III
One turns with relief to contemporary opera in New Orleans. The preëminence of New Orleans as an operatic centre among American cities of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was as marked as that of New York has been in recent times, though its population was only a fraction of that possessed by New York, Philadelphia, or Boston. Of course, New Orleans really was not an American city and did not contain any considerable number of American residents until many years after the Louisiana Purchase. It was, in effect, a French provincial city with a metropolitan flavor due to its position as the head of a rich and important colony. When one remembers the notably gregarious instincts of Frenchmen and their intense and tenacious devotion to the homeland, it is easy to understand how in New Orleans they reproduced as far as possible the social and artistic conditions of Paris. The thoroughly French character of New Orleans and its life remained unchanged during the Spanish régime, and even the purchase effected no appreciable change until many years had passed. This was especially so at the opera, which even now remains a thoroughly French institution, and it has been said that until after the Civil War American visitors to the opera were very rare. Indeed, opera is a form of art which has always appealed less to native Americans than to foreign-born citizens.
Information on the actual beginnings of opera in New Orleans are rather scanty, but we know that a regular troupe of French comedians and singers appeared there in 1791, and it is to be assumed that they presented operas of Grétry, Gluck, Dalayrac, Monsigny, and others, more or less efficiently. Opera, drama, and ballet in the best French manner were given at M. Croquet's Théâtre St. Philippe in 1808. Another theatre was built in St. Peter Street in 1810, and among the operas given there in that and the following year were Paesiello's 'Barber of Seville' and Zingarelli's 'Romeo and Juliet.' The arrival of John Davis in 1811 with a troupe from San Domingo marks one of the real epochs in American operatic activities. Davis built the Théâtre d'Orléans in 1813 and, when it was burned down four years later, he rebuilt it at a cost of $180,000. This new theatre was by far the finest and best appointed in America. Opera was given there three times a week by a regular opera company, and not by artists who combined opera with the spoken drama, as was customary elsewhere in America. After the death of John Davis his son Pierre conducted the theatre for twenty-five years. The glories of French opera in New Orleans during those years must await mention in a later chapter, but, remarkable as they were, they hardly surpassed the achievements of the elder Davis during a period when opera elsewhere in America offered little of interest or artistic importance. The works of Rossini, Mozart, Spontini, Méhul, Grétry, Gluck, and other of the most eminent operatic composers were given in the best manner by competent orchestras and ensembles, by distinguished conductors and soloists. Beginning with García's visit in 1825, New York received frequent attentions from foreign opera companies, and soon was enjoying an operatic life which has now grown to proportions surpassed by few cities in the world, but at least half of the nineteenth century had passed away before New Orleans lost its proud position as the real home of opera in America.
W. D. D.
FOOTNOTES:
[37] One must except Mr. Sonneck, who has unearthed some interesting material on opera in America prior to 1750. The reader is referred to his article in 'The New Music Review,' New York, Vol. 6, 1907.
CHAPTER VI
OPERA IN THE UNITED STATES. PART I: NEW YORK
The New York opera as a factor of musical culture—Manuel García and his troupe; da Ponte's dream—The vicissitudes of the Italian Opera House; Palmo's attempt at democratic opera—The beginnings of 'social' opera: the Academy of Music—German opera; Maretzek to Strakosch—The early years of the Metropolitan—The Grau régime—Conried; Hammerstein; Gatti-Casazza; Opera in English; the Century Opera Company.
The vogue of English ballad opera, as we have seen, began to lose some of its hold on New York audiences during the first years of the nineteenth century. Symptomatic of an awakening desire for other forms of operatic entertainment were the adaptations of Il Barbiere di Siviglia, Le Nozze di Figaro, Der Freischütz, and similar favorites of the contemporary European stage. There existed in New York at that time a society of some brilliance, wealth, and culture—a modest replica of the upper circles of London, Paris, and Vienna. In these latter cities the opera flourished as a social function; it was one of the most important foci of fashion. Obviously New York could not remain long without such an addition to its fashionable life. Nor could English opera serve the purpose, for English opera had ceased to be the thing in London. Society had taken up Italian opera, and only Italian opera was then de rigueur. Why New York did not have Italian opera at an earlier date it is difficult to say. Possibly the field did not seem sufficiently tempting to the European entrepreneurs; possibly New York society had not yet affected that cosmopolitan air which had come to be the distinguishing mark of the socially elect elsewhere.
Whatever factors operated to keep Italian opera out of New York, the situation had altered sufficiently in 1825 to tempt Manuel García[38] over with an opera company in that year. To be sure, García was past his prime as a singer and, except for his daughter, Maria, and the basso Angrisani, his company was worse than indifferent. But his coming marked the beginning of an epoch in the operatic history of this country. He gave New Yorkers a first taste of the best in contemporary opera and inaugurated a fashion which on the whole has been productive of very brilliant results. In spite of the fact that opera is not and never has been in New York a diversion for the proletariat; in spite of the fact that it has been to a large extent a vehicle for ostentation; in spite of the fact that its conduct has not always been guided by broad artistic ideals—in spite of all these and other drawbacks New York has set for itself a standard of operatic achievement which is scarcely surpassed by any city in the world. The value of this standard in the promotion of musical culture is questionable; that it subserves the best interests of art is not certain. But at least New York must be awarded the credit of doing such operatic work as it has chosen to do in a finished and magnificent manner.