The Reform Operas of Gluck
October 2nd 2006 13:26
I'm struggling to write an update with work pressures this week, so I thought I might put up an essay I wrote last semester as a Music History assessment. Be warned, it's more than a little long in comparison to my regular updates!
It is a discussion of Gluck's role in the reform of Opera based on his composition of Orfeo ed Euridice. Unfortunately, the footnotes don't come up here at all, if anyone is that interested in my accountability in this writing, I can gladly give a copy of the original document.
In writing Orfeo and Euridice (1762) Christoph Willibald Gluck aimed his work as a stoic reaction to the progressingly undramatic nature of Opera Seria in the Germanic states and Italy. His composition demonstrates a refined and intelligent examination of the conventions of both French and Italian opera, and evidences that he gave careful thought as to how to best combine these two fields. Gluck utilised the whole production and structure of Orfeo, in which music was a major part, to complement the drama presented in the libretto and make a more emotional, effective production. Gluck does not work to this end alone, however, and choreographers, cast, and especially the librettist (Ranieri de Calzabigi) all contribute to Gluck’s reform of opera. Gluck’s revisions do not contribute a full scale evolution to the extent of Wagner many years later, but they do combine elements of the French Opera Comique, aspects of Italian Opera Seria, and Gluck’s own ingenuity to create an important step forward in the development of dramatic musical theatre.
In order to analyse how Gluck made these reforms, it is beneficial to first look at some of the factors around the ideals of reform opera, and the circumstances under which Gluck was able to ally with the necessary artists. The desire for reform was far from existing in isolation with Gluck. As a general rule during most of the classical period, in reaction to Baroque superficiality, there was a ‘profound yearning for free, simple, unaffected expression of human feelings’ . Two prominent librettists, Ranieri de Calzabigi (1714 -1795) and the French Francesco Algarotti (1712-1764) were already exponents of the ideal of simple expression through increase of dramaticism, a reaction against the priorly popular Metastasio(1698-1782). Algarotti’s important text, Saggio Sopra l’opera in musica (1755) set out, among other factors, a desire for ‘a more direct confrontation with the tragic in opera plots’ . Gluck and Calzibagi appeared to share this idea. The reform of theatre based acting was something that had occurred about 20 years earlier to the composition of Orfeo, instigated primarily by the developments of actor David Garrick. Before these reforms, plays had similar staging to operas, where one character at a time would occupy the stage, and the plays were presented largely as an evolving dramatic monologue between characters. Garrick, like Gluck later in opera, introduced a greater emotional quality to the works of theatre, with more interaction between characters and more realistic presentation of feelings . To achieve this in Orfeo, it is unsurprising that Gluck chose a student of Garrick for the lead castrato title role, Gaetano Guadagni. Guadagni apparently fit well with Gluck’s ideas to reform the superficiality of opera, as he sung ‘with much art, as well as feeling’ and apparently acted the part of the distraught Orfeo convincingly. Refinements in set design were being made by Giovanni Maria Quaglio(who apparently had ‘a flair for combining the formal with the natural’ ), to try and depict grand areas which could equally represent the story being told in them. In dance, too, choreographer Gasparo Angiolini was developing more dramatic mime presentations . As has been shown, the ideology of reform was spreading to many fields of art.
Of pivotal influence to the reforms by Gluck was the Intendant of Imperial theatres in Vienna, Count Durazzo. Giacomo Durazzo, who came to Vienna as Genoese ambassador was also an influential figure who wished to reconcile the imbalance between French and Italian opera. Since the prevailing style in Vienna was for Italian Opera Seria, this involved the importing of French works. Gluck was given the task by Durazzo of converting these French works into operas ready to be accepted by the Viennese public. It is here that Gluck received influence from the French style, with increased use of chorus and dance, and reduction in some of the longer or overly formal forms that dominated works by contemporaries such as Hasse . Gluck however continued to use some early classical\ late baroque features throughout his life, most notably the use of classical mythology. Durazzo was able to assemble with his influence Calzabigi to work with Gluck, along with Guadagni, Quaglio and Angiolini. The combining of these reformist forces was used for the production of Orfeo, and the effect was of great historic importance . Each person brought reforms to their field of art in opera. In this regard, it is possible to see Durazzo as being largely responsible for heralding the idea of Italian opera reform . Gluck therefor did not work alone, but his reforms were in co-ordination with other artists in all the fields of opera production.
As mentioned above, around the late middle of the eighteenth century, there was a prevailing trend for opera’s subject matter to use situations from classical mythology or history. The plot of Orfeo had proven so popular that it has been used in productions from the earliest demonstrations of Opera and continued to be used after Gluck’s work . However, Gluck and Calzabigi’s interpretation is generally seen as very distilled and simple, with a main cast of just three characters(Orfeo, Euridice, and the God Amour). The plot is short and generally to the point, bypassing a period of establishment by beginning the play at a scene of mourning for the recently deceased Euridice. While the story does have a fleshed out development for the virtuous character of Orfeo, little backstory is given to the death of Euridice . Instead, the libretto is full of emotion as Orfeo laments through the first two scenes of the Opera with language such as ‘Alone my sorrow stricken breast shall once more sigh her name where she will rest in death’ . By using this emotive development, focusing on feelings rather than events in Opera, Calzabigi gave Gluck the opportunity to work with these emotions in his score, and provide poignant airs and recitatives which would fully convey this emotional impact, using the score to complement the poetry. This was a very noticeable variation to previous operatic ideology, that seemed to feel that the libretto and the music to an opera may have been both important, but that they had their separate areas of development and never truly shared the stage . The simplicity at the heart of Gluck’s reform was thus intended to cater to human feeling, creating a kind of return to classicalism in writing. The libretto, like the music and other aspects of the opera, were all subordinated only to the achievement of ultimate dramaticism .
Gluck’s ability with orchestration is a factor that accounts for much of the dramaticism of his operas. The ideas he set out in the preface to Alceste were obviously present from the construction of Orfeo. He states that ‘instruments ought to be introduced in proportion to the degree of interest and passion in the words’ and that ‘Instruments are to be employed not according to the dexterity of the players, but according to the dramatic propriety of their tone’ . This can be taken as meaning that Gluck realised the important emotional effect that instrumentation and it’s use could convey. Examining the score for Orfeo and Euridice, there is the use of 2 flutes, 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, 2 trumpets, 3 trombones, timpani, harp and strings . By comparison to contemporary orchestras, this was incredibly large, almost an exact foretelling of future romantic orchestras. Using instruments for their tonal qualities was obviously done very well in Orfeo, with the sacred connotations of the trombones working with the dramatic accents of timpanis in the temple scene at the end of Orfeo that created an effect which must have been astonishing to contemporary audiences . The use of a hidden harp playing a lilting arpeggio figure(with it’s own accompaniment by hidden orchestra) in Act 2 Scene 1, where Orfeo confronts the furies in the underworld, creates the sense that the song of Orfeo is coming not from the orchestra in the pit but from he himself . Knowledge of the Sturm und Drang style is demonstrated, and used to intense effect during the ‘Air de Furie’ in D minor . Choir use throughout, such as in the solemn opening to set the scene of mourning and with accents on ‘Cer-ber-us!’ depicting the terror of the furies(underscored with string sfortzandos) succeed in portraying the terror of the environment Orfeo was in. In addition to these special effects, Gluck was also generally ahead of his time in orchestral part writing, removing the cembalo to allow the orchestra full control of it’s own harmonic development(for instance forcing violas to take a more individual role). His string writing is described to have ‘full[er] harmony...richer inside parts...substantial body and solidity’ . Gluck’s orchestration abilities definitely assisted in conveying the dramaticism of the libretto.
In terms of opera structure, here too Gluck brought reform that was beneficial to the conveyance of drama. Looking at the structure of the whole opera, there is no clear aria-recitative pattern throughout the acts, as was priorly the fashion. Instead, a freer approach is utilised, with the insertion of dances or purely orchestral numbers at points to aid in the telling of the story . It is a well known fact that Gluck hated the De Capo aria because it unreasonably held up the plot . In response to this, he instead uses different forms without repeats, which carry the story forward. This can be seen in the strophic aria-recitative like form of the aria beginning ‘Objet de mon amour’ in Act 1, Scene 2 , which tells more about the character of Orfeo since new material is introduced much faster that would be with repeats. Previously ensemble use in operas was a very rare occurrence, but Gluck uses a trio in the final Act for particularly dramatic effect in the aria ‘Tendre Amour’ . This aria can also be used to demonstrate his approach to lyrical bel canto writing. Gentle, flowing lines in 6\8 times show that Gluck favoured writing that was simple and tuneful, and detested the use of an aria as a vessel to be used by vocalists as a demonstration of ability, as was common practice . Gluck acted against the use of large coloratura cadenzas and cadential passages, since they did not serve the dramatic action in any way. A good example of prior precocity is shown in some operas of Handel . Also, with the disappearance of a cembalo part, recitatives by Gluck were treated with less active orchestral parts which more effectively portrayed the drama of the libretto than sparse cembalo chords. Through these design features in addition to orchestral effects, Gluck brought the music much closer to the drama that was being portrayed.
For all of these advancements, however, Gluck did not bring an orchestral revolution that completely changed the way people expected music to act in opera, as Wagner managed to. In his orchestral use, it can be seen through out the scores that while brought emancipation to the viola, he always doubled the cellos with basses. This ignores the potential for cellos to be used for the dramatic properties of their tone as a melodic instrument, and seems somewhat ignorant of a composer obviously skilled in writing for strings . Despite Gluck’s desire for the orchestra to be able to tell the drama of the story, the overture to Orfeo is strident with huge C major chords and a bright melody before moving into the solemn and heart wrenching choir scenes in Act 1. This is however forgivable, seeing as Orfeo’s premier was on the celebration of the name day of Maria Theresa’s husband, Franz Stefen, and a sombre introduction may have been inappropriate. Rarely, his orchestral writing can be criticised to look like simple expanded string quartet writing but to be fair, it is also probable that this divertissement style scene was intended to convey drama through it’s poignant simplicity. Some of these criticisms are fixed in Gluck’s next opera, Alceste, which features a much more appropriate overture beginning in D minor, acting not as a traditional overture at all but termed a ‘Intrada’ . Bafflingly, this opera features the re-introduction of the cembalo, but uses many more ensemble numbers, with 5 or more singers, departing much more from prior trends. It is possible that Gluck was still experimenting with his formula for a perfect production, and that the complete unification of all artistic forces could not be completed by him in his lifetime.
In conclusion, while Gluck’s opera developments weren’t entirely what we may view as complete, Orfeo’s showcase as the first true reform opera was a very historic event in operatic (and even compositional)history. Gluck’s developments can be seen to be taken further with his future operas Alceste, and later Iphigénie en Tauride, but Orfeo represented the heart of Gluck’s ambitions: To bring a dramatic unity to all the components of the opera. It is therefore Orfeo more than his other operas which solidifies Gluck’s role in operatic history.
It is a discussion of Gluck's role in the reform of Opera based on his composition of Orfeo ed Euridice. Unfortunately, the footnotes don't come up here at all, if anyone is that interested in my accountability in this writing, I can gladly give a copy of the original document.
In writing Orfeo and Euridice (1762) Christoph Willibald Gluck aimed his work as a stoic reaction to the progressingly undramatic nature of Opera Seria in the Germanic states and Italy. His composition demonstrates a refined and intelligent examination of the conventions of both French and Italian opera, and evidences that he gave careful thought as to how to best combine these two fields. Gluck utilised the whole production and structure of Orfeo, in which music was a major part, to complement the drama presented in the libretto and make a more emotional, effective production. Gluck does not work to this end alone, however, and choreographers, cast, and especially the librettist (Ranieri de Calzabigi) all contribute to Gluck’s reform of opera. Gluck’s revisions do not contribute a full scale evolution to the extent of Wagner many years later, but they do combine elements of the French Opera Comique, aspects of Italian Opera Seria, and Gluck’s own ingenuity to create an important step forward in the development of dramatic musical theatre.
C. W. Gluck
Of pivotal influence to the reforms by Gluck was the Intendant of Imperial theatres in Vienna, Count Durazzo. Giacomo Durazzo, who came to Vienna as Genoese ambassador was also an influential figure who wished to reconcile the imbalance between French and Italian opera. Since the prevailing style in Vienna was for Italian Opera Seria, this involved the importing of French works. Gluck was given the task by Durazzo of converting these French works into operas ready to be accepted by the Viennese public. It is here that Gluck received influence from the French style, with increased use of chorus and dance, and reduction in some of the longer or overly formal forms that dominated works by contemporaries such as Hasse . Gluck however continued to use some early classical\ late baroque features throughout his life, most notably the use of classical mythology. Durazzo was able to assemble with his influence Calzabigi to work with Gluck, along with Guadagni, Quaglio and Angiolini. The combining of these reformist forces was used for the production of Orfeo, and the effect was of great historic importance . Each person brought reforms to their field of art in opera. In this regard, it is possible to see Durazzo as being largely responsible for heralding the idea of Italian opera reform . Gluck therefor did not work alone, but his reforms were in co-ordination with other artists in all the fields of opera production.
As mentioned above, around the late middle of the eighteenth century, there was a prevailing trend for opera’s subject matter to use situations from classical mythology or history. The plot of Orfeo had proven so popular that it has been used in productions from the earliest demonstrations of Opera and continued to be used after Gluck’s work . However, Gluck and Calzabigi’s interpretation is generally seen as very distilled and simple, with a main cast of just three characters(Orfeo, Euridice, and the God Amour). The plot is short and generally to the point, bypassing a period of establishment by beginning the play at a scene of mourning for the recently deceased Euridice. While the story does have a fleshed out development for the virtuous character of Orfeo, little backstory is given to the death of Euridice . Instead, the libretto is full of emotion as Orfeo laments through the first two scenes of the Opera with language such as ‘Alone my sorrow stricken breast shall once more sigh her name where she will rest in death’ . By using this emotive development, focusing on feelings rather than events in Opera, Calzabigi gave Gluck the opportunity to work with these emotions in his score, and provide poignant airs and recitatives which would fully convey this emotional impact, using the score to complement the poetry. This was a very noticeable variation to previous operatic ideology, that seemed to feel that the libretto and the music to an opera may have been both important, but that they had their separate areas of development and never truly shared the stage . The simplicity at the heart of Gluck’s reform was thus intended to cater to human feeling, creating a kind of return to classicalism in writing. The libretto, like the music and other aspects of the opera, were all subordinated only to the achievement of ultimate dramaticism .
Gluck’s ability with orchestration is a factor that accounts for much of the dramaticism of his operas. The ideas he set out in the preface to Alceste were obviously present from the construction of Orfeo. He states that ‘instruments ought to be introduced in proportion to the degree of interest and passion in the words’ and that ‘Instruments are to be employed not according to the dexterity of the players, but according to the dramatic propriety of their tone’ . This can be taken as meaning that Gluck realised the important emotional effect that instrumentation and it’s use could convey. Examining the score for Orfeo and Euridice, there is the use of 2 flutes, 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 2 horns, 2 trumpets, 3 trombones, timpani, harp and strings . By comparison to contemporary orchestras, this was incredibly large, almost an exact foretelling of future romantic orchestras. Using instruments for their tonal qualities was obviously done very well in Orfeo, with the sacred connotations of the trombones working with the dramatic accents of timpanis in the temple scene at the end of Orfeo that created an effect which must have been astonishing to contemporary audiences . The use of a hidden harp playing a lilting arpeggio figure(with it’s own accompaniment by hidden orchestra) in Act 2 Scene 1, where Orfeo confronts the furies in the underworld, creates the sense that the song of Orfeo is coming not from the orchestra in the pit but from he himself . Knowledge of the Sturm und Drang style is demonstrated, and used to intense effect during the ‘Air de Furie’ in D minor . Choir use throughout, such as in the solemn opening to set the scene of mourning and with accents on ‘Cer-ber-us!’ depicting the terror of the furies(underscored with string sfortzandos) succeed in portraying the terror of the environment Orfeo was in. In addition to these special effects, Gluck was also generally ahead of his time in orchestral part writing, removing the cembalo to allow the orchestra full control of it’s own harmonic development(for instance forcing violas to take a more individual role). His string writing is described to have ‘full[er] harmony...richer inside parts...substantial body and solidity’ . Gluck’s orchestration abilities definitely assisted in conveying the dramaticism of the libretto.
An image depicting the tale of Orfeo ed Euridice, taken from www.culturaspettacolovenezia.it
For all of these advancements, however, Gluck did not bring an orchestral revolution that completely changed the way people expected music to act in opera, as Wagner managed to. In his orchestral use, it can be seen through out the scores that while brought emancipation to the viola, he always doubled the cellos with basses. This ignores the potential for cellos to be used for the dramatic properties of their tone as a melodic instrument, and seems somewhat ignorant of a composer obviously skilled in writing for strings . Despite Gluck’s desire for the orchestra to be able to tell the drama of the story, the overture to Orfeo is strident with huge C major chords and a bright melody before moving into the solemn and heart wrenching choir scenes in Act 1. This is however forgivable, seeing as Orfeo’s premier was on the celebration of the name day of Maria Theresa’s husband, Franz Stefen, and a sombre introduction may have been inappropriate. Rarely, his orchestral writing can be criticised to look like simple expanded string quartet writing but to be fair, it is also probable that this divertissement style scene was intended to convey drama through it’s poignant simplicity. Some of these criticisms are fixed in Gluck’s next opera, Alceste, which features a much more appropriate overture beginning in D minor, acting not as a traditional overture at all but termed a ‘Intrada’ . Bafflingly, this opera features the re-introduction of the cembalo, but uses many more ensemble numbers, with 5 or more singers, departing much more from prior trends. It is possible that Gluck was still experimenting with his formula for a perfect production, and that the complete unification of all artistic forces could not be completed by him in his lifetime.
In conclusion, while Gluck’s opera developments weren’t entirely what we may view as complete, Orfeo’s showcase as the first true reform opera was a very historic event in operatic (and even compositional)history. Gluck’s developments can be seen to be taken further with his future operas Alceste, and later Iphigénie en Tauride, but Orfeo represented the heart of Gluck’s ambitions: To bring a dramatic unity to all the components of the opera. It is therefore Orfeo more than his other operas which solidifies Gluck’s role in operatic history.
| 79 |
| Vote |
