=Spread of Italian Opera=.—The fame of Italian opera soon spread to
other countries. Princes and kings, eager to hear the new style of
music, held out golden inducements to Italian composers and singers to
come to their courts; it was generally thought that none but an Italian
could compose an opera or sing an aria. The consequence was that in
almost all countries during the 18th century the prevailing musical
influence was Italian; native composers and singers were obliged to
study Italian models if they wished to attain to popular favor. In
France, however, this influence was only sufficient to _modify_ without
obscuring the features of an essentially national school. Independence
in matters of art has always been a marked characteristic of the
French; they have led rather than followed. The most distinguished
names in the history of French opera have been those of foreign birth,
but whatever their nationalities, all give evidence of the effect
exerted upon them by the definite form, the clearness of dramatic
intention demanded by the canons of French taste.
=Origin of French Opera=.—As the Italian opera was derived from the
classical tragedy, so the _French opera_ had its _origin_ in the
_Ballet_, the favorite form of amusement in France. The French Ballet
of the 17th century was by no means confined to the dance; it was a
heterogeneous mingling of dances and dialogues, songs and choruses,
corresponding to the English Masque. Like the early operas in Italy,
their spectacular features were on a large and expensive scale, which
confined them to occasions of especial festivity at court or among
the nobility. The taste for dancing had much to do with the direction
taken by the opera in France; it is still characteristic of the French
school, as is shown by the prominent place given to the ballet in the
Grand Opera.
=Lully=.—The founder of the French school, =Jean Baptiste Lully=
(1633-1687), was Italian by birth, but at the age of thirteen he was
taken from his native city, Florence, to France, as a page in the
service of the Chevalier de Guise. His musical gifts soon won him a
place in the royal band and finally the post of court composer. He
first wrote ballets in which the King (Louis XIV) himself danced, and
later turned his attention to the opera.
=Italian Opera in France=.—Italian opera had already been heard in
France. Through Cardinal Mazarin, an opera company from Venice had
visited Paris in 1645, and two years later Peri’s _Euridice_ had been
given also by a Venetian troupe; but these and later performances had
aroused no attempts at imitation by French composers. They contented
themselves with writing ballets which were performed as intermezzos
between the acts of Italian operas in order to bring them nearer the
French standards of taste. The superior vocal ability of the Italians
was acknowledged, but the lack of rhythmic form in their music made
an unfavorable impression. The king was passionately fond of dancing;
he and his courtiers frequently took part in the ballets produced at
court, hence the interest lay in the drama as illustrated by the dance
rather than by song.
=Beginning of French Opera=.—The first French opera to receive public
performance was _Pomone_ (Pomona), in 1671, by =Robert Cambert=
(1628-1677), who had previously written several others which had been
performed only in private. It awakened much more interest than the
Italian operas which thus far had been heard in Paris, and incited
Lully to the composition of his first opera, _Les Fêtes de l’Amour
et Bacchus_ (The Feasts of Love and Bacchus), which was produced the
following year. From that time until his death he composed fifteen
operas, which determined the form of French opera for practically a
century.
=Characteristics of Lully’s Operas=.—Lully’s operas, like those of the
Florentine school, were on the whole _declamatory_ in style, and like
them their subjects were generally taken from classical mythology.
They are destitute of the sustained melody which appeared somewhat
later in the Neapolitan school; but the recitatives are so skilfully
varied in rhythm and show such intimate knowledge of the genius of the
French language that in dramatic effect they are far superior to those
of the earlier school. To the overture, the ballet, the chorus, he
assigned music of a different type, rhythmic and formal in nature, thus
relieving the monotony of an exclusively declamatory style. A master
of stagecraft, his operas abounded in cunningly-devised spectacles and
original scenic effects which excited wonder and held the attention. In
short, so far as the means of the times allowed, we find in the Lully
operas the well-considered balance between the musical and dramatic
elements still characteristic of the French school.
=The French Overture=.—One of Lully’s greatest services was the
elaboration of the Overture into a larger and more dignified form.
The Italians had never paid much attention to the overture. At first
it appeared only as a _brief instrumental prelude_, sometimes but a
few measures in length. The introduction to Monteverde’s _Orfeo_, for
example, consists of only nine measures which the composer directs
to be played over three times to serve as overture. Later it was
somewhat _extended_ in length and provided with some regularity of
design, but the Overture as a fixed form dates from Lully. It began
with an impressive slow movement, followed by an Allegro in fugue
style. Sometimes this was all; but it generally concluded with another
slow movement, often one of the stately, dignified dance tunes of the
day, and often merely a repetition of the Introduction. This form was
known as the French Overture, and was soon adopted by composers of all
nationalities. About the middle of the 18th century it was supplanted
by the Italian Overture, perfected by Scarlatti, and described in
Lesson XIX.
=The Prologue=.—The overture was commonly followed by a Prologue.
This had nothing to do with the action of the drama; it introduced
mythological and allegorical characters who danced and sang, often
paying the most fulsome adulation to the king, who was compared to the
most celebrated heroes of mythology and antiquity. After the prologue,
either the overture was repeated, or another and a shorter one was
played. This pseudo-classical type of opera naturally flourished in the
artificial atmosphere of the court on which it was dependent for favor.
It lasted until the time of Gluck, when the influences which led to the
great uprising of the people in the latter part of the 18th century
swept it away with other traditions and conventions.
=Rameau=.—Until we come to =Jean Philippe Rameau= (1683-1764), none of
Lully’s successors succeeded in definitely extending the limits he had
fixed. Rameau had won the name of the first theoretician of the day,
and was a man of fifty when his first opera, _Hippolyte et Aricie_, was
produced. Even he made no essential change in the scheme established by
Lully beyond greatly enlarging the sphere of the orchestra, originating
novel rhythms and bolder harmonies. This was, however, a long step
in advance, since it saved the opera from sinking to the level of a
dull, mechanical imitation of Lully’s methods, into which contemporary
composers had fallen.
=The English School=.—Italian music, in the form of the Madrigal, had
been popular in England since the time of its introduction in 1598,
by =Thomas Morley= (1557-1604). Native composers immediately took it
into favor, a favor it has never lost; madrigals are still composed and
sung in England, though elsewhere the form has been dead for nearly
two centuries. The declamatory opera of the early Italian school,
however, never took root. It was, as we have seen, primarily a drama in
which music played a secondary part, and as such it was far too crude
and lacking in human interest to appeal to a public accustomed to the
plays of Shakespeare and his contemporaries, and whose taste in music,
moreover, was rather for melody than for recitative. Then, during the
Protectorate, the Puritanical spirit which led to the destruction of
church organs and for a time forbade all theatrical performances proved
an insuperable obstacle to any development of dramatic music.
=The First English Operas=.—In 1656, Sir William Davenant, the
playwright and theatrical manager, evaded this prohibition by
introducing music into his plays and calling them operas. Much of
this music, which was in the form of incidental songs, choruses and
instrumental interludes, was written by =Henry Lawes= (1595-1662) and
=Matthew Lock= (——d. 1677). The latter is well known for his music to
“Macbeth,” which up to within a few years was not infrequently heard
in performances of the tragedy. These so-called operas had little or
no effect on the development of a native school. They are principally
noteworthy in being the first English operas and the first theatrical
performances in England in which women appeared on the stage.
Previously the parts of women had been played by boys.
=Influence of the French School=.—At the Restoration in 1660, Charles
II found the prevailing style of music in England but little to his
taste. Fond of the gay measures and lively dances of the French opera,
in 1664 he sent =Pelham Humfrey= (1647-1674), the most talented of
the boys forming the choir in the Chapel Royal, to Paris to study
with Lully. Three years later he returned, and became the teacher of
England’s greatest composer.
=Henry Purcell=.—This was =Henry Purcell= (1658-1695), one of a family
of musicians of whom he stands first. As a child he is said to have
composed anthems while a chorister in the Chapel Royal, and at the
age of twenty-two he composed his first opera, _Dido and Eneas_, a
most remarkable work for a youth of his years. It is the only one of
his dramatic works in which there is _no spoken dialogue_, its place
being supplied by recitative, and therefore, strictly speaking, it
was his only opera. He can never have seen an opera of this type;
his acquaintance with the new style must have been largely based on
what Humfrey had told him of such performances in Paris, though it is
possible that he had the opportunity of studying Lully’s scores. In its
union of dramatic feeling and characterization with depth of musical
resource, _Dido and Eneas_ was far in advance of anything that had
yet appeared in France or Italy. Though it shows the influence of the
French school, the sturdy English character which distinguishes all of
Purcell’s music is plainly apparent.
[Illustration: HENRY PURCELL.]
=Purcell’s Dramatic Works=.—It was followed by a large number of works
for the stage, but these were in the main merely incidental music for
dramas; among them Shakespeare’s “Tempest,” “Midsummer Night’s Dream”
(known as The Fairy Queen), Dryden’s “King Arthur,” the last being the
most important and extended in form. Unfortunately, many of them have
been lost; but enough remain to show that in Purcell’s early death
England lost the most original musical genius she ever possessed. He
founded a distinctly national school which, for the lack of a successor
of equal gifts, was destined to succumb to foreign influences.
=Their Characteristics=.—His melodies bear the freshness and
spontaneity of the English Folk-song at a period when music was
generally cultivated, before civil wars and religious bigotry had
crushed the art spirit which, during the 16th century, had made the
English people the leaders in musical progress. His recitatives show
a vigor and an intuitive perception of dramatic effect unsurpassed by
any of his contemporaries on the Continent. He was an accomplished
contrapuntist and applied his knowledge of counterpoint with admirable
results to sacred music, yet never allowed it to become obtrusive in
his dramatic works. In these clear, expressive melody and vigorous
declamation were the distinguishing features; his learning served only
to secure a natural flow of the one and an appropriate setting for the
other.
=The Masque=.—The precursor of the English opera was the Masque. Like
the French Ballet, this was a dramatic entertainment consisting of
dialogues, dances, songs, and choruses. The subject was allegorical or
mythical in nature and the mounting of the most elaborate description.
The leading poets and dramatists of the day wrote many masques. The
most famous was Milton’s “Masque of Comus,” the music by Lawes, which
was performed at Ludlow Castle in 1634. The music in these masques
was at first designed merely to give variety to what was in the main
a pleasure to the eye, but Purcell relieved it of this subordinate
character by investing it with a weight and authority which made it an
integral factor in the dramatic expression.
=Typical English Opera=.—He thus fixed the form of the _English opera_
as a _play with songs, choruses, ensembles_, etc., connected by _spoken
dialogue_ instead of recitatives. The music, therefore, instead of
carrying on the action, is confined to the more quiet situations of
the drama, such as are naturally adapted to lyrical expression. The
inflexibility of this form has doubtless had much to do with the
lack of development in the English School of Opera compared with the
remarkable growth of other schools which have abandoned the union of
the spoken with the sung word in the serious opera.
=The Ballad Opera=.—The only characteristic creation of the English
school is the Ballad Opera. This had its origin in “The Beggar’s
Opera,” produced in 1728. Slight in texture, it was simply a play
with songs set to the most popular ballad tunes of the day. Its
extraordinary success in the face of the financial failure of Italian
opera left no doubt as to the real taste of the English people, and
was decisive as to the direction taken by later composers, such as
=Sir Henry Bishop= (1786-1855), =Michael Balfe= (1808-1870), =Arthur
Sullivan= (1842-1901).