SOME LESSER STARS IN THE OPERATIC FIRMAMENT.
(_c_) THE FRENCH SCHOOL (RAMEAU TO AMBROISE THOMAS).
Rameau—Divergence of methods—The successors
of Gluck and Piccini—Méhul—Cherubini and
Spontini—Meyerbeer—Auber—Gounod—Bizet—Reasons
for the popularity of _Faust_ and
_Carmen_—Offenbach—Délibes and Lalo—Thomas.
The Italian Lully had no small share in founding what afterwards became
a school of Grand Opera in Paris. As we have already said, he was so
jealous of his fame that he brooked no rivals; so powerful was he, too,
at Court that he was instrumental in keeping in the background every
other aspirant to fame in his own particular line. So that we have to
wait for some years before we find any notable name in France so far as
operatic development is concerned.
[Sidenote: =Rameau, 1683-1764=]
Rameau is the next composer to be mentioned. His fame is not so
great as that of his predecessor Lully, nor are his works so full of
vivacity and brightness. But he was a capable and skilled workman,
and did much for French opera; his music is pompous and antique, nor
does it compare in interest with that of the versatile Jean Jacques
Rousseau, who wrote at least one work, _Le Devin du Village_, which
enjoyed very many years of popularity.
[Sidenote: =Divergence of Methods=]
The last-named work, moreover, did not pretend to belong to the genus
“Grand Opera,” but was an “Opera Comique,” a branch of art in which
the French have always excelled: indeed, from about this date (1760
_circa_) opera in France was diverging into two lines, one looking
towards Grand Opera, and taking exalted, serious, or tragic themes for
treatment, the other having the production of Comic Opera, with all its
variety of scope and more human subjects of interest, as its aim; the
course of these two must be followed, as indeed they ran to a great
extent, side by side.
Much was due to the opening, in 1762, of the new “Opera Comique”
Theatre in Paris, at which composers obtained a hearing, whose music
was not fit for the Opera House proper, and who would not, moreover,
have attempted work in the larger and more serious forms.
[Illustration: PUCCINI.]
[Illustration: PICCINI.]
[Sidenote: =The Successors of Gluck and Piccini=]
Such men were Monsigny (1729-1817), Grétry (1741-1813), and Philidor
(1726-1797). They were at work in Paris shortly after the Gluck-Piccini
contest, and wrote operas which pleased by their simplicity,
brightness, and tunefulness; all of them being of the order of the
German “Singspiel”—_i.e._, with spoken dialogue. But it must be
remembered that these composers, although they flourished subsequent to
Gluck, had not imbibed his principles; nor did the light forms of opera
which they, in the main, set themselves to write, leave much room for
the exemplification of such. Consequently, when the operas of Mozart,
constructed with artistic unity of principle and upon logical lines,
began to obtain a hearing in Paris, such works as theirs soon dropped
out of fashion.
[Sidenote: =Méhul, 1763-1817=]
Of more importance is Méhul, who, while still writing in the main for
the Opera Comique, did so in a thoroughly artistic manner, taking
Gluck as his model. He was a man of considerable originality, who made
the curious experiment of leaving out the violins of the orchestra
throughout the whole of his opera _Uthal_, with the idea of giving
a cold, vague effect. However successful in that respect, it may
be safely prophesied that this was done by Méhul for the first and
the last time. His most popular work was _Joseph_, a story dealing
with the Bible narrative. One of its tunes is well known to pianists
through the fact that Weber wrote a set of very interesting pianoforte
variations upon it.
[Sidenote: =Cherubini and Spontini=]
We must now turn our attention to two Italian composers, who belong
to France through the fact of their having produced almost all their
important works on the boards of either the Opera Comique or the
Académie. Cherubini (1760-1842) wrote two or three great works, such as
_Les deux Journées_ (1800), _Les Abencerages_ (1813), and _Ali Baba_
(1833). The first-named, known in England as _The Water Carrier_,
although classed as opera comique, approximates in its music more
to what Beethoven wrote in _Fidelio_ and Weber in _Der Freischütz_
than to the ephemeral productions which were the fashion of the hour.
Cherubini’s music is that of a man who preceded all composers of the
“romantic” period, and therefore sounds antique and colourless to
modern ears; nevertheless it is solid and good, and far superior to
much of the same date.
Spontini (1774-1851) is spoken of by Naumann the historian in the
following words:—“No other composer has succeeded in infusing into the
music the spirit of _heroism and glory_ which prompted the victorious
exploits of Napoleon, in portrayal of which Spontini created a kind of
artistic expression, the influence of which has extended to the present
day.” His chief works, replete with grandeur and magnificence, are _La
Vestale_ (1807), _Fernand Cortez_ (written at the request of Napoleon
in 1809 on a Spanish subject, partly with the idea of conciliating the
Spanish), and _Olympia_ (1819).
Other composers of the period include Boieldieu (1775-1834), who wrote
the world famous _La Dame Blanche_, Isouard (1777-1818), Adam, Halèvy,
Hérold (the composer of _Zampa_), and many another. The names of these
composers pale before that Titan of French Grand Opera, whose advent
upon the scenes we must now note—Meyerbeer.
[Sidenote: =Meyerbeer, 1791-1864=]
Meyerbeer, a German by birth, having first seen the light of day
in Berlin, and, withal of Jewish origin, produced operas in Italy,
Germany, and France; his choicest efforts were lavished upon his operas
for the Paris Académie, and his name is now always classed with French
music. He had wonderful gifts, which he sometimes abused, for his
music seeks the _effective_, irrespective of its artistic unity or the
reverse.
In his lifetime he was lauded to the skies, and afterwards just as
bitterly denounced. Wagner, who really learned much from him, speaks
of him as “a miserable music-maker, a Jew banker to whom it occurred
to compose operas.” It must be admitted that Meyerbeer’s music is
often vulgar and conventional, but his masterpiece, _The Huguenots_,
contains some fine writing, and is specially noticeable for the clever
and striking use made at several points in the progress of the story of
Luther’s grand old hymn-tune, “Ein Feste Burg.” This chorale is used as
a kind of _leit-motif_ for the persecuted Huguenots, and forms a most
effective foil to much of the other music of the opera.
The opening of the Chorale, from Meyerbeer’s “Les Huguenots.”
[Music]
In his most famous works, _Robert le Diable_ (1831), _Les Huguenots_
(1836), _Le Prophète_ (1849), _Dinorah_ (1859), and _L’Africaine_
(1864), Meyerbeer shows his knowledge of effect, both vocally and
orchestrally. Although over-elaborate and pompous, these operas are
still performed at fairly frequent intervals, seeing that they are
effective from a stage point of view, and also extremely gratifying
to the singers, without descending to that inanity which so often
characterizes operatic music written to please vocalists.
[Sidenote: =Auber, 1782-1871=]
Passing over that eccentric genius, Hector Berlioz, who made a few
bids for popularity in operatic composition, with remarkable lack
of success, we must notice the brilliant Auber, whose light-hearted
music filled the Opera Comique audiences with delight for many years.
Although only known to us in England by the overtures which are so
popular with sea-side orchestras and amateur bands, his operas are
still popular enough on the Continent. He wrote both for the Grand
Opera and the Opera Comique, his most lasting successes being achieved
in the latter field; of the larger type, _Masaniello_ is the best
known, and is important as inaugurating a new career for French grand
opera, in so far as it breaks from the classic model of Gluck and
his followers and incorporates elements of the newer romance school.
Of the lighter works, _Fra Diavolo_ is one of the most successful.
Auber will be remembered not only for the vivacity and brightness of
his music, but also for his fascinating and clever employment of the
orchestra, for which he wrote with consummate ease and invariable
excellence.
[Sidenote: =Gounod, 1818-93=]
In Gounod we meet the composer of _Faust_, probably the most popular
opera that the world has ever known. The reasons for its popularity
are not hard to seek—an easily understood and well-known story, a
succession of bright, melodious, and yet good musical numbers, and an
amount of opportunity for the stage management beyond the average—all
these things have tended to keep _Faust_ constantly before the
opera-goer.
_Faust_ was produced in 1859, and although its orchestration may sound
thin, and its melodies appear ultra-square to those who are accustomed
to feast on the sonorous melody of Wagner, it yet pleases and is likely
to please. It is the best of the Gounod operas, and quite outpaces
other efforts by the same composer. Of these, _Romeo and Juliet_ is
the most often heard, but there are others, such as _The Mock Doctor_,
_Philémon and Baucis_, and _Mireille_, which latter Gounod always said
was his best opera.
[Illustration: OFFENBACH.]
[Sidenote: =Bizet, 1838-75=]
If _Faust_ holds first place for popularity with the masses, it is
closely followed in this respect by the _Carmen_ of Bizet, a work
of greater dramatic power, and offering much that is fresh in its
scoring and its ingenious use of Spanish colouring and rhythms. The
performance of _Faust_ or _Carmen_ is fairly certain to fill any
provincial opera-house, and we find these works to be very often the
mainstay of the touring companies. Indeed, statistics show the number
of performances of these works to exceed that of all other operas, and
in 1881 the number of times _Carmen_ had been performed exceeded, as
was ascertained in Berlin, that of all the representations of Weber
and Wagner’s works put together. But Wagner’s music enjoys so large a
share of public attention at the present time that the proportion of
performances of these operas is probably now considerably less.
[Sidenote: =Offenbach, 1819-80=]
Contemporary with Gounod and Bizet was Jules Offenbach, a composer of
comparatively low aim but with a certain amount of musicianly skill and
a sure knowledge of effect. His operas are mostly comic, but in their
day they enjoyed a _furore_ by no means limited to the Parisian public.
His output was enormous, nearly seventy operas standing to his name;
of these the most famous is _Orphée aux enfers_; his most ambitious
effort, _Les Contes d’Hoffmann_, was only completed just before his
death. Written only for the pleasure of the time, there is little of
any lasting merit in his work.
[Sidenote: =Délibes and Lalo=]
Of higher standard, although his attention was in the main given
to comic opera, is the music of Léo Délibes (1836-91), composer of
the operas _Le Roi l’a dit_ (1873), _Lakmé_ (1883), and the ballet,
_Coppélia_. Lalo (1823-92) is best known by his work, _Le Roi d’ Ys_,
often staged and containing much good music. Victor Massé (1822-76)
composed _Paul et Virginie_ and many other works which gained
popularity.
[Sidenote: =Thomas, 1811-96=]
With brief mention of Ambroise Thomas, a musician much influenced by
Gounod, who wrote two works at least of enduring quality, _Mignon_
(1866) and _Hamlet_ (1868) for the French opera, we must for the
present leave this school of composition, returning to it anon to make
mention of a number of brilliant men of talent still happily alive
and at work to-day adding their quota to the fabric reared by their
predecessors.