A not less important office is undertaken by the orchestra in assisting the psychological characterisation, not only by giving light and shade and colouring through changes of tone-colouring and similar devices unattainable by the voices, but by taking a positive part in the rendering of emotion.
No emotion is so simple as to be capable of a single decided and comprehensive expression. To the voices is intrusted the task of depicting the main features, while the orchestra undertakes to express the secondary and even 'the contradictory impulses of the mind, from the conflict of which arise emotions capable of being expressed in music alone of all the arts. We can scarcely wonder that Mozart's FIGARO AS AN OPERA BUFFA. contemporaries, surprised at the novelty of his orchestral effects, failed to appreciate their true meaning,[ 46 ] nor that his imitators confined themselves to the material result, and failed to perceive the intellectual significance of the improved instrumentation.[ 47 ] The freedom with which Mozart employs voices and orchestra together or apart to express dramatic truths can only exist as the highest result of artistic knowledge and skill. The independence with which each element cooperates as if consciously to produce the whole presupposes a perfect mastery of musical form. True polyphony is the mature fruit of contrapuntal study, although the severe forms of counterpoint are seldom allowed to make themselves visible.
To sum up, there can be no doubt that Mozart's "Figaro" must be ranked above the ordinary performances of opera buffa on higher grounds than its possession of an interesting libretto, a wealth of beautiful melody, and a careful and artistic mechanism. The recognition of truth of dramatic characterisation as the principle of musical representation was an immense gain, and had never even been approached by opera buffa, with its nonsensical tricks and caricatures.
Rossini himself said that Mozart's "Figaro" was a true dramma giocoso, while he and all other Italian composers had only composed opere buffe.[ 48 ] Even though we acknowledge the influence of French opera on Mozart (Vol. II., p. 342) as formed by Gluck,[ 49 ] and still more by Grétry (Vol. II., p. 15),[ 50 ] the first glance suffices to show that Mozart's superior musical cultivation enabled him to employ the resources of his art to LE NOZZE DI FIGARO. a far greater degree than Grétry. Granting also Grétry's undoubted powers of dramatic characterisation and expression of emotion, Mozart's nature is also in these respects far deeper and nobler. Nothing can be more erroneous than the idea that Mozart's merit consisted in taking what was best from Italian and French opera, and combining them into his own; it was solely by virtue of his universal genius' that he was enabled to produce an opera which is at once dramatic, comic, and musical. Chance has decreed that "Figaro" should be an Italian adaptation of a French comedy, set to music by a German; and this being so serves only to show how national diversities can be blended into a higher unity.
A glance by way of comparison at the Italian operas which competed in some respects successfully with "Figaro," such as Sarti's "Fra due litiganti il terrzo godef" Paesiello's.
"Barbiere di Seviglia" and "Re Teodoro," Martin's "Cosa Rara and "Arbore di Diana," or Salieri's "Grotta di Trofonio," may at first excite surprise that they contain so much that reminds us of Mozart, and which we have learnt to identify with Mozart, knowing it only through him. But a nearer examination will show that this similarity is confined to form, for the most part to certain external turns of expression belonging to the time, just as certain forms of speech and manner belong to different periods. In all essential and important points, careful study will serve only to confirm belief in Mozart's originality and superiority. All the operas just mentioned have qualities deserving of our recognition. They are composed with ease and cleverness, with a full knowledge of theatrical effect and musical mechanism, and are full of life and merriment, of pretty melodies, and capital intrigue. But Mozart fails in none of these qualities, and only in minor matters do these other works deserve to be placed side by side with his. None of them can approach him even in some matters of detail, such as the treatment of the orchestra, or the grouping of the ensembles. What is much more important, however, they fail altogether in that wherein consists Mozart's true pre-eminence: in the intellectual organisation, the psychological depth, the VIENNA, 1786. intensity of feeling, and consequent power of characterisation, the firm handling of form and resource, proceeding from that power, and the purity and grace which have a deeper foundation than merely sensual Beauty. Those operas have long since disappeared from the stage, because no amount of success in details will preserve in being any work uninteresting as a whole. Mozart's "Figaro" lives on the stage, and in every musical circle; youth is nourished on it, age delights in it with ever-increasing delight. It requires no external aid for its apprehension; it is the pulse-beat of our own life which we feel, the language of our own heart that we catch the sound of, the irresistible witchery of immortal beauty which enchains us—it is genuine, eternal art which makes us conscious of freedom and bliss.
