The spirit of revolution, which was uprooting all old traditions, good and bad, at the end of the eighteenth century, forced even the Italian composers to see that more was required than they had ever given, to make opera what it should be, and they were compelled to acknowledge that, after Gluck’s reforms and their still lasting effects, and after Mozart’s influence and his noble examples, they must take up higher ground if they would succeed in other than the Italian cities.
They composed, therefore, in a more serious manner for Paris or Vienna, and the Italian opera gained a fresh importance by the slight reforms thus adopted, and through the successful power of Rossini it again held sway in the principal European courts.
Rossini made a great many melodies and much pecuniary profit, and finding the singers ready to return to those abuses against which Gluck had protested so strongly, rather than permit them to play tricks with his music and embellish his melodies, he made the trills and embroideries so fulsome himself that there was nothing left which they could add!
In the present century Mercadante, Bellini, and Donizetti followed in his train; following them comes Verdi, who is still living, and whose later works are very fine, being a happy combination of immense dramatic insight with effective situations and great melodic charm. We find in Boito the most decided attempt to unite Italian traditions and the latest German development. Thus much for the land in which opera was born.
Opera soon spread, and travelled to the various European courts, and became there the amusement of noble and wealthy patrons. Such prestige did it carry with it, that to be successful in England or Germany, a composer had to write in the Italian style.
France, whilst building upon the Italian foundation, created an opera in many ways differing from that form. Real French opera was first written by Lulli at the end of the seventeenth century. He will be ever remembered as the inventor of the overture, which replaced the small introduction of the Italians. Another thing he did which was new: he brought into his scheme the dance or ballet; and a third point was, that in his operas the chorus played a most important part.
Following Lulli, we see Rameau greatly developing all these resources.
When Gluck migrated to Paris he found the supporters of Italian opera backed by such essayists as Rousseau and Baron von Grimm, and named the “Bouffonists,” opposing the “Anti-Bouffonists,” who adhered to Lulli and Rameau. Also there were Philidor, Gretry, and others trying to combine the new and old styles. Gluck cut down the superabundance of melody, adapted his own reforms already referred to, gave the overture its true connection with the poem, and, as it were, out-Rameaued Rameau. With all his works produced in Paris he made great successes, notwithstanding his rival Piccini’s powerful opposition.
We will again leave Gluck elevating, for this time, the French stage also, and glance at opera comique, a term used in France as early as 1712.
I suppose that the equivalent of the Italian intermezzo was the vaudeville. Claude Gilliers appears to have written many about this period.