MODERN OPERA SINCE WAGNER’S REFORMS.
Wagner’s influence—No mere copying—Modern
“Melos”—Use of the orchestra—His harmony
—Men of a younger generation—The Slavs.
The last of the revolutionists has left an indelible mark upon operatic
history. As we have before said, there has been nothing since the time
of Wagner which can lay claim to having advanced the art of opera,
nothing new has been done, and it is not easy to see on what lines
anything fresh can be attempted.
[Sidenote: =Wagner’s Influence=]
But composers have not been slow to take advantage of the new methods
introduced by that Colossus among opera writers, whose innovations
have altered the whole aspect of things, both in stage management, in
the wedding of suitable music to a really dramatic libretto, in the
use of the _leit-motif_, and in the writing of _melos_, accompanied by
characteristic and definitive use of the orchestra.
[Sidenote: =No mere Copying=]
It is not too much to say that every composer of opera, since Wagner’s
later works became known, has come under the influence of the great
master, consciously or unconsciously. It is not inferred that modern
musicians have taken the system of guiding themes and used them
systematically in the manner in which they are used in the _Ring_:
this has indeed been attempted, sometimes on quite a large scale, and
sometimes with success, more often with failure; for mere imitation
of Wagner’s methods have always spelt failure. The systematic use
of guiding themes has, however, become common, not only in dramatic
music, but even in abstract music, and occasionally in the oratorio, as
witness Elgar’s _Apostles_.
[Sidenote: =Modern Melos=]
But whether the guiding-theme plan has been adopted or no by late
nineteenth century composers of opera, there is no doubt that all have
been influenced by the _melos_ and accompanied recitative of Wagner.
The new, richly-constructed musical dialogue, if we may so term it,
which he was the first to treat in so characteristic and individual a
manner, became a new tool in the hands of composers. The tool is one
which turns out attractive work and has been plentifully laboured with:
its results are apparent everywhere, in the modern dramatic passages
that differ as widely from the Mozartean recitatives as they in turn do
from those of Scarlatti. The main difference is due to the polyphonic
blending of themes in the orchestral accompaniment: they may or may
not be guiding themes, but in any case they are superimposed to a much
greater extent than was the case in the simple chordal recitative
sections of earlier days.
[Sidenote: =Use of the Orchestra=]
Wagner’s use of the orchestra, too, unquestionably led the way for
much of the modern scoring; the rich completeness of a whole family
of instruments of the same timbre has found many admirers, and modern
orchestration has a resonance and a roundness which is hard to find in
music prior to his time. The tendency to-day is to use more and more
instruments, and to group them according to their characteristic tone
colour, thus offering a palate of greater scope and variety.
[Sidenote: =His Harmony=]
It must be borne in mind, too, that Wagner’s simultaneous use of many
themes brought into prominence the possibility of the use of many
uncommon harmonies. We will not say he invented these, because it is
difficult, if not impossible, to find any that have not occurred in
the writings of that marvellous contrapuntist, J. S. Bach; but whereas
in the older master their use is fortuitous and rare, they become in
Wagner of frequent and designed occurrence—hence the ear accepts
them eventually, although sometimes at first repelled. These many new
harmonies are part of the legacy bequeathed to a younger generation by
the Bayreuth maestro.
We have seen how Verdi, the greatest of Wagner’s contemporaries, was
influenced by the German composer, and how his whole style underwent
transformation as he imbibed deeper and deeper of the fountain of new
methods and ideas which sprung from the study of such works as the
_Ring_. Nor was Verdi alone of those of whom we have already spoken in
being thus influenced, although the traces of such influence are not
everywhere so apparent. Gounod, Ambroise Thomas, Sullivan, and many
another wrote works during and after Wagner’s lifetime which owe at
least something to what their composers had learned from him.
[Sidenote: =Men of a Younger Generation=]
But it is only natural that fuller results should be seen in the men of
a younger generation, men happily alive and at work to-day, in various
countries and of various nationalities. To these we may now devote a
little attention. That they have by no means slavishly copied Wagner is
of course readily admitted; at the same time it cannot be maintained
that they have in any way advanced upon his work, and their success is
largely dependent upon their ability to seize upon the chief merits
of his models and to combine with them some of their own particular
features of temperament, and of their individuality of style.
The chief modern composers of opera living to-day are—
(_a_) German—Goldmark, Humperdinck, Richard Strauss.
(_b_) Italian—Boito, Puccini, Mascagni, Leoncavallo,
Cilea, Mancinelli, Franchetti.
(_c_) French—Saint-Saëns, Massenet, Messager, Bruneau,
d’Indy, Charpentier, and Debussy.
(_d_) English—Mackenzie, Stanford, Cowen, Bunning,
Corder, de Lara, Ethel Smyth, McCunn, and others.
[Sidenote: =The Slavs=]
Before saying more about these composers, whom we can conveniently
treat under the headings of the different nationalities to which they
belong, we may turn aside a moment for a consideration of a school of
composition that possesses peculiar and characteristic features of its
own—namely, that of the Russian and Slav races. The most prominent of
its representatives have lived and worked since the time of Wagner,
but the strong national characteristics of the Slavs have prevented
his influence from being so apparently marked as it is in the case
of composers of the more western nations. The opera writers of this
school are, in many cases, still living, but as death has taken from us
Glinka and Tchaïkovsky, and more recently Dvŏrák, it will be as well to
treat of the Slav composers in a separate chapter, making some slight
endeavour to grasp some outline of the distinctive features which are
theirs, and which colour all their compositions, whether for the stage
or otherwise.