History of the Opera from its Origin in Italy to the present Time Part 31

[Sidenote: ROSSINI'S BIOGRAPHERS.]

Rossini had already composed several operas for various Italian theatres (among which may be particularly mentioned _L'Italiana in Algeri_, written for Venice in 1813, the composer having then just attained his majority) when the _Barbiere di Siviglia_ was produced at Rome for the Carnival of 1816. The singers were Vitarelli, Boticelli, Zamboni, Garcia and Mesdames Giorgi-Righetti, and Rossi. A number of different versions of the circ.u.mstances which attended, preceded, and followed the representation of this opera, have been published, but the account furnished by Madame Giorgi-Righetti, who introduced the music of Rossini to the world, is the one most to be relied upon and which I shall adopt.

I may first of all remind the reader that a very interesting life of Rossini, written with great _verve_ and spirit, full of acute observations, but also full of misstatements and errors of all kinds,[81] has been published by Stendhal, who was more than its translator, but not its author. Stendhal's "Vie de Rossini" is founded on a work by the Abbe Carpani. To what extent the ingenious author of the treatise _De l'Amour_, and of the admirable novel _La Charteuse de Parme_, is indebted to the Abbe, I cannot say; but if he borrowed from him his supposed facts, and his opinions as a musician, he owes him all the worst portion of his book. The brothers Escudier have also published a "Vie de Rossini," which is chiefly valuable for the list of his works, and the dates of their production.

[Sidenote: THE BARBER OF SEVILLE.]

To return to the _Barber of Seville_, of which the subject was librsuggested to Rossini by the author of the _libretto_, Sterbini.

Sterbini proposed to arrange it for music in a new form; Rossini acquiesced, and the librettists went to work. The report was soon spread that Rossini was about to reset Paisiello's libretto. For this some accused Rossini of presumption, while others said that in taking Paisiello's subject he was behaving meanly and unjustly. This was absurd, for all Metastasio's lyrical dramas have been set to music by numbers of composers; but this fact was not likely to be taken into consideration by Rossini's enemies. Paisiello himself took part in the intrigues against the young composer, and wrote a letter from Naples, begging one of his friends at Rome to leave nothing undone that could contribute to the failure of the second _Barber_. When the night of representation, at the Argentina Theatre, arrived, Rossini's enemies were all at their posts, declaring openly what they hoped and intended should be the fate of the new opera. His friends, on the other hand, were not nearly so decided, remembering, as they did, the uncomplimentary manner in which Rossini's _Torvaldo_ had been received only a short time before. The composer, says Madame Giorgi-Righetti "was weak enough to allow Garcia to sing beneath Rosina's balcony a Spanish melody of his own arrangement. Garcia maintained, that as the scene was in Spain the Spanish melody would give the drama an appropriate local colour; but, unfortunately, the artist who reasoned so well, and who was such an excellent singer, forgot to tune his guitar before appearing on the stage as "Almaviva." He began the operation in the presence of the public. A string broke. The vocalist proceeded to replace it; but before he could do so, laughter and hisses were heard from all parts of the house. The Spanish air, when Garcia was at last ready to sing it, did not please the Italian audience, and the pit listened to it just enough to be able to give an ironical imitation of it afterwards.

The introduction to Figaro's air seemed to be liked; but when Zamboni entered, with another guitar in his hand, a loud laugh was set up, and not a phrase of _Largo al factotum_ was heard. When Rosina made her appearance in the balcony, the public were quite prepared to applaud Madame Giorgi-Righetti in an air which they thought they had a right to expect from her; but only hearing her utter a phrase which led to nothing, the expressions of disapprobation recommenced. The duet between "Almaviva" and "Figaro" was accompanied throughout with hissing and shouting. The fate of the work seemed now decided.

At length Rosina came on, and sang the _cavatina_ which had so long been looked for. Madame Giorgi-Righetti was young, had a fresh beautiful voice, and was a great favourite with the Roman public. Three long rounds of applause followed the conclusion of her air, and gave some hope that the opera might yet be saved. Rossini, who was at the orchestral piano, bowed to the public, then turned towards the singer, and whispered "_oh natura_!"

This happy moment did not last, and the hisses recommenced with the duet between Figaro and Rosina. The noise increased, and it was impossible to hear a note of the finale. When the curtain fell Rossini turned towards the public, shrugged his shoulders and clapped his hands. The audience were deeply offended by this openly-expressed contempt for their opinion, but they made no reply at the time.

The vengeance was reserved for the second act, of which not a note pa.s.sed the orchestra. The hubbub was so great, that nothing like it was ever heard at any theatre. Rossini in the meanwhile remained perfectly calm, and afterwards went home as composed as if the work, received in so insulting a manner, had been the production of some other musician.

After changing their clothes, Madame Giorgi-Righetti, Garcia, Zamboni, and Botticelli, went to his house to console him in his misfortune. They found him fast asleep.

[Sidenote: THE BARBER OF SEVILLE.]

The next day he wrote the delightful _cavatina, Ecco ridente il cielo_, to replace Garcia's unfortunate Spanish air. The melody of the new solo was borrowed from the opening chorus of _Aureliano in Palmira_, written by Rossini in 1814, for Milan, and produced without success; the said chorus having itself figured before in the same composer's _Ciro_ in _Babilonia_, also unfavourably received. Garcia read his _cavatina_ as it was written, and sang it the same evening. Rossini, having now made the only alteration he thought necessary, went back to bed, and pretended to be ill, that he might not have to take his place in the evening at the piano.

At the second performance, the Romans seemed disposed to listen to the work of which they had really heard nothing the night before. This was all that was needed to ensure the opera's triumphant success. Many of the pieces were applauded; but still no enthusiasm was exhibited. The music, however, pleased more and more with each succeeding representation, until at last the climax was reached, and _Il Barbiere_ produced those transports of admiration among the Romans with which it was afterwards received in every town in Italy, and in due time throughout Europe. It must be added, that a great many connoisseurs at Rome were struck from the first moment with the innumerable beauties of Rossini's score, and went to his house to congratulate him on its excellence. As for Rossini, he was not at all surprised at the change which took place in public opinion. He was as certain of the success of his work the first night, when it was being hooted, as he was a week afterwards, when every one applauded it to the skies.

[Sidenote: THE BARBER OF SEVILLE.]

In Paris, more than three years afterwards, with Garcia still playing the part of "Almaviva," and with Madame Ronzi de Begnis as "Rosina,"

_Il Barbiere_ was not much better received than on its first production at Rome. It was less astonis.h.i.+ng that it should fail before an audience of Parisians (at that time quite unacquainted with Rossini's style) than before a highly musical public like that of Rome. In each case, the work of Paisiello was made the excuse for condemning that of Rossini; but Rossini's _Barber_ was not treated with indignity at the Italian Theatre of Paris. It was simply listened to very coldly. Every one was saying, that after Paisiello's opera it was nothing, that the two were not to be compared, &c., when, fortunately, some one proposed that Paisiello's _Barber_ should be revived. Paer, the director of the music, and who is said to have been rendered very uneasy by Rossini's Italian successes, thought that to crush Rossini by means of his predecessor, was no bad idea. The St. Petersburgh _Barber_ of 1788 was brought out; but it was found that he had grown old and feeble; or, rather, the simplicity of the style was no longer admired, and the artists who had already lost the traditions of the school, were unable to sing the music with any effect. Rossini's _Barber_ has now been before the world for nearly half a century, and we all know whether it is old-fas.h.i.+oned; whether the airs are tedious; whether the form of the concerted pieces, and of the grand finale, leaves anything to be desired; whether the instrumentation is poor; whether, in short, on any one point, any subsequent work of the same kind even by Rossini himself, has surpa.s.sed, equalled, or even approached it. But the thirty years of Paisiello's Barber bore heavily upon the poor old man, and he was found sadly wanting in that gaiety and brilliancy which have given such celebrity to Rossini's hero, and after which Beaumarchais's sparkling epigrammatic dialogue appears almost dull.[82] Paisiello's opera was a complete failure. And when Rossini's _Barbiere_ was brought out again, every one was struck by the contrast.

It profited by the very artifice which was to have destroyed it, and Rossini's enemies took care for the future not to establish comparisons between Rossini and Paisiello. Madame Ronzi de Begnis, too, had been replaced very advantageously by Madame Fodor. With two such admirable singers as Fodor and Garcia in the parts of "Rosina" and "Almaviva,"

with Pellegrini as "Figaro," and Begnis as "Basil," the success of the opera increased with each representation: and though certain musical _quid-nuncs_ continued to shake their heads when Rossini's name was mentioned in a drawing-room, his reputation with the great body of the theatrical public was now fully established.

The _tirana_ composed by Garcia _Se il mio nome saper voi bramate_, which he appears to have abandoned after the unfavourable manner in which it was received at Rome, was afterwards re-introduced into the _Barber_ by Rubini.

The whole of the _Barber of Seville_ was composed from beginning to end in a month. _Ecco ridente il cielo_ (the air adapted from _Aureliano in Palmira_) was, as already mentioned, added after the first representation. The overture, moreover, had been previously written for _Aureliano in Palmira_, and (after the failure of that work) had been prefixed to _Elizabetta regina d'Inghilterra_ which met with some success, thanks to the admirable singing of Mademoiselle Colbran, in the princ.i.p.al character.

Rossini took his failures very easily, and with the calm confidence of a man who knew he could do better things and that the public would appreciate them. When his _Sigismondo_ was violently hissed at Venice he sent a letter to his mother with a picture of a large _fiasco_, (bottle). His _Torvaldo e Dorliska_, which was brought out soon afterwards, was also hissed, but not so much.

[Sidenote: THE BARBER OF SEVILLE.]

This time Rossini sent his mother a picture of a _fiaschetto_ (little bottle).

The motive of the _allegro_ in the trio of the last act of (to return for a moment to) the _Barber of Seville_, is, as most of my readers are probably aware, simply an arrangement of the ba.s.s air sung by "Simon,"

in _Haydn's Seasons_. The comic air, sung by "Berta," the duenna, is a Russian dance tune, which was very fas.h.i.+onable in Rome, in 1816. Rossini is said to have introduced it into the _Barber of Seville_, out of compliment to some Russian lady.

Rossini's first opera _la Pietra del Paragone_, was written when he was seventeen years of age, for the Scala at Milan, where it was produced in the autumn of 1812. He introduced the best pieces out of this work into the _Cenerentola_, which was brought out five years afterwards at Rome.

Besides _la Pietra del Paragone_, he laid _il Turco in Italia_, and _la Gazzetta_ under contribution to enrich the score of _Cinderella_. The air _Miei rampolli_, the duet _un Soave non so che_, the drinking chorus and the burlesque proclamation of the baron belonged originally to _la Pietra del Paragone_; the _sestett_, the _stretta_ of the finale, the duet _zitto, zitto_, to the _Turco in Italia_, (produced at Milan in 1814), _Miei rampolli_ had also been inserted in _la Gazzetta_.

The princ.i.p.al female part in the _Cenerentola_, though written for a contralto, has generally, (like those of Rosina and Isabella, and also written for contraltos), been sung by sopranos, such as Madame Fodor, Madame Cinti, Madame Sontag, &c. When sung by Mademoiselle Alboni, these parts are executed in every respect in conformity with the composer's intentions.

[Sidenote: ROSSINI'S INNOVATIONS.]

Rossini's first serious opera, or at least the first of those by which his name became known throughout Europe, was _Tancredi_, written for Venice in 1813, the year after _la Pietra del Paragone_. In this opera, we find indicated, if not fully carried out, all those admirable changes in the composition of the lyric drama which were imputed to him by his adversaries as so many artistic crimes. Lord Mount Edgc.u.mbe, in his objections to Rossini's music, strange and almost inexplicable as they appear, yet only says in somewhat different language what is advanced by Rossini's admirers, in proof of his great merit. The connoisseur of a past epoch describes the changes introduced by Rossini into dramatic music, for an enemy, fairly enough; only he regards as detestable innovations what others have accepted as admirable reforms. It appeared to Rossini that the number of airs written for the so-called lyric dramas of his youth, delayed the action to a most wearisome extent. In _Tancredi_, concerted pieces in which the dramatic action is kept up, are introduced in situations where formerly there would have been only monologues. In _Tancredi_ the ba.s.s has little to do, but more than in the operas of the old-school, where he was kept quite in the back ground, the _ultima parte_ being seldom heard except in _ensembles_. By degrees the ba.s.s was brought forward, until at last he became an indispensable and frequently the princ.i.p.al character in all tragic operas. In the old opera the number of characters was limited and choruses were seldom introduced. Think, then, how an amateur of the simple, quiet old school must have been shocked by a thoroughly Rossinian opera, such as _Semiramide_, with its brilliant, sonorous instrumentation, its prominent part for the ba.s.s or baritone, its long elaborate finale, and above all its military band on the stage! Mozart had already antic.i.p.ated every resource that has since been adopted by Rossini, but to Rossini belongs, nevertheless, the merit of having brought the lyric drama to perfection on the Italian stage, and forty and even thirty years ago it was to Rossini that its supposed degradation was attributed.

"So great a change," says Lord Mount Edgc.u.mbe, "has taken place in the character of the (operatic) dramas, in the style of the music and its performance, that I cannot help enlarging on that subject before I proceed further. One of the most material alterations is, that the grand distinction between serious and comic operas is nearly at an end, the separation of the singers for their performance, entirely so.[83] Not only do the same sing in both, but a new species of drama has arisen, a kind of mongrel between them called _semi seria_, which bears the same a.n.a.logy to the other two that that nondescript melodrama does to the legitimate tragedy and comedy of the English stage."

And of which style specimens may be found in Shakespeare's plays and in Mozart's _Don Giovanni_! The union of the serious and the comic in the same lyric work was an innovation of Mozart's, like almost all the innovations attributed by Lord Mount Edgc.u.mbe to Rossini. Indeed, nearly all the operatic reforms of the last three-quarters of a century that have endured, have had Mozart for their originator.

[Sidenote: ROSSINI'S INNOVATIONS.]

"The construction of these newly invented pieces," continues Lord Mount Edgc.u.mbe, "is essentially different from the old. The dialogue which used to be carried on in recitative, and which in Metastasio's operas, is often so beautiful and interesting, is now cut up (and rendered unintelligible, if it were worth listening to), into _pezzi concertati_, or long singing conversations, which present a tedious succession of unconnected, ever-changing motivos, having nothing to do with each other: and if a satisfactory air is for a moment introduced, which the ear would like to dwell upon, to hear modulated, varied and again returned to, it is broken off before it is well understood, by a sudden transition into a totally different melody, time and key, and recurs no more; so that no impression can be made or recollection of it preserved.

Single songs are almost exploded ... even the _prima donna_ who would formerly have complained at having less than three or four airs allotted to her, is now satisfied with one trifling _cavatina_ for a whole opera."

Lord Mount Edgc.u.mbe has. .h.i.therto given a tolerably true account of the reforms introduced by Rossini into the operatic music of Italy; only, instead of calling Rossini's concerted pieces and finales, "a tedious succession of unconnected, ever-changing motivos," he ought to describe them as highly interesting, well connected and eminently dramatic. He goes on to condemn Rossini for his new distribution of characters, and especially for his employment of ba.s.s voices in chief parts "to the manifest injury of melody and total subversion of harmony, in which the lowest part is their peculiar province." Here, however, it occurs to Lord Mount Edgc.u.mbe, and he thereupon expresses his surprise, "that the princ.i.p.al characters in two of Mozart's operas should have been written for ba.s.ses."

When the above curious, and in its way valuable, strictures on Rossini's music were penned, not only _Tancredi_, but also _Il Barbiere_, _Otello_, _La Cenerentola_, _Mose in Egitto_, _La Gazza Ladra_, and other of his works had been produced. _Il Barbiere_ succeeded at once in England, and Lord Mount Edgc.u.mbe tells us that for many years after the first introduction of Rossini's works into England "so entirely did he engross the stage, that the operas of no other master were ever to be heard, with the exception of those of Mozart; and of his only _Don Giovanni_ and _le Nozze di Figaro_ were often repeated.... Every other composer, past and present, was totally put aside, and these two alone named or thought of." Rossini, then, if wrongly applauded, was at least applauded in good company. It appears from Mr. Ebers's "Seven years of the King's Theatre," that of all the operas produced from 1821 to 1828, nearly half were Rossini's, or in exact numbers fourteen out of thirty-four, but it must be remembered that the majority of these were constantly repeated, whereas most of the others were brought out only for a few nights and then laid aside. During the period in question the composer whose works, next to Rossini, were most often represented, was Mozart with _Don Giovanni_, _Le Nozze_, _La Clemenza di t.i.to_, and _Cosi fan Tutti_. The other operas included in the repertoire were by Paer, Mayer, Zingarelli, Spontini, (_la Vestale_), Mercadante, Meyerbeer, (_Il Crociato in Egitto_) &c.

[Sidenote: TANCREDI.]

Our consideration of the causes of Rossini's success, and want of success, has led us far away from the first representation of _Tancredi_ at the theatre of La Fenice. Its success was so great, that each of its melodies became for the Venetians a second "Carnival of Venice;" and even in the law courts, the judges are said to have been obliged to direct the ushers to stop the singing of _Di tanti palpiti_, and _Mi rivedrai te rivedr_.

"I thought after hearing my opera, that the Venetians would think me mad," said Rossini. "Not at all; I found they were much madder than I was." _Tancredi_ was followed by _Aureliano_, produced at Milan in 1814, and, as has already been mentioned, without success. The introduction, however, containing the chorus from which Almaviva's _cavatina_ was adapted, is said to have been one of Rossini's finest pieces. _Otello_, the second of Rossini's important serious operas, was produced in 1816 at Naples (Del Fondo Theatre). The princ.i.p.al female part, as in the now-forgotten _Elizabetta_, and as in a great number of subsequent works, was written for Mademoiselle Colbran. The other parts were sustained by Benedetti, Nozzari, and the celebrated Davide.

In _Otello_, Rossini continued the reforms which he had commenced in _Tancredi_. He made each dramatic scene one continued piece of music, used recitative but sparingly, and when he employed it, accompanied it for the first time in Italy, with the full band. The piano was now banished from the orchestra, forty-two years after it had been banished by Gluck from the orchestras of France.

Davide, in the part of Otello," created the greatest enthusiasm. The following account of his performance is given by a French critic, M.

Edouard Bertin, in a letter from Venice, dated 1823:--

[Sidenote: OTELLO.]

"Davide excites among the _dilettanti_ of this town an enthusiasm and delight which could scarcely be conceived without having been witnessed.

He is a singer of the new school, full of mannerism, affectation, and display, abusing, like Martin, his magnificent voice with its prodigious compa.s.s (three octaves comprised between four B flats). He crushes the princ.i.p.al motive of an air beneath the luxuriance of his ornamentation, and which has no other merit than that of difficulty conquered. But he is also a singer full of warmth, _verve_, expression, energy, and musical sentiment; alone he can fill up and give life to a scene; it is impossible for another singer to carry away an audience as he does, and when he will only be simple, he is admirable; he is the Rossini of song.

He is a great singer; the greatest I ever heard. Doubtless, the manner in which Garcia plays and sings the part of "Otello" is preferable, taking it altogether, to that of Davide. It is purer, more severe, more constantly dramatic; but with all his faults Davide produces more effect, a great deal more effect. There is something in him, I cannot say what, which, even when he is ridiculous, commands, enhances attention. He never leaves you cold; and when he does not move you, he astonishes you; in a word, before hearing him, I did not know what the power of singing really was. The enthusiasm he excites is without limits. In fact, his faults are not faults for Italians, who in their _opera seria_ do not employ what the French call the tragic style, and who scarcely understand us, when we tell them that a waltz or quadrille movement is out of place in the mouth of a Caesar, an a.s.sur, or an Otello. With them the essential thing is to please: they are only difficult on this point, and their indifference as to all the rest is really inconceivable: here is an example of it. Davide, considering apparently that the final duet of _Otello_ did not sufficiently show off his voice, determined to subst.i.tute for it a duet from _Armida_ (Amor possente nome), which is very pretty, but anything rather than severe.