"Among the works for the stage written by Gluck in the 5 years between 1774 and 1779 for Paris, are not only original compositions but also new arrangements of old works. To these belong 'Orphée et Euridice' (August 1774), the two comic operas 'L'arbre enchanté' (February 1775) and 'Cythère assiégée' (August 1775) as well as the last work in the series 'Alceste' (April 1776). The changes effected in these works vary in nature and extent. The older and new version of the two comic operas are both based on French texts but in the case of 'L'Orphée et Euridice' and 'Alceste' the language problem is important and pregnant with consequences. Both these music dramas were originally composed to Italian texts by Calzabigi but in the Paris adaption French was naturally substituted for Italian which led necessarily to changes in the declamation and the melodic treatment. But the contrast between the two versions is not confined to such details. There is a greater formal variety and a more refined or at least altered tonal structure. The Vienna (Italian) and Paris (French) versions of 'Alceste' are related or identical only on the most basic level and in certain details; as artistic wholes they are independent phenomena.
"The adaption of the Italian libretto into French is the work of a man of letters called Le Blanc du Roullet (1716-1786), of aristocratic Norman ancestry, bailiff and knight of the order of Malta, who came to Vienna in about 1770, apparently as a secretary at the French embassy, and in the following years, working closely with Gluck, wrote the text for 'Iphigénie en Aulide' and helped Gluck realize his Parisian ambitions culminating in the acceptance and performance of the 'Iphigénie en Aulide' (1773/74) by the Académie royale, which led to him being considered tiresome and overbearing by Gluck's other friends and members of the institute (especially Francœur).
"Particularly significant for the new version of the text was Gluck's meeting with J.J. Rousseau in 1774, apparently in the period before the premiere of 'Iphigénie'. Gluck asked this enthusiastic admirer for an opinion on the Italian 'Alceste' which Rousseau was reluctant to give. Finally, however, he consented because 'Mr. Gluck was so insistent that I could not refuse him this kindness'. Evidently Gluck wished to profit from Rousseau's criticisms for the new version of the work. It would appear that he did in fact do so for Rousseau it was, as he himself later confirmed, who inspired the fundamental alteration in Act 2, the transfer of the court feast from the middle to the beginning of the act. It is however, probable that Gluck only began to compose the music for the French 'Alceste' on his return to Vienna at the end of March 1775. The first mention of it is in a letter to a Parisian friend and patron the Abbé François Arnaud dated 12 May 1775 in which there is a brief reference to 'Alceste'. One of the most important written documents on this subject is Gluck's letter of 1 July 1775 to du Roullet, a 'letter in 3 acts' as he jokingly describes it. Act I is concerned with the correct production of the second version of 'Cythère assiégée' of 1775, which in his view, was not being properly done in Paris. In Act 2 he speaks of a buffo libretto by an unnamed author which he had been offered, mentioned also in later letters but finally not accepted. Act 3 finally deals with 'Alceste' with unusual thoroughness. Gluck mentions in particular the dance interlude at the beginning of Act 2 which must not become too long as it is neither a solo nor a pas de deux. He wanted the views of his librettist about this. He then goes on to speak of the much discussed Act 3. Gluck does not consider the solution sent to him by du Roullet a satisfactory one, it being more suitable for an opera by Chabanon, Marmontel etc. but not for a 'masterpiece' 'Alceste'. The nature of du Roullet's finale may be inferred from Gluck's words: 'What the devil do you think Apollo is doing here with the arts, they are in their place with him on Mount Parnassus, here they interfere too much with the story.' In place of du Roullet's final apotheosis in the style of traditional French opera Gluck outlines a different solution which came to him in a 'flash' and which he considers 'infinitely better' than du Roullet's and - with disarming flattery - which 'would be a fitting crown to the beauty of your work'.
"Gluck's plan for the end of Act 3 formed the basis for further work on this difficult section of the opera which was given its premiere on 23 April 1776 in a version not substantially different from this one. Gluck also gives some indications about the performing length of the work at this stage. Act 1 takes 40 minutes and Act 3 until the arrival of Apollo takes 20 minutes so that 'Alceste' can never be a 'winter season opera'. 'Fortunately' he hastens to add. Meanwhile the final form of the work appears to have expanded. Gluck's words expressing his wish to have only a chaconne as ballet finale are very remarkable indeed. The conventional ballet finale is out of place even in 'Iphigénie en Aulide' and here ('Alceste') 'even more so'. Gluck was at that time waging a tenacious war against the French custom of following the close of an opera with a lengthy ballet. Even when writing to Franz Kruthoffer in Paris on 30 May 1775 about the opera-ballet 'Cythère assiégée' which was to be published and performed simultaneously, he expressed no wish for a final divertissement, regarding it as a 'hors d'œuvre'. In a further letter to Kruthoffer on 31 July 1775 he confirms this view and adds on a threatening note, 'What is more in future in my operas I will write no more ballet music apart from that which is part of the action and if people do not like it I will write no more operas as I have no wish to be reproached in all the papers that my ballets are weak, mediocre etc. The lousy curs will have no more of them from me and my operas will always finish with the words.' The ultimate finale of 'Alceste', however, showed that Gluck was not able to impose his will on Paris.
"Finally it may be said that Gluck's letter illuminates his relationship with this work and his view of the basic material. 'I myself go almost mad when I go through it. The nervous tension it generates lasts for too long and one is gripped by it from the first word to the last.' He compares the work a barrel of frozen wine 'of which the essence has collected in the centre, it is really delicious but too substantial to be drunk in any quantity. Woe to the poet or musician who would undertake another work of the same kind.' Gluck returns again and again to the physically overpowering nature of the material and looks forward to finishing it and having it performed soon. 'Believe me this kind of opera is very wearing', he exclaims and he is no beginning to understand why Quinault and Calzabigi introduce so many subsidiary personages who give the spectator an opportunity to relax. A work like 'Alceste', however, 'is not an amusement but a serious matter'.
"Work on 'Alceste' was once more under way and Gluck is already thinking of publishing. On 29 November he wrote to Franz Kruthoffer: 'I will shortly be sending you something of Alceste which I am thinking of having produced after Easter. Would you therefore sound Mr. Peters (to whom my compliments) to see whether he would like to have it. He is so honest that I would like to give him preference.' At the end of the month, however, he must have received an anxious 'Alceste' letter from du Roullet because in his letter of 2 December to his Parisian friend Gluck mentions new problems which must have been raised by du Roullet in the meantime. This letter, like the one dated 1 July, throws a very important light on Gluck's views. Half reluctantly half encouragingly he exclaims, 'When are you going to stop worrying about 'Alceste', do you want to become pale and thin as at the time of 'Iphigénie'?'. In a remarkable passage he then attempts to convince du Roullet that the working out of the 'Alceste' story, which is the main problem, is not as difficult as the latter believes if Gluck's plan is followed. The main ideas in the letter may be summarised as follows above all du Roullet must remember that he is writing for the opera and not a tragedy for actors. Thus the rules which bound Voltaire and Racine do not apply to him. On this subject Gluck writes the following significant words, 'Sometimes one must disregard rules, and create one's own so as to derive effective results from them'. He adds almost self-consciously revolutionary words, pointing out that 'the ancient Greeks' were men 'with a nose and two eyes like us' and we don't always have to submit to their rules. On the contrary 'we must rise above' their rules and 'break the chains' with which they would bind us and 'try to become originators ourselves'.
Gluck then continues on the subject of the two projects, his own and that of du Roullet, between which the final form of Act 3 is to be decided. First he humorously disarms the objection made by du Roullet to his own plan on the ground that, if used it would deprive the librettist of the authorship of the third act. Furthermore, he adds, du Roullet's project would turn the work into a 'reversed pyramid'. The opera begins with the choirs taking part in the action which in the first two acts is carried forward mainly by them. This means that the people are spontaneously participating and do not wish to lose their King and Queen. In Act 3, however, the choirs are no longer present. The drama, however, so Gluck insists, 'cannot end before these poor people are consoled' and he is not convinced by du Roullet's point that Apollo causes the royal pair to reappear. That is a 'hors d'œuvre' and 'dragged in by the skin of its teeth'. Moreover, Apollo appears in the guise of magician for a second time: after the change of scene from the wood of death to a splendid square it is Apollo who transports the people there by 'magic'. Furthermore the choir starts to sing suddenly 'without having been gradually prepared for its happiness'. In Gluck's sketch, however, 'everything follows on naturally without any need for miracles and the piece finishes with pomp and grandeur as it began without recourse to special effect.' Gluck adds that it is not for musical reasons that he urges the adoption of this version, for the music is here a side issue and very short anyway, but because, after repeated readings of the text, he remains unconvinced of the naturalness and good effect of du Roullet's plan. In a happy mixture of irony, courtesy, and insistence he concludes by saying that if du Roullet's mind is not set at rest by all this, then he Gluck, on his arrival in Paris would undertake to convince him - or failing that - be convinced by him. Finally he says that now he must think only of 'Alceste' so as to finish the first two acts before the departure of the courier at the beginning of January.
"At the end of the year the two first acts were ready to be despatched. In one of his last letters written to François Arnaud (31 January 1776) before his departure for Paris, Gluck again briefly outlined the 'Alceste' problem, expressing considerable doubt about the form of the third act and the solution of the drama. Although the whole is now 'smoother' than in the Italian version and, if he succeeds in inspiring choir and soloists, 'you will have a sensational work which will put you out of patience with others', on the other hand he confesses that he is not happy with the solution of Act 3. 'The opera will be like a beautiful portrait with withered hands' by which he probably means that Alcestis' awakening does not flow logically from the action and thus puts a strain on dramatic cohesion. Du Roullet too, he continues, said correctly that the action is over with the death of Alcestis. On the other hand one must consider, he said, that Euripides, no novice in theatrical matters, introduces Hercules who brings Alcestis back to life and to her husband, thus avoiding choking the life out of the piece with too many rules. This is the first time that Hercules is mentioned in the discussions concerning 'Alceste' and significantly it is by Gluck himself. Possibly is was he who, a quarter of a year later, decided to introduce the figure of Hercules.
"Gluck set out in this third and shortest Paris journey before the middle of February 1776. He arrived in Paris at the beginning of March and his first care was to complete Act 3. Together with du Roullet he must have accomplished this in a few days as the libretto was passed by the censor and ready for printing on March 19th. As stated on the title page of the printed text the premiere had been fixed for Tuesday, 16 April 1776. However, probably due to the Easter holidays, there was insufficient rehearsal time and the performance was postponed for 8 days until Tuesday, 23 April. This change could not be included in the libretto already in print. On 20 April the 'Mémoires secrets' mention th announcement of the opera and describe it as 'sad, lugubrious, horrifying'. It is mentioned again on 23 April, the day of the premiere, referring to the announcement of the libretto, noted with a certain reserve. It remains to be seen, thus significantly, whether the French musical public will be of the same opinion. The general view after rehearsals was that the first two acts of 'Alceste' were 'lovely' but the last act 'worthless'. The weak points of the work, ever again a subject of critical discussion, were thus highlighted.
"After a few performances, the negative reaction of critics and public, as well as their own doubt, cause Gluck and du Roullet to make radical alterations to Act 3. On 6 May the 'Mémoires secrets' announce that changes are expected in the next day's performance of 'Alceste'. Gluck himself is full of confidence, convinced that if his work is not succesful immediately then it would be the following year or in 10 years, because his music mirrors nature faithfully and is very true to life. If one relies on the 'Mémoires secrets' of 12 May then it would appear that it was only in the 6th performance on Friday, 10 Myay that the much discussed changes were introduced, above all the figure of Hercules. The 'Mémoires secrets' of 12 May report that the house was full and very excited about the new form of the work which had been awaited for several performances. Nevertheless the piece gained nothing and Gluck's serious admirers would prefer the older version. M. Grimm too mentions the introduction of Hercules, who, although he does not appear on a cloud like a god yet appears at the beginning of Act 3 as if 'fallen from the heavens'. According to Grimm there were several further alterations. At first Hercules repulsed the furies with blows of his club (scene 5) thus preventing them from seizing Alcestis. The effect of this was ridiculous so then the furies were to be permitted to seize their victim. Alcestis was to disappear inside the dark gates of the underworld. Admetus in the utmost despair makes to follow her but is held back by Hercules who saves Alcestis and restores her to her husband." (Rudolf Gerber, tr. Ruth von Csorba. From the liner notes.)
Performers: Chor und Symphonieorchester des Bayerischen Rundfunks, Serge Baudo, Jessye Norman, Nicolai Gedda, Tom Krause, Bernd Weild, Siegmund Nimsgern
1.1. Ouverture
1.2. Acte I: 'Dieux! Rendez-nous Roi, Notre Pere'
1.3. Acte I: 'O Malheureux Admete!'
1.4. Acte I: 'Dieu Puissant! Ecarte Du Trone'
1.5. Acte I: 'Immortel Apollon!'
1.6. Acte I: 'Ou Suis-je? O Malheureuse Alceste!'
1.7. Acte I: 'Tes Destins Sont Remplis'
1.8. Acte I: 'Divinites Du Styx'
2.1. Acte II: 'Que Les Plus Doux Transports Succèdent Aux Alarmes'
2.2. Acte II: 'Ô Mon Roi! Notre Appui! Notre Père!'
2.3. Acte II: 'Cher Époux!'
2.4. Acte II: 'Grands Dieux! Pour Mon Époux, J'implore Vos Secours'
3.1. Acte III: 'Nous Ne Pouvons Trop Répandre De Larmes'
3.2. Acte III: 'Après De Longs Travaux'
3.3. Acte III: 'Grands Dieux, Soutenez Mon Courage!'
3.4. Acte III: 'Ciel Admète! Ô Moment Terrible!'
3.5. Acte III: 'Ami, Leur Rage Est Vaine'
3.6. Acte III: 'Poursuis, Digne Fils!'
3.7. Acte III: 'Et Vous, Qui Vous Montrez À Vos Rois'
3.8. Acte III: 'Reçois, Dieu Bienfaisant'
3.9. Acte III: 'A Mes Amis'
No comments:
Post a Comment