Evening star., 1935-07-28

bIlO OpC1do Ia 1146AioiA eAoAA'AsoAOAAo; Va
the proper combination which his
good musicianship knows is neceSSaI
claim is that opera, which is so little
try, could have more followers If it "
stand the text, if singers were trs
tranSlators could be found who we
time.
In the last Issue of Musical Amer
ica comes denial of these cherished
arguments with another point OF the
question put forth in logical and in
teresting fashion. Herbert F. Peyser.
author of the article, has had all the
BACKGROUND needed to give authority
to his statements. For several years
he has been music critic on outStand-
ing New York newspapers, and has
acted in that capacity for the New
York Times during his past five years
residence in Berlin and Vienna. A few
of the salient points of Mr.. Peyser's
argument are herewith given for the
consideration of those fair enough to
want to know every angle Of a dis
cuSsed question.
twenty years ago I was heartily
in favor of translating all operas into
the language of the people to whom
they were sung. Today / am just as
heartily opposed to 1t. attribute this
change of front largely to the circum-
stance that, living for the past five
years in Germany and Austria, have
listened in and out of season to prac-
tically nothing but translated opera. I
can recommend no better corrective
than such an experience to those
theorists and viSionaries who believe
that the performance Of all operas in
English versions is the secret OF do
mesticating the lyric drama in Amer
lea.
Before considering the matter more
closely let me make it clear that the
singability of the English language Is
not point at issue. It ought to be
as preposterous to argue that English
is Singable as to rush to arms in de-
tense of the multiplication table.
Every language in the world is sing
able If it is used according to the
physical canonS OF the human voice.
The folk song is the an-sufiicient
proof of that.
'The reason why opera translated
into the popular tongue has never
gained an extensive or q lasting foot
hold in England and America lies
neither in the defects of translauons,
the antagonism of cliques, the oppo-
sition of foreign singers, the un-
tutored diction of native ones or some
fancied musical insuficiency of the
English language. 1t lies first and
foremost in the Anglo-Saxon psy-
chology and in the reaction OF this
psychology to opera as such. That the
average English translation Of an
opera is usually poorer than the aver
age foreign one happens not so much
because the English translators are,
man for man, less skilled than their
colleagues in other lands as because
the public for which they work Is
psychologically what it is.
Neither the American nor the Eng
lishman has ever accepted as the con-
tinental European has done the fun
damental convention of opera. That
the characters of a stage piece should
sing of their actions and emotions in
stead of speaking them, that their
song should sometimes assume highly
artificial forms, that their movements
and demeanor should be regulated by
thA impositionS of the music rather
than by the more obvious logic of ma
ture-these things have always exer-
cised q more or less estranging effect
upon even cultivated Americans or
Englishmen, let alone on the musi-
cally illiterate. The more the words
this individual hears fall below Ger
tain level of dignity and the closer
their sound and sense approach the
commonplace and the colloquial the
more disturbing, incongruous or
downright funny it strikes him that
they are sung rather than spoken.
Unless the intention is deliberately
comic, to sing sentiment or state
ment is, in the Anglo-Saxon view, to
enhance, ennoble or idealize it. But
to "ennoble" a colloquialism or q
platitude by communicating it in
poetic or in musical terms is almost
willy-nilly to achieve satire. It ex-
plains why time out of mind an Amer
ican will smile in the opera house
when he hears in his own language
a phrase to which the European will
listen with unrufled composure and
even with gravity. And to the maker
of English operatic translations land
the author of English ibrettos gen.
erally) it lays down a law which he
can flout only at his peril.
"In the second place, there is, to
my thinking, flaw in the argument
that, as soon as an American audi
st will grasp the plot of the piece that
was heretofore obscure to 1t under
stand without further hindrance
what is being sung and, so under
standing, take grand opera forever
and aye to its hitherto reluctant
bosom. Such q point Of view leaves
out of account that neither in Amer
ica nor anywhere else is it the habit
OF audiences to strain their ears and
concentrate on the text. If this text
Is understood, so much the better. If
not, so much the worse. Has any one
ever heard of a singer with good
voice discharged from an opera COM
pany because his diction was not
clear? Does any one imagine that
an opera containing beautiful music
and other elements Of success would
be refused or discarded solely because
some fault of the composers preju-
diced the intelligibility of the words?
The thing in opera that matters first
and last-whether the opera be by
Handel, Mozart, Rossini, Verdi, Wag-
ner, Debussy, Krenek. Deems Taylor
or Alessandro Scarlatti-is the music.