MEYERBEER AND HALÉVY:

MEYERBEER AND HALÉVY:

RELATIONS BETWEEN TWO MASTERS OF THE FRENCH GRAND OPÉRA

A TALK FOR THE BICENTENNIAL CELEBRATION OF THE BIRTH OF

JACQUES-FROMENTAL-ELIE HALÉVY

NEW YORK 11 APRIL 1999

ROBERT IGNATIUS LETELLIER

1) Introduction

The occurrence of a bicentenary is always something very special, even more so when it provides an opportunity to remember and celebrate the life and work of a great man who has inexplicably fallen into the shadows of the collective memory. This is even more special. when the person concerned can be linked with another whose greatness and contribution to the enrichment of our culture has been called into question. It is therefore special beyond words that we should be here today to remember and celebrate Jacques Fromental-Elie Halévy, and moreover, him in relation to Giacomo Meyerbeer, the undisputed master of French grand opera.

The few ideas I would like to present to you today centre on the relationship between these two composers as revealed in the Diaries of Meyerbeer, the full English translation of which has been my special concern over the past six years.

2) The Meyerbeer Diaries

Meyerbeer's diaries are a paradoxical document, at once all-inclusive in the precise coverage of the events of a full and famous life, and at the same -time exasperatingly silent sometimes about people and situations the composer met or experienced, arid yet withheld his opinion or personal reactions.

The treatment of Halévy is an extremely interesting case in point. Both composers presented their most famous works within a year of each other: La Juive in 1835 and Les Huguenots in 1836, two works which provided the most powerful and enduring examples of the genre which dominated the operatic stage for nearly a century. The Lwo men knew each other for over 30 years, and were similar and yet very different. Both were loyal Jews, with Halévy a devout practioner and Meyerbeer reticent about about his religion while personally very religious. Both achieved I:ame and fortune in Paris, with Halévy a native of the city and bound to it in life and work. Meyerbeer saw Paris as the centre of his most developed artistic self expression, but his personal loyalties were divided between France and Prussia, and his professional and artistic mission demanded a restless and in some ways itinerant life style which took him all over Europe in ceaseless wandering for his art.

Halévy's serene and somewhat detached character and general lack of mobility contrasts sharply with Meyerbeer's more anguished and passionate personality, with his vivid inner life, deep concern about religion, nationality, family and art. While Halévy, rather like Saint-Saens later, would produce his operas nearly every year with apparently effortless ease, for Meyerbeer each opera required a long and careful, not to say fraught period of reflection, gestation, creation, redaction and presentation.

3) Personal relations between Meyerbeer and Halévy the man

Meyerbeer's teasingly minimal diary entries can seem disappointingly curtailed, yet actually convey a great deal more than appears to be the case. On hearing of Halévy's death he observed on Tuesday l8 March 1862:

Read in the French papers that Halévy has died in Nice. He was a solid, talented musician, and moreover, a noble character. I knew him for 32 years, and mourn his passing.

For all its brevity, this says all that needs to be said about Halévy's courteous and dignified character, and his fine musicianship.

The early associations between the two composers seem to have been formal, and based on professional contacts. The first sustained involvement came as the result of Halévy's position as chief chorus master at the Opera. In these days of busy preparation for the premieres of Robert le Diable and Les Huguenots, Meyerbeer did not keep a full diary, but made crisp observations in his Taschenkalender.

During the rehearsals of Robert:

19 Oct 1831

To Halévy about the bells [in Act 5].

27 October 1831

To Halévy about a cut in the organ piece, and to retake chorus easier.

During the rehearsals for Les Huguenots:

5 September 1835

To Halvvy about the chorus in Damoreau’s aria; that Mlle Bouvenne should already begin learning her part in the aria.

7 Sept 1835

To Halévy about the six newly invited members of the male chorus

14 Sept 1835

To Halévy, that Mlle Laurent should take the second coryphée's part in Damoreau's aria, like Mlle Bouvenne.

15 Feb 1836

Rehearsed the trio with Halévy and the chorus.

22 July 1836

That Halévy should take the chorale in act 5 more slowly.

The 1840s were a particularly restless time for Meyerbeer, devoted extensively but his new duties as Generalmusikdirektor, It was also a period of strain with the management of the Paris Opera, the age of Léon Pillet and Rosine Stoltz, the scheming mezzo prima donna with no flexibility, when Meyerbeer effectively withdrew from the Parisian scene, and left it to Donizetti and Halévy, both of whom produced some of their best and most celebrated work at this time. One is slightly at a loss to know what contact existed between the composers during these years. Meyerbeer's diaries do not record either meetings with or letters to Halévy.

The situation does change a little later, though. We do have indications of the cordial nature of their relationship in the late 1840s, when Meyerbeer returned to Paris to revise Le Prophète and bring it to production. A series of social encounters between the two composers ensued. On 16 December 1847 we are told that Meyerbeer attended:

Dinner with Panseron where I found Auber, Halévy, Adam and Batton.

Then a few days later on Thursday 30 December 1847:

Dined with Zimmermann: Auber and Halévy were also there.

Then early in the new year, Meyerbeer gave one of his famous supper parties.

I hosted a dinner (a 20 fr.) to which which I invited Scribe, Delavigne, Auber, Halévy, Batton, Zimmermann, Adam, Buloz, and Panseron.

This guest list includes some of the most illustrious names then active on the Parisian musical scene: composers, librettists, musicologists and critics, all colleagues and friends of Meyerbeer.

The situation of social expansiveness continued into 1849. A few months after the premiere of Le Prophète, Meyerbeer was visited in Paris by his special friend and confidant, Dr Joseph Bacher from Vienna. The highpoint of Dr Bacher's reception was a visit to Halévy’s in the company of Meyerbeer. On Saturday 14 July 1849 Meyerbeer observed:

I was invited to dinner at Halévy’s with Dr Bacher, at Chatoux. We arrived home shortly after midnight.

This suggests that a good time was had by all. The dose of Halévy delights was capped by attendance at one of his operas, on Monday 16 July 1849 when we are told:

Heard Halévy’s Le Val d'Andorre with Dr Bacher.

Following on Meyerbeer's return from the Tyrol, where he had begun working on act I of L'Étoile du Nord, the series of cordial contacts continued. On Saturday 27 October 1849 he included Halévy among the guests at another of the famous supper parties, again for some of his most illustrious colleagues and friends in Paris.

I gave a dinner: V6ron, Armand Berton, Benoit Fould, Auber, Halévy, Berlioz, Marquis Durn, Jules Janin, Edmond Blanc, Ernest Blanc, Gouin. This dinner was 20 fr. per person.

The sense of expansiveness, generosity, and new artistic experience continued in this unique year of artistic triumph for Meyerbeer. Halévy was once more included in a matinée artistique, this time on 10 November 1849:

Today in honor of Baron Lüttichau, I invited the following guests to lunch with me: Kaskel, Count Wielhorsky, Martschendorff, Scribe, Auber, Halévy, Adam, Vatry, Gouin.

There was never to be a time like this 1849 for the warmth and frequency of contact between the two composers. The 1850s were a very busy time for Meyerbeer, who riding the greatest crest of his artistic career, now turned his attention to Opera Comique and the successful creation and widespread production of two very diverse scores for this genre. Visits to Paris became rarer, and as the decade progressed, and Meyerbeer's health began to decline markedly after 1856, the social outreach diminished. In the early 1850s, there were still occasions for entertainment in the old style, with Halévy, of course, among those invited. On Friday 26 November 1852:

I hosted a dinner. The guests were, Romieu (le Directeur des Beaux Arts), Véron, Roqueplan, Brindeau, Halévy, Auber, Adam, Thomas, Bouche. All in all this dinner cost me 400 fr. even though we were only 10 persons.

4) Meyerbeer and Halévy the artist

The principal diary entries on Halévy, however, relate to the artist. Here Meyerbeer's reactions again are limited, but tellingly sharp in their brevity. The careers of the two composers ran in parallel lines, and the appearance of new works by Halévy are a regular feature of Meyerbeer's mature experience. From his early years in Paris, Meyerbeer felt the need to reflect critically on Halévy's works. A regular feature of this reaction was a caution in assessing the impressions of Halévy's music. Invariably, a first impression was not to be trusted. As early as 2 January 1831 he records:

... they performed a one act opera, La Langue musicale, with music by Halévy. I will reserve my opinion about this work and its composer until I have seen another production.

Apparently this never happened. But nineteen years later his reactions would be exactly the same. On Thursday 12 October 1849 he notes the following:

In the Opéra Comique Halévy's new opera La Fée des roses. Madame Ugalde and Battaile sang the principal roles excellently. I want to hear another performance of this opera before I form my opinion.

This must have been very positive because attendance at seven other performances are recorded.

Halévy's subtle and restrained style required a studied reaction, and certainly was never populist in its appeal. A comment by Meyerbeer on first seeing Les Mousquetaires de la Reine says much about a general reaction to Halévy's music. On Sunday 14 February 1846 he observed:

In the evening to the first Berlin performance of Die Musketiere der Köningin in with music by Halévy. The opera pleases without causing a furore.

The impression is sustained by the reactions to the same opera in Vienna some six months later on Sunday 14 February 1847:

In the evening to the Kdrntnertor-Theater for the first two acts of Halévy's Die Musketiere der Köningin. In spite of many ingenious details, I found neither music nor libretto entertaining.

This restrained reaction, this perception of a considerable intellect at work, without the power to vitalize a visceral response in the hearers, has remained a consistent reaction to Halévy's music which has been perceived to be academic and learned, and without a distinctive melodic character. This emerges from the first in one of the most sustained reactions to Halévy's work, in fact a very sustained critique of his music. Halévy's thematic opacity, and intellectual approach to period and atmosphere, so admired by Richard Wagner in La Juive, is evident also in Meyerbeer's critique of the ballet, Manon Lescaut, on 12 January 1831:

In the evening to the Opera where I saw Act I of the ballet Manon Lescaut by Scribe and Aumer, with music by Halévy. The music is very sterile for the ballet. Actual thematic invention is very sparse, and grace in the phrasing is often lacking. On the other hand, the old French music of the Baroque period (1720) is outstandingly recreated, interpreted and reworked and scored in the manner of the great majority of original songs and dances of this period. It testifies to an accomplished musical master. I was delighted by many of these old French melodies, and intend to write down some of them...

Wagner's development of the unendliche Melodie, related as it is to the grand opéra concept of the ligne brisée, is presciently discussed in Meyerbeer I s most penetrating investigation of Halévy I s style in his review of the performances of Le Guitarréro which he saw in Leipzig and Berlin in late 1841. Writing on Tuesday 19 October he observed:

In the evening to the Opera for Halévy's Der Guitarenspieler. It was a much better performance than in Leipzig and the music appealed to me much more. The orchestration is very interesting , even if it is rather dismembered (what the Italians call tritto [minced]). There are many melodious phrases, even though these melodies are, on the whole, only the product of rhythmic combinations. There is an intelligent perception of the text, and a gifted grasp of the lante style. The whole is interesting, although there is too much inlaid-work [marqueterie] put together from endlessly small pieces. The tenor Mantius was very good, the baritone Bottcher most tolerable, Demoiselle Tuczek very good as the Donna.

Meyerbeer's reactions draw firm attention to the declamatory quality so characteristic of Halévy's style, a feature he would return to in his Diary where he reflected on Jaguerita l'Indienne which was so influential in establishing the French interest in the Orient. On Friday 7 September 1855 he writes:

In the Théatre Lyrique: Halévy's Jaguerita. The music appealed to me more this time than on the first occasion. It has much that is beautiful and thematic, even if this is brought out mainly in the declamation of the verses.

In orchestration, Halévy was always innovatory (especially in his development of a dynamic chromatic use of the brass instruments) even if stylistically he remained somewhat unadventurous. These aspects are implicit to Meyerbeer's critique of one of Halévy's most recherché works. On 18 March 1849, a month before the premiere of Le Prophète, Meyerbeer wrote:

Concert in the Conservatoire: for the first time they performed Prométhée enchainé, after Schiller's reworking of Aeschylus's tragedy, with music by Halévy (in the style of Mendelssohn's Antigone). In the strings he has introduced progressions of quarter tones.

Halévy's great intellect and academic approach is also reflected in Meyerbeer's recourse to his ideas on musicological matters. This emerged in the controversy on the tuning pitch Meyerbeer was asked to report on as part of his duties to the Berlin Academy. On Friday 30 May 1862, he observed:

To inspector Maars, in order to arrange for a sitting of the musical section of the Academy, concerning the lowering of the tuning tone. Studied Halévy's report on this subject.

This report contained in Leçons de lecture musicale (Paris, 1859) is part of body of musical writing and thinking to which Halévy gave much attention in his professional life. Meyerbeer clearly thought of it as definitive, and worked carefully on the German report. On Monday 2 June 1862 we read that he

corrected Burguis's translation of Halévy's report on the lowering of the tuning pitch

and on Thursday 5 June 1862

translated the tableaux appended to Halévy's report on the tuning pitch for the Academy.

5) Meyerbeer and Halévy's operas

But one of the most interesting aspects of Meyerbeer's diaries is the list of works he attended throughout his life. An investigation of the Halévy operas he recorded as having seen provides a fascinating gauge of the relative popularity and distribution of his operas all over Europe in the mid-nineteenth century.

Meyerbeer saw 17 of Halévy's operas between 1831 and 1863 at least according to his Diary entries. The list contains several extraordinary surprises.

1. The most frequently performed opera is neither La Juive, nor L'Eclair, but the opéra comique, Les Mousquetaires de la Reine, which Meyerbeer saw 15 times between 1846 and 1857. Its popularity in Germany was easily as great as in France.

2. La Juive comes next with 13 performances between 1838 and 1863.

3. La Fée des roses follows with no fewer than 8 performances between 1849 and 1852.

4. Le Juif errant clocks up to 7 in 1852-53.

5. La Reine de Chypre 6 between 1843 and 1860.

6. Le Guitarréro then features with 5 in 1841, and Le Val d'Andorre, also with 5 in 1848-49.

7. Three performances each are listed for:

Charles VI (1848) L'Éclair (1836, 1849, 1857) Jaguerita l'Indienne (1855) La Magicienne (1858-59)Le Nabab (1853)

8. He attended one performance each of: La Dame_de_pique (1851) Guido et Ginevra (1842)La Langue musicale (1831) La Tempesta (1847) Prométhée enchainé (1849)

7) Conclusion

Meyerbeer's frienship and admiration for this eminent and noble composer found its last courteous and thoughtful expression in a public gesture of mourning and celebration when he observed on Friday 4 July 1862

Wrote to Gemmy Brandus enclosing 200 fr. for the monument to Halévy.

Shalom ba-olam dear Jacques-Fromental-Elie. May you rest in beatitude, and may we soon be able to celebrate your life through knowing and loving the hidden treasures of your slumbering scores.