Part 34 (1/2)

At five in the morning, Louis XVIII. was by the side of his dying nephew. An attempt had been made, the making of which was little less than an insult to the king, to dissuade him from being present at the duke's last moments.

[Sidenote: A MURDER AT THE OPERA.]

”The sight of death does not terrify me,” replied His Majesty, ”and I have a duty to perform.” After begging that his murderer might be forgiven, and entreating the d.u.c.h.ess not to give way to despair, the Duke de Berri breathed his last in the arms of the king, who closed his eyes at half-past six in the morning.

Opera was now to be heard no more in the Rue Richelieu. The holy sacrament had crossed the threshold of a profane building, and it was necessary that this profane building should be destroyed; indeed, a promise to that effect had been already given. All the theatres were closed for ten days, and the Opera, now homeless, did not re-commence its performances until upwards of two months afterwards, when it took possession for a time of the Theatre Favart. In the August of the same year the erection of the theatre in the Rue Lepelletier was commenced.

The present Theatre de l'Opera, (the absurd t.i.tle of Academie having recently been abandoned), was intended when it was first built, to be but a temporary affair. Strangely enough it has lasted forty years, during which time it has seen solidly constructed opera-houses perish by fire in all parts of Europe. May the new opera-house about to be erected in Paris, under the auspices of Napoleon III., be equally fortunate.

I am here reminded that both the Napoleons have proved themselves good and intelligent friends to the Opera. In the year eleven of the French republic, the First Consul and his two a.s.sociates, the Minister of the French republic, the three Consuls, the Ministers of the interior and police, General Junot, the Secretary of State, and a few more officials occupied among them as many as seventeen boxes at the opera, containing altogether ninety-four places. Bonaparte had a report drawn up from which it appeared that the value of these boxes to the administration, was sixty thousand four hundred francs per annum, including fifteen thousand francs for those kept at his own disposition. Thereupon he added to the report the following brief, but on the whole satisfactory remark.

”_A datter du premier nivose toutes ces loges seront payees par ceux qui les occupent._”

The error in orthography is not the printers', but Napoleon Bonaparte's, and the doc.u.ment in which it occurs, is at present in the hands of M.

Regnier of the Comedie Francaise.

A month afterwards, Napoleon, or at least the consular trio of which he was the chief, a.s.signed to the Opera a regular subsidy of 600,000 francs a year; he at the same time gave it a respectable name. Under the Convention it had been ent.i.tled ”Theatre de la Republique et des Arts;”

the First Consul called it simply, ”Theatre des Arts,” an appellation it had borne before.[90]

Hardly had the new theatre in the Rue Lepelletier opened its doors, when a singer of the highest cla.s.s, a tenor of the most perfect kind, made his appearance. This was Adolphe Nourrit, a pupil of Garcia, who, on the 10th of September, 1821, made his first appearance with the greatest success as ”Pylade” in _Iphigenie en Tauride_. It was not, however, until Auber's _Muette de Portici_ was produced in 1828, that Nourrit had an opportunity of distinguis.h.i.+ng himself in a new and important part.

[Sidenote: LA MUETTE DE PORTICI.]

_La Muette_ was the first of those important works to which the French Opera owes its actual celebrity in Europe. _Le Siege de Corinthe_, translated and adapted from _Maometto II._, with additions (including the admirable blessing of the flags) written specially for the Academie, had been brought out eighteen months before, but without much success.

_Maometto II._ was not one of Rossini's best works, the drama on which it was constructed was essentially feeble and uninteresting, and the manner in which the whole was ”arranged” for the French stage, was unsatisfactory in many respects. _Le Siege de Corinthe_ was greatly applauded the first night, but it soon ceased to have any attraction for the public. Rossini had previously written _Il Viaggio a Reims_ for the coronation of Charles X., and this work was re-produced at the Academy three years afterwards, with several important additions (such as the duet for ”Isolier” and the ”Count,” the chorus of women, the unaccompanied quartett, the highly effective drinking chorus, and the beautiful trio of the last act), under the t.i.tle of _le Comte Ory_. In the meanwhile _La Muette_ had been brought out, to be followed the year afterwards by _Guillaume Tell_, which was to be succeeded in its turn by Meyerbeer's _Robert le Diable_, _Les Huguenots_ and _Le Prophete_, (works which belong specially to the Academie and with which its modern reputation is intimately a.s.sociated), by Auber's _Gustave III._, Donizetti's _la Favorite_, &c.

_La Muette de Portici_ had the great advantage of enabling the Academie to display all its resources at once. It was brought out with magnificent scenery and an excellent _corps de ballet_, with a _premiere danseuse_, Mademoiselle n.o.blet as the heroine, with the new tenor, Nourrit, in the important part of the hero, and with a well taught chorus capable of sustaining with due effect the prominent _role_ a.s.signed to it. For in the year 1828 it was quite a novelty at the French Opera to see the chorus taking part in the general action of the drama.

[Sidenote: LA MUETTE DE PORTICI.]

If we compare _La Muette_ with the ”Grand Operas” produced subsequently at the Academie, we find that it differs from them all in some important respects. In the former, instead of a _prima donna_ we have a _prima ballerina_ in the princ.i.p.al female part. Of course the concerted pieces suffer by this, or rather the number of concerted pieces is diminished, and to the same cause may, perhaps, be attributed the absence of finales in _La Muette_. It chiefly owed its success (which is still renewed from time to time whenever it is re-produced) to the intrinsic beauty of its melodies and to the dramatic situations provided by the ingenious librettist, M. Scribe, and admirably taken advantage of by the composer.

But the part of Fenella had also great attractions for those unmusical persons who are found in almost every audience in England and France, and for whom the chief interest in every opera consists in the skeleton-drama on which it is founded. To them the graceful Fenella with her expressive pantomime is no bad subst.i.tute for a singer whose words would be unintelligible to them, and whose singing, continued throughout the Opera, would perhaps fatigue their dull ears. These ballet-operas seem to have been very popular in France about the period when _La Muette_ was produced, the other most celebrated example of the style being Auber's _Le Dieu et la Bayadere_. In the present day it would be considered that a _prima ballerina_, introduced as a princ.i.p.al character in an opera, would interfere too much with the combinations of the singing personages.

I need say nothing about the charming music of _La Muette_, which is well known to every frequenter of the Opera, further than to mention, that the melody of the celebrated barcarole and chorus, ”_Amis, amis le soleil va paraitre_” had already been heard in a work of Auber's, called _Emma_; and that the brilliant overture had previously served as an instrumental preface to _Le Macon_.

_La Muette de Portici_ was translated and played with great success in England. But shameful liberties were taken with the piece; recitatives were omitted, songs were interpolated: and it was not until _Masaniello_ was produced at the Royal Italian Opera that the English public had an opportunity of hearing Auber's great work without suppressions or additions.

The greatest opera ever written for the Academie, and one of the three or four greatest operas ever produced, was now about to be brought out.

_Guillaume Tell_ was represented for the first time on the 3rd of August, 1829. It was not unsuccessful, or even coldly received the first night, as has often been stated; but the result of the first few representations was on the whole unsatisfactory. Musicians and connoisseurs were struck by the great beauties of the work from the very beginning; but some years pa.s.sed before it was fully appreciated by the general public. The success of the music was certainly not a.s.sisted by the libretto--one of the most tedious and insipid ever put together; and it was not until Rossini's masterpiece had been cut down from five to three acts, that the Parisians, as a body, took any great interest in it.

[Sidenote: GUILLAUME TELL.]

_Guillaume Tell_ is now played everywhere in the three act form. Some years ago a German doctor, who had paid four francs to hear _Der Freischutz_ at the French Opera, proceeded against the directors for the recovery of his money, on the plea that it had been obtained from him on false pretences, the work advertised as _Der Freischutz_ not being precisely the _Der Freischutz_[91] which Karl Maria von Weber composed.

The doctor might amuse himself (the authorities permitting) by bringing an action against the managers of the Berlin theatre every time they produce Rossini's _Guillaume Tell_--which is often enough, and always in three acts.

The original cast of _Guillaume Tell_ included Nourrit, Leva.s.seur, Dabadie, A. Dupont, Ma.s.sol, and Madame Cinti-Damoreau. The singers and musicians of the Opera were enthusiastic in their admiration of the new work, and the morning after its production a.s.sembled on the terrace of the house where Rossini lived and performed a selection from it in his honour. One distinguished artist who took no part in this ceremony had, nevertheless, contributed in no small degree to the success of the opera. This was Mademoiselle Taglioni, whose _tyrolienne_ danced to the music of the charming unaccompanied chorus, was of course understood and applauded by every one from the very first.