New-York tribune., 1912-02-14
MUSIC
MARY GARDEN AS "CARMEN"
first Representation of the Chi
cago. Philadelphia Company

irS, he said about the first of this sea-
s,s representations at the Metropoh'ah
80 House by the hicago-PhliaoeipHld
.ary last night there are also soiie
cVn .m,bt hut most emphatically a Few
ue ,vst II would be a curious occupa-
a. sov the least, TO inquire into the
uon' ,,1, IN 4 week in which nine per-
.rces are TO be vouchsated 10 the
,o lO.. ~ New York the visitors, VINO are
po roenect strangers and who preach no
a-tistic evangel, though they may use
h'" ". novel texts. should have been greeted
large an audience as the great
,rh would hold. London and boston
o,s IN the throes of an operauc crlsls' NC"
york seems opera mad An obvious oO-
.ryation touching last nights ou'Pouilne
net he a repetition of that mace upon l'0
ns-allel occa sion last year II was hol 'Ae
srbscription audience native TO lhe "ou'e'
~ N sneak, but largely an audience Vi All
n,ber though an equally fine type ooi
s,,sion7 That when the spirit or the hiaii'a
h.s eeized upon the New York PUBIC tneie
- onerag goers enough to All not two Dut
- tbrae opera houses in the metropolis
WHY was the demonstration mace III 'ns
49,. ~ 1Iamrerstein's struggling consul-
.h,n7 A timid answer Because the Mammal
.a, orera House did not invoke the propui-
sive mower of fad and fashion. Ihe aieu
ment? Mr. Dippels company ias' ms
,ooked as like the old company IN west o1'i'
street as two peas in the same POD ferhaPS
the opera exerted an unusual attractio"'
az II ought: New Yorks opera IoNers
ougbt not TO be deprived Of Carmen
be brightest gem in the modern frehch
,.ueI box. But Carmen" was always
feature in Mr.. Hammerstein's repertory'
ost night we had Carmen" with dill
terence: but the difference. personifed IN
Miss Mary Garden, the representative 81
-. horoine added nothing to the attract
,,.pess of the performances, which llnser
-, fo,dl,. in the memory Of those who
know and love the opera. on the con
,,orv ouite the reverse. Let us indulge
II restrospect for a moment Since Bizets
80 became known to New York in the
snclont DAYS of Strakosch and Mapleson
d. n is possible to recall nearly score OF
Carmens. Here are the names OF some
which come into mind without help OF an
sppeal TO the historical records: Cara
1ouise Kellogg Minnie Hauk, lreoelh'
Adeina Patti. Lehman, De Lussan, Bres-
sler.Gianoli. Calv&, Fremstad, FerraDih'
Maria Gay, Cavalieri. Mazarin, Gerville-
Reache, Marguerite Sylvia Was any one
~ them like Mary Garden, vocally or his
,rionically? Not a bit. Miss Garden, then
made an original revelation last night
She did, indeed; but not one with which
We should care to compare the impersona-
don NJ any one Of half a dozen of the
artists mentioned. 1t would not be respect
o,I N them: neither would II be respectful
n the author OF the novel on which the
onera is based. who is entitled to some
Consideration, nor to Messrs. Meilhac and
Haleyv. who made the libretto, men also to
whom respect is due, and least of all to
~ Bizet. the brilliant musician VINO
,sssed ali that his predecessors had done
through the fires Of his unique genius ana
brought the material forth with an enrich
ment which has kept public and critics IN
thrail for a generation
Miss Gardens Carmen is her own crea-
Ton. or that there can be question We
,sn recall only one artist who was as
ORIGINAL in the part as he, and hers was
Me least interesting impersonation In all
lhe long list. Il was that Adellna Patti
who ignored its dramatic elements entirely,
and cared only for the music. and only the
music in which she sang alone. Miss Car
6ep. constitutionaily and artstically IN
fapsble of doing justice TO either her SOLOS
or the music in the ensembles, mace
sad work Of it all and put her
dramatic conception Of the heroine
not ONLY in the foreground, but IN the
background and sideground and in every
scene Of the drama Her conception, be IL
understood not that of one of the creators
Of the piece 1t she forced upon the atten-
tion of the public with a violent eXtraVa-
gance OF action which sometimes made the
spectators gasp and stare with amazement.
Nine Calve, before her artistic ideals oe-
generated TO the point whence she could see
nothing in the opera except an opportunity
to exploit her personality, used 10 present
Carmen as a woman thoroughly Wantoi'
but one equipped with witcheries which, ue-
spite their wickedness, offers some explana-
ton, even II no palliation OF Don Jose; she
helped him to become tragic hero. Nine
Fremstad also presented the picture OF
loose-limbed, loose minded woman, an en-
bodiment Of selfish animalism and lust;
but II was possible that, though Varl-
able in her love, she yet felt the
passion. There was charm, which ap-
pealed 10 sympathetic interest In the
finest because the most natural, the
most intelligently worked out conception
presented by Nine. Bressler-Gianoh. But
II there was anything like charm in Miss
Gardens impersonation we are unable to
point It out If there is dramatic truth
fulness in consistent brutality, then let
that merit be set down TO her credit All
others have made the music and action
OF the first act insinuating, and thus eX-
tenuated and explained the infatuation OF
Don Jose Miss Gardens habafera and
seguidilla breathed only threatenings and
slaughter. A strange conception truly;
but only one example of many.
There were bright moments In the per-
formance as a whole NJ. Renaud provided
some OF them as Escamillo. though he had
TO play down 10 Miss Gardens crude no
ton in his entrance scene. NJ. Dalmores
provided others In intention, though
hoarseness made his voice fail him. There
was a supreme one in the singing OF Nine.
sepilH, who has developed into a remark
able artist. The solo dancer caused wave
OF enthusiasm by her fire and grace in the
dance in the last act The chorus did ex-
cellent work, as did the orchestra, under
signor Campanini; but the opera was Miss
Garden, II. E. K.