Two (or more) of a Kind pt. 1

Sometimes my brain just goes somewhere weird, and this is one of those times. I have always been fascinated by those oddities of music history where different composers taking a stab at the same book or play or myth and come up with something completely different (and not just the music.) One of the oddest "doublings" is Hector Berlioz and Kurt Weill writing comic operas on Benvenuto Cellini's Autobiography. A larger-than-life character, Cellini must have seemed ideal as a hero for a popular work. Alas, both Benvenuto Cellini (Berlioz) and The Firebrand of Florence (Weill) were horrible flops in their first productions. Both have had champions since, but they are far from "easy" to produce and perform, so no wonder the first audiences (and performers) had so much trouble. Anyone can listen to them on fine recordings (beware the Weimar version of the Berlioz) and compare, but here are a few ideas on each. Personally, I think these two geniuses have come up with two masterworks (Berlioz's a masterPIECE, yes it is, don't argue with me. That means you--you know who you are.) Listen and see for yourself.

Berlioz wanted to conquer the Paris Opera, so he wrote the opera comique to end all opera comiques. It had everything an opera comique could ever want: Lovely arias for the lovers (Cellini has two), comic duets, trios, ensembles, action, farce, romance, a dash of violence (okay, most opera comiques don't have a dash of violence) and a great musical build-up to the happy ending. But all of them were "super-charged" and left the audience, singers, orchestra, and conductor in the dust. Today, we've heard many more complex works and, with some concentration, can hear his great musical ideas that just proliferate throughout the work and enjoy them. (The Carnival Finale to Act One is unlike anything else, even today.) The orchestration alone is a marvel of its--hell, ANY--time. I personally smile every time I hear the bassoon mock the comic father by playing along with his low note during one of his "laments." (He almost continuously laments. It might not sound wonderful, but it is.) And he gets mocked again during the Carnival scene, where a troupe of actors "portray" him on a stage (while the "real" character watches) and--oh, just go listen, or better yet, if you're in New York, watch the MET production when it comes back next year. I'll just say the orchestration alone is funny.

The libretto--which has been criticized by some and blamed in part for the operas poor reception--is never less than functional and frequently more than that. Berlioz was obviously inspired by it. I've heard it many times and I have seen the MET production when it was premiered during the composer's Bi-Centennial year. It plays beautifully. But you have to pay attention. It is not The Barber of Seville (to name a comic opera where characters are shared by more than one work.) It has a much more complex story, is musically more sophisticated and requires virtuoso musicians from top to bottom--onstage and in the pit-- and is far-less frequently done, so the world hasn't already heard half the arias before the curtain goes up. And Berlioz has heard more chords than I-IV-V-I in three different keys. And colleges can't perform it with students. (So I don't LOOOOOVE Rossini. Bite me.) Maybe it's still a connoisseur's opera in it's opera comique on steriods approach, but anyone with a little musical sophistication can get something out of it. Others can go watch Barber at your neighborhood junior college.

Now the Weill piece is not nearly as successful as a whole, but PARTS of it are wonderful. Actually, from a musical standpoint, MOST of it is wonderful. Alas, the libretto is poor and even Ira Gershwin is not on his best form. (Some of the rhymes are so forced, you have to say, "What?") But it has a lovely duet for the two lovers, many comic numbers for most of the other characters, some clever ensemble writing, good solos, etc. etc. The "characteristic" Weill orchestrations, harmonies, and melodies are prolix here, and enjoyable on their own. Part of its original failure seems to have been a casting problem: most of these roles require true "operetta" voices, not "musical comedy" ones. He got a musical comedy cast and all the flaws of the show came right to the foreground and it's mastery fell away. But you can go listen to an odd but still charming recording--it keeps all the music intact but does away with the "bad" book by describing it in rhymed verse. ( I warned you it was odd.) The singing is masterly, though, so it does the musical side full justice. And a wonderful singer I went to school with named Lucy Schaufer has a role and more people should hear her so she might get more recordings.

So two "flops" that are musically wonderful. Go listen to them (or try to catch Cellini.)  Tomorrow, four Manons...yes, four.