, Fräulein Slach; a Young

Shepherd, Fräulein Stern; the Landgrave, Josef Koegel; Tannhäuser, Anton

Schott; Wolfram, Adolf Robinson; Walther von der Vogelweide, Emil

Tiffero; Biterolf, Josef Miller; Heinrich der Schreiber, Otto Kemlitz;

Reinmar, Ludwig Wolf. The performance made no claim upon special

analysis or description. Its highest significance consisted in the

publication which it made with reference to the new ideals in operatic

representation which came in with the new movement. No doubt to a large

portion of the audience, still judging by the old standards, much of it

must have been inexplicable, much of it (especially the singing of Herr

Schott) little short of monstrous. To a smaller portion, familiar with

the opera, the language of its book and the spirit of the play, as well

as the music, it came as a vivid realization of the purposes of the

poet-composer. To all but the German element in the audience the opera

itself was practically a novelty. "Tannhäuser" had not been incorporated

in the Italian repertory as "Lohengrin" had, and only those knew it

who had attended the sporadic German performances of earlier decades

conducted by such men as Bergmann, Anschütz, and Neuendorff. The

first New York performance took place on August 27, 1859, at which the

Männergesangverein Arion supplied the choruses.

Wagner once described his Tannhäuser as "a German from head to foot,"

and it was doubtless because Dr. Damrosch saw in it a representative

quality that he chose it for his opening. There was patriotism as well

as lovely artistic devotion, too, in the choice of "Fidelio" for the

second performance, on November 19th. Beethoven's opera had almost

as little association with Italian opera as "Tannhäuser," and it was

noteworthy that the only portion of the audience room which was not

filled was that occupied by the stockholders' boxes. It was an English

company that, in September, 1839, had introduced "Fidelio" to New York,

and with it made such successful competition with the Italian company of

the day that it was performed fourteen times in succession. Mr. Mapleson

made a pitiful essay with it in March, 1882, at the Academy, but to

recall as vivid and vital a performance as that under discussion one had

to go back to the days of Mme. Johannsen and her associates, who gave

German opera in 1856. In Dr. Damrosch's performance Marianne Brandt

effected her entrance on the American stage, and the memory of her

impersonation of the heroine is still one of the liveliest and most

fragrant memories of those memorable days. The dramatic framework of

"Fidelio" is weak, its construction faulty. Only one ethical idea

is presented in it with real vividness, but it is an idea which is

peculiarly dear to the German heart--the saving power of woman's love.

"Fidelio" is a tale of wifely devotion, and Beethoven bent all his

energies to a glorification of his heroine's love and fidelity. To

represent the character faithfully has been the highest ambition of

German singers for a century. In that time not many more than a dozen

have achieved high distinction in it; and Marianne Brandt is among the

number. On its musical side her performance was thrillingly effective,

but on its histrionic it rose to grandeur. Every word of her few

speeches, every note of her songs, every look of her eyes and expression

of her face was an exposition of that world of tenderness which filled

the heart of Leonore. Nine-tenths of the action which falls to the

part of Leonore is by-play, and by-play of the kind which is made

particularly difficult by the time consumed by the music, which is not

wisely adjusted with reference to the promotion of the action. Yet all

these waits while Leonore is in view were filled by Fräulein Brandt

with little actions which tended to develop the character so sadly

left in the background by the playwright, but so lovingly treated by

the composer. It was down to its smallest detail a picture of a woman

impelled by one idea, in which her whole soul had been resolved, and

which had grown out of a lofty conception of love and duty. There was

nothing of the petty theatrical in Fräulein Brandt, and it was only an

evidence of the sincerity of her devotion to the art work which made her

bend over and stroke the wrist which she had freed from manacles while

the powerful personages of the play were bowing before her as a pattern

of conjugal love and the mimic populace were shouting their jubilations

over salvation accomplished.

At the third representation, on November 21st, Meyerbeer's "Huguenots"

was brought forward to introduce Mme. Schroeder-Hanfstängl; and at the

fourth tribute to the characteristic German spirit was paid by the

production of Weber's "Der Freischütz." From the day of its birth this

has been the opera in which the romantic spirit of the German race

has found its most vivid reflection. The sombre lights and mysterious

murmurings of the German forests pervade it; the spectres of that

paganism from which the sturdy Northerners could be weaned only by

compromise and artifice flit through it. The Wild Huntsman overshadows

it and, though he says not a word, he powerfully asserts his claim upon

the trembling admiration of those who keep open hearts for some of his

old companions of pre-Christian days--especially for the burly fellow

who under a new name is welcomed joyfully every Christmastide. In

another sense, too, "Der Freischütz" is a national opera; the spirit of

its music is drawn from the art-form which the people created. Instead

of resting on the highly artificial product of the Italian renaissance,

it rests upon popular song--folk-song, the song of the folk. Its

melodies echo the cadences of the Volkslieder in which the German heart

voices its dearest loves. Instead of shining with the light of the

Florentine courts it glows with the rays of the setting sun filtered

through the foliage of the Black Forest. Yet "Der Freischütz" failed on

this its revival--failed so dismally that Dr. Damrosch did not venture

upon a single repetition. The lesson which it taught had already been

suggested by "Fidelio," but now it was made plain and Dr. Damrosch paid

heed to it at once. The dimensions of the Metropolitan Opera House

forbade the intimacy which operas founded on the German Singspiel

demand for appreciation, and spoken dialogue, especially in a foreign

tongue, was painfully destructive of artistic illusion. The operas which

followed were more to the purpose: "William Tell," on November 28th,

with Robinson as the hero, Schroeder-Hanfstängl as Mathilde, Slach as

Gemmy, Staudigl as Gessler, Koegel as Walter, Udvardi as Arnold, and

Brandt exemplifying a new spirit in opera by her assumption of the

unimportant part of Tell's wife; "Lohengrin," on December 3d, with

Krauss, Brandt, Schott, and Staudigl in the principal parts; "Don

Giovanni," on December 10th, with Schroeder-Hanfstängl as Donna Anna,

Hermine Bely as Zerlina, Brandt as Elvira, Robinson as the Don,

Koegel as the Commander, and Udvardi as Ottavio; "Le Prophète," on

December 17th, with Brandt as Fidès (one of her greatest rôles),

Schroeder-Hanfstängl as Bertha, and Schott as John of Leyden; "La Muette

de Portici" (otherwise "Masaniello") on December 29th, with Schott as

the hero and Isolina Torri as Fenella. There was an interruption of

this spectacular list on January 2, 1885, when "Rigoletto" was given

to gratify the ambition of Herr Robinson to be seen and heard as the

Jester, and of Mme. Schroeder-Hanfstängl to sing the music of Gilda. In

this opera Fräulein Brandt played the part of Maddelena and interpolated

a Spanish song sung in German. Then, on January 5th, came Mme. Materna's

first operatic appearance in America, in a repetition of "Tannhäuser."

Before continuing the record a few notes on some of these operas and

their performance may not be amiss. There was little that was noteworthy

about the representation of "Don Giovanni" except Dr. Damrosch's effort

to do justice to the famous finale, the full effectiveness of which

failed nevertheless because of the arrangement of the stage, which

was that of the preceding season. "Les Huguenots" was a distinct

disappointment. "La Muette de Portici," which was as good as new to

the majority of the audience, acquired historical interest from close

association with "William Tell." It was something of an anomaly that,

though Rossini's opera had made its appearance during the many years of

Italian domination whenever a tenor came who could be counted on to make

a sensation with his high notes in the familiar trio of men, Auber's

opera, its inspiration as a type, had had so few representations that

it had passed out of memory except for its overture. But the history

of "La Muette" is full of anomalies. Its story is Neapolitan and there

is Neapolitan color in its music; but it is nothing if not French. It

inspired Rossini to write "William Tell" and Meyerbeer to write "Les

Huguenots" for the French stage, and is the masterpiece of its author;

but Auber is the only Frenchman among the great composers for the

Académie in the first half of the nineteenth century. Wagner defended it

against the taste of the Parisians, who preferred Rossini and Donizetti,

and was snubbed for his pains by the editor of the Gazette Musicale,

who was an officer of the French government. Von Weber condemned as

coarse the instrumentation which Wagner praised for its fire and

truthfulness. Its heroine is dumb; yet to her is assigned the loveliest

music in the score.

"Lohengrin" better than "Tannhäuser" gave the public an opportunity to

study the change in matter and spirit which had been introduced into

local opera by the coming of the Germans to the Metropolitan.

Mme. Materna's first appearance on January 5th was followed by a second

on January 7th as Valentine in "Les Huguenots," and a third on January

16th in Halévy's "La Juive." By this time Dr. Damrosch was ready with

the first of the large Wagnerian productions which were a part of the

dream which it was fated should be realized, not by him, but by his

successor, whose name was thereby made illustrious in the operatic

annals of New York. On January 30th "Die Walküre" was performed, with

the following cast: Brünnhilde, Amalia Materna; Fricka, Marianne

Brandt; Sieglinde, Auguste Krauss; Siegmund, Anton Schott; Wotan, Josef

Staudigl; Hunding, Josef Koegel; Gerhilde, Marianne Brandt; Ortlinde,

Fräulein Stern; Waltraute, Fräulein Gutjar; Schwertleite, Fräulein

Morse; Helmwige, Frau Robinson; Siegrune, Fräulein Slach; Grimgerde,

Frau Kemlitz; Rossweise, Fräulein Brandl.

"Die Walküre" had been presented before in New York at a so-called

Wagner festival at the Academy of Music on April 2, 1877, under the

direction of Adolf Neuendorff; but the memories of that production

were painful when they were not amusing, and, though much of the music

of the Nibelung trilogy had been heard in the concert room, this was

practically the first opportunity the people of New York had to learn

from personal experience what it was that Wagner meant by a union of

arts in the lyric drama. Dr. Damrosch had made an earnest effort to meet

the standard set by the Bayreuth festivals. The original scenery and

costumes were faithfully copied, except that for the sake of increased

picturesqueness Herr Hock, the stage manager, had draperies replace the

door in Hunding's hut, which, shaking loose from their fastenings, fell

just before Siegmund began his love song, and disclosed an expanse of

moonlit background. In the third act, too, there was a greater variety

of colors in the costumes of the Valkyrior. Fräulein Brandt again

disclosed her artistic devotion by enacting the part of Fricka and also

leading the chorus of Valkyrior; but Mme. Materna was the inspiration of

the performance. It was a surprise to those who had already learned to

admire her to see how in the character of Brünnhilde she towered above

herself in other rôles. Both of the strong sides of the character had

perfect exemplification in her singing and acting--the wild, impetuous,

exultant freedom of voice which proclaimed the Valkyria's joy in living

and doing until the catastrophe was reached, and the deep, unselfish,

tender nature disclosed in her sympathy with the ill-starred lovers

and her immeasurable love for Wotan. Her complete absorption in the

part fitted her out with a new gamut of expression. "If anything can

establish a sympathy between us and the mythological creatures of

Wagner's dramas," I wrote at the time, "that thing is the acting and

singing of Materna." The drama made a tremendous impression, and in the

three weeks which remained of the season (including some supplementary

performances) "Die Walküre" had seven representations.

The remaining incidents of the season may now be hurried over to make

room for a record of the catastrophe which marked its close. By the

middle of January it was reported that the receipts were double those of

the corresponding period in the previous year, notwithstanding that the

price of admission had been reduced nearly one-half. By this time, too,

the board of directors had decided to continue the policy adopted at the

suggestion of Dr. Damrosch and engage him as director for the next year.

This decision had not been reached, however, without consideration of

other projects. Charles Mapleson, a son of the director of the Academy

of Music, and doubtless only his go-between, submitted a proposition for

the directorship, and so did Adolf Neuendorff, a man of indefatigable

energy and enterprise, who had given New York its first hearing of

"Lohengrin" at the Stadt Theater, in the Bowery, in April, 1871. In

January there was also a strike of the chorus, which was quickly

settled, and all but the ringleaders in the disturbance taken back

into favor on signing an apology.

Rejoicings over the success of the enterprise gave way to general grief

and consternation with the unexpected death of Dr. Damrosch on February

15th. On Tuesday, February 10th, he contracted a cold from having thrown

himself upon a bed in a cold room for a nap before dinner on returning

from a rehearsal at the opera house. He had neglected to open the

furnace register or cover himself, and he awoke thoroughly chilled.

After dinner he went to a rehearsal of the Oratorio Society, which was

preparing Verdi's Manzoni Requiem for performance the following week.

Before the conclusion of the rehearsal he was so ill that he was

forced to hurry home in a carriage. The next morning it was found that

pneumonia had set in, complicated by pleurisy, and a consultation of

physicians was held. Only one of the subscription performances at the

Metropolitan Opera House remained to be given, but there were still

before the director in the way of operatic work five supplementary

performances and seasons at Boston, Chicago, and Cincinnati. This

naturally caused the sick man a great deal of concern. He deferred to

the wishes of his physicians and sent his son Walter, in whose talent

and skill he felt great confidence and pride, to conduct the remaining

subscription performance in the evening, hoping in the meantime to

secure such good care as to enable him to be in his chair on Thursday

evening when "Die Walküre" was to be repeated. In this hope, too, he

was disappointed and had to send his son a second time to conduct a

performance of the drama which had put the capstone to the astonishingly

successful season which his zeal, learning, skill, enterprise, and

perseverance had brought about. As on the previous day he went through

the score with his son and called his attention to some of the details

of the responsible and difficult task before him. The young man's

knowledge of the score and aptitude in grasping the suggestions made to

him comforted and quieted the father, and the representations at the

opera house went off in a manner which caused complimentary comments on

Thursday evening and Saturday afternoon. On Sunday, February 15th, at

3 o'clock A.M., a change in the sick man's condition set in, and the

physicians, realizing that the case was hopeless, so informed the family

early in the day. Dr. Damrosch was not disturbed by the prospect of

death. He retained consciousness until one o'clock in the afternoon, and

within an hour before that time called Walter to his bedside and asked

that an opera score be brought that he might give a few more suggestions

for the concluding representations in New York. He was assured that

all would go well. His last thoughts and words were with his family

and work. In disjointed phrases he repeatedly asked that nothing be

permitted to suffer because of his sickness; that the preparations for

the operas and concerts of the societies of which he was conductor

should go on. With his mind thus occupied he sank into unconsciousness

and died at a quarter after two o'clock in the afternoon of Sunday,

February 15, 1885. His funeral took place at the opera house on

February 18th, amidst impressive ceremonies, addresses being made by

the Rev. Horatio Potter (Assistant Bishop of New York), the Rev. Henry

Ward Beecher, and Professor Felix Adler. The remaining performances of

the supplementary season were conducted by Mr. Lund, after which the

company went on tour, Mr. Lund and Walter Damrosch sharing the work

of conducting. The season had begun on November 17th, one week after

Colonel Mapleson opened his seventh season at the Academy of Music. It

lasted until February 21st, but the last subscription performance was

that on the evening of the day after Dr. Damrosch had fallen ill. The

subscription was for thirty-eight nights and twelve Saturday matinées.

There was no Christmas interregnum. The list of operas produced, the

date of first representation, and the number of times each opera was

given can be read in the following table:

Opera First performance Times given

"Tannhäuser" .............. November 17 ........... 9

"Fidelio" ................. November 19 ........... 3

"Les Huguenots" ........... November 21 ........... 5

"Der Freischütz" .......... November 24 ........... 1

"William Tell" ............ November 28 ........... 3

"Lohengrin" ............... December 3 ............ 9

"Don Giovanni" ............ December 10 ........... 2

"Le Prophète" ............. December 17 ........... 9

"La Muette de Portici" .... December 29 ........... 3

"Rigoletto" ............... January 2 ............. 1

"La Juive" ................ January 16 ............ 5

"Die Walküre" ............. January 30 ............ 7

--

Total number of representations ................. 57

Twelve out of twenty-two works promised in the prospectus were given,

the unperformed operas being "Rienzi," "Der Fliegende Holländer,"

"Le Nozze di Figaro," "Die Zauberflöte," "Il Barbiere di Siviglia,"

Gounod's "Faust," "Die Lustigen Weiber von Windsor," "La Dame Blanche,"

"Hans Heiling," and Kreutzer's "Nachtlager von Granada." The failure

to produce all the operas promised was largely due to the teachings of

the first month of the season. In the list were a number of peculiarly

German works, in which the musical numbers alternated with spoken

dialogue. The experience made with "Fidelio" and "Der Freischütz" showed

that works of this character were unedifying to the persons of native

birth in the audience, and this was one reason why it was decided

to omit several of them. Another reason was that it was found that

the large dimensions of the opera house detracted from even good

performances of light works; and still another was that the style of

the singers was adapted to vigorous and declamatory music, rather than

to that which depends for effect upon purity and beauty of voice and

excellence of vocalization. A comparison of the last performances

with those which were given when the company was continually engaged

in studying new works suggests another reason: "Der Freischütz" was

poorly performed; the first representations of "William Tell" and

"Les Huguenots" threatened the loss of all the prestige won by the

performances of "Tannhäuser"; and "Fidelio" and "Don Giovanni" called

for a vigorous exercise of good nature. Whatever disappointment came,

therefore, from the failure to produce such interesting works as "Hans

Heiling," one of the finest products, if not the finest, of the epigonoi

of Weber, and "Die Lustigen Weiber von Windsor," unquestionably the best

Shakespearian opera extant (Verdi's "Otello" and "Falstaff" excepted),

was compensated for by the excellence which marked the performances

of "Tannhäuser," "Lohengrin," "Le Prophète," and "Die Walküre." The

production of this great work was a fitting end to Dr. Damrosch's

artistic career. It marked the beginning of a new era in New York's

operatic affairs, and led to the execution in the years which followed

of his large plan to produce the entire Nibelung tragedy, "Tristan und

Isolde" and "Die Meistersinger"--a plan carried out by his successor.

For "Tannhäuser," "Fidelio," "William Tell," "La Muette de Portici," "La

Juive," and "Die Walküre" new stage decorations had to be provided, and

this was done on a scale of great liberality, in comparison with what

New York had been accustomed to. The largest expenditure on a single

representation was $4,000, and the average cost was $3,400. These sums

were much smaller than those expended in the previous season on the

hurdy-gurdy Italian list, and the stage pictures were all much finer.

The saving was in the salaries of the artists, no two of which cost

together as much as Mme. Nilsson alone.

CHAPTER XII

END OF ITALIAN OPERA AT THE ACADEMY

The season 1885-86 witnessed the collapse of the Italian opposition at

the Academy of Music, but also the rise of an institution in its

place, which, had it commanded a higher order of talent and been more

intelligently administered, might have served the lofty purposes set for

the German opera. This was the American Opera Company, which, after an

extremely ambitious beginning, made a miserable end a season later,

leaving an odor of scandal, commercial and artistic, which infected the

atmosphere for years afterward. German opera was also given throughout

a large part of the season at the Thalia Theater, the manager being Mr.

Gustav Amberg, and the conductor John Lund, who had come into notice at

the Metropolitan Opera House by reason of the death of Dr. Damrosch.

These performances were unpretentious, and divided between operetta and

the type of opera which grew out of the Singspiel. Their significance,

so far as this history is concerned, lay in the evidence which they bore

of a considerable degree of interest on the part of the public outside

of the patrons of the Metropolitan Opera House in German opera. There

were also commendable features in the repertory. Thus, the performances

began on October 13, 1885, with "Der Freischütz," in which appeared

Ferdinand Wachtel, a son of the famous "coachman tenor," Theodore

Wachtel, whose sensational career in Europe and America had come to an

end a decade before, though he did not die till 1893. The father's

battle horse, "Le Postillon de Lonjumeau," was brought out for the son,

but the public were not long in discovering that the latter had all the

faults and none of the merits of the former, and he failed to become

even a nine days' wonder. Among the operas brought forward by Mr.

Amberg was Nicolai's "Lustigen Weiber von Windsor," and Emil Kaiser's

"Trompeter von Säkkingen," a production obviously prompted by the

sensational success in Europe of Nessler's opera of the same name.

Nicolai's opera, which has never lost its popularity with the Germans,

was probably given on its merits alone, but the fact that Dr. Damrosch

had abandoned it after putting it in his prospectus, may have had

something to do with its performance by Mr. Amberg's modest troupe, as

well as by the proud American Opera Company, which brought it out in a

specially prepared English version. Mr. Amberg's company also brought

forward a German version of Maillart's "Les Dragons de Villars," under

the title, "Das Glöckchen des Eremiten."

Colonel Mapleson, having spent the summer bickering and negotiating

with the directors of the Academy, after having failed to get into the

Metropolitan Opera House under the cloak of his son Charles, began his

eighth season in the Academy of Music, which had been furbished up for

the occasion, on November 2, 1885. Mme. Patti had deserted him, and

if he ever had made overtures to Mme. Nilsson, whose engagement he had

announced, they came to naught. He now made a virtue out of necessity

and proclaimed the merits of "good all 'round" opera, and the iniquity

of the star system. His company, however, was the old one, with Alma

Fohström and Minnie Hauk in place of Mme. Patti, Gerster, and Nevada.

Among the familiar names in the prospectus were those of Mme. Lablache,

Ravelli, de Anna, Del Puente, Cherubini, and Carraciolo; among the

newcomers were Signor Giannini, an extremely serviceable tenor, who had

sung in the previous season in the "Milan Grand Opera Company," compiled

by James Barton Key and Horace McVicker, as related in the preceding

chapter; also a Mlle. Felia Litvinoff, whom we shall meet again as Mme.

Litvinne, sister-in-law of M. Édouard de Reszke, and member of a company

singing at the Metropolitan Opera House. Mapleson opened with "Carmen,"

the heroine represented by Mme. Hauk. She had created the character in

London and New York, and set a standard which prevailed in England and

America until the coming of Mme. Calvé; but time had dealt harshly

with Mme. Hauk during the nineteen years which had elapsed since she,

a lissome creature, had first sung at the Academy of Music (she had

effected her operatic début in Brooklyn a few weeks before), and much of

the old charm was gone from her singing, and nearly all from her acting.

The opening was distinctly disappointing, and the season came to an end

on November 28th, after twelve evening and four afternoon performances.

There could scarcely have been a more convincing demonstration of how

completely the fashionable world had abandoned the Academy of Music than

the giving of a subscription season of only four weeks' duration. Within

this period, moreover, there was no sign of effort to get out of the old

rut into which Colonel Mapleson's repertory had sunk. "Carmen" was

given three times, "Il Trovatore" twice, "Lucia di Lammermoor" twice,

"L'Africaine" twice, "La Sonnambula" once, "La Favorita" once, "Fra

Diavolo" twice, "Don Giovanni" twice, and "Faust" once. Mlle. Fohström

effected her American début in a performance of "Lucia" on November

9th. She had been announced for the second night of the season in "Il

Trovatore," but was taken ill. She had been little heard of previous to

her coming, though diligent observers of musical doings knew that she

had sung for several seasons in Europe, and, I believe, South America,

and had figured in Colonel Mapleson's spring season in London in 1885.

She was a small creature, with features of a markedly Scandinavian

type--she was a native of Finland--and had evidently studied the

traditions of the Italian operatic stage to as much purpose as was

necessary to present, acceptably, the stereotyped round of characters.

But her gifts and attainments were not great enough to take her

impersonations out of the rut of conventionality, nor to save her

singing from the charge of nervelessness and monotony of color. Three

seasons later (1888-89) she was a member of the German company at the

Metropolitan Opera House, and sang such rôles as Marguerite de Valois

("Les Huguenots"), Mathilde ("William Tell"), Marguerite ("Faust"),

Bertha ("Le Prophète"), and Eudora ("La Juive"), giving place at the

beginning of February to Mme. Schroeder-Hanfstängl, who had returned,

to the delight of her admirers. In the interim she increased her

artistic stature very considerably, her voice proving more effective

in the new house than in the Academy of Music, which was incomparably

better acoustically. Mapleson's singers came back to the Academy on

December 20th to sing Wallace's "Maritana" in Italian (with Tito

Mattei's recitatives in place of the spoken dialogue), and at the

manager's benefit on December 23d Massenet's opera "Manon" was performed

for the first time in America. Under the circumstances the cast deserves

to be set forth: The Chevalier des Grieux, Signor Giannini; Lescaut,

Signor del Puente; Monfontaine, Signor Rinaldini; the Count des Grieux,

Signor Cherubini; du Bretigny, Signor Foscani, (Mr. Fox, an American);

an innkeeper, Signor de Vaschetti; attendant of the Seminary of St.

Sulpice, Signor Bieletto; Poussette, Mlle. Bauermeister; Javotte, Mme.

Lablache; Rovette, Mlle. de Vigne; Manon, Mme. Hauk.

From January 4th to April 17th the Academy of Music was occupied by the

American Opera Company, the artistic director of which was Theodore

Thomas, who had long stood at the head of orchestral music in America.

As I have already intimated, rightly managed this institution might have

become of the same significance to the future of opera in the United

States as the German company, which had just established a domicile at

the Metropolitan Opera House. Indeed, it might have become of greater

significance, for the best friends of the German enterprise looked upon

it as merely a necessary intermediary between the Italian exotic and a

national form of art, with use of the vernacular, which every patriotic

lover of music hoped to see installed some day in the foremost operatic

establishment in the land. Unfortunately, its claims to excellence were

put forward with impudent exaggeration, and there was no substantial

or moral health in its business administration. It could not expect to

cope with foreign organizations or local aggregations of foreign artists

in respect of its principal artists, but it could, and did, in respect

of scenic investiture, and in its choral and instrumental ensemble.

Unhappily, even in these elements it was unwisely directed, though with

a daring and a degree of confidence in popular support which may be said

to have given it a characteristically American trait. In three respects

the season was unique in the American history of English opera (or opera

in English, as it would better he called, since there was not an English

opera in its repertory), viz.: in the brilliancy of the orchestra, the

excellence of the chorus (numerous and fresh of voice), and the

sumptuousness of the stage attire.

There were sixty-six performances in the season of light operas, and one

ballet, the latter Delibes's "Sylvia." The operas were Goetz's "Taming

of the Shrew" (five times), Gluck's "Orpheus" (thirteen times), Wagner's

"Lohengrin" (ten times), Mozart's "Magic Flute" (six times), Nicolai's

"Merry Wives of Windsor" (nine times), Delibes's "Lakmé" (eleven times),

Wagner's "Flying Dutchman" (seven times), and Massé's "Marriage of

Jeannette" (in conjunction with the ballet, five times). "The Taming of

the Shrew" received its first performance in America on January 4, 1886;

"Lakmé" on March 1st; "The Marriage of Jeannette," on March 24th, and

"Lohengrin" (in English), on January 20th.

Immediately on the death of Dr. Damrosch, trouble broke out in the

Metropolitan company. There had been some jealousy among the women

singers because of the large honorarium paid to Mme. Materna. It was her

third visit to America, and she had learned to say dollars when at home

she was accustomed to think of florins. Moreover, in the spring of the

year she had made an extensive concert tour with Mme. Nilsson, under

the direction of Mr. Thomas, and knew something about the liberality of

Americans in the matter of artists' fees. Herr Schott (Dr. von Bülow's

dis-, des-, and detonating tenor), developing a large and noisy

managerial ambition, scarcely waited for the burial of Dr. Damrosch

before beginning an agitation looking toward his installation in the

dead director's place. All this might have been done in a seemly manner,

and if it had been so done might have been carried through successfully

and with popular approbation, for Herr Schott's project, in the main,

was the one acted on by the directors. But Herr Schott, in an effort

to promote his scheme, made an ungallant attack upon the artistic

character of Mme. Materna, and this the public found to be "most

tolerable and not to be endured." The occasion soon presented itself

for Schott to show that he had an overweening sense of his own

importance and popularity. At the end of the fourth of the five

supplementary performances there was a demonstration of applause. Herr

Schott interpreted it as a curtain call for himself, and promptly showed

himself, and bowed his thanks. The applause was renewed, and he repeated

this performance. Then came a third call, and again the tenor stepped

out before the footlights. Now the applause of his friends was mingled

with cries of "Materna!" but on a fourth call, and a fourth appearance

of Schott, the popular feeling exploded in hisses and calls for the

soprano. He retired unabashed, but Mme. Materna, answering the next

call, was tumultuously greeted. So far as the overwhelming majority

of the patrons of the house was concerned, Herr Schott's cake was now

dough. Foolishly he, or his friends for him, proceeded to anger the

directors from whom they were expecting favors. It was given out that

he had submitted a proposition concerning the management of the opera

house at the request of the directors. This met with prompt denial at

the hands of Mr. Stanton, the secretary of the board, and by some of

the directors themselves.

Herr Schott had submitted a proposition, however, and had coupled it

with a hint, which sounded like a threat, that in case it was not

promptly accepted it would go to the directors of the Academy of Music.

This vexed some of the stockholders of the older institution, who

made public denial that they were considering German opera, even as a

remote possibility. Herr Schott's proposition was dismissed with little

ceremony by the Metropolitan directors, who, however, sent Mr. Stanton

and Mr. Walter Damrosch to Europe to organize a company to carry out the

lines already established during the coming season. In doing so they

adopted several valuable suggestions contained in Herr Schott's plan.

In this plan Schott was to be the musical director of the company, of

course, but not the conductor. For this post he contemplated engaging

Anton Seidl, then conductor of the Municipal Theater of Bremen and

husband of the jugendlich Dramatische, who had successfully gone

through the ordeal of one season--Auguste Krauss. Walter Damrosch was

to be assistant conductor, Mme. Schroeder-Hanfstängl, Frau Krauss,

Fräulein Brandt, and Herren Staudigl and Blum, of the old company, were

to be kept, and the new singers were to be a Fräulein Gilbert, Fräulein

Koppmeyer, Ferdinand Wachtel (son of Theodore, already referred to), and

Carl Hill, bass.

The organization, as finally effected, placed Mr. Stanton at its head

as director, acting for the stockholders; Walter Damrosch, as assistant

director, and also conductor; Lilli Lehmann, of Berlin, was the

principal soprano; Marianne Brandt, principal contralto; Albert Stritt,

principal tenor; Emil Fischer, of Dresden, principal bass, and Adolf

Robinson, principal barytone. Other singers were Auguste Krauss (who now

became Seidl-Krauss), Max Alvary, tenor; Fräulein Slach, mezzo-soprano;

Eloi Sylva, tenor; Kemlitz, tenor; Lehmler, bass; Frau Krämer-Wiedl,

dramatic soprano; Herr Alexi, barytone, and Fräulein Klein, soprano.

With this company the second season of German opera was opened on

November 23, 1885, the opera being "Lohengrin." I shall not take up

the features of the season seriatim, nor make detailed record of

the consecutive productions of the operas on its list. Only special

incidents shall be recorded; but before this is done something may

be said touching the newcomers:

Anton Seidl was a young man when he came to New York, but he had filled

the position of secretary to Richard Wagner, and been a member of his

household for six years. Before then he had studied at the Leipsic

Conservatory (which he entered in October, 1870), and been a chorus

master or accompanist at the Vienna Opera. There he came under the eyes

of Hans Richter, who sent him to Wagner when the latter asked for a

young man who could give him such help on "The Ring of the Nibelung" as

Richter had given him on "Die Meistersinger"--that is, to write out the

clean score from the composer's hurried autograph. The period which he

spent with Wagner was from 1872 to 1879. During all the preparations for

the first Bayreuth Festival in 1876 he was one of the poet-composer's

executive officers. He was one of the assistant conductors on the stage

during the festival, and afterward conducted the preliminary rehearsals

for the concerts which Wagner gave in London and elsewhere to recoup

himself for the losses made at the festival. Then, on Wagner's

recommendation, he was appointed conductor at the Municipal Theater

at Leipsic (his associates being Victor Nessler and Arthur Nikisch),

later on of Angelo Neumann's "Richard Wagner Theater," which gave

representations of "Der Ring des Nibelungen" in many cities of Germany,

Holland, England, and Italy, and still later of the Municipal Theater in

Bremen--the post which he held when the death of Dr. Damrosch created

the vacancy which brought him to New York. All this he had accomplished

before his thirty-fifth year (he was born in Pesth on May 7, 1850), and

he was not yet thirty when Wagner, in a speech delivered in Berlin,

alluded to him as "the young artist whom I have brought up, and who is

now accomplishing astounding things." Naturally, when he came to New

York, he was looked upon as a prophet, priest, and paladin of Wagner's

art. For twelve years he filled a large place in the music of New York,

in concert room as well as opera house, and when he died it was like

his predecessor, in the fulness of his powers, and in the midst of his

activities. But this belongs to a later chapter of this story.

Lilli Lehmann brought to New York chiefly the fame which she had won in

Bayreuth at the first Wagner festival, of 1876, at which she was one of

the Rhine daughters (Woglinde), and one of the Valkyrior (Helmwige), and

where she also sang the music of the Forest Bird in "Siegfried." At that

period in her career she was still classed among the light sopranos, and

so she continued to be classed until she broke violently away from the

clogs which tradition puts upon artists in the theaters of Germany. She

felt the charm of freedom from the old theatrical conventions when she

sang Isolde at Covent Garden on July 2, 1884, and her growth to a lofty

tragic stature was rapid. She was filled with fervor for the large rôles

of Wagner when she came to New York, and her success in them was so

gratifying to her ambition that it led her at the expiration of her

leave of absence from the Court Opera at Berlin (where she had been

fifteen years as erste Coloratursängerin) to extend her stay in America

beyond the period of her furlough, and involved her in difficulties with

the Berlin Intendant, and the federation of German theatrical managers,

called the Cartellverband. Having carried to her an offer from the

president of the Cincinnati Festival Association to sing at the festival

of May, 1886, which was the ultimate reason for her action, I am in

a position to give the details of the story of what became a cause

célèbre, and led to a wide discussion of the relations between the

German managers and their singers. A short time before Miss Lehmann had

declined an offer from the committee of the North American Sängerbund to

take part in the Sängerfest, which was to be held in Milwaukee in June,

1886. She had also been asked by the artistic manager of the house of

Steinway & Sons to go on a concert tour with Franz Rummel and Ovide

Musin. When I came to her with the dispatch from Cincinnati she spoke of

her unwillingness to break her contract with Berlin, and of the loss of

the lifelong pension to which her period of service at the Court Opera

would eventually entitle her. I declined to advise her in the premises,

but made a calculation of her prospective net earnings from the three

engagements which were offering, and suggested that she compare the

income from their investment with the pension which she would forfeit.

I also agreed, if she wished it, to reopen the negotiations with the

Sängerfest officials at Milwaukee. She took the matter under advisement,

and in a few days, having concluded the engagement with a representative

of the Cincinnati association, she told me she had determined to stay in

America during June. In July, against the advice of some of her American

friends, she paid a fine imposed upon her by the Intendant of the Court

Opera. The amount of the fine was 13,000 marks ($3,250), and this amount

she had received from the Milwaukee engagement. I had written to Mr.

Catenhusen, the director of the Sängerfest, as promised, and he had

reopened negotiations with more than willingness. Asked for her terms,

she replied: "Three thousand three hundred dollars," and turning to a

friend said: "I'll let the festival pay my Berlin fine." After she had

paid the money into the royal exchequer, the manager of Kroll's Theater

engaged her for a series of representations, but met an unexpected

obstacle in the form of a refusal of the Intendant of the Court Theater

to restore her to the privileges which she had forfeited by breaking

her contract. It was long before she succeeded in making peace with

the Governmental administration of the Court Opera, and in the public

discussion which accompanied her efforts she took part in an eminently

characteristic way. The newspapers were open to her, and in the Berlin

Tageblatt (I think it was) she defended her course on the ground that

America had enabled her to exercise her talent in a field which the

hidebound traditions of the German theaters would have kept closed to

her. Once a florid singer, always a florid singer, was her complaint,

and she added: "One grows weary after singing nothing but princesses

for fifteen years." Though she began in "Carmen," and followed with

"Faust," Miss Lehmann soon got into the Wagnerian waters, in which she

was longing to adventure, and in them set some channel buoys which the

New York public still asks Brünnhildes and Isoldes to observe. It was

then, however, and still is, characteristic of her broad ideals in art,

that, while winning the highest favor in tragic parts, she preserved not

only her old skill, but her old love for good singing in the old sense.

When, at the height of her Wagnerian career, she sang at a performance

for her own benefit, she chose "Norma."

From 1885 till the time when her operatic experiences had become the

exception to her rule of concert work, the greater part of her career

was spent in New York; and during the whole of the period she was in all

things artistic an inspiration, and an exemplar to her fellow artists.

For industry, zeal, and unselfish devotion in preparing an opera I have

never met an artist who could be even remotely compared with her. When

"Siegfried" was in rehearsal for its first American production, she took

a hand in setting the stage. Though she had nothing to do in the second

act, she went into the scenic lumber room and selected bits of woodland

scenery, and with her own hands rearranged the set so as to make

Siegfried's posture and surroundings more effective. When the final

dress rehearsal of "Götterdämmerung" was reached a number of the

principal singers were still uncertain of their music. Miss Lehmann was

letter perfect, as usual, but without a demur repeated the ensembles

over and over again, singing always, as was her wont, with full voice

and intense dramatic expression. This had been going on literally for

hours when the end of the second act was reached. When she came into the

audience room for the intermission I ventured to expostulate with her:

"My dear Miss Lehmann, pray have a care. You are not effecting your

début in New York, nor is this a public performance. Think of to-morrow.

You will weary your voice. Why do you work so? Markiren Sie doch!"

"Markiren thu Ich nie!" ("Markiren," it may be explained, is the

technical term for singing in half-voice, or just enough to mark the

cues.) "As for the rest, rehearsals are necessary, if not for one's

self, then at least for the others. Don't be alarmed about my voice.

It is easier to sing all three Brünnhildes than one Norma. You are so

carried away by the dramatic emotion, the action, and the scene that

you do not have to think how to sing the words. That comes of itself.

But in Bellini you must always have a care for beauty of tone and

correct emission. But I love 'Norma,' and Mozart's 'Entführung.'"

Very different this from the conduct of Max Alvary after he had begun to

grow into public favor. He was a son of the Düsseldorf painter, Andreas

Achenbach, and came to New York without reputation, and engaged to

sing second rôles. Early in the season Stritt, the first tenor, after

creating the part of Assad in Goldmark's "Königin von Saba" yielded it

up to Alvary, finding the range of the music a little too trying for

his voice. Alvary's handsome face and figure, especially the latter,

his gallant bearing, and his impeccable taste in dress, made a deep

impression, and it was not long before he developed into a veritable

matinée girl's idol. He developed also an enormous conceit, which near

the end of his New York career led him to think that he was the opera,

and that he might dictate policies to the manager and the directors back

of him. So in the eyes of the judicious there were ragged holes in his

shining veneer long before his career in New York came to a close. The

preparation of "Siegfried" for performance led to an encounter between

him and Mr. Seidl, in which the unamiable side of his disposition, and

the shallowness of his artistic nature were disclosed. At the dress

rehearsal, when alone on the stage, he started in to go through his

part in dumbshow. Seidl requested him to sing.

"It is not necessary; I know my part," was the ungracious reply.

"But this is a rehearsal. It is not enough that you know your part

or that you know that you know your part. I must know that you know

it. Others must sing with you, and they must hear you."

He started the orchestra again. Not a sound from the puffed up little

tenor in his picturesque bearskin and pretty legs. Seidl rapped for

silence, and put down his baton.

"Call Mr. Stanton!" he commanded.

Mr. Stanton was brought from his office, and Mr. Seidl briefly explained

the situation. He would not go on with the rehearsal unless Mr. Alvary

sang, and without a rehearsal there would be no first performance of

"Siegfried" to-morrow. Mr. Alvary explained that to sing would weary

him.

"I shall not sing to-day and to-morrow. Choose; I'll sing either to-day

or to-morrow."

"Sing to-day!" said Stanton curtly, and turned away from the stage. Like

a schoolboy Alvary now began to sing with all his might, as if bound to

incapacitate himself for the next day. But he would have sacrificed a

finger rather than his opportunity on the morrow, and the little misses

and susceptible matrons got the hero whom they adored for years

afterward.

Next to Miss Lehmann, the most popular singer in the company in this

second year of German opera at the Metropolitan was Emil Fischer, the

bass. Except for a short period spent abroad in an effort to be an opera

manager in Holland, Fischer has remained a New Yorker ever since he came

in 1885. This has not been wholly of his own volition, however. He came

from Dresden, where he was an admired member of the Court Opera. His

coming, or his staying, involved him in difficulty with the Royal

Intendant, and though the singer began legal proceedings against his

liege lord, the King of Saxony, for rehabilitation, he never regained

the privileges which he had forfeited in order to win the fame and

money which came to him here. The fame was abiding; the money was

not. Twenty-one year after his coming his old admirers were still so

numerous, and their admiration so steadfast, that a benefit performance

at the Metropolitan Opera House, in which he took part in an act of

"Die Meistersinger," yielded nearly $10,000.

The season of 1885-86 at the Metropolitan Opera House began on November

23d, and lasted till March 6th, with an interregnum of two weeks from

December 19th to January 4th, during which the company gave performances

in Philadelphia, with woeful financial results, the loss to the

stockholders being $15,000. The excellence of the management and the

wisdom and honesty of the artists were attested by the circumstance that

not once was an opera changed after it was announced. Nine operas were

performed, and of these three were wholly new to the Metropolitan

stage, two were absolutely new to America, and two were provided with

considerable new scenery. The table of performances was as follows:

Opera First performance Times given

"Lohengrin" .............. November 23 ............ 4

"Carmen" ................. November 25 ............ 2

"Der Prophet" ............ November 27 ............ 3

"Die Walküre" ............ November 30 ............ 4

"Die Königin von Saba" ... December 2 ............ 15

"Tannhäuser" ............. December 11 ............ 4

"Die Meistersinger" ...... January 4 .............. 8

"Faust" .................. January 20 ............. 5

"Rienzi" ................. February 5 ............. 7

--

Total representations ............................ 52

The attractive charm of a new work was shown in the success achieved

by Goldmark's "Queen of Sheba," which was given with great pomp in its

externals, but also finely from a musical point of view. It brought into

the box office an average of $4,000 for fifteen performances, and was

set down as the popular triumph of the season, though, considering that

"Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg" had a month less to run, its record

was also remarkable. The average difference in attendance on the two

works which led the list was about one hundred and fifty. The directors

had fixed the assessment on the stockholders in October at $2,000 a box,

and their receipts from this source were $136,700; from the general

public, $171,463.13; total, $308,163.13. The cost of producing the

operas, omitting the charges for new scenery and properties, but

including the expenses of the Philadelphia season, was $244,981.96. The

fixed charges on the building (taxes, interest, and rental account) were

about $85,000 in the preceding year, and the financial outcome was so

satisfactory to the stockholders that the directors promptly re-engaged

Mr. Seidl, and adopted a resolution empowering the managing director,

Edmund C. Stanton, to make contracts with artists for three years. It

was interesting to note the effect upon the opera houses and artists

of Germany. I cannot recall that there were any more difficulties like

those which attended the disruption of their contracts by Fräulein

Lehmann and Herr Fischer. Instead, the managers of the municipal

theaters of Germany especially (and, I doubt not, court theaters also)

found that they, too, could come in for a share of the American dollars

by granting leaves of absence for the New York season, and taking a

percentage of the liberal fees received by their stars.

CHAPTER XIII

WAGNER HOLDS THE METROPOLITAN

The incidents of the early history of the Metropolitan Opera House come

to me in such multitude that I find it difficult to apportion seasons

and chapters in this record. Later, it may be, when the new order of

things shall have been established, and again given place to the old,

the relation may make more rapid progress. I have already devoted much

space to the second German season, but there are a few details which

deserve special consideration. The first of these (if the reader will

accept the instantaneous popularity of Mr. Seidl as a conclusion from

the remarks made in his introduction in these annals) was the first

appearance of Lilli Lehmann. Circumstances would have it that she should

show herself first, not as the singer of old-fashioned florid rôles,

with which (except for her Bayreuth experience) she was associated, nor

yet as the Wagnerian tragedienne which she became later, but in a

transitional character--that of Carmen in Bizet's opera of that name.

Lehmann as the gipsy cigarette maker, with her Habanera and Seguidilla,

with her errant fancy wandering from a sentimental brigadier to a

dashing bull fighter, is a conception which will not come easy to the

admirers of the later Brünnhilde and Isolde; and, indeed, she was a

puzzling phenomenon to the experienced observers of that time. Carmen

was already a familiar apparition to New Yorkers, who had imagined that

Minnie Hauk had spoken the last word in the interpretation of that

character. When Fräulein Lehmann came her tall stature and erect, almost

military, bearing were calculated to produce an effect of surprise of

such a nature that it had to be overcome before it was possible to enter

into the feeling with which she informed the part. To the eye, moreover,

she was a somewhat more matronly Carmen than the fancy, stimulated by

earlier performances of the opera or the reading of Mérimée's novel,

was prepared to accept; but it was in harmony with the new picture that

she stripped the character of the flippancy and playfulness popularly

associated with it, and intensified its sinister side. In this, Fräulein

Lehmann deviated from Mme. Hauk's impersonation and approached that

of Mme. Trebelli, which had been brought to public notice at the

first Italian season at the Metropolitan Opera House. In her musical

performance she surpassed both of those admired and experienced artists.

Her voice proved to be true, flexible, and ringing, and, also, of a most

particularly telling quality. She disclosed ability to fill the part

with the passionate expression and warmth of color which it called for,

and utilized that ability judiciously and tastefully. M. Eloi Sylva, the

new tenor, effected his American introduction in Meyerbeer's "Prophet"

on November 27th. He was an exceedingly robust singer, with an imposing

stage presence, a powerful voice, which, in its upper register,

especially, was vibrant, virile, and musical. Two seasons later he

essayed English opera, with about the same results, so far as his

pronunciation was concerned, as he achieved in German. Fräulein Lehmann

was first seen and heard as Brünnhilde in "Die Walküre" on November

30th. She was statuesquely beautiful, and her voice glorified the music.

In the first scene she brought into beautiful relief the joyful nature

of the Wishmaiden; her cries were fairly brimming with eager, happy

vitality. While proclaiming his fate to Siegmund, she was first inspired

by a noble dignity, then transformed instantaneously into a sympathetic

woman by the hero's devotion to the helpless and hapless woman who lay

exhausted on his knees.

The first of the two novelties of the season was Goldmark's opera

"Die Königin von Saba," which had its first performance in America on

December 2d. The cast was as follows: Sulamith, Fräulein Lebmaun;

Königin, Frau Krämer-Wiedl; Astaroth, Fräulein Brandt; Solomon, Herr

Robinson; Assad, Herr Stritt; Hohepriester, Herr Fischer; Baal Hanan,

Herr Alexi. Mr. Seidl conducted. The opera (which had had its first

production in Vienna ten years before, and had achieved almost as much

success in Germany as Nessler's "Trompeter von Säkkingen") was produced

with great sumptuousness, and being also admirably sung and acted, it

made a record that provided opera-goers in New York with a sensation of

a kind that they had not known before, and to which they did not grow

accustomed until the later dramas of Wagner began their triumphal career

at the Metropolitan. Twenty years afterward (season 1905-06) Mr. Conried

revived the opera at the Metropolitan, but it was found that in the

interim its fires had paled. In 1885 there were reasons why the public

should not only have been charmed, but even impressed by the opera. In

spite of its weaknesses it was then, and still is, an effective opera.

Thoughtfully considered, the libretto is not one of any poetical worth,

but in its handling of the things which give pleasure to the superficial

observer it is admirable. It presents a story which is fairly rational,

which enlists the interest, if not the sympathy, of the observers, which

is new as a spectacle, and which is full of pomp and circumstance.

Looked at from its ethical side and considered with reference to the

sources of its poetical elements, it falls under condemnation. The title

of the opera would seem to indicate that the Bible story of the visit of

the Queen of Sheba to Solomon had been drawn on for the plot. That is

true. The Queen of Sheba comes to Jerusalem to see Solomon in his glory,

and that is the end of the draft on the Biblical story; the rest is the

modern poet's invention. But that is the way of operas with Biblical

subjects--a few names, an incident, and the rest of invention. In

Gounod's "Reine de Saba" the magnificently storied queen tries to elope

with the architect of Solomon's temple like any wilful millionaire's

daughter. Salome is a favorite subject just now that the danse du

ventre is working its way into polite society, but save for the dance

and the names of the tetrarch and his wife, the Bible contributes

nothing to the Salome dramas and pantomimes. Sulamith, who figures like

an abandoned Dido, in the opera of Mosenthal and Goldmark, owes her

name, but not her nature or any of her experiences, to the pastoral

play which Solomon is credited with having written. The Song of Songs

contributes, also, a few lines of poetry to the book, and a ritualistic

service celebrated in the Temple finds its prototype in some verses from

Psalms lxvii and cxvii, but with this I have enumerated all that "Die

Königin von Saba" owes to the sacred Scriptures. Solomon's magnificent

reign and marvelous wisdom, which contribute factors to the production,

belong to profane as well as to sacred history, and persons with deeply

rooted prejudices touching the people of Biblical story will be happiest

if they can think of some other than the Scriptural Solomon as the

prototype of Mosenthal and Goldmark, for in truth they make of him a

sorry sentimentalist at best. The local color of the old story has been

borrowed from the old story; the dramatic motive comes plainly from

"Tannhäuser"; Sulamith is Elizabeth, the Queen Venus, Assad Tannhäuser,

and Solomon Wolfram. Goldmark's music is highly spiced. At times it

rushes along like a lava stream, every measure throbbing with eager,

excited, and exciting life. He revels in instrumental color; the

language of his orchestra is as glowing as the poetry attributed to the

veritable King whom the operatic story celebrates. Many composers before

him made use of Oriental cadences and rhythms, but to none did they seem

so like a native language. It has not been every Jew who could thus

handle a Jewish subject. Compare Halévy, Meyerbeer, and Rubinstein with

Goldmark.

The first performance of Wagner's "Meistersinger" fell on the same

night as the production for the first time in America of Goetz's

"Widerspänstigen Zähmung" in English by the National Opera Company.

We thus had in juxtaposition an admirable operatic adaptation of a

Shakespearian comedy and a modern comedy, of which I thought at the

time I could not speak in higher praise than to say that it was truly

Shakespearian in its delineation of character. In my book, "Studies in

the Wagnerian Drama," I have analyzed Wagner's comedy from many points

of view, and printed besides the results of investigations of the old

Nuremberg mastersingers made on the spot. The significance of this

record is that it tells of the introduction in America of a comedy

which, though foreign in matter and manner to the thoughts, habits, and

feelings of the American people, has, nevertheless, held a high place

in their admiration. Later we shall see that this admiration was based

on the sound understanding of the play which the original, performers

inculcated. Let their names therefore be preserved. They were: Hans

Sachs, Emil Fischer; Veit Pogner, Josef Staudigl; Kunz Vogelsang,

Herr Dworsky; Konrad Nachtigal, Emil Sänger; Sixtus Beckmesser, Otto

Kemlitz; Fritz Kothner, Herr Lehmler; Balthasar Zorn, Herr Hoppe; Ulrich

Eisslinger, Herr Klaus; Augustin Moser, Herr Langer; Hermaun Ortel,

Herr Doerfer; Hans Schwartz, Herr Eiserbeck; Hans Foltz, Herr Anlauf;

Walther von Stolzing, Albert Stritt; David, Herr Kramer; Eva, Auguste

Seidl-Krauss; Magdalena, Marianne Brandt; Nachtwächter, Carl Kaufmann.

Mr. Seidl conductor.

I modulate to the Metropolitan season 1886-87 through the performances

of the opposition, which began at the Academy of Music, but ended in

the house which was now definitely acknowledged to be the home, and

only home, of fashionable opera. Mme. Patti provided the last bit of

evidence. In the two preceding seasons she had led Colonel Mapleson's

forces at the Academy; yet the public would have none of his opera. Now,

after a year's absence, she returned to America under the management of

Mr. Abbey, who had opposed Nilsson to her when the rivalry of the houses

began. She gave operatic concerts, one, two, three, and four, at the

Academy of Music, with old favorites of the New York public--Scalchi,

Novara, and a French tenor named Guille--in her company, besides Signor

Arditi; and she gave fragments of opera ("Semiramide" and "Martha"),

besides a miscellaneous concert. The experiences of Mme. Patti on her

return to her old home in 1881 were measurably repeated. The great

singer was admired, of course, and half an operatic loaf was accepted as

better than no bread. This was in November, 1886, and in April, 1887,

Mr. Abbey decided to offer the operatic loaf, such as it was, but to

cut it, not at the house with which Patti's name had been intimately

associated, but at the Metropolitan Opera House. He was conjuring

with the legend (then new, but afterward worn threadbare), "Patti's

Farewell." I am writing in July, 1908, and have just been reading the

same legend again in the London newspapers--twenty-one years after

it served Mr. Abbey a turn. In April, then, Mr. Abbey came to the

Metropolitan Opera House with Mme. Patti to give six "farewell"

operatic performances. The company consisted of Scalchi, Vicini,

Galassi, Valerga, Del Puente, Novara, Abramoff, Corsi, and Migliara,

some of them recruited from an earlier company that had come and

departed like a shadow in the fall season. Also Miss Gertrude Griswold,

whom I mention because she was an American singer who had given promise

of good things in Europe, and who helped Mme. Patti with the one and

doubly singular performance of "Carmen," in which she was seen and

(occasionally) heard in the United States. Mr. Abbey gave six

performances, in all of which Mme. Patti appeared, the operas being

"La Traviata," "Semiramide," "Faust," "Carmen," "Lucia," and "Marta."

The financial results were phenomenal. The public paid nearly $70,000

for the six operas! Had Colonel Mapleson been able to do fifty per cent.

of such business the Academy of Music might have been saved. But Mr.

Abbey, to use the slang of the stage, was playing Patti as a sensation.

Prices of admission were abnormal, and so was the audience. Fashion

heard Patti at the Metropolitan, and so did suburban folk, who came to

$10 opera in business coats, bonnets, and shawls. Such audiences were

never seen in the theater before or since.

This was a little Italian opera season, but a successful one, and one

housed at the Metropolitan. In the fall there had been another at the

Academy of Music, which was not a success, and which ended in a quarrel

between prima donna and manager that contributed a significant item to

the popular knowledge of the status of Italian opera. On October 18th an

Italian named Angelo began a season of Italian opera at the Academy. The

name of the company was the Angelo Grand Italian Opera Company, and its

manager's experience had been made, as an underling of Mapleson in the

luggage department. The season, as projected, was to last five weeks,

and a virtue proclaimed in the list was to be a departure from the

hurdy-gurdy list which had been doing service so long. There were smiles

among the knowing that a trunk despatcher should appear as the successor

of his former employer, and that employer so polished a man of the world

as James H. Mapleson; but opera makes strange bedfellows, and there have

been stranger things than this in its history. A Hebrew boy named Pohl

was little more than a bootblack when he entered the service of Maurice

Strakosch, but as Herr Pollini a couple of decades later he was a

partner of that elegant gentleman and experienced impresario, and one of

the operatic dictators of Germany. Eventually, in the case of the Angelo

Grand Italian Opera Company, it turned out that the Deus ex machina was

the prima donna, Giulia Valda (Miss Julia Wheelock), an American singer,

who had chosen this means of getting a hearing in her native land. The

list of operas sounded like an echo of half a century before. Five

operas were given, and four of them were by Verdi: "Luisa Miller,"

"I Lombardi," "Un Ballo in Maschera," and "I due Foscari;" the remaining

opera was Petrella's "Ione." Here was an escape from the threadbare

with a vengeance. It made the critics rub their eyes and wonder if Mme.

Valda had not been in the company of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus. Five

weeks were projected, but trouble came at the end of a fortnight--that

is to say, it came to public notice at the end of a fortnight; it began

probably with the season. On November 3d the persons who came to hear

a promised performance of "La Juive" found the doors of the Academy

closed. A few spasmodic efforts to galvanize the corpse into the

semblance of life were made, but in vain; the Angelo Grand Italian Opera

Company was dead. Some of its members had been heard before in other

organizations; some were heard later. They were Giulia Valda, Mlle.

Prandi, Mme. Valerga, Mlle. Corre, Mathilde Ricci, Mme. Mestress,

Mme. Bianchi-Montaldo, Signor Vicini, Lalloni, Bologna, Greco,

Giannini, Pinto, Corsi, Migliara, and Conti. The conductors were

Logheder and Bimboni, the latter of whom was discovered as a young

conductor of surprising merit twenty years later by Boston.

One season of the American Opera Company sufficed to involve it in

such financial difficulties that its managers deemed a reorganization

necessary. It appeared, therefore, in the season of 1886-87 under the

title, National Opera Company. Mr. Theodore Thomas was still its musical

director, and Mr. Gustav Hinrichs and Arthur Mees assistant conductors;

Charles E. Locke was the business manager. The company spent the

greater part of the season in other cities, but gave two series of

representations in Brooklyn, at the Academy of Music, and one series at

the Metropolitan Opera House. The first Brooklyn season was of one week,

from December 27th to January 1st, when the German company was idle; the

second embraced the Thursday evenings from February 28th to March 26th,

during which period the company gave a regular series of representations

in New York. Among the singers were Pauline L'Allemand, Emma Juch,

Laura Moore, Mathilde Phillips (sister of Adelaide Phillips, one of

the singers of first rank sent out into the world by America), Jessie

Bartlett Davis, Mme. Bertha Pierson, William Candidus, Charles Bassett

(The Signor Bassetti of Colonel Mapleson's company in the previous

season), William Fessenden, William Ludwig, Myron W. Whitney, Alonzo E.

Stoddard, and William Hamilton. The notable feature of the repertory was

the first production in America of Rubinstein's opera "Nero," on March

14, 1887. The book had been translated for the production by Mr. John

P. Jackson. Mr. Thomas conducted, and the cast was as follows: Nero

Claudius, William Candidus; Julius Vindex, William Ludwig; Tigellinus,

A. E. Stoddard; Balbillus, Myron W. Whitney; Saccus, William Fessenden;

Sevirus and a Centurion, William Hamilton; Terpander, William H. Lee;

Poppaea, Bertha Pierson; Epicharis, Cornelia van Santen; Chrysa, Emma

Juch; Agrippina, Emily Sterling; Lupus, Pauline L'Allemand. So far as I

can recall, "Nero" is the only opera of Rubinstein's that has been given

in the United States. Its performance by the National Opera Company did

greater justice to its spectacular than its musical features, but in

this there was not a large measure of artistic obliquity. The opera

seems to have been constructed with the idea that mimic reproductions

of scenes from Rome in its most extravagant, debauched, and luxuriant

period would prove more fascinating to the public than an effort to

present the moral and intellectual life of the same place and period

through the medium of an eloquent, truthful, compact, well-built, and

logically developed drama with its essentials further vitalized by

music. From whatever side he is viewed, Nero is an excellent operatic

character, and the wonder is that the opera of Barbier and Rubinstein

did not have sixty instead of only six predecessors. Not only is it

a simple matter to group around him historical pictures of unique

interest, brilliancy, variety, and suggestiveness, but, as the

historians present him to us, he is as made for the stage. His cruelty,

profligacy, effeminacy, cowardice, and artistic vanity are traits which

invite dramatic illustration, and for each one of them the pages of

Suetonius afford incidents which accept a dramatic dress none the less

willingly because they are facts of historical record. Besides all this,

there is something like poetical justice in the conceit of making a

stage character out of the emperor who hired himself to a theatrical

manager for 1,000,000 sesterces (say $40,000--a pretty fair honorarium

for the time, I should say), and who employed a claque of 5,000 young

men. To throw a sequence of the characteristic incidents in the life

of Nero into the form of a dramatic poem, logical in its development,

and theatrically effective, ought not to be a difficult thing to do.

And yet, in the case of this opera, Barbier did not do it, and by a

singularly persistent and consistent fatality Rubinstein apparently

found every weak spot in the poet's fabric, and loosened and tangled his

threads right there. The operas and ballets performed by the National

Opera Company in this season besides "Nero" were "The Flying Dutchman,"

"The Huguenots," "Faust," "Aïda," "Lakmé," "The Marriage of Jeannette,"

Massé's "Galatea," "Martha," "Coppélia," and Rubinstein's "Bal Costumé,"

an adaptation.

"Galatea" had its first New York performance at the Academy of Music

in Brooklyn, on December 30, 1886, under the direction of Arthur Mees;

Delibes's ballet "Coppélia" at the Metropolitan on March 11, 1887,

under the direction of Gustav Hinrichs. It is likely that both works

were previously given by the National Opera Company on tour.

The fourth regular subscription season of opera at the Metropolitan

Opera House (third season of opera in German) began on November 8, 1886,

under the management of the board of directors, the direction of Edmund

C. Stanton, with Anton Seidl and Walter Damrosch, conductors. It

extended over fifteen weeks, the closing date being February 26, 1887,

and comprised forty-five subscription nights, and fifteen matinées,

no opera having been given from December 5th to January 3d. In the

prospectus the directors had promised to produce fourteen operas, and

the promise was kept as to number, though two operas, "Tristan und

Isolde" and "Fidelio," were substituted for "Siegfried" (which had been

completely staged) and "Les Huguenots." The operas thus substituted were

the most successful of the list, "Fidelio" being received with so much

favor on the two occasions for which it had been announced that an

extra performance had to be given to satisfy the popular demand. Of

this incident more presently. This extra performance raised the number

of representations to sixty-one, which were distributed through the list

of operas as follows:

Opera First performance Times given

"Die Königin von Saba" ........... November 8 ....... 4

"Die Walküre" .................... November 10 ...... 3

"Aïda" ........................... November 12 ...... 4

"Der Prophet" .................... November 17 ...... 5

"Das Goldene Kreutz" and ballet .. November 19 ...... 4

"Tannhäuser" ..................... November 28 ...... 6

"Tristan und Isolde" ............. December 1 ....... 8

"Faust" .......................... December 8 ....... 3

"Lohengrin" ...................... December 15 ...... 4

"Merlin" ......................... January 3 ........ 5

"Fidelio" ........................ January 14 ....... 3

"Die Meistersinger" .............. January 21 ....... 5

"Rienzi" ......................... January 31 ....... 5

"La Muette de Portici" ........... February 16 ...... 2

--

Total performances ................................ 61

The cost of representation was $288,400, and of maintaining the opera

house about $154,000; in this total of about $442,000 was included the

cost of the scenery, wardrobe, and properties. The company's receipts

comprised $202,751 from subscriptions and box office sales, about

$33,000 from rentals, and about $175,000 from an assessment of $2,500

from each of the stockholders; in all about $410,751 I am able to be

thus explicit about the financial affairs of the German régime because

of courtesies received at the time from Mr. Stanton, with the sanction

of the stockholders, who were inclined then to look upon their

undertaking as one of public, not merely of private, concern. The

figures will enable the student of this history to view intelligently

some of the happenings at a later period, when the giving of opera

became a business speculation pure and simple. In attendance, the

measure of public patronage was represented by 137,399. The prices of

admission ranged from fifty cents to four dollars, and the average

receipts were $1.47 1/2 per individual.

The incidents of a particularly interesting character in the season were

the first American performances of "Tristan und Isolde," and Goldmark's

opera "Merlin," and the coming and going of Albert Niemann; secondary

in importance were the production of Wagner's "Rienzi," with which was

connected the return of Anton Schott to the ranks of the company, the

surprising triumph of "Fidelio," and the production of Brüll's opera,

"Das goldene Kreutz," and the ballet, "Vienna Waltzes." "Tristan und

Isolde" was brought forward on December 1, 1886, under the direction of

Anton Seidl. The distribution of characters was as follows: Tristan,

Albert Niemann; Isolde, Lilli Lehmann; König Marke, Emil Fischer;

Kurwenal, Adolf Robinson; Melot, Rudolph von Milde; Brangäne, Marianne

Brandt; Ein Hirt, Otto Kemlitz; Steuermann, Emil Sanger; Seemann,

Max Alvary. The interesting character of the occurrence was fully

appreciated by the public, and the drama was seen and heard by a

remarkable assembly. The last seat had been sold four days before, and

the vast audience room was crowded in every portion. The tenseness of

the attention was almost painful, and the effect of Herr Niemann's

acting in the climax of the third act was so vivid that an experienced

actress who sat in a baignoir at my elbow grew faint and almost swooned.

At the request of Mr. Stanton, or Mr. Seidl, he never ventured again

to expose the wound in his breast, though the act is justified, if

not demanded, by the text. The enthusiasm after the first act was

tremendous. The performers came forward three times after the fall of

the curtain, and then Mr. Seidl, who had won the greenest laurels that

had yet crowned him, was called upon to join them, and twice more the

curtain rose to enable the performers to receive the popular tribute.

Five recalls after an act would have meant either nothing or a failure

in an Italian theater; it was of vast meaning here. The reception

accorded Wagner's love drama was not such an one as comes from an

audience easily pleased or attracted by curiosity alone. It told of

keen and lofty enjoyment and undisguised confession of the power of

the drama. The applause came after the last note of the orchestral

postludes. The drama was performed eight times in seven weeks, and

took its place as the most popular work in the repertory, though in

average attendance it fell a trifle short of the three representations

of "Fidelio," which also served to signalize the season.

I shall have something to say presently about Herr Niemann, and a

criticism of his interpretation of the character of the hero of the

tragedy can be spared. From a histrionic point of view it has been

equaled only by his performances of Siegmund and Tannhäuser; nothing

else has shown such stature that has been witnessed on the operatic

stage of New York. Nor has his declamation of the text been equaled,

though the compelling charm of Wagner's melody was potently presented

years later by Jean de Reszke. Herr Niemann was long past the prime of

life when he came to New York, and when he went back to Berlin after

his last visit there was very little left of his public career; but the

youngest artist in the company might have envied him the whole-souled

enthusiasm with which he set about his tasks. How completely he

dedicated himself to the artistic duty was illustrated when, in the

season of 1887-88, he realized what had been the ambition of years,

and gave a first performance of Siegfried in "Götterdämmerung." He had

studied the part a dozen years before in the hope of appearing in it

at the first Bayreuth festival; but Wagner did not want the illusion

spoiled by presenting the actor of Siegmund on one evening as the actor

of Siegfried on another, and Niemann's Siegmund was a masterpiece that

must not be despoiled. In New York, on Niemann's second visit, he asked

for the privilege of enacting the Volsung's part in the last division of

the tetralogy, and studied the part ab initio with Seidl. I chanced one

evening to be a witness of his study hour--the strangest one I ever saw.

It was at the conductor's lodgings in the opera house. There was a

pianoforte in the room, but it was closed. The two men sat at a table

with the open score before them. Seidl beat time to the inaudible

orchestral music, and Niemann sang sans support of any kind. Then

would come discussion of readings, markings of cues, etc., all with

indescribable gravity, while Frau Seidl-Krauss, a charming ingénue

budding into a tragedienne, sat sewing in a corner. After the

performance of the drama, I sat again with Niemann and Seidl over

cigars and beer. I thanked Niemann for having discarded a universal

trick in the scene of Siegfried's murder, and for carrying out Wagner's

stage directions to the letter in raising his shield and advancing a

step to crush Hagen, and then falling exhausted upon it.

"I am glad you noted that," said Niemann in his broad Berlinese. "Years

ago I was angered by the device which all Siegfrieds follow of lifting

the shield high and throwing it behind themselves before they fall.

Das hat doch gar kein Sinn. There's no sense in that; if he has

strength enough to throw the shield over his head, he certainly has

strength enough to hurl it at the man he wants to kill. He lifts the

heavy shield for that purpose, but his strength gives way suddenly, and

he falls upon it with a crash. It's dangerous, of course. A fellow might

easily break a finger or a rib. But if you do a thing, do it right. I

have waited more than ten years to sing Siegfried, and now I've done it;

but, youngster (to Seidl), if we meet again years from now, and I've

fifty marks in my pocket, I'll get an orchestra, and you will conduct

just enough to let me sing 'Ach! dieses Auge, ewig nun offen,' and

then I'll die in peace! That's the climax of Siegfried's part, and it

must sound red, blood red--Siegfried is red; so is Tristan. Vogl sings

Tristan well, but he's all yellow--not red, as he ought to be."

I recall another bit of Niemann's characteristic criticism: Adolf

Robinson, the barytone of the first few German seasons, was an excellent

singer and also actor; but he belonged to the old operatic school,

and was prone to extravagant action and exaggerated pathos. He was,

moreover, fond of the footlights. At one of the last rehearsals for

"Tristan und Isolde," Robinson, the Kurwenal of the occasion, was

perpetually running from the dying hero's couch to the front of the

stage to sing his pathetic phrases with tremendous feeling into the

faces of the audience. Niemann, reclining on the couch, immovable as

a recumbent statue, as was his wont, without a gesture, all evidence

of the seething impatience which is consuming him mirrored in the

expression of his face, and particularly his eyes, watched the

conventional stage antics of his colleague till he could endure them no

longer. He gave a sign to Seidl, who stopped the orchestra to hear the

dying knight addressing his squire in wingèd, but un-Wagnerian, words

to this effect:

"My dear Robinson, this scene is not all yours--Tristan has also

something to say here; but how am I to make my share of the dramatic

effect if you are always going to run down to the audience and sing at

it? After a while there will be nothing left for me to do but to get

up and hurl my boots into the audience room. And I'm a very sick man.

Now, there's a good fellow, come over here to the couch; stay by me

and nurse me, and you'll see there's something in my part, too."

Niemann's first American appearance was on November 10th in "Die

Walküre." From the criticism of his performance, which I wrote for

The Tribune on that occasion, I reprint the following extract as

the best summing up which I am able to make of the great dramatic

singer's art:

The creation of a Wagnerian musical drama created also the need of

Wagnerian singers. Those who go to see and hear Herr Niemann must go to

see and hear him as the representative of the character that he enacts.

It is only thus that they can do justice to themselves, to him, and to

the art-work in which he appears. A drama can only be vitalized through

representation, and the first claim to admiration which Herr Niemann

puts forth is based on the intensely vivid and harmonious picture of

the Volsung which he brings on the stage. There is scarcely one of the

theatrical conventions which the public have been accustomed to accept

that he employs. He takes possession of the stage like an elemental

force. Wagner's dramas have excited the fancy of painters more than any

dramatic works of the century, because Wagner was in a lofty sense a

scenic artist. Niemann's genius, for less it can scarcely be called,

utilizes this picturesque element to the full. His attitudes and

gestures all seem parts of Wagner's creation. They are not only instinct

with life, but instinct with the sublimated life of the hero of the

drama. When he staggers into Hunding's hut and falls upon the bearskin

beside the hearth a thrill passes through the observer. Part of his

story is already told, and it is repeated with electrifying eloquence in

the few words that he utters when his limbs refuse their office. The

voice is as weary as the exhausted body. In the picturesque side of his

impersonation he is aided by the physical gifts with which nature has

generously endowed him. The figure is colossal; the head, like "the

front of Jove himself"; the eyes large and full of luminous light, that

seems to dart through the tangled and matted hair that conceals the

greater portion of his face. The fate for which he has been marked out

has set its seal in the heroic melancholy which is never absent even in

his finest frenzies, but in the glare of those eyes there is something

that speaks unfalteringly of the godlike element within him. This

element asserts itself with magnificent force in the scene where

Siegmund draws the sword from its gigantic sheath, and again when he

calmly listens to the proclamation of his coming death, and declines

the services of the messenger of Wotan who is sent to conduct him to

Walhalla.

There are aspects in which, even from a literary point of view, Wagner's

"Ring of the Nibelung" seems to be the most Teutonic of the several

German versions of the old legend which is its basis. It is a primitive

Teutonism, however, without historical alloy; such a Teutonism as we can

construct by letting the imagination work back from the most forceful

qualities of the historical German to those which representatives of

the same race may have had in a prehistoric age. The period of Wagner's

tetralogy, it must be remembered, is purely mythical. The ruggedness of

the type which we obtain by such a process is the strong characteristic

of Herr Niemann's treatment of Wagner's musical and literary text. It

is, like the drama itself, an exposition of the German esthetic ideal:

strength before beauty. It puts truthful declamation before beautiful

tone production in his singing and lifts dramatic color above what is

generally considered essential musical color. That from this a new

beauty results all those can testify who hear Herr Niemann sing the love

song in the first act of "Die Walküre," which had previously in America

been presented only as a lyrical effusion and given with more or less

sweetness and sentimentality. Herr Niemann was the first representative

of the character who made this passage an eager, vital, and personal

expression of a mood so ecstatic that it resorts to symbolism, as if

there was no other language for it. The charm with which he invests the

poetry of this song (for this is poetry) can only be appreciated by one

who is on intimate terms with the German language, but the dramatic

effect attained by his use of tone color and his marvelous distinctness

of enunciation all can feel.

The defects in Herr Niemann's singing, the result of the long and hard

wear to which his voice has been subjected in a career of thirty-five

years' duration, are so obvious that I need not discuss them. To do

so would be as idle as to attempt to deny their presence. He must be

heard as a singing actor, as a dramatic interpreter, not as a mere

singer.

Niemann said farewell to the New York public at a notable performance

of "Tristan und Isolde," the last of the season, on February 7, 1887.

I doubt if the history of opera in New York discloses anything like

a parallel to the occasion. Out of doors the night was distressingly

dismal. A cold rain fell intermittently; the streets were deep with

slush, and the soft ice made walking on the pavements uncomfortable,

and even dangerous. But these things were not permitted to interfere

with the determination of the lovers of the German lyric drama to bear

testimony to their admiration for the artist who had done so much for

their pleasure. The house was crowded in every part. Every seat had been

sold days before. Many of the tickets had been bought by speculators,

who, in spite of the untoward weather, reaped a rich harvest. During the

day the prices obtained varied from ten dollars to fifteen dollars for

the orchestra stalls (regular price, four dollars), and at night seats

in the topmost gallery fetched as much as three dollars, which was six

times the regular tariff. There were delegations in the audience from

Boston, Philadelphia, and Cincinnati. The enthusiasm after each act

was of the kind that recalled familiar stories of popular outbursts in

impressionable Italy. Herr Niemann husbanded his vocal resources in the

first act, but after that both he and Fräulein Lehmann threw themselves

into the work with utter abandon, such abandon, indeed, as made some of

the prima donna's friends tremble for her voice. After two recalls had

followed the second fall of the curtain a third round was swelled by

a fanfare from the orchestra. To acknowledge this round Herr Niemann

came forward alone, and was greeted with cheers, while a laurel wreath,

bearing on one of its ribbons the significant line from "Tannhäuser,"

"O, kehr zurück, du kühner Sänger," was handed up to him. The third act

wrought the enthusiasm to a climax. After the curtain had been raised

over and over again, Herr Niemann came forward and said, in German: "I

regret exceedingly that I am not able to tell you in your own language

how sincerely I appreciate your kindness toward me. I thank you

heartily, and would like to say 'Auf wiedersehn.'" His place for the

rest of the season was filled by Herr Anton Schott.

I have referred to the "Fidelio" incident of the season, which may now

be told, since Herr Niemann also figured in it. To Beethoven "Fidelio"

was a child of sorrow; that fact is known to every student of musical

history. On its first production it failed dismally. With his heart

strings torn, the composer yielded to the arguments and prayers of his

friends and revised the opera. In the new form it was revived, and made

a better impression; but now Beethoven quarreled with his manager, and

withdrew his opera from the Vienna theater. He offered it in Berlin, and

it was rejected. For seven years it slept. Then it was taken in hand

again by the composer, and adapted to a revised text. Some of the music

elided at the first revision was restored. By this time four overtures

had been written for it. Again it was brought forward; and this time the

Viennese awoke to an appreciation of its splendor. Since 1814 its name

has been almost the ineffable word for the serious musician. But sorrow

and disaster have followed upon innumerable efforts to habilitate it

in the opera houses of the world. We have seen that Dr. Damrosch made

haste to produce it at the Metropolitan Opera House, but the financial

results were so direful that two years later it was only upon the urgent

entreaty of a few friends who stood close to him that Mr. Stanton

consented to include it in the repertory for 1886-87.

"But," said the director to his petitioners, "if I give it once I must

give it twice, for I have two Leonores in my company, and there must be

no quarrel."

So he gave the opera on Friday, January 14th, with Fraulein Brandt

as the heroine, and on Wednesday, January 19th, with Fräulein

Lehmann--Niemann being the Florestan on both occasions. The enthusiasm

was boundless, though the silly laugh of a woman in one of the boxes at

the first performance so disconcerted Fräulein Brandt at the beginning

of the duet in the dungeon scene that she broke down in tears, and Mr.

Seidl had to stop the orchestra till she could sufficiently recover her

composure to begin over again. Now, the popular interest was so great

that Mr. Stanton gave an extra performance, with Fräulein Lehmann, and

when the record of the season was made up, lo! Beethoven's opera led

all the rest in average receipts and attendance. In Berlin, Dr. Ehrlich

preached a sermon to the people of Germany with the incident as a text.

As a novelty "Tristan und Isolde" had been preceded on November 19th

by Brüll's pretty little opera, "Das goldene Kreutz," and the ballet,

"Vienna Waltzes." It was succeeded on January 3d by Goldmark's "Merlin,"

conducted by Walter Damrosch, with the parts distributed as follows:

Artus, Robinson; Modrid, Kemlitz; Gawein, Heinrich; Lancelot, Basch;

Merlin, Alvary; Viviane, Lehmann; Bedwyr, Von Milde; Glendower,

Sieglitz; Morgana, Brandt; Dämon, Fischer. Much interest centered in

the opera because of its newness (it had received its first production

in Vienna less than two months before), and the great success achieved

by its predecessor, "The Queen of Sheba;" but it failed of popular

approval, eight operas preceding it in popularity, as evidenced by

the attendance, and but one of them--"Tristan"--a novelty.

CHAPTER XIV

WAGNERIAN HIGH TIDE

In this chapter I purpose to tell the story of a period of three years,

from 1887 to 1890, and in order to cover the ground I shall leave out

what appertains to the repetition of works incorporated in the repertory

of the Metropolitan Opera House during the preceding three seasons.

The period was an eventful one and marked the high-water of achievement

and also of popularity of the German régime, but also the beginning of

the dissatisfaction of the boxholders, which resulted two years later in

a return to the Italian form. It witnessed the introduction of the "Ring

of the Nibelung" in its integrity and illustrated in a surprising manner

the superior attractiveness of Wagner's dramas to the rest of the

operatic list. Outside of the Nibelung dramas it brought two absolute

novelties to the knowledge of the public and revived several old operas

of large historical and artistic significance, which had either never

been heard at all in New York, or heard so long ago that all memory of

them had faded from the public mind. It saw the light of competition

flicker out completely at the Academy of Music, and after a year of

darkness it beheld the dawn of Italian rivalry in what had become the

home of German art.

Twenty operas were brought forward in the first three years of the

German régime. They were "Tannhäuser," "Fidelio," "Les Huguenots,"

"Der Freischütz," "William Tell," "Lohengrin," "Don Giovanni," "The

Prophet," "Masaniello," "Rigoletto," "La Juive," "Die Walküre,"

"Carmen," "The Queen of Sheba," "Die Meistersinger," "Rienzi," "Aïda,"

"Das Goldene Kreutz," "Tristan und Isolde," and "Merlin." (In this list

I have set down the titles in the language in which they live in the

popular mouth in order to avoid what might seem like an affectation were

I to use the German form always in the story simply because the Italian

and French works were sung in German.) Additions to the list in the

season of 1887-88 were "Siegfried," "Der Trompeter von Säkkingen,"

"Euryanthe," "Ferdinand Cortez," and "Götterdämmerung"; in the season of

1888-89, "L'Africaine," "Das Rheingold," and "Il Trovatore"; in 1889-90,

"Der Fliegende Holländer," "Un Ballo in Maschera," "Norma," and "Der

Barbier von Bagdad."

The record of the last two years indicated a falling off in energy,

but though it caused disaffection at the time, it seems notable enough

compared with the activities of the establishment twenty years later

under much more favorable circumstances. For the last of the three

seasons under discussion seven additions to what was called by courtesy

the established list had been promised; but counting in "Norma," (a

special performance for the benefit of Lilli Lehmann) and "The Flying

Dutchman," which had been promised only by implication in the plan of

a serial representation of Wagner's works, only four additions were

made. Two causes operated toward the disappointing outcome. One was an

epidemic of influenza which prevailed during the greater part of the

winter and caused much embarrassment to the singers; the other was the

inefficiency of the chorus--a defect which has not yet been remedied,

but was greater in the season 1907-08 than a decade earlier. "Otello"

was in readiness so far as the principals were concerned, but the chorus

consumed so much time restudying old works that it had to be abandoned;

also Lalo's "Le Roy d'Ys." Though the stockholders were giving opera

themselves for themselves, they took no steps toward making it a

permanent institution. Their decision to give German opera was made from

year to year, and the end of every season brought with it practically

a complete disruption of the company. There had to be a reorganization

each fall. The directors were unwilling to give their own manager

the degree of permanence which they bestowed without hesitation upon

a lessee, and the policy of the house was thus kept continually in

controversy. The fact is that the activities of the Germans were not

to the taste of the stockholders, who were getting serious art where

they were looking for fashionable diversion. This became painfully

obvious when the conduct of the occupants of the boxes scandalized

the institution to such a degree that the directors were compelled to

administer a public rebuke to themselves and their associates, and a

stigma was placed upon the institution from which it has suffered,

very unjustly, ever since. But a discussion of these incidents can be

more intelligently and profitably introduced later in this narrative.

The fourth German season began on November 2, 1887, and ended on

February 18, 1888, and consisted of forty-seven subscription nights,

sixteen subscription matinées, and one extra matinée. In all fourteen

operas were produced. The two Wagnerian novelties, "Götterdämmerung"

and "Siegfried," were the most popular features of the season, the

former being given seven times, though it was the last of the season's

productions. It brought into the treasury a total of $30,324, or

an average of $4,332, and was heard by audiences averaging 2,871.

"Siegfried" was a good second. It had nine weeks' advantage of

"Götterdämmerung" and was performed eleven times, with total receipts

amounting to $37,124.50, or an average of $3,374.95. Pursued by its

old fatality, "Fidelio" dropped to the foot of the list with four

performances, which yielded only $8,997. The receipts for the season

were $411,860.24, of which $190,087.24 came from the box office sales

and subscriptions, $170,180 from the stockholders' assessment of $2,500

on each box, and $51,593 from rentals. This assessment was only $24,000

more than the cost of maintaining the opera-house, which was about

$146,000. The staging of new operas cost $19,727.27, more than half of

which was expended on Spontini's "Ferdinand Cortez." The scenery for

"Siegfried" had been purchased the year before and also the costumes for

that drama and "Götterdämmerung." The principal members of the company

were Lilli Lehmann, Marianne Brandt, Auguste Seidl-Krauss, Biro di

Marion, Louise Meisslinger, Albert Niemann, Max Alvary, Emil Fischer,

Adolf Robinson, Rudolph von Milde, Johannes Elmblad, Herr Ferenczy,

and Herr Alexi.

The first American representation of Wagner's "Siegfried" took place on

November 9, 1887. Anton Seidl conducted and the parts were distributed

as follows: Siegfried, Max Alvary; Mime, Herr Ferenczy; der Wanderer,

Emil Fischer; Alberich, Rudolph von Milde; Fafner, Johannes Elmblad;

Erda, Marianne Brandt; Brünnhilde, Lilli Lehmann; Stimme des

Waldvogels, Auguste Seidl-Krauss. The production of this drama was

an invitation to the people of New York to take the longest and most

decisive step away from the ordinary conventions of the lyric theater

that had yet been asked of them. At the time it seemed foolishly

presumptive to attempt a prediction of what the response would be. A

season before "Tristan und Isolde" had been received with great favor

and under conditions which did not admit a question of the honesty and

intelligence of the appreciation. This was encouraging to the lovers of

Wagner's dramas, but the difference between opera of the ordinary type

and "Tristan und Isolde" is not so great as between "Tristan und Isolde"

and "Siegfried," notwithstanding that in the love tragedy Wagner took

as uncompromising a stand as ever did a Greek poet, and hewed to the

lines of his theoretical scheme with unswerving fidelity. In the

subject-matter of the drama lies the distinction. Despite the absence of

the ethical element which places "Tannhäuser" immeasurably higher than

"Tristan" as a dramatic poem, the latter drama contains an expression of

the universal passion which is so vehement, so truthful, and so sublime

that it seems strange that anybody susceptible to music and gifted with

emotions could ever have been deaf to its beauties or callous to its

appeals. Besides this, the sympathies are stirred in behalf of the

personages of the play who stand as representatives of human nature,

and, though the co-operation of a chorus, which has always been

considered an essential element of the lyric drama, is restricted to

a single act, the dramatic necessity of the restriction is so obvious

that an audience, once engrossed in the tragedy, must needs resent such

a violation of propriety as the introduction of a chorus in any scene

except that of the first act would be. In "Siegfried," however, the case

is not so plain. Here there is not only no chorus, but scarcely more

than five minutes during which even two solo voices are blended in a

duet. Except Siegfried and Brünnhilde, the personages of the play have

no claim upon human sympathy, and their actions can scarcely arouse a

loftier feeling than curiosity. Through two acts and a portion of the

third, save in a dozen measures or so, the music of woman's voice and

the charm of woman's presence are absent from the stage, and, instead,

we are asked to accept a bear, a dragon, and a bird, a sublimely solemn

peripatetic god who asks riddles and laughs once, and two dwarfs,

repulsive of mind and hideous of body.

These are the drawbacks concerning which there can be no controversy.

To them are to be added the difficulties which result from a desire

to employ in a serious drama mechanical devices of a kind that custom

associates only with children's pantomimes and idle spectacles. A bear

is brought in to frighten a dwarf; a dragon sings, vomits forth steam

from its cavernous jaws, fights and dies with a kindly and prophetic

warning to its slayer; a bird becomes endowed with the gift of human

speech through a miraculous process which takes place in one of the

people of the play. Surely these are grounds on which "Siegfried" might

be stoutly criticized from the conventional as well as a universal point

of view; but I have not enumerated them for the purpose of disparaging

Wagner's drama, but rather to show the intellectual and esthetic

attitude of the patrons of the Metropolitan Opera House twenty years

ago, who, through all these defects, saw in "Siegfried" a strangely

beautiful and impressive creation, which, under trying circumstances,

challenged their plaudits at the outset and soon won their enthusiastic

admiration.

More direct and emphatic was the appreciation of "Götterdämmerung," the

last of the season's novelties, as "Siegfried" was the first. It was

produced on January 25, 1888, only three weeks before the close of the

season, yet it was given six times in the subscription performances

and once outside the subscription, with the financial results already

mentioned. The cast was as follows: Siegfried, Albert Niemann; Gunther,

Adolf Robinson; Hagen, Emil Fischer; Alberich, Rudolph von Milde;

Brünnhilde, Lilli Lehmann; Gutrune, Auguste Seidl-Krauss; Woglinde,

Sophie Traubmann; Wellgunde, Marianne Brandt; Flosshilde, Louise

Meisslinger. Mr. Seidl conducted. It was but natural that the concluding

drama of the tetralogy should have excited warmer sympathy than its

immediate predecessor. In it the human element becomes really active

for the first time. This circumstance Mr. Seidl accentuated by two bold

excisions. One of the things for which Wagner has been faulted is that

in his treatment of the Siegfried legend he has sacrificed historical

elements in order to bring it into closer relationship with Norse

mythology; has, in fact, made the fate of the gods and goddesses of

our ancestors the chief concern of the prologue and succeeding dramas.

Except for those who prefer to see only ethical symbols in the

characters there is some force in the objection. Like Homer in his

"Iliad," Wagner has a celestial as well as a terrestrial plot in his

"Ring of the Nibelung," and the men and women, or semi-divine creatures,

in it are but the unconscious agents of the good and evil powers

typified in the gods and dwarfs.

The criticism, however, is weaker here than in Germany, where ten or a

dozen dramas (chief of which is Geibel's "Brünnhild"), as well as the

medieval epics, have accustomed the people to think of their national

hero with something like historical surroundings. In these writings

the death of Siegfried is brought about by his alliance with the

Burgundians, whose seat was at Worms; and the Gunther of the legend

is easily identified with King Gundikar, who was overcome by Attila

and died A.D. 450. Wagner's original draft of "Götterdämmerung" (an

independent drama which he called "Siegfried's Death") followed the

accepted lines, and it was not until the tetralogy was planned that the

mythological elements from the Eddas were drawn into the scheme, the

theater of the play changed, its time pushed back into a prehistoric

age, and the death of the hero made to bring about the destruction

of the old gods--the Ragnarök of the Icelandic tales. The connection

between the death of Siegfried and the fate of the gods is set

forth in the two scenes which were eliminated at this production of

"Götterdämmerung." The first is the prologue in which the Nornir (the

Fates of Northern mythology), while twisting the golden-stranded rope of

the world's destiny, tell of the signs which presage the Twilight of the

Gods. The second is the interview between Brünnhilde and Waltraute, one

of the Valkyrior, who comes to urge her sister to avert the doom which

threatens the gods by restoring the baneful ring to the Rhine daughters.

Both scenes are highly significant in the plan of the tragedy as a

whole, but a public largely unfamiliar with German and unconcerned

about Wagner's philosophical purposes can much more easily spare than

endure them. In later years they were restored at the Metropolitan

performances, but I make no doubt that Mr. Seidl's wise abbreviation

had much to do with the unparalleled success of the drama in its first

season. Persons familiar with the German tongue and the tetralogy,

either from study of the book and music or from attendance on

performances in Germany, were justified in being disappointed at the

loss of two scenes highly important from a dramatic point of view and

profoundly beautiful from a musical; but it was better to achieve

success for the representations by adapting the drama to the capacity

of the public than to sacrifice it bodily on the altar of integrity.

Nessler's opera, "Der Trompeter von Säkkingen," which had for nearly

five years fairly devastated the German opera houses, receiving more

performances than any three operas in the current lists, won only a

succès d'estime. It was performed for the first time on November 23d,

dressed most sumptuously and effectively cast (Robinson as Werner,

Elmblad as Conradin, Kemlitz as the Major-domo, Sänger as the Baron,

Frau Seidl-Krauss as Marie, Von Milde as Graf von Wildenstein, and

Meisslinger as Gräfin), but it reached only seven performances, was

fourth from the bottom in the list arranged according to popularity,

and in the following year it was not included in the repertory. In

1889-90 it was revived and received four performances, but its rank was

seventeenth in a list of nineteen. Weber's "Euryanthe" fared but little

better, though a work immeasurably greater. It, too, received four

performances, and it was but one remove in advance of "Der Trompeter."

To all intents and purposes it was new to the American stage when it was

produced on December 23, 1887, with Lehmann, Brandt, Alvary, Fischer,

and Elmblad in the parts of Euryanthe, Eglantine, Adolar, Lysiart, and

the King, respectively. Mr. Seidl conducted. Twenty-four years before

there had been some representations of the opera under the direction of

Carl Anschütz in Wallack's Theater, at Broadway and Broome Street, but

of this fact the patrons of the Metropolitan Opera House had no memory.

It was a beautiful act of devotion on the part of Herr Anschütz and his

German singers to produce "Euryanthe" at that time, and, had it been

possible to break down the barriers of fashion and reach the heart of

the public, the history of the lyric theater in America during the

quarter of a century which followed would, no doubt, read differently

than it does. "Tannhäuser" and "Lohengrin" were produced under similar

circumstances, and even "Die Walküre"; but "Lohengrin" was popularized

by the subsequent performances in Italian, and "Tannhäuser" and "Die

Walküre" had to wait for appreciation until fortuitous circumstances

caused fashion, fame, and fortune to smile for a space upon the German

establishment at the Metropolitan. It may have been a benignant fate

which preserved "Euryanthe" from representation in the interval. The

work is one which it is impossible for a serious music lover to approach

without affection, but appreciation of all its beauties is conditioned

upon the acceptance of theories touching the purpose, construction,

and representation of the lyric drama which did not obtain validity

in America until the German artists at the Metropolitan had completed

their missionary labors. Indeed, there are aspects of the case in which

Weber's opera, with all its affluence of melody and all its potency

of romantic and chivalric expression, is yet further removed from

popular appreciation than the dramas of Wagner. In these there is

so much orchestral pomp, so much external splendor, so much scenic

embellishment, so much that is attractive to both eye and ear, that

delight in them may exist independently of a recognition of their deeper

values. "Euryanthe" still comes before us with modest consciousness of

grievous dramatic defects and pleading for consideration and pardon

even while demanding with proper dignity recognition of the soundness

and beauty of the principles that underlie its score and the marvelous

tenderness, sincerity, and intensity of its expression of passion.

When it was first brought forward in Vienna in October, 1823, Castelli

observed that it was come fifty years before its time. He spoke with a

voice of prophecy. It was not until the fifty years had expired that

"Euryanthe" really came into its rights, and it was the light reflected

upon it by the works of Weber's great successor at Dresden that

disclosed in what those rights consisted. After that the critical voices

of the world agreed in pronouncing "Euryanthe" to be the starting point

of Wagner, and, as the latter's works grew in appreciation, "Euryanthe"

shone with ever-growing refulgence. No opera was ever prepared at the

Metropolitan with more patience, self-sacrifice, zeal, and affection

than this, and the spontaneous, hearty, sincere approbation to which the

audience gave expression must have been as sweet incense to Mr. Seidl

and the forces that he directed. But "Euryanthe" is a twin sister in

misfortune to "Fidelio"; the public will not take it to its heart. It

disappeared from the Metropolitan list with the end of the season which

witnessed its revival.

Chapters of Opera Being historical and critical observations and records concerning the lyric drama in New York from its earliest days down to the present time · 第 26 / 30 章