At the "Siegfried" performance just referred to the audience

fortunately was large; but there have been other performances, equally

good, when the audience was meagre. On such occasions much of my

enjoyment was marred by the melancholy thought that such glorious

music should be wasted on empty stalls, when there were thousands of

persons in the city who, if they only could have been induced to

overcome their prejudices and devote a few hours of previous study to

the libretto and the pianoforte-score of these operas, would not only

have found them entertaining, but would have enjoyed them rapturously.

The essence and perennial charm of German music lies in its _melodious

harmony_. Nothing is more absurd than the notion that there is more

melody in Italian than in German music. The only difference is that in

Italian music the melody is more prominent, being unencumbered by

complicated harmonies and accompaniments, while in German music the

melody is interwoven with the various harmonic parts, which makes it

difficult to follow at first. But when once this gift has been

acquired, it is a source of eternal pleasure. Nor is it so difficult

to cultivate the harmonic sense, if one takes pains to hear good music

often and _attentively_. I once met a young lady on a transatlantic

steamer, who frankly confessed she could not see any beauty in certain

exquisite Wagnerian and Chopinesque modulations and harmonies which I

played for her on the piano. When asked if she did not care for

harmony at all, she replied: "Oh, yes! I know a chord which is _simply

divine_!" Then she played--what do you fancy?--the _simple major

triad_--A flat in the bass, and A flat, C, E flat an octave

higher--which is the most elementary of all chords, the very alphabet

of music. If she found this commonplace chord "simply divine," what

would she have said could she have been made to realize that the

modulations I had played were as superior to her chord in poetic charm

as a line of Shakspere is to the letters A B C? And she _could_ have

been made to realize this truth in a few months, under proper

instruction.

I have dwelt so long on this matter because I have come to the

conclusion, as already stated, that the greatest problem in connection

with German opera is to enlarge the patronage, and induce persons to

reserve their judgment of a "heavy" opera until they have heard it two

or three times. They will soon find that the word "heavy" is a very

relative and changeable term in music. To one who really admires

Shakspere and Homer, a fashionable novel is tedious beyond endurance;

just so, to one who can appreciate "Tristan" or "Euryanthe," Verdi's

"Ernani" and Bellini's "Norma" are heavy as lead, soporific as opium.

The difficulty of understanding subtle harmonies is perhaps the main

reason why English-speaking people are so slow in appreciating and

encouraging the opera. But there are two other important reasons which

may be briefly referred to--religious rigorousness, and a certain

predilection for the ornamental style of singing.

No doubt there was a time when the stage was so profligate that the

Puritans were justified in tabooing it altogether. But that is not now

the case. There are many theatres where plays are given that are not

only pure in tone, but exert a refining and educating influence on all

who hear them. And as for operas, there is hardly one in the modern

repertory that is open to censure on moral grounds. Mr. Carl Rosa

refers to the curious fact that, when circumstances compel him to give

an operatic performance in a hall instead of a theatre, the audiences

are of quite a distinct character, including many who like opera, but

do not wish to go to a theatre. Now, this general condemnation of the

theatre because it is often used for frivolous purposes is just as

unreasonable as it would be to condemn and avoid all novels because

Zola writes novels.

There is, indeed, a positive harm that results from the tabooing of

the theatre by religious people. Why is so large a proportion of our

plays frivolous and vulgar? Because the frivolous and vulgar

predominate among theatre-goers. If the large number of refined

people who avoid the theatre were to attend, this proportion might be

reversed, and more of the managers would find it profitable to bring

out clean and wholesome dramas. Some prominent clergymen have lately

expressed themselves in this sense, and it is probable that a reaction

is at hand that will benefit the cause of serious opera. There is

absolutely nothing in any of the operas given at the Metropolitan that

could not be fitly sung before a Sunday-school audience. Why, then,

taboo the opera and jeopardize its existence, leaving the field to the

frivolous operettas and farces?

The other obstacle alluded to--the love of colorature song--is a thing

that will cure itself with the advance of musical culture. The Germans

and the French have long since turned their backs on the florid

variety of vocalists, and the Italians are now following suit. An

eminent Italian teacher in New York, who has made a specialty of

teaching trills and runs and roulades and other vocal circus tricks,

lately declared that he was tired of this style of singing, and began

to prefer a more simple and dramatic style. The same is true of the

modern Italian composers. It is well known that Boïto, Ponchielli, and

Verdi in his latest operas, approximate the German style; and their

admirers will doubtless ere long adapt their taste to this change.

Nevertheless, there are not a few remaining who look upon opera as a

sort of vocal acrobatics. They go once or twice to the Metropolitan,

and feel defrauded of their money if the prima donna fails to come

forward to the prompter's box to run up some breakneck scales, and,

having arrived at the top, descend by means of a chain of trills or

series of somersaults. Their interest in music is _athletic_ (feats of

skill), not _æsthetic_ (artistic expression of emotions). Yet these

people have the impudence to say that German opera is "stupid,"

forgetting that their case might be analogous to that of the drunkard

who thinks the earth is reeling when he is.

This class of opera-goers never tire of abusing such singers as

Fräulein Brandt and Herr Niemann because their voices are no longer as

mellow as in their youth, and sometimes weaken in a sustained note or

swerve for a second from the pitch. Such blemishes are no doubt to be

regretted, but they are a hundred times atoned for by the passion and

the variety of emotional expression that animate their voices, and by

their superb acting. Fräulein Brandt's _Ortrud_, _Eglantine_, and

_Fides_ will be referred to generations hence as models, as will Herr

Niemann's _Tannhäuser_, _Siegmund_, _Cortez_, _Lohengrin_, _Tristan_,

etc. New Yorkers must consider themselves fortunate in having heard

for two seasons the greatest of Wagnerian tenors--even though he is no

longer in his prime--the man who sang the title _rôle_ of

"Tannhäuser" when that opera was produced in Paris in 1861; who

created the part of _Siegmund_ in 1876 at Bayreuth; and who, in his

way, has done as much to popularize Wagner's operas as Liszt did

during the Weimar period, when people had to go to that city to hear

"Lohengrin" and "Tannhäuser," as they now go to Bayreuth to hear

"Parsifal." He is not only valuable for the sake of his artistic

qualities, but because of his enthusiasm for the cause of the best

music. Wagner held him in the highest esteem; and he wrote in his

review of the Bayreuth festival of 1876, that without Niemann's

devotion and ardor its success would not have been assured. He

regretted subsequently that he did not ask Niemann to create the

_rôle_ of _Siegfried_ in the last drama of the Tetralogy, as well as

that of _Siegmund_ in the second. Thanks to this mistake, New Yorkers

had the privilege of hearing Niemann's _début_ in this _rôle_--at the

age of fifty-seven, an age when most tenors have retired on their

pensions.

Three artists are included in the present company at the Metropolitan

whom Mr. Stanton could not dispense with under any circumstances. One

of these is Herr Fischer, who, now that Scaria is no more, is beyond

comparison the finest dramatic bass on the stage. No Italian could have

a more mellow and sonorous voice, and his method has all the

conscientiousness, passion, and distinctness of enunciation that

characterize the German style. His _Wotan_ and his _Hans Sachs_,

especially, are marvels of operatic impersonation. Herr Alvary, the

second of the vocalists who unite Italian with German merits, is a

young singer who has a great future before him, if his _Siegfried_, a

most realistic and powerful impersonation, may be argued from. And as

for the third of these artists--Lilli Lehmann--her equal can hardly

to-day be found on the operatic stage. It is very characteristic of the

late Intendant of the Berlin theatres--Herr von Hülsen (who waited nine

years before he accepted "Lohengrin" for performance, and afterward

repeated the same _faux pas_ with the Nibelung Trilogy)--that he

confined Fräulein Lehmann for years to subordinate _rôles_. Indeed,

although she had acquired considerable fame abroad, it may be said that

her real career did not begin till she came to New York. Here her rare

merits were at once recognized, and instead of resting on her laurels,

she has grown more admirable as an actress and singer every year. Her

voice has a sensuous beauty that is matchless, and no other prima

donna, except Materna, has emotion in her voice so deep and genuine as

that which moves us in Lehmann's _Isolde_ and _Brünnhilde_.

She made her _début_ in 1866, at Prague, and ten years later sang the

small _rôles_ of the first Rhine maiden and the forest bird in

"Rheingold" and "Siegfried," at the Bayreuth festival--little

fancying, perhaps, that she would twelve years later be the queen of

German opera in America. She takes excellent care of her voice, and

never allows the weather to interfere with her daily walk of several

miles. Her versatility is extraordinary, for she sings _Norma_ and

_Valentine_ as well as she does _Isolde_. She scouts the idea that

Wagner's music ruins the voice, agreeing on this point with the most

famous vocal teacher of the day, Madame Marchesi. It is only when

Wagner's music is sung to excess that it injures the voice, according

to Fräulein Lehmann, because it requires such extraordinary power to

cope with the orchestra. Heretofore she has not always succeeded in

holding her own against the full orchestra, but in her latest and

greatest impersonation--_Brünnhilde_, in "Die Götterdämmerung"--her

voice rivalled Materna's in power without losing a shade of its

sensuous beauty, which is always enchanting.

If it were possible to secure half a dozen more singers like Lehmann,

Alvary, and Fischer, the operatic problem might be regarded as solved.

It is the scarcity of first-class acting vocalists that makes opera so

expensive, and prevents it from being self-supporting. The number of

first-class singers is so small that every manager competes for them,

and enables them to charge fancy prices, which are ruinous to any

manager who has no government or other support to fall back on.

It is a curious thing, this scarcity of good singers. We read so much

about all professions being over-crowded; and yet here is a profession

in which success literally means millions, and yet so few come forward

in it that managers are at their wits' ends what to do, especially in

the case of tenors. Herr Niemann obtains seven hundred and fifty

dollars for every appearance; Fräulein Lehmann gets six hundred

dollars, and there are singers who are much better paid still because

they appear under the star system. Surely this ought to be a

sufficient bait to catch talented pupils. How many professions are

there in which one can make between five hundred and two thousand

dollars in three or four hours?--not to speak of the possibility of

winning the great prize--Madame Patti's four or five thousand?

It is sometimes said that the repertory is at fault; but I am

convinced that if there were plenty of good singers in the field, many

of the operas that were formerly in vogue might be revived

successfully--always excepting the flimsy productions of Bellini and

Donizetti. It was formerly believed for years that "Lohengrin" was the

only one of Wagner's early operas that American audiences cared for.

But "Tannhäuser" has, in a few years, become more popular than

"Lohengrin," thanks largely to its better staging and interpretation.

Owing in a large measure to Fräulein Brandt's _Fides_ and Fräulein

Lehmann's _Bertha_, Meyerbeer's "Prophète" has been a success for

several years. Spontini's "Cortez," Weber's "Euryanthe," Wagner's

"Rienzi," and Beethoven's "Fidelio," are among the most interesting

revivals during Mr. Stanton's enterprising _régime_.

No composer, and few poets, have ever inspired so many artists to

visualize their conceptions on canvas as the poetic scenes suggested

in Wagner's dramas. A special exhibition of such pictures was held in

Vienna some years ago. It is not too much to say that Wagner's scenic

backgrounds are as much more artistic than those of other opera

composers as his texts are more poetic than theirs. He avoids frequent

changes, and generally has only three scenes for an opera. But each of

these, if executed according to his directions, is a masterpiece, and

impresses itself on the memory like the canvas of a master.

The performance of the Trilogy in New York has naturally revived among

the Wagnerites the question as to which of the master's works is the

greatest. Leaving aside "Tristan" and "Die Meistersinger," which he

never surpassed, many regard the first act of "Die Walküre" the most

finished of Wagner's creations; and certainly it has a marvellously

impressive climax--_Siegmund's_ drawing of the sword from the

ash-tree, and the love duo which follows; and another in _Wotan's_

farewell in Act III. But grand as these are, many consider the last

act of "Die Götterdämmerung" the supreme achievement of Wagner. The

exquisite trio of the Rhine maidens swimming and singing in a

picturesque forest scene; the death of _Siegfried_, and the procession

that slowly carries his body by the light of the moon up the hill; and

the burning of the funeral pyre at the end, until it is put out by the

rising waters of the Rhine bearing the maidens on the surface; these

scenes, with the glorious music accompanying, cannot be matched by any

act of any other opera. Nevertheless, as a whole, "Siegfried" is, in

my opinion, the grandest part of the Trilogy. In no other work of

Wagner is there such a minute correspondence, every second, between

the poetry, music, and scenery. Every action and gesture on the stage

is mirrored in the orchestra; and I shall never forget the remark made

to me in 1876, at Bayreuth, by a musician, that in "Siegfried" we hear

for the first time music such as Nature herself would make if she had

an orchestra.

* * * * *

+--------------------------------------------------------------+

| Typographical errors corrected in text: |

| |

| Page 92: removed extra 'to' in 'resorted to to rouse' |

| Page 158: Wilhelmj replaced with Wilhelm |

| Page 162: Erlich replaced with Ehrlich |

| |

| Since 'Erlking' (page 138) and 'Erl King' (page 237) are |

| from two articles, and both are legitimate spellings of |

| Schubert's music, these are left as is. |

+--------------------------------------------------------------+

* * * * *

End of Project Gutenberg's Chopin and Other Musical Essays, by Henry T. Finck

Chopin and Other Musical Essays · 第 14 / 14 段