November 4th, 2008 by admin

English translation of title: “Abduction from the Seralio”

A Singspiel in 3 Acts.

Composed by W.A. Mozart. Librettist: Christoph Friedrich Bretzner, adapted by Gottlieb Stephanie.

Plot Summary:

Location: The Palace of the Pasha Salim, somewhere close to the coast.

Time Period: 18th Century

ACT 1:

Belmonte has found the palace of Pasha Salim and is searching everywhere for his beloved, Constanza, and her English maid-servant Blondchen. Both were abducted by pirates and sold to the Pasha. He approaches the palace and finds Osmin, the guard of the Pasha’s women. He pleads with Osmin to give him information, and asks about his servant, Pedrillo, who was also sold to the Pasha. Osmin does not oblige and leaves angrily. However, Belmonte and Pedrillo find eachother shortly after, and the two pan to abduct the woman fom the seraglio and sail away in the middle of the night. The set changes, and the Pasha has confronted Constanza about his love for her. Constanza tells him that although she admires him and respects him for his kind treatment of her, she can never love him, as she has given her heart to Belmonte. Freshly refused by Constanza, Pedrillo enters and asks that his “italian Architect friend” (Belmonte) be granted access to the palace. The Pasha agrees, and exits the stage. The Act ends with Osmin making it very difficult for Pedrillo and Belmonte to enter.

ACT 2:

The Act opens with a fiesty scene between Blondchen and Osmin. As Osmin makes advances towards Blondchen, she avoids his advances by lecturing him about the way English women are to be treated. Osmin exits and Constanza enters, telling Blondchen of her fears that the Pasha will resort to taking her love by force. When Constanza leaves, Pedrillo enters and tell Blonchen that he has found Belmonte and they plan to take the two women and escape. Blonchen is overjoyed an goes to tell Constanza the happy news. Pedrillo begins to carry out his plan, as he tempts Osmin to drink with him. He succeeds in getting Osmin drunk and so intoxicated that he falls asleep, allowing Pedrillo and Belmonte to enter and see his beloved Constanza.

ACT 3:

Pedrillo and Belmonte come to the windows of the Female quarters with ladders. Belmonte gets Constanza, but as Pedrillo reaches for Blonchen, then four are caught by Osmin. Osmin brings the before the Pasha. In an attempt to help their cause, Belmonte reveals that he is the son of a rich Spanish Governor who would pay a large ransom for them. Upon hearing this, the Pasha reveals that Belmonte’s father is his greatest enemy, and is delighted with an opportunity for revenge. However, when he sees the love between Constanza and Belmonte, and their sorrow, he is touched. He decides to repay vengeance with kindness, and declares that he is given more satisfaction y repaying evil with good, than by repaying evil with evil. This disappoints Osmin, who wanted to see them both executed. The Opera closes with the chorus celebrating of the great mercy of Pasha Salim, as the four captives freely set sail together for their homeland.

DVD Reviewed:

Recorded at the Teatro della Pergola, Florence, May 2002.

Director: Eike Gramss Set Design: Christoph Wagenknecht Costumes: Catherine Voeffray

Lighting: Jacques Battocletti Technical Director: Massimo Teoldi Orchestra Master: Zubin Mehta

Cast:

“Bassa Selim” (Pasha) = Markus John

“Konstanze” (Constanza) = Eva Mei

“Blonde” (Blondchen) = Patrizia Ciofi

“Belmonte” (Belmonte) = Rainer Trost

“Pedrillo” (Pedrillo) = Mehrzad Montazeri

“Osmin” (Osmin) = Kurt Rydl

Production Review and General Opera Analysis:

During Mozart’s lifetime, “Die Entführung aus dem Serail” achieved great success and was staged many times in many major cities across Europe. However, in the present time, the Da Ponte operas are the most popular and frequently played, with “Die Entführung aus dem Serail” seen only on the periphery as one of Mozart’s early Singspiels. In this production the musical merit, well constructed characters and universal themes are utilized and portrayed brilliantly, doing justice to the opera that did so well when premiered, and proving the worth and maturity of the opera within Mozart’s operatic output.

One of the most striking aspects of this production to me was the intricate link between the acting and the music. In the romantic era, composers such as Berlioz and Mendelssohn are known for portraying intense emotion without the need for words; Ideas of expressive, emotional music are never linked to the Classical composers. However, the compositional structure of “Die Entführung aus dem Serail” has potential to be interpreted in a very romantic sense; There were many musical interludes between Constanza and the Pasha, and between Constanza and Belmonte that are absolutely heart wrenching because the combination of the music and the acting so beautifully depicted the inner turmoil of the characters. Without one word every being sung or spoken, the subtle expression in Mozart’s composing gave the characters an expressive foundation to build upon. The Pasha had an incredible presences. Mozart created the characters with the potential for incredible depth and complexity when interpreted correctly, and the Pasha’s character in this production was most definitely came across as a three dimensional character. His intense emotional connection with Constanza was so strongly portrayed, the emotional understanding between those two singers gave their scenes a strength that far surpassed any other singers and characters in the opera. The scenes featuring Constanza and the Pasha were stronger than the scenes featuring Constanza and Belmonte, because Belmonte simply did not have the same strong presence as the Pasha. That said, the love duets at the end of the opera between Constanza and Belmonte must mentioned with high regard, as they were blocked and executed extremely well. Both Constanza and Belmonte are in held captive, their shackles keeping them just far enough apart that they could hardly touch each other. The physical distance between the two characters forced their body language to portray their intense sorrow and love for each other. When you combine the acting and blocking of the characters with the music Mozart composed underneath them, the affect is so expressive. The interpretation and directing of this production was done with such a thorough understanding of the potential Mozart wrote into the opera, the outcome was a perfect marriage of music, emotion, and acting.

The link between the acting and the music can also be drawn back to ideas of the enlightenment and classicism and their affect on Mozart’s composing. “Die Entführung aus dem Serail” contains element of both schools of thought, and in way, it is the combination of the two that strike a good balance between the plot and the music. Elements of Classicism can be seen in the formal structures and style of the arias. There were still many arias where the characters were alone on stage, and the libretto of the aria was focused largely on one affection. Yet, these arias were balanced by duets, trios, and quartets that displayed a complex layering of conflicting emotions between characters, a level of complexity strongly linked to ideals of the enlightenment. The plot itself also demonstrates a mix of Classicism and Enlightenment philosophies. The mercy of the Pasha pleases both the pride of the aristocracy within the ideas of classicism, and the enlightenment school of thought regarding the victory and freedom of the middle class. The emphasis built into the plot regarding steadfast love and faithfulness stem from the enlightenment, yet, the ideals of classicism can still be seen as the characters still love within their social class: Pedrillo and Blondchen are both servants, Constanza and Belmonte are both upper class; The Pasha and Constanza are upper class, Blondchen and Osmin are both servants. In this sense, the ideals of classicism are maintained. However, the triumph of love and the stark differentiation made between a barbaric treatment of women verses the refined treatment of women can be attributed to the ideas of the enlightenment. Overall, the opera represents a strong mix of classicism and enlightenment ideals.

As for the overall assessment of the opera, I found the opera accessible and impressive on many levels. Appealing to a broad depth emotions, the opera was funny and heartfelt, with moments of sorrow and moments of triumph. The production was excellently constructed and executed from the score to the stage. The cohesive and effect nature of the production suggests the creative force behind the production had a thorough understanding of the potential Mozart infused into every character and every note. I believe “Die Entführung aus dem Serail” demonstrates an expressivity well ahead of its time, and when interpreted correctly, can be seen as a mature part of Mozart’s output.

November 3rd, 2008 by admin

Source:

Wegman, Rob C. “From Maker to Composer: Improvisation and Musical Authorship in

the Low Countries, 1450- 1500″ Journal of the American Musicological Society

49, 3 (Autumn, 1996): 409 -479.

In an attempt to navigate some kind of “beginning” to the idea of musical ownership, I have begun searching for information regarding Machaut; I remember being told that he was the first composer to sign his name on copies of his work. When searching for information supporting this, I stumbled across this source, and the title caught my attention. Although this source did not help my search for documentation of Machaut’s signed manuscripts, it did offer interesting insight into the idea of ownership and authorship in the middle ages. The main focus of the article is to compare the development of amateur music makers and designated composers in urban centers verses the rural low country between 1450 and 1500. The focus of the article is not strongly related to my research focus, however, the author does examine ideas of “authorship” in this era and offers important points that help establish the historical framework of copyright and ownership of musical works.

Wegman argues that the professionalization of the composer, and the cultural recognition of musical authorship in this time period stemmed from and perpetuated long-established modes of thought in both Urban and Rural settings. Wegman divides his defense of this statement into 7 categories, and it is categories 5, and 7, that I am most interested in.

Section 5 begins with an examination of the difference between “making” and “doing”, drawing attention to the Aristotelian distinction between making (poiesis) and doing (prax- is), and how the influence of Boethius’ writing at the time established an accepted view of music in this regard:

“To “make” is to produce a piece of work, an object, and sound is not an object but motion. It is fleeting, transitory, immaterial: sound cannot be made (factus) but only uttered (prolatus). To think of music as a “thing” is a paradox: things have permanence and spatial extension, and for sound this is unthinkable unless it is represented by ink on paper, thus assuming matter and form.” - pg. 439

I found this striking, as copyright law today is still based on this principle. Once a work is written down, the creator assumes full copyright to the work. However, if it is not written down, it is, as Wegman states, a fleeting thing, only gaining permanence by being written down.

Wegman goes on to examine the use of the word “make” and “composer”. At this point in history, the phrase “to make music” meant the same thing as “to compose music”. Why is this, and what complexity does this cultural tidbit reveal? In the footnotes, Wegman explains:

“Although writing, creating, and making are nowadays used inter- changeably as synonyms for composing, medievals were acutely conscious of the distinctions between them, and they carefully maintained these in written statements. “To create,” as Aquinas put it, is to “produce something out of nothing,” which only the Creator can. To make or to compose is to work on or put together material provided by nature, which is what the artist does. To write, finally, is to copy…” - pg. 440-441

In section 7, Wegman touches on the subject of authorship and societies view of such ideas at the time.

Wegman states that prior to the 1450-1500 era, ideologies of authorship had traditionally been foreign to medieval aesthetics. (pg. 457) This ideology of medieval culture is fascinating, as it is so different from the modern view of authorship and a right to ownership. Wegman summarizes medieval thought on the issue:

“The thought of a composer exercising authorial control over the performance and interpretation of his work was virtually unknown to late medieval musical culture: he provided only the “made thing,” a set of notational instructions “signifying” the performance. It was the performance that really mattered, that benefactors paid for-and generously-to be realized. The notated work itself, significantly, was not an economic commodity: it constituted freeware, copied widely so long as it was deemed useful, but discarded as soon as it had passed beyond its stylistic sell-by date.” - pg. 460

As the world today revolves around financial pursuits, it is hard to imagine a society where ownership was not the primary focus of the composer. What could one possibly have to gain from composing, why even bother, if time spent would not guarantee food or water? Wegman explains:

“What incentives were there to compose, when there was so little direct encouragement or pressure coming from society? The answer lies precisely in the effects listed by Tinctoris: music pleases God, adorns his praises, chases away the devil, exalts to ecstacy or pious contemplation, banishes melancholy, softens a hard heart, cures those who are ill, adds to the pleasure of a banquet, and many other things. That, in a sense, was all the incentive medieval composers would have needed-even if their “making” alone brought no financial rewards, let alone secured them a livelihood.” - pg. 461

It is always said that Western Art music is inarguably linked to the church; this quote demonstrates how strong that bond was in medieval times. As a result, ideals of ownership, authorship, and copyright really were not of primary importance, if they were even thought of at all. The ultimate goal of most medieval composers was the glory of God…and in a sense, they did not believe their compositions really “belonged” to them at all, they belonged to God… the breakdown of the feudal system and the struggles within the church could have played a part in bringing a stronger sense of ownership to society and composers, as the devout religious obedience of medieval society weakened.

November 1st, 2008 by admin

Well, this blog is finally created and in working order!

I will soon start posting my most recent essay research. Check our the categories for posts related to specific topics.