New-York tribune., 1909-01-29
MUSIC
MANHATTAN OPERA HOUSE.
A Second Production of salome.


ward at the Manhattan Opera House last night.
| Had the first production been spared the inter
ference of the owners of the Metropolitan the
question OF the attitude Of New Yo-ks opera lovers
| toward the work would long ago have been estab-
lished and we would have been spared revival OF
| the unsavory mess. L secret two years
ago among those familiar with the affairs OF the
Metropolitan that q failure OF he opera was pre-
saged by the small sale Of seats for the representa-
tions projected by Mr. Conried and diligently kept
before the attention nf the public While the conro-
versy between him and the directors of the Metr~-
| politan Opera and Real Estate Company
rag aging. 1t is very likely astute Mr.. Ham
! rerstein the handwriting on the wall at the
time, for three iour days after the opera had
been given and while the question OF its withdrawal
still pending, he told reporter Of The Tribune
| that he had declined to purchase the performing
rights of the drama m the preceding summer partly
| on the advice Of Nine. Iill Lehman and that he
glad he had done so. adding that he would not
| produce "Saome'' if Mr.. Conried gave up the
! rights. The for his change Of heart since
| is not far 70 seek; nor need we attach any more
| significance to the broken promises Of impresaros
than Jove does 10 lovers perjuries. Mr.. Hammer
| stein would not have thought of giving ''Salome
| il It had been for the opportunity for that as
sociation to which that made appeal to last
nights audience was due The curiosity which
potent enough 10 fill the theatre at doubled prices
directed, not 10 the play Of Wilde. not to It's
| musical investiture by Strauss but TO Mary Gar
den and to her chiefly in the lascivious dance Mr..
Conried had felt the public pulse and renounced
| his project with but little show of unwilhngness
The talk about transferring the representations to
another theatre dribbied away. So did the an
| nouncements that the opera would be given on
| the road So did the proclamation that long
series OF performances would be given in New York
prior 10 the opening Of che subscription season or
| 1eo7-0s Mr.. Conried surrendered his rights at
| what must have been large cost; and within
| year or so Mr.. Hammerstein acquired them.
Why? After his own utterances cannot be-
| leve that Mr.. Hammerstein convinced that
the withdrawal OF ''Salome' from the Metropolitan
| Opera House had left the public hungering for 1t
with consuming hunger that to satisfy 1t
| either artistic duty a promising enterprise
! from financial point of view. No; new factor
! had entered into the proposition. Miss Garden
wanted be in the titular role convinced that
! by her acting. dancing and disrobins she could
achieve the success which did not smile propitious
| the first production. But Mise Gardens eyes
| We're directed upon New York alone. Paris had
| welcomed Miss Fremstads moving dramatic i'm
| personation and hailed her Interpretation of the
music with delight. Even II she could not hope
10 cope with the latter. she certainly could outdo
the former especially II she 10 do the Dance
Of the Seven veis'' herself, and thus throw gen
| erous exhibition OF her physical charms into the
| contest. For Mr.. Hammerstein there the con-
vncing evidence Of the soundness OF this argument
| IN the OF "Thars'' last season. But Miss
| Garden does not sing in German, nor do any of
! Mr. Hammerstein's singers. So the project was
evolved of performing the drama in French, which
| did not seem very revolutionary. in view of the
| fact that Oscar Wilde had originally written the
| drama in French and that the English version.
which has failed 10 gain foothold either in Eng
| land America. and the German. which with
| STRAUSS music has ravaged the theatres of Ger
| many. are both translations. Paris heard "salome
| in German; New York is the first city 10 hear 1t
! in French.
Here we have a good deal that looks paradoxical;
but perversion the theme OF 'Salone" in all its
/ elements and 4 discuss It anew because OF an
| added aspect would scarcely be worth while Nor
| is there need of much discussion Of the effect Of
| the French text the music BY the composers
| own confession, words and the human voice are
| only tolerated by him as necessary evis. Some
| day mayhap he will reach the height 10 which
| Asger Hamerik ascended by less rugged road
| and exemplifed IN Opera Without Words At
present Strauss IS still among the earth-born bsb-
| blers of srticulate speech. Naturally there is
| one point OF view from which the consorting OF
| such music Strausss with the French language
| seems anomalous. Elegance OF expression is in
! herent in all forms OF French art; dramatic truth
fulness and strength. sometimes TO the verge Of
! uncouthness OF German. The nervous chatter Of
| Burrian's German Herod was much more charac-
| teristc the sthenic created by Wilde than
was the more or less tuneful singing OF Dalmores's
| Tetrerch But this largely matter Of inter
| probation. The French singer would not miss an
opportunity sing phrase II IL offered itself;
| the German willing TO sacrifice everything TO
| an Illumination OF the pathological nature OF
! Herods pitiful AS for the pres schments and
denunciations of Jochanaan. in which is contained
| practically all the sustained music Of the score
except the final tonal bea6cation Of the necrophil-
/ ism of the unspeakable Salome they did not seem
| 70 be either helped or hindered by the change of
| tongue These utterances. which sometimes rise to
| something approaching real grandeur, were set
| forth with such compelling eoquence and tonal
beauty by NJ. Dufranne last night as 70 thrill the
| listeners AS Mr. Van Rooy had done before him.
| NJ Dufranne forced upon the reviewer the refec-
! ton that the only Whit of fresh air which blows
through text and OF the drama is that which
| exhaIes from the cistern-prison OF the Baptist.
| Details Of Mr. Hammersteins production mast
| be discussed with little comparison as possible
| between it and the German representation Of two
! wears ago In q general way it may be said that
| the artistic aims OF the dramatist and composer
| and the gencies and devices for achieving them
were presented with greater integrity consistency
| care and efficiency at the metropolitan opera
! House than they last night Especially
| this the in the orchestral part From the in
| str,1mental pit of the Metropolitan there arose
| throughout the performance a tonal aura which
perIneated picture and action on the stage above,
! floating futtering. papitating. shmmering with
opalescent hues. giving color to every phrase and
| some etimes to every word. MI. Csnpaninis band
| WAS less uncomfortable less Kaleidoscope. Many
| effects designed TO fash out only for second.
| were overlooked The size OF the room its fine
acoustical qualities the large number of players.
their disposition almost leVe with the listen
| ers) and occasional apses hom moderation were
! responsible few climaies which threatened
to split the the listeners But in the express
| sion OF the gentler moods MIR. CsInpanin and hls
| men were frequently most admirable
The stage-set is beautiful, though the picture is
| marred by incongruities and anachronisms
such as introduction of the fan1lisr winged pull
| or AssvIia into the architecture o. Herod's palace
| But as has been intimated the centre OF gravity
in this production lies in another direction, ana d
| discussion of every departure from archaeological
| correctness would be idle as discussion OF the