New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1917-04-22

gamut Of subscription meetings and
were given an extra representation be-
sides, and the other novelties and re
vivals" enjoyed the fortune usually,
though not always, accorded to the
fresh productions of a season. Mr..
De Koven's opera received more con-
sideration than any of it's American
predecessors. We wonder if it was be-
cause Mr.. Gatti considered it finer
work than Professor Parker's "Mona,"
Mr.. Damrosch's "Cyrano" or Mr.. Her
bert's "Madeleine"? Zandonai's "Fran-
cesca da Rimini" was a brave show, but
its musical beauty was largely con-
fined TO its first act, in which there
was no dramatic interest, and its Spec
tacular interest to the second, in which
the music was reduced 10 its lowest
estate. Particularly disappointing was
the scene of the reading of the Iris
tram romance, which, of all the scenes
in the play, calls out most loudly for
sensuous beauty and lofty passion in
the music. Gluck's "Iphigenia in
Tauris," though beautifully mounted
and performed with evident sincerity,
failed to make a deep enough impress
sion to justify the expectation that 1t
will remain in the Metropolitan roper
tory. Some of the reasons were obvi-
Gus from the beginning. The work,
which is one Of the finest examples OF
French classicism, was too much leu
tonized. not only in its language but
also in the manner of its performance.
Concerning it we repeat what we have
several times said, that if it was i'm
practicable to perform it in French it
ought to have been given in English.
A translation into the vernacular would
have done no greater violence to the
genius of the French language as
Gluck conserved it in his setting than
did the German; and we might have
been spared some of the bad vocaliza-
ton with which we have frequently
been overwhelmed in this and previous
seasons. Which reflection suggests the
pertinency and propriety of few
short observations concerning the tut
ure of the Metropolitan enterprise.
American Singers and English Operas
The conditions wrought by the war
wrought no change in the policy of the
management nor produced any altera-
ton in the attitude of the public toward
the institution. The management con-
Quoted. the season just ended on the
old lines Of strenuous employment of
all the forces, so as to give as many
performances as possible, and in all
things deferred to the whims and fads
of the public; the public gave no
thought to the opera, but centred its
attention on its favorite singers-ex-
cept in the case of the Wagnerian list,
circumstance for which the German
American patrons of the establishment
deserve large measure of credit. The
intimation has gone out that the next
season will follow the same lines and
that not only will German opera be
retained in the scheme, but the Ger
man artists who have been with US this
season kept in the employ of the com
pany. That German art should be
recognized as generously as Italian and
French-though it never has been-is
obvious, and we need waste no words
on the subject. We have no artistic
chauvinism in this country, and the
plan to give all schools Of composition
recognition and present all works so
far as is possible in the languages to
which they were composed is not only
wise but imperative in the case Of an
institution Of such dignity and magni-
tude as the Metropolitan Opera House.
But does liberality toward the art
works of Germany carry with 1t the
continued obligation to contribute as
generously in the future as we have
done in the past 70 the alien enemy
within our gates? As a rule. the con-
duct Of the members Of the German
contingent of the company during the
period of neutrality was commendable.