Famous composers and their works, Vol. 2

by Unknown

MONUMENT TO MOZART IN SALZBURG.

Erected in 1842.

Mozart, as we have seen, wrote much for the church. Unfortunately the best known of his masses were written to suit the florid taste of his patron; and his church music, judged thereby, has been reproached for its frivolity and insincerity. Some, forgetting the solemnity of the litanies de venerabili, the dignity of the vespers, the heavenly "Ave Verum," the "Qui tollis" from the mass in C minor, and portions of the Requiem, have denied him religious feeling, so far as his religious music is concerned. But the musical expression of religious feeling differs with the time, the place, and the individual. What is religious music? To the Aztec, who in religious sacrifice cut out the victim's heart, the beating of the serpent-skin drum was religious music; to the monks of the Middle Ages the drone of the plain song of the church seemed the expression of religious contemplation; and to-day many worthy people find spiritual consolation in the joyous ditties of the Salvation Army. We define religious music conformably with our own religious sentiment. In the days of Palestrina, church music influenced subtly the congregation; it created a mood, a Stimmung. In the days of Haydn and Mozart the influence of the virtuosoship of the opera-singer was strongly felt; it invaded the church; it was recognized by the composer of the mass. So in more modern days the dramatic instinct of operatic composers is seen in their religious works; and one may say with Rubinstein, "I think it an error, however, to condemn for that reason the 'Stabat Mater' of Rossini or the 'Requiem' of Verdi in Protestant countries. The Protestant may indeed say: 'I have a different feeling,' but not, 'That is bad, because it is other than my feeling of worship.'" Thibaut may attack the church music of Mozart, and Lorenz may defend it; each expresses thereby his own religious sentiment. It is true that many of the masses of Mozart, considered as music, are not to be compared with his works of a higher flight; and the one that is the most popular, the 12th, so called, was not written by him. But how about the "Requiem," which he left unfinished, and which has been the subject of so many legends, so many disputes? Did not the mystery that for a time surrounded its birth give it a fictitious value? The Requiem and Kyrie are the work of Mozart as they now exist; the movements from the Dies Iræ to the first eight bars of the Lacrimosa, also the Domine Jesu and Hostias, were finished by him in the voice part and bass, and the principal points of the instrumentation were also indicated by him. It will be seen, therefore, that the part of Süssmayer, who completed it, is considerable. Now there has been much discussion concerning the merits of the double fugue even from the technical standpoint, and it is true that the most beautiful portions of the work are the least polyphonic, as the wailing Lacrimosa, which beyond a peradventure belongs to Mozart, although so little was actually written with his own hand; the Confutatis with the antiphonal effects of male and female voices, and the marvellous, unearthly harmonies of the Oro supplex; the powerful and concise Rex tremendae. On the other hand the Tuba mirum with the trombone cantabile is an inadequate setting of the dread scene. By many worshippers of Mozart, who at the same time believe in the supremacy of religious music, the Requiem is called the truest and most genuine expression of Mozart's nature, and his imperishable monument. But the contrary opinion now prevails among prominent musicians. The Requiem as a whole cannot be considered as complete a revelation of the genius of the composer as the G-minor symphony, the quartets dedicated to Haydn, "Figaro" or "Don Giovanni."

Now the supreme genius of Mozart is seen in his dramatic works. It has been said that he completed the palace of Italian opera and laid the enduring foundations of the German. This saying has more of epigram than truth; or it is only partially true. The opera is a thing of fashion, an amusement of the day. It is finally shaped by the prevailing popular taste, although the beginnings of a new and varying form may be in opposition to that taste. The history of opera from the time of its invention at Florence to the pilgrimages to Bayreuth is a story of fickle tastes, passionate caprices, violent disputes. First there was the revolt against the contrapuntists; then came the rule of the singer; then the conflict between dramatic truth and personal vainglory, a conflict that was born with the birth of opera. Run over the "History of Operas" by Clément and Larousse; glance at the roll of singers from the early times of virtuosoship: names that are utterly forgotten, and yet they once filled the mouths of men and were the idols of the day. It is a dreary business, this reading of the exploits of singers and opera makers of the past,—not unlike the deciphering of moss-covered tombstones in the hillside graveyard of a well-nigh deserted New England village. To better appreciate the work of Mozart, let us briefly consider the condition of opera when he first looked toward the stage. In the middle of the eighteenth century the singer ruled supreme. They were great days, those eighteenth-century days,—"When men had longer breaths and voices that never grew old, when strange and terrible things still happened, sapphire rings presented them by the demon, processions to welcome them, and violent deaths by murder or in brawls." The singers had contributed largely in forming the lyric drama, but their demands became exorbitant and the composer was their slave. The introduction of castrates on the stage was of special influence in shaping the operatic conditions. Take any opera seria of that day: it consists simply of a series of detached airs strung together by the poet's story. There was no dramatic action; there was simply an operatic concert. The prima donna was the queen of the theatre; she claimed the privilege of the escort of a page when she made her entrance; he held the train of her robe and followed every movement. The tenor was obliged to be either a noble father, a traitor or tyrant. The basso was restricted to opera buffa, for it was thought that his voice was naturally too "grotesque" to be heard in opera seria. The castrate was the monarch of the scene. Singularly enough, he was called the primo uomo, and to him was given the lover's part. His very person was sacred on the stage. Others might slay and be slain; he was inviolable, and his head was always crowned with laurel. It was the rule in Italy, never to admit the murder of the chief singer, although the piece itself might reek with blood. These male sopranos were spoiled children. One must make his appearance upon a horse; another insisted on descending from a mountain; another would not sing unless his plume was five feet in length. The moment they finished their airs, they left the stage, or remained upon it sucking oranges or drinking wine. They made their demands on the composer; he was obliged to write a bravura aria, or an air di portamento with perhaps a trumpet obligato, according to their caprice. They robbed their associates of their airs if they saw a possible distribution of glory. The chief singer and the composer between them made the opera, for there was but little ensemble work. The custom was to finish the second act with a duet between the castrate and the first soprano; to end the third by a terzetto in which the first tenor was admitted. Grétry tells us that during the seven or eight years he lived in Rome, he never saw a serious opera succeed. "If the theatre was crowded, it was to hear a certain singer; and when the singer left the stage, the people in the boxes played cards or ate ices, and the people in the parterre yawned." And Voltaire summed up the whole matter when he wrote M. de Cideville (1752) that "the opera is a public rendezvous where people meet on certain days without knowing why; it is a house which is frequented by everybody, although the master is freely cursed and the crowd bored."

PRIZE MODEL FOR NEW MONUMENT TO MOZART IN VIENNA.

Reproduced from a photograph.

It was different in opera buffa. In this species of opera the virtuosos were not so powerful as the poet and the composer. The castrate could not afford to waste his time in consorting with the "bouffons," and so his place was taken by the tenor, who became the passionate lover. In like manner the prima donna, was paid such a small sum that the manager was obliged to look for women of ambition and dramatic talent instead of acknowledged vocal skill. The basso was admitted to the company, and here was the foundation of an ensemble impossible in grand opera. The opera seria remained in its conventional or ideal world; the opera buffa was concerned with subjects of everyday life. The former clung to history or legend; the latter delighted in appealing to the life of the people. The composer was allowed more liberty. He was not confined to the da capo air, composed of two parts with the invariable repetition of the first; he could use the rondo, where the chief melody appears after each secondary theme; or the cavatina, with one movement; or the chanson with its simple couplet; in other words, he could better suit the dramatic action. He wrote duets, trios, quartets of importance, and gradually the finale was developed. So too the orchestra, which had been subordinated to the imperious singer in opera seria, found its voice, and even sang in passages where the text demanded of the singer a rapid delivery that was almost dramatic speech. The opera buffa rapidly grew in public favor, and Arteaga in his famous book on the "Revolution of Italian Dramatic Music" frankly confessed that the opera buffa was in better condition and gave greater promise than its more pretentious rival.