The Bartered Bride and National

Home , Emmy Destinn, Leo Slezak, The Bartered Bride

A “BOHEMIAN” PREMIERE? SMETANA’S THE BARTERED BRIDE AND NATIONAL

IDENTITY IN 1909 NEW YORK

Laura Fehr, B.M.

Thesis Prepared for the Degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS

May 2020

APPROVED:

Peter Mondelli, Major Professor Margaret Notley, Committee Member Mark McKnight, Committee Member Benjamin Brand, Chair of the Division of Music History, Theory, and Ethnomusicology Felix Olschofka, Director of Graduate Studies in the College of Music John Richmond, Dean of the College of Music Victor Prybutok, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate School

Fehr, Laura. A “Bohemian” Premiere? Smetana’s The Bartered Bride and National

Identity in 1909 New York. Master of Arts (Music), May 2020, 43 pp., 2 appendices, bibliography, 52 titles.

When Czech composer Bedřich Smetana’s opera The Bartered Bride received its

American premiere at the Metropolitan Opera in February 1909, New York music critics published positive reviews which displayed a great fascination with the many “Bohemian” aspects of the production. However, certain comments or language used by some critics indicate that American opinions of the Czech people were less than positive. After Czechs began immigrating to America en masse in 1848, already-established American citizens developed skewed cultural perceptions of the Czech people, established negative stereotypes, and propagated their opinions in various forms of press throughout the nation. Despite a general dislike of the Czechs, reviewers revered The Bartered Bride and praised its many authentic

“Bohemian” qualities. This research explores the idea of a paradoxical cultural phenomenon in which the prejudice against Czech people did not fully cross over into the musical sphere.

Instead, appreciation for Czech music and musicians may have trumped any such negative opinions and authentic Czech productions such as The Bartered Bride may have been considered a novelty in the eyes of early twentieth-century New Yorkers.

Laura Fehr

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

CHAPTER 2. THE BARTERED BRIDE: THE AMERICAN PREMIERE ...... 4

CHAPTER 3. THE “BOHEMIAN” ISSUE ...... 14

CHAPTER 4. CZECH MUSICIANS IN NEW YORK CITY ...... 22

CHAPTER 5. IMPLICATIONS: CZECH OPERA IN NEW YORK CITY ...... 26

APPENDIX A. CZECH AND GERMAN CHARACTER NAMES...... 35

APPENDIX B. THE BARTERED BRIDE PLOT SUMMARY ...... 37

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 40

iii CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

When thousands of Bohemian residents emigrated en masse to America beginning in the late 1840s, a new cultural phenomenon was born. The Czech people brought to their new community in America a rich culture and a strong sense of nationalism. Czech immigration, the immigrants themselves, and the various products of their establishment in the United States remain understudied today. During the first half-century of their time in America, it was primarily the Czechs themselves who kept a strong documentary history of their people both in their new country and their homeland. Unfortunately, many of their publications and writings have been lost to time. What exists perhaps in larger quantities, however, are various forms of documentation which display, both in outright and subtle ways, prejudice against or misunderstandings of Czech immigrants on the part of already-established American citizens.

By the early 1900s, the term “Bohemian” had become a common label for people of

Czech origin in America, serving to differentiate this ethnic group from other groups of immigrants. The use of this term was a highly sensitive issue for members of the Czech community, however, as it had become a term also used for Romani and individuals who led unconventional lives. This slippage caused many Americans to have misconceptions about the people of Czech (Bohemian) origin. This in turn had an impact on the reception of Czech music and musicians in New York City. Although many beloved Czech musicians emigrated to New

York and obtained substantial influence over the New York music scene, misunderstandings persisted. By 1909 when Bedřich Smetana’s opera The Bartered Bride premiered at The

Metropolitan Opera, the term “Bohemian” had come to stand for a mixture of positive and

negative associations, of carefully crafted self-identification and general misconceptions.1 A

critic for The New York Times said in his review of the premiere that “the opera gave much pleasure, and was received with genuine enthusiasm, not only by the representatives of the

Bohemian colony who were present, but also by the great body of the audience, perhaps more sophisticated in the matter of new productions, and not especially prejudiced in favor of peasant operas.”2 Thus, the use of “Bohemian” in the wake of the first American performance of The

Bartered Bride indicates that the American view of Czech compositions and performers was

ultimately skewed by richly complex cultural perceptions of Czech people.

To understand the complexity of the reception of Czech music in New York fully, it is

important to understand first the discourse surrounding the city’s Czech immigrant culture. My

thesis seeks to cultivate such an understanding using the American premiere of Smetana’s The

Bartered Bride as a case study. By examining the language used in newspaper reviews

surrounding the opera’s premiere, as well as in other articles for comparison, I have discovered

the frequency with which ethnically charged reviews were written. Subsequently, having

observed the convergence of American and Czech culture at this performance and working

outward, I have illuminated the cross-cultural exchange of Czech opera being performed in the

United States during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

This thesis begins with a detailed look into the premiere performance of The Bartered

Bride in America, focusing on performers and the conductor, distinctively Czech elements in

both the music and libretto, and how the opera was received by citizens of New York and local

1 Marek Vlha. “’What is the Bohemian nation?’ Geneze povedomí o ceském národu ve Spojených státech amerických do pocátku 20. Století” ["’What is the Bohemian Nation?’ A Genesis of the Awareness of the Czech Nation in the United States of America up to the Beginning of the 20th Century”], Cesky Casopis Historicky 113, no. 2 (2015): 415. 2 Richard Aldrich, “’Bartered Bride’ at Metropolitan,” review of The Bartered Bride, Metropolitan Opera, New York Times, February 20, 1909.

Czech immigrants. Most importantly, however, this chapter introduces the “Bohemian” discourse surrounding the opera. The third chapter provides a brief history of Czech immigration to America and the lives the immigrants made in their new country. Here, I explore the possibility that prejudices existed against the Czechs. I also explain the origin of the word

“Bohemian” and how its acquired meanings may have led to misconceptions about the Czechs as well as Czech reactions against such misunderstandings. In the fourth chapter, I briefly explain a few of the roles that various Czech musicians played in the development of New York’s music scene and how a select few were received by the New York newspaper critics or by the general population. In the final chapter of my thesis, I synthesize the information to find possible explanations for the cultural phenomenon that was The Bartered Bride premiere.

3 CHAPTER 2

THE BARTERED BRIDE: THE AMERICAN PREMIERE

When news that Czech composer Bedřich Smetana’s opera, The Bartered Bride (Czech title, Prodana Nevesta) was finally to premiere on American soil during the Metropolitan

Opera’s 1908-1909 season, both frequent New York opera attendees and the Czech community were eager to witness the momentous event. The Bartered Bride had premiered at the Provisional

Theatre in Prague in 1866. After the opera underwent revisions, the final version was premiered at the Provisional Theatre in 1870. The opera was slow to achieve popularity outside Bohemia and did not truly enter the operatic repertory until its performance at the Vienna National Music and Theatre Exhibition in 1892 by the Prague Provisional Theatre. By the time of the opera’s

American premiere on February 19, 1909, The Bartered Bride had garnered a spectacular reputation throughout both Europe and America.3

The opera was considered a benchmark of Czech nationalism by people of Czech heritage as it boldly exemplified the lives, rich culture, and unique musical essence of Bohemia and its people.4 For the Czech immigrant community of New York City in particular, the opera—even though it was performed in German translation—not only resonated with them and reminded them of their homeland, but offered a positive glimpse of their country and their

3 Contrary to most sources, which state that the American premiere took place at the Metropolitan Opera in 1909, some sources have claimed that it occurred much earlier. Julius Mattfeld in A Handbook of American Opera Premieres 1731-1962 states that the first performance took place in Chicago at the Haymarket Theater on August 20th, 1893. This claim is also found in an article by Dr. Jaroslav E.S. Vojan entitled “Czechoslovak Art and Literature in America” which adds that the opera was given during the World’s Fair, performed by the Ludvik Theatrical Group, and conducted by J. H. Capek. Also found in Vojan’s publication, as well as Jan Lowenbach’s article “Czechoslovak Composers and Musicians in America,” is the statement that the first performance given in New York occurred on May 12th, 1894 at the Central Opera House. While it is possible that these performances did occur, I have written my thesis under the assumption that the majority sources, which claim the Metropolitan Opera premiere as the first in America, are most accurate. In terms of the opera’s reputation, the opera was performed by various companies across Europe after the outstanding performance at the Exhibition in Vienna in 1892. Positive reports of the opera’s music and plot spread throughout the musical and opera-going communities. 4 Oxford Music Online, s.v. “The Bartered Bride,” https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:5982/.

culture to the whole of New York. The vast array of distinctively Czech elements contained in

The Bartered Bride are to be found in every aspect from libretto and music to scenery and

costumes. The libretto by Karel Sabina, the same librettist responsible for Smetana’s first opera,

The Brandenburgers in Bohemia, is one of the few libretti to be written in mostly trochees or

prose instead of the standard high-style iambs.5 Trochees were a natural choice for Czech opera

libretti as the stressed first syllable matches the first-syllable stress of the Czech language. While

Brandenburgers and The Bartered Bride were written and premiered around the same time, the latter is quite different from its predecessor regarding genre and plot as the former is a historical

drama and the latter is a jovial comedy (see appendix B for a summary of the plot).

The music of The Bartered Bride is lighthearted and somewhat less complex than operas by Smetana’s contemporaries, but is certainly not lacking in musical interest. Following in the footsteps of traditional opera buffa, it contains all the necessary elements to place it in the genre.

The quaint and energetic overture had garnered a popularity of its own apart from the rest of the opera and, thanks in part to Gustav Mahler, who had conducted it multiple times, was already well-known in New York City by the time the opera premiered in late February 1909. The remainder of the opera contains jovial chorus numbers, engaging ensemble and duet sections, several beautiful arias, and distinctively Czech dance sections. While most scholars who discuss this opera state that it does not contain existing Czech folk tunes, it has a distinctive Czech folk- like sound. Contradicting John Tyrell’s Grove Music Online article, which states that Smetana did not include any actual folk tunes, William Everett claims in his article “Opera and National

Identity in Nineteenth-Century Croatian and Czech Lands” that the furiant in Act II contains

Smetana’s only direct folk song quotation, but that the text was omitted with the exception of the

5 Oxford Music Online, s.v. “The Bartered Bride,” by John Tyrell, https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2147/.

title, Sedlak, Sedlak.6 Other than this possible quotation, the folk-like qualities of this opera

derive more from rhythmic meters, specifically in the dance numbers, the bagpipe imitation in

the overture, and general melodic qualities throughout.7

For the American premiere, Mahler, with the boundless support of Metropolitan Opera

Co-Director, Andreas Dippel, sought to achieve ethnographic authenticity in an effort to please

the audience and to produce a successful performance.8 Dippel went to great lengths and spared

little expense to ensure that the scenery, costumes, and even performers were authentically

Czech. The costumes and scenery, designed by Heinrich Lefler, were based on the designs of the

original production at the National Theatre in Prague.9 There were only two scenic backgrounds

for the opera—an open area in a Bohemian village and the interior of a local inn. Regarding the costumes, one can observe from a surviving photograph that the performers pictured wore traditionally Slavic garments, complete with aprons of lace on the women and fur-trimmed hats on the men. Henry Krehbiel of the New York Tribune wrote, “no damsels with gauze skirts, these dancers, pirouetting and smirking, but lusty men and women in bodices and skirts of brilliant colors, and stout shoes which come down upon the floor with a rhythmical clatter that sets one’s blood coursing wildly.”10

Certain performers in The Bartered Bride were chosen in part for their contribution to the

production’s authenticity. Hired to perform in multiple operas during the season, the famous

6 William A. Everett, “Opera and National Identity in Nineteenth-Century Croatian and Czech Lands,” International Review of the Aethetics and Sociology of Music 35, no. 1 (2004): 65. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/. 7 Oxford Music Online, “The Bartered Bride.” 8 Everett, “Opera and National Identity,” 65. 9 Henry-Louis de LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, vol. 4, A New Life Cut Short (1907-1911) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 346. 10 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 349.

Czech prima donna Emmy Destinn was cast as the leading female, Marie. Carl Burrian, a tenor

also from Bohemia, was chosen for the role of Hans. Though it is not stated directly in surviving

documents or secondary literature, it can be assumed that these leading performers were selected

for this opera due to their national origins and international popularity. In addition to those in the

singing roles, dancers played an important part in creating authenticity in The Bartered Bride.

Well-known Czech dancer and choreographer Ottokar Bartik choreographed and performed in

the two dance scenes for the opera and Czech dancers were imported from the Prague National

Theatre exclusively for these scenes.

Of all the artists involved in the premiere of The Bartered Bride, however, Mahler was

undoubtedly the most famous. The Bohemian-born composer and conductor was the person

responsible for bringing this Czech masterpiece to the American stage. According to Henry-

Louis de LaGrange—whose extensive biography on the conductor offers the most detailed

picture of the premiere to date—The Bartered Bride was a passion project for Mahler, and he

addressed every aspect of the production with great affection.11 Mahler made significant

decisions to alter the opera that incited both enthusiastic reviews and harsh criticisms. As

performance practice during this time avoided use of the original language and following the

tradition established by the popular Viennese production of 1892, The Bartered Bride was

performed in German instead of Czech.12 Many considered this work to be Austrian following

the 1892 performance and the German title, Die Verkaufte Braut, was most well-known throughout the world.13 In addition to the choice of language, Mahler also made changes to

Smetana’s original instrumentation for the opera and altered rhythms. However, the most

11 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 346. 12 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 348. 13 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 348.

significant and widely discussed change made by the conductor was to perform the

independently well-known overture at the beginning of the second act. This decision was made

so that patrons who arrived late to the opera would not miss what Mahler believed to be an

excellent piece of music.14 Most in attendance were highly pleased with Mahler’s involvement in

the production, claiming him as one of the primary reasons for the show’s enormous success.15

Carl Burrian, however, was critical of Mahler’s participation in the event as he did not believe

that Mahler was a true Czech, saying that “Mahler was born on Czech soil, but he was never a

Czech, nor was he a Czech artist. . . Let Destinová [Destinn] confirm without challenge whether

it was The Bartered Bride which delighted the audience so much under Mahler. Was Mahler

sincere about the work of our Grand Master? . . This meant much for America—for Smetana it

meant less.”16 Burrian was the only person critical of Mahler’s involvement and it has been speculated that this was due to his personal impression of Smetana’s work.17 All others,

including Emmy Destinn, were highly pleased with Mahler’s involvement.

Anticipation for the Czech opera was high among the citizens of New York. Newspapers

published announcements, posters were made highlighting the people involved, and

conversations between musicians and other New Yorkers heightened the excitement over this

new production. The Czech-American community was perhaps most eager to experience The

Bartered Bride in the place that they now called home. Czech organizations contacted The

Metropolitan Opera almost immediately following the announcement of The Bartered Bride’s

14 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 347. 15 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 346. 16 Carl Burrian’s Memoires, Z Mých Pamětí (Prague, 1913). Referenced in LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 346. 17 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 347.

inclusion in the season to purchase seats for a total of $2,000.18 Mahler had also been invited as

guest of honor at the Bohemian Club, held on January 23, 1909.19 Czech performer Emmy

Destinn spoke kindly of the upcoming event saying that this would be “one of the most

memorable productions of The Bartered Bride she had known in her rich career.”20

As predicted, The Bartered Bride was wildly successful according to critics at major

newspapers in New York City. Many reviewers noted that the audience cheered with great

exuberance and requested curtain calls after each act.21 People in the lobby during intermissions

held conversations brimming with positive opinions of the comic opera. At the end of the

performance, the Bohemian Society of America gave large wreaths tied with the colors of

Bohemia and America to both Destinn and Mahler.22 Czech and American audience members

alike were teeming with excitement over this performance.

In addition to covering the excitement of the evening, reviewers also went into elaborate

detail in discussing key aspects of the performance. When reviewing the music they heard that

night, many critics raved about Smetana’s delightful composition and the musicians bringing it

to life. A critic for the New York American noted that “Every note in the score had the life and character of Bohemia in it, the strange, sweet sentiment of a Slav people idealized, the piquancy and the color of quaint villages scattered between the frontiers of the ‘Saxon Switzerland’ and of

German Austria.”23 Many critics even compared Smetana’s music to that of Mozart or

18 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 347. 19 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 347. 20 LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 346. 21 Henry Krehbiel, “First performance of Smetana’s ‘Bartered Bride,’” review of The Bartered Bride, Metropolitan Opera, New York Tribune, February 20, 1909. 22 Dr. Vojan, Musical Review. Referenced in LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 347. 23 Charles Henry Meltzer, “Smetana’s rustic opera produced,” review of The Bartered Bride, Metropolitan Opera, New York American, February 20, 1909.

Mendelssohn due to the melodiousness of the score as well as the opera buffa forms employed,

calling the composer the “Bohemian Mozart”24 Some reviewers were somewhat critical of the

score, however, saying that the music was both old-fashioned and not challenging enough for

singers like Emmy Destinn. Charles Henry Meltzer of the New York American said in his review that “Destinn, who interpreted the heroine, was ‘to the manner born,’ being herself a Bohemian, versed in the ways of Bohemian peasants. The vocal demands of her part are small for so distinguished an artist. And they were met easily.”25 When discussing Emmy Destinn’s vocal

abilities and her performance on stage, however, the critics were always exceptionally positive.

Several critics commented on the lack of difficulty in the libretto, as well. Meltzer said

that “the libretto of ‘The Bartered Bride,’ indeed, is immeasurably stupid—simple to the point of

inanity.”26 Others, however, adored the light freshness that the comic opera brought to the

Metropolitan stage, which many believed had seen too much grief and sorrow in recent months

with such dramatic productions as Puccini’s Madame Butterfly and several of Wagner’s operas

taking the stage earlier in the season. One Czech attendee declared, “In New York we had our

Bartered Bride newly dressed by the purest art in ideal guise, thanks to which Smetana came,

conquered, and left behind him a sense of boundless admiration.”27

Mahler’s masterful conducting and artistic interpretation were major talking points in

almost every review. A critic for the New York Press remarked that “few persons in the audience

knew that Mahler had reorchestrated Smetana’s score to a large extent. Had that fact been

published a few old fogies might have raised objections. The fact is, however, that by making

24 Meltzer, New York American, 1909. 25 Meltzer, New York American, 1909. 26 Meltzer, New York American, 1909. 27 Dr. Vojan, Musical Review, 1909. Quoted in LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 347.

these changes Mahler, who understands the art of orchestration far better than Smetana ever

pretended to, added a great deal to the effectiveness of the music and improved its chances for

success in the Metropolitan Opera House.”28 Richard Aldrich of the New York Times wrote that

“in all and through all the master hand of Mr. Mahler was evident, whose performances all have

a special quality of their own, in the finish and dramatic potency with which the music is

presented, and all the factors of a vivid representation are brought together and co-ordinated.”29

Critics also praised Mahler for placing the overture in the second act and taking such creative

liberties with his conducting to create lively and exuberant dancing scenes.

It was, indeed, the dances that consistently received among the highest praises throughout

the reviews. Audiences adored the energetic choreography, for which critics rightly gave credit to Bartik. In fact, the New York Times contributed much of the evening’s success to Bartik and the Czech dance troupe saying that “the polka in the first act was danced by a corps of Bohemian dancers in the true Bohemian manner, which was not that of the ballroom. The furiant was done by members of the ballet, but plainly under an equally Bohemian influence.”30 The dance numbers composed by Smetana, combined with the vivacious dancing on stage, contributed a great deal to the overall success of the opera.

With all of these elements combined, New York critics certainly seem to have felt the all- encompassing sense of Bohemia that this opera provided. When proposing reasons why this opera should be “hailed with pleasure,” Krehbiel of the New York Daily Tribune discussed how

“one is offered by the. . . fascination exerted by its novel local color in scene and music. Still

28 Unsigned review, “Opera fifty years old is sung here at last,” review of The Bartered Bride, Metropolitan Opera, New York Press, February 20, 1909. 29 Aldrich, New York Times, 1909. 30 Aldrich, New York Times, 1909.

another by the satisfaction which it brings of a long-cherished curiosity and historical interest.”31

Yet another critic stated that, “to attend a performance of The Bartered Bride is like taking a trip to Bohemia.”32 Music critics of New York were highly fascinated by the many facets of this opera that created a picturesque experience for all in attendance.

The topic of national origin was certainly a significant factor regarding the premiere performance, for reviews did not consider the work for its musical or production-based merits alone. Almost every review of The Bartered Bride considered it through a “Bohemian” lens, noting or emphasizing the regional origin of its composer, conductor, and prima donna. Krehbiel wrote, “And the performance? Mr. Mahler is a Bohemian. Miss Destinn is a daughter of

Bohemia’s capital. The dancers were brought from the National Theatre at Prague, the home of

Czechish music. They are to the Bohemian manner born.”33

The review published by The New York Times on February 20 is one of the few, if not the only, to indicate negative undertones regarding the music, style, plot, and even the audience members. Aldrich made a comment about the Czech-American attendees saying, “the opera gave much pleasure, and was received with genuine enthusiasm, not only by the representatives of the

Bohemian colony who were present, but also by the great body of the audience, perhaps more sophisticated in the manner of new productions, and not especially prejudiced in favor of peasant operas.”34 Although this is one of the only reviews that appears to have a somewhat negative slant toward the Czech attendees specifically, each review makes a point to label and emphasize every “Bohemian” element in both the opera itself and its premiere performance. In doing this,

31 Krehbiel, New York Daily Tribune, 1909. 32 Referenced in LaGrange, Gustav Mahler, 350. 33 Krehbiel, New York Daily Tribune, 1909. 34 Aldrich, New York Times, 1909.

reviewers appear to treat Czech immigrants as an “other” and their beloved opera as a product of such. Perhaps it is only through the application of a modern lens that one can observe this

“other” status projected onto the Czech immigrants of 1909. Or, perhaps this means of differentiation was, in fact, present in the natives’ way of thinking and, therefore, their writing.

The use of “Bohemian” in the wake of the first and subsequent performances of The Bartered

Bride, therefore, indicates that the American view of Czech compositions and performers was ultimately skewed by richly complex cultural perceptions of Czech people.

13 CHAPTER 3

THE “BOHEMIAN” ISSUE

Before the creation of Czechoslovakia in 1918, Bohemia (Čechy) was a Kingdom of the

Holy Roman Empire until it was absorbed by the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the seventeenth

century. Under Habsburg rule, the occupation and Germanization of the Czech lands not only

caused Czechs to feel oppressed but created a great deal of contention between the Czechs and

the German-speaking occupants.35 Due to these circumstances, the people and culture of

Bohemia were relatively unknown to Americans and Bohemia was known simply to be a

“German living space.”36 When America did receive news concerning Bohemia, it was generally

transmitted by German-language press, which often displayed anti-Czech sentiments due to the

tense history between the two groups.37 Once people from the Czech lands settled in America,

however, American awareness of this land and its people changed dramatically. Though Czech

citizens began emigrating to America in the seventeenth century, mass emigration began in 1848

following a failed uprising against the Habsburg monarchy. For some, the motivation to emigrate

was political. For others, their reasoning was primarily economic as they faced devastating

droughts, failed potato crops, or the financial inability to retain their property. Recent news of the

discovery of gold in America proved an exciting incentive, as well.38 The mass emigration of the

Czech people suddenly and dramatically altered American knowledge and opinion of the

Bohemian people.

35 Nancy M. Wingfield, Flag Wars and Stone Saints: how the Bohemian Lands became Czech (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007): 5. 36 Vlha, “’What is the Bohemian nation?,’” 415. 37 Vlha, ’What is the Bohemian nation?,’” 416. 38 Thomas Capek, The Čechs (Bohemians) in America: A Study of Their National, Cultural, Political, Social, Economic and Religious Life. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1920), 28.

Once in America, early Czech immigrants settled into Czech-speaking communities in

various cities and rural areas across the country. Within large cities, different immigrant groups

dominated their own discrete sections, creating ethnically distinct neighborhoods. New York

City, specifically, was home to one of the largest and most prominent Czech communities in the

country. The official United States census of 1910 determined that there were 40,988 persons of

Bohemian and Moravian origin living in New York State, most in the city.39 This number may

not be accurate, however, as many Czechs accused the census of unfair treatment for placing

thousands of Czechs in the column dedicated to persons of Austrian origin.40 The majority of

Czechs in New York City lived in areas occupied by several immigrant groups of various national origins but separated into their own distinct conclaves by city blocks, first between

Houston, Eighth street, and Avenue A until the late 1880s when they gradually migrated uptown to an area between Sixty-fifth and Seventy-eighth streets. Residents of the Czech neighborhoods established their own stores and business offices that catered primarily to their people, many with signs written in the native language.41 These communities remained fiercely independent and enthusiastically nationalistic, as the language barrier prevented them from engaging most effectively with the world around them, thereby reinforcing their bond as a distinct ethnic group.42 Czech settlers opened businesses for their communities, often distinguished by signage

in the Czech language, which only further solidified their dominance within their neighborhood.

Apart from owning and operating local businesses, Czech immigrants had various types of

39 Thomas Capek, The Čech (Bohemian) Community of New York, with introductory remarks on the Czechoslovaks in the United States. (New York, NY: America’s Making, Inc., 1921), 12. 40 Thomas Capek, The Čech (Bohemian) Community of New York, 12. 41 Thomas Capek, The Čech (Bohemian) Community of New York, 21. 42 Chroust, “Bohemian Voice: Contention, Brotherhood and Journalism Among Czech People in America, 1860- 1910,” (PhD diss., Texas A&M University, 2009): 75-76, https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2165/.

employment, depending on where they settled. Many Czechs owned and worked farms, opened

or taught in schools, worked in factories, performed or taught music both professionally and as

amateurs, sought political offices, established Czech societies and organizations, opened or

worked in publishing houses, or engaged in one of numerous additional professions.43 No matter

their profession, Czech immigrants worked diligently to establish America as their new home.

From their arrival, the overall agenda for many Czech immigrants was trifold—cultivate a strong Bohemian identity among the immigrant children, combat the negative influence of

German-produced sources on the American public’s perception of ethnic conflict between the

Czech lands and the Hapsburg Empire, and positively influence the American public’s opinions of Czech people, beliefs, and culture.44 One significant means of achieving these goals was

through the publication of newspapers, periodicals, and books concerning a wide range of

Czech-centered topics. The persons involved in these endeavors created an extensive intellectual, educational, and literary culture with which to educate the American people.

To the American public, the recent immigrants from Bohemia were vastly different from the German, Irish, and Scandinavian immigrants who had arrived long before. Around 1880, those already living in the United States started to develop new opinions of all immigrants and placed them into separate categories with different perceptions of each. The first groups of immigrants from Germany, Ireland, etc., came to be called the “old immigrants,” whom

Americans believed had worked hard to earn their fortunes and were now considered successful, welcome settlers. Though people from these countries continued to immigrate to the United states during the mid-1800s, their cultural presence in America had already been established by

43 Capek, The Čechs (Bohemians) in America, 70. 44 Chroust, “Bohemian Voice,” 1.

those who had settled previously. Immigrants from Bohemia and Moravia were grouped with the

“new immigrants,” people from various regions who had yet to establish a presence in America.

These groups of immigrants were viewed as ignorant and weak-minded.45 Topics such as

illiteracy were widely discussed among the American public as rampant issues with the new

immigrants. When compared to other Slavic immigrant groups during a 1910 survey, however,

those from Bohemia proved to be the most literate. The Czech illiteracy rate was merely 1.7

percent in comparison to the 24 to 53 percent of other Slavic groups.46 Such facts, of course,

were not necessarily considered when such stereotypes were conceived.

Though grouped with the negatively perceived “new immigrants,” Czechs in America

still garnered stereotypes of their own. These stereotypes involved their religious beliefs and

political affiliations, as well as inherent traits of the people themselves. After hundreds of years

of contention between Protestants and Catholics in Bohemia, many Czechs stepped away from

religion altogether and, in America, were considered “the most irreligious” group of immigrants

even into the mid-1920s.47 Religion was of the utmost importance to many Americans at the turn

of the twentieth century, so it is easy to see how their frustration with Czech immigrants

developed in part as a result of the latter’s general lack of religious affiliation. Further, it is

possible to link this lack of religious belief to the Czech’s involvement with the Freethinker

Party. The philosophy of this political group reveres reason and eschews religious belief.48 Czech immigrants were, in part, attracted to the Freethinker party as it was vehemently against the

Catholic clergy, what they viewed as the only traditional Hapsburg authority representatives

45 Tim Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox: My Ántonia and Popular Images of Czech Immigrants,” MELUS 29, no. 2 (2004): 6, https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/. 46 Chroust, “Bohemian Voice,” 1. 47 Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 11. 48 Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 11.

present in America.49 For some Americans, it was the Czechs’ political affiliation with the

Freethinker Party and lack of religious faith that negatively colored their opinions of the Czech

people. For others, it was the belief that the Czech people were materialistic.50 Despite the many

negativities, some positive stereotypes about Czechs did exist, as well, including their tenacity about retaining their native language, their musical proficiency, their phenomenal work ethics,

and an unshakeable love for their homeland that coincided with their dedication to their new

country.51

On the whole, however, negative stereotypes persisted. Edward A. Steiner wrote in his

1906 book, On the Trail of the Immigrant, that

[t]he Bohemian immigrant comes to us burdened by rather unenviable characteristics, which his American neighbor soon discovers, and the love between them is not great. Coming from a country which has been at war for centuries, and in which to-day a fierce struggle between different nationalities is disrupting a great empire, and clogging the wheels of popular government, he is apt to be quarrelsome, suspicious, jealous, clannish, and yet factious; he hates quickly and long, and is unreasoning in his prejudices; yet that for which a people is hated, and which we call characteristic of race or nation, soon disappears under new environment, and the miracle which America works upon the Bohemians is more remarkable than any other of our national achievements.52

Though not all Americans in the early 1900s would agree with Steiner, many Americans were

similarly perturbed by the unwillingness of the “new immigrants” to assimilate to American

culture and customs which had long been established. These natives believed that Czech

immigrants should dispose of all traits and opinions that they carried with them from their

homeland and become Americanized.

Some believed that the differences between Czechs and other people groups went further

49 Chroust, “Bohemian Voice,” 18-19. 50 Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 15. 51 Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 11. 52 Edward Steiner, On the Trail of the Immigrant, (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1906), 227-8.

than just cultural differences. Scientific theories and studies conducted in the late nineteenth and

early twentieth centuries sought to prove that the “new immigrants” were genetically different from the “old immigrants.” One pervasive theory that evolved from phrenology and the studies of polygenism used a cephalic index to measure European human skulls and subsequently place them in three different subspecies of man based on geographic region: northern (Nordic),

Southern (Mediterranean), and Central (Alpine).53 This study theorized that people belonging to

the Central region had round skulls while those in the other two regions had long skulls. Those in

the central region, which includes people belonging to the “new immigration,” were therefore

genetically different than people from the other two regions. As people believed that having a

round skull was genetically inferior, this theory was used to bolster the divide between the old

and new immigrants as well as marginalize Slavic people. Though this theory was popularized in

Madison Grant’s 1916 book, The Passing of the Great Race, it only solidified the already-

existing idea that the “new immigrants,” including the Czechs, were in every way inferior.54

The issue goes further than just differences between old and new immigrants, however.

In 1919, William J. Fielding published an article in The Nation discussing his life in the iron mills, saying that he and another employee “are the only two white men in the cast house. . . the rest are Poles, Slaves, Finns, Letts, and Bohunks [slang for Czech].”55 To this writer, and many

others since the mass Czech immigration began, Czechs were not “white” like their German or

English neighbors. Moreover, Czechs were even considered different from the “Slavs,” despite

their belonging to that group. These ideas of Czech ethnicity and nationality as something

53 Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1916), 19-20. 54 Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 8. 55 William J. Fielding, “The Furnaces,” The Nation (1919): 586. Referenced in Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 10.

different and lesser had been developing in the minds of Americans for decades prior to the

theory popularized in 1916.

Misconceptions about the Czech people not only had to do with cultural behaviors or

perceived genetic differences, but were also perpetuated through linguistic means, as well. By

the time of the American premiere of The Bartered Bride, the term “Bohemian” had become a

common label for people of Czech origin in America, serving to differentiate this ethnic group

from other groups of immigrants. Bohemia is the English translation of Čechy, therefore, a

Bohemian is a person whose heritage is of Bohemia or who resides in Bohemia. The term

“Bohemian” was also used to identify the native and official language of Bohemia and Moravia.

Yet the use of this term was a highly sensitive issue for members of the Czech community as it

had become an umbrella term not only for residents of Bohemia, but also for Romani and, more

generally, for individuals who led unconventional lives.

The term “Bohemian” was first used in reference to Romani due to a misunderstanding.

In the middle ages, a group of Romani arrived in France after traveling from Bohemia and were

thus called “Bohemians” by the French.56 Romani, however, did not originate in Bohemia and

modern genealogical research has traced their ancestry to northern India. Czechs and Romani are

thus different in terms of ethnicity as well as in their lifestyle and culture. Years following the misunderstanding by the French, William Makepeace Thackeray (1811–63), an English novelist, is supposed to have been the first to use the term to refer to “’a socially unconventional person’” after the French bohémien, which refers to a person from Bohemia.57 According to Dudek in his

article, The Bohemian Language in America I. Czechoslovakia, “this meaning is really the

56 J. B. Dudek, "The Bohemian Language in America I. Czechoslovakia," American Speech 2, no. 7 (1927): 309, https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/. 57 Oxford Dictionary of Word Origins, “Bohemian.”

antithesis of the Czech character, which is conservative and sober.”58 The ensuing conflation of people from Bohemia and Romani resulted in a great deal of distress for the general body of

Bohemians, who did not want to be confused with the widely disliked Romani. Whether through the mutation of the term that identifies them or the backlash against their physical and cultural presence in their new nation, the history of Czechs in America has been propagated by misconceptions.

58 Dudek, "The Bohemian Language in America I. Czechoslovakia," 309.

21 CHAPTER 4

CZECH MUSICIANS IN NEW YORK CITY

Knowing that misconceptions colored the existing American population’s opinions of

Czech immigrants as a whole, it is important to consider whether the same misconceptions were

projected more specifically onto Czech musicians. To Americans living at the turn of the

twentieth century, one of the most positive attributes of the Czech people was their musical

talent. Of the thousands of Czech immigrants in New York, a large number had musical talent,

and several worked in the field professionally. As in many cities throughout the country,

musicians residing in New York City performed with their local companies, including such

renowned companies as the New York Philharmonic and the Metropolitan Opera. Many Czechs

also held teaching positions at prestigious music schools including violinist Josef Jan Kovařík at

The National Conservatory of Music in New York.59 Others took to the podium and conducted,

such as Vincenc Frantisek who conducted at the Barnum and Bailey Circus in Brooklyn in the

early twentieth century.60 In addition, many renowned Czech performers and composers visited

New York to perform, including vocalists Carl Burian, Otokar Mařák, and Emmy Destinn;

violinist Jan Kubelík; cellist Bedřich Váška; and, of course, composers and conductors Gustav

Mahler and Antonín Dvořák.

Though not all Czech musicians played a direct role in developing the musical life of

New York City, several were quite significant. Even before mass immigration began, Czech composers of the early-to-mid nineteenth century contributed to the developing culture of the

city. During his time as conductor of the Grand Opera House and the Astor Place Opera House in

59 Jan Lowenbach, “Czechoslovak Composers and Musicians in America,” The Musical Quarterly 29, no. 3 (1943): 315. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/. 60 Lowenbach, “Czechoslovak Composers and Musicians in America,” 318.

the mid-1800s, Czech composer and conductor Max Mareček was responsible for introducing

several new Italian and French operas to New York.61 Gustav Mahler was, of course, a large

contributor to New York’s musical culture as he introduced various symphonic and operatic

works to the city’s audiences. Starting in the late 1890s, a larger number of Czech musicians came to the city as the rapidly developing musical life resulted in the need for more composers and musicians.62 During this time, American appreciation of Czech music and musicianship was

growing, as well, which provided yet another incentive for immigration .63

It would be remiss to discuss the significance of Czech musicians in New York without

mentioning perhaps its most famous visitor, Antonín Dvořák. This composer’s contribution to

New York musical life, and American music in general, is paramount, for it was there that

Dvořák composed one of the most significant works created on American soil: the “New World

Symphony.” The composition capitalized on the unique styles of American Indian and African

American music while also incorporating traditional Czech elements such as the pentatonic

scale. Though this symphony was received with high praise, articles published in the months leading up to its premiere show that the Bohemian composer writing a symphony using

American idioms was a point of contention for some Americans. American composer Amy

Beach did not agree that Dvořák’s influences from the aforementioned people represented in full accuracy America’s music, writing that, “we of the North should be far more likely to be influenced by old English, Scotch or Irish songs inherited with our literature from our ancestors

[. . .] In order to make the best use of folk-songs of any nation as material for musical composition, the writer should be one of the people whose songs he chooses, or at least brought

61 Lowenbach, “Czechoslovak Composers and Musicians in America,” 315. 62 Lowenbach, “Czechoslovak Composers and Musicians in America,” 317-318. 63 Lowenbach, “Czechoslovak Composers and Musicians in America,” 317-318.

up among them.”64 Despite the success of the Czech composer’s symphony, the debate over the

adoption of musical styles from non-Anglo-European descended Americans to serve as

representative of American music became a prominent issue surrounding the premiere.

When observing newspaper articles published in the months leading up to and after the

premiere of the “New World Symphony,” it became evident that the national origin of the composer was a significant factor, as people questioned his right to create such a work. When discussing various musical aspects of the symphony, Krehbiel wrote in the New York Tribune,

“Here, too, it might be urged that Dr. Dvořák is no more American than he is Scotch.”65 Some

Americans were in an uproar throwing criticisms at Dvořák for not only creating a work to

represent a nationality different from his own, but for wanting to establish a school in America in

which music students could learn more about and follow in the footsteps of what Dvořák thought

to be American Folk traditions.66 The negative sentiments regarding the Czech composer’s work

in America, and subsequent emphasis on his nationality, arose from American opinion that

Dvořák was infringing upon a nationalistic topic that did not belong to him. Despite the contention, however, Dvořák was always revered for his exceptional compositions.

While the national origin of Czech musicians was sometimes discussed in excess, it did not occur with the frequency that one might assume considering the level of prejudice suggested

in the previous section of this thesis. When searching through a large selection of New York City

newspapers for articles mentioning noteworthy Czech musicians from the 1890s through 1910, I

did not find any that matched the level of importance found in the Czech heritage of the

64, “American Music,” Boston Herald, May 28, 1893. Referenced in Douglas Shadle, Orchestrating the Nation (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016): 251. 65 Henry Krehbiel, “Dr. Dvorak’s American Symphony,” New York Tribune, December 15, 1893. 66 Krehbiel, New York Tribune, 1893.

performers as occurred in articles about Dvořák’s “New World Symphony” or, most especially,

The Bartered Bride. Articles that mention Emmy Destinn without connection to The Bartered

Bride rarely mentioned her nationality. The same can be said for other Czech musicians, as well.

Newspaper articles that mention Czech violinist Jan Kubelík almost never mention his nationality unless the publication includes a short biography. Jean de Reszke was quoted in the

New York Tribune in 1910 calling tenor Leo Slezak the “greatest living tenor.”67 In this and

many other short features on Slezak, his national origin was not often mentioned. In fact, The

Sun in 1908 announced the singer as “Leo Slezak of Vienna,” perhaps due to his extended career

in the Austrian city.68 In the case of Mahler, the composer and conductor received a great deal of

emphasis on his Bohemian place of birth in reviews of The Bartered Bride, likely in an effort to

add to the novelty of an authentic Bohemian operatic experience. Aside from this specific

occurrence, however, Mahler has often been touted as Austrian, though these locations were one

in the same under Hapsburg rule.

When reading through primary sources about famous Czech musicians, it would appear

that prejudices toward Czech immigrants in America did not cross over fully into the realm of

music. The national origin of the musicians was frequently noted, sometimes excessively as in

the case of Destinn or Mahler for The Bartered Bride premiere, or when Americans felt their

world being encroached upon by an outsider as in the case of Dvořák; but despite the culture of

prejudice that existed, their nationality does appear to negate their exceptional musical offerings

in the minds of the American people.

67 New York Tribune, February 17, 1910. 68 “Opera Doings in Europe,” The Sun, November 29, 1908. It is significant to note that Vienna was the capital of the Austro-Hungarian empire – a fact which may have given those against Bohemians a reason to claim Slezak as Viennese.

25 CHAPTER 5

IMPLICATIONS: CZECH OPERA IN NEW YORK CITY

Now that a better understanding of Czech immigrant life and culture in America has been

established and we have glimpsed into the acceptance and significance of Czech musicians in

New York City, we can formulate and address several questions concerning the premiere of The

Bartered Bride. We know that public opinion of Czech immigrants was generally unfavorable

and that the American press often disparaged Czechs. It is fair to assume, then, that the

comments found in reviews of the opera’s premiere could be indicative of something more than

just a review of the opera. As we have seen, the misconceptions and negativities were ingrained

into American society and therefore require examination. Though such an examination

invariably involves speculation, opening a discussion on the topic of Czech opera reception in

early twentieth century America is beneficial for gaining a more developed picture of Czech-

American music history.

The first and most prominent question that comes to mind when reading these reviews is why the use of the word “Bohemian” was particularly excessive in accounts of the premiere of

The Bartered Bride. The most obvious answer is that the opera is quintessentially Bohemian, as it was conceived in Bohemia by the man commonly referred to as the father of Czech national music and it contains numerous elements characteristic of Czech opera as previously discussed.69

These facts alone provide ample reasoning for critics to discuss the opera in terms of its

“Bohemianness.” However, it is the superfluous uses of the term “Bohemian” that are indicative of a cultural phenomenon surrounding the premiere. Because almost every aspect of the opera

69 Grove Music Online, s.v. “Bedřich Smetana,” by Marta Ottlová, Milan Pospíšil, John Tyrrell, and Kelly St Pierre, 2018. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2147/.

was noted for its “Bohemianness,” it is likely that American audience members considered The

Bartered Bride to be a novelty. Since most cultural facets of Bohemia – especially as portrayed

in the opera – were vastly different from those considered typical of the United States, American

attendees would have been fascinated by a representation of life so different from their own.

Further, The Bartered Bride was likely the first overtly Czech opera produced on the

Metropolitan Opera stage, which indicates that operas from Bohemia were rarely, if ever, seen

on large New York City stages, making this production especially unique.70 The critic for the

New York Tribune certainly aligns with the idea that this opera was a novelty as he stated that

“one is offered by the. . . fascination exerted by its novel local color in scene and music. Still

another by the satisfaction which it brings of a long-cherished curiosity and historical interest.”71

Though considering this Czech opera a novelty does not appear to possess negative connotations,

it does expose the perceived separation between the two groups of people, which had the

potential of furthering the “otherness” of the Czechs in the minds of many Czechs and

Americans.

Because there was a general dislike of Czech people on the part of many long-established

American citizens, it can be assumed that some New York newspaper critics would share at least

some of these negative views. In his article “The Bohemian Paradox: My Antonia and Popular

Images of Czech Immigrants,” Tim Prchal discusses how the American press was highly

prejudiced against Czech immigrants and often portrayed them in a defamatory manner.72 To these Americans, one would assume that such a strongly nationalistic Czech production on a

70 Gerald Fitzgerald, ed., Annals of the Metropolitan Opera: the complete chronicle of performances and artists, New York: Metropolitan Opera Guild: 1989-. 71 Krehbiel, New York Daily Tribune, 1909. 72 Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 3.

great American stage like the Metropolitan Opera could have been perceived as promotion of a

people they disliked. Music critics were not forthright about displaying anti-Czech sentiments in

reviews of this premiere, however. Therefore, the comments in specific reviews that could be

perceived as negative or slanderous must be examined in more depth. A quote from the New

York Times, though seen earlier in this thesis, harbors the most blatant ideas of “otherness.” The

critic stated that, “the opera gave much pleasure, and was received with genuine enthusiasm, not

only by the representatives of the Bohemian colony who were present, but also by the great body

of the audience, perhaps more sophisticated in the manner of new productions, and not especially

prejudiced in favor of peasant operas.”73 First, this author differentiates the “Bohemian colony”

from the rest of the audience, which could be viewed as a way to further solidify the idea of them

as an “other.” However, since mass Czech immigration began only sixty-one years prior to this premiere, the immigrants would have still been relatively new in the eyes of the American people. Furthermore, the Czech people did not stray too far from their section of the city and did not want to assimilate to the American way of life. Therefore, the first half of the above quote may not be showing bias through this differentiation. Where this quote does offer a sense of prejudice, however, is in the latter half, which indicates that this reviewer may believe that the

Czech people in attendance were not as cultured as the Americans who perhaps attend opera premieres or newer operas on a regular basis. What could be significant about this is that the author may not have any knowledge of which or how many Czech immigrants attend new operas and is therefore making this judgement based on his own assumptions or prejudices. Further, this critic indicates that the Czech immigrants were partial to “peasant operas.” It is possible that this critic was simply saying that the Czech attendees prefer operas concerning characters from their

73 Aldrich, New York Times, 1909.

own country. However, there is a question as to whether he meant this comment to be

disparaging, as a way of placing Czechs in a kind of lower class than the rest of the audience.

While the reviewer’s overall intentions may have been to say that the opera was a delight to everyone in the audience, and not just those to whom it shares a region of origin, his choice of words may expose a deeper layer to this quote that matches beliefs shared by many Americans of the time.

The Bohemian qualities of both the music and libretto were major factors in reviews of the Czech opera. Generally, the Bohemian qualities were praised, as in Meltzer’s review when he wrote “Every note in the score had the life and character of Bohemia in it, the strange, sweet sentiment of a Slav people idealized, the piquancy and the color of quaint villages scattered between the frontiers of the ‘Saxon Switzerland’ and of German Austria”74 Meltzer’s reviews

also contained some peculiar comments, however. When discussing instrumentation for the

score, he stated that “the Bohemian character, tender and primitive and with a touch of sadness

hidden in its most cheerful phases, more than sufficed to save it from reproach.”75 The term

“primitive” is curious, as he speaks of the orchestration in a positive light, but also seems to

proclaim that the “Bohemian” element causes it to be simplistic. Meltzer says the same of the

libretto earlier in his review, stating that it is “immeasurably stupid – simple to the point of

inanity.”76 In this and many other reviews, critics were extremely positive about the undeniably

Bohemian qualities of the opera, but minor word choices or phrases read as less than positive.

They indicate, moreover, the presence among New York critics of what Richard Taruskin has

termed the “double bind” faced by composers, performers, and works perceived as nationalistic:

74 Meltzer, New York American, 1909. 75 Meltzer, New York American, 1909. 76 Meltzer, New York American, 1909.

The Bartered Bride was to them not just another opera, but a specifically “Bohemian” opera.77

The constant and consistent remarks on its region of origin indicate that the critics might have

refused to see the work as anything more than just local color.

It has been established that “Bohemian” as a term for people who originate from the

Czech lands had been conflated with its use in reference to Roma and countercultural

movements. Because The Bartered Bride originated in the Czech lands and use of the word according to its original meaning would be understood, one might wonder if critics ever used the word for its additional meanings. However, as these misconceptions were so ingrained into cultural perceptions of the Czech people, it would be extremely difficult to identify specific evidence of misuse of the word occurring in any of the reviews. This is due, in part, to the blatantly nationalistic basis of this opera, as well. One of the easier ways to spot the prejudices and misconceptions, however, is through reviews of the Bohemian people both in the audience and performing in the opera. Critics emphasized the national origin of the Bohemian performers more in this specific production than that of most other musical works during the same period.

Writing in the Tribune, Krehbiel said, “And the performance? Mr. Mahler is a Bohemian. Miss

Destinn is a daughter of Bohemia’s capital. The dancers were brought from the National Theatre at Prague, the home of Czechish music. They are to the Bohemian manner born.”78 In this

passage, Krehbiel ensures his readers knowledge that each Czech performer is undoubtedly

Czech and that that impacts their portrayal of Czechness in the performance. In most music

reviews from the same time, critics simply said the name of the artist, or would occasionally say

their country of origin before stating their instrument or vocal fach and finally their name. Critics

77 Richard Taruskin, Defining Russia Musically: Historical and Hermeneutical Essays (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997), 48-49. 78 Krehbiel, New York Tribune, 1909.

for The Bartered Bride wrote reviews for shows of all types for New York City newspapers and mostly left the national origin of performers out of their reviews. Therefore, the fact that these reviews were written with such an extreme emphasis on national origin indicates that there was something unique about this premiere not necessarily occurring elsewhere. But one must wonder why this occurred for this specific opera and not most others. Perhaps the answer lies in the idea that this production was a novelty – a Czech opera performed by one of the leading Czech sopranos and conducted by one of the most famous Czech conductors. To an American public who is much more accustomed to German- and Italian-centric repertory, the fact that authentic

Czech people were performing an authentic Czech opera could have been a strong reason to emphasize the national origin of the musicians. It is also highly possible that the immense talent of the Czech musicians outweighed the negative feelings that many Americans harbored against people of Czech origin.

It must also be mentioned that the major performers in The Bartered Bride were visitors of the United States and not immigrants seeking permanent residence. Perhaps the fact that

Destinn, Mahler, and the company of dancers were only temporarily encroaching upon their country resulted in a generally positive outlook on their presence and allowed for such numerous references to their national origin. That they were visitors, however, did not necessarily make them “better” to all reviewers. Meltzer in his New York American review said that “Destinn, who interpreted the heroine, was ‘to the manner born,’ being herself a Bohemian, versed in the ways of Bohemian peasants.”79 Whether the author means that Destinn was a peasant or simply that

she had experience being around Czech peasants, Meltzer’s review can be interpreted as

somewhat disparaging toward both Destinn and Bohemian people collectively, as he could have

79 Meltzer, New York American, 1909.

been putting them into a category of lower-class citizens. It must be noted that the term

“peasant” has been used several times throughout reviews of the opera because the plot concerned Bohemian peasants. It is curious, however, because the term was used to describe more than just characters in the plot, but musical aspects of the opera, and even performers involved as seen above. Whether critics conflated all these ideas and terms in order to create or emphasize the most authentic Bohemian experience possible, or these conflated ideas were the result of preexisting prejudices, the idea of The Bartered Bride as a novelty appears to have been paramount in the minds of the critics.

No matter how deeply we read into these potentially negative reviews, none of the reviews were wholly negative; they were, in fact, primarily positive. This is contradictory both to the knowledge that many Americans were heavily prejudiced against Czechs and that the

American press, according to Prchal’s article, blatantly displayed such sentiments in news publications. Of course, the positive reactions expressed by these critics could be quite complex as some of their comments may have been insincere or backhanded; or were indicative of other factors altogether. While newspaper critics are notorious for not being the most trustworthy sources for facts, their reviews are still immeasurably significant for getting a fuller picture of

American culture.80 A letter written by Charles H. Sláma of Madison, Wisconsin, published in an

1893 issue of The Bohemian Voice, a national newspaper directed toward Czech immigrant

readers, wrote that “the number of people who can really form any judgement as to the

comparative merits of Bohemia and Bohemian people might be counted on one’s fingers. On the

other hand, the number of people who make the most confident assertions about us, and who

80 Shadle, Orchestrating the Nation, 257.

fancy they are especially qualified to speak, is almost unascertainable.”81 From this quote, we certainly get a better idea that much of what was published in the popular media of the day was biased against Czechs. If the press displayed such biases toward this group, however, it is curious that music critics were not more negative about the Czech people and music of The Bartered

Bride. In fact, the ways in which Czech immigrants were perceived in America were paradoxical. Steiner wrote in his 1903 piece “The Bohemian in America,” “The Bohemian is among the best of our immigrants and yet may easily be the worst.”82 This paradox is displayed quite plainly when we explore it within the realm of music. These prejudices and biases against

Czech immigrants that were so blatantly displayed in other areas of life in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were rarely seen in American publications concerning musical performances. If examination of The Bartered Bride’s American premiere tells us anything, it is that prejudice against Czech people did not fully penetrate the bubble that surrounds the world of music. Still, while the prejudices are not extremely obvious, they did exist. More so than a blatant dislike of the Czech people, the idea of them as an “other” appears to be a prominent undercurrent throughout reviews. That the American people who harbored such negative opinions of Czech people would be so fascinated and pleased by the novelty of an authentic

Czech opera produced in their country appears odd and only furthers the idea of a paradoxical cultural phenomenon.

The first performance of The Bartered Bride on an American stage offers a fascinating look into Czech-American relations and cultural biases in relation to musical reception. This topic is vastly understudied in musical circles, but by delving into the reception history of

81 Charles H. Sláma, The Bohemian Voice, 1893. Referenced in Prchal, “The Bohemian Paradox,” 3. 82 Steiner, On the Trail of the Immigrant, 971.

productions such as this, perhaps scholars can gain a better understanding of the degree to which

cultural biases affected reception of Czech opera. In the midst of the misconceptions and biases

that Americans held against Czechs, one thing is known for certain: early twentieth-century

Americans had a great appreciation for Czech music.

34 APPENDIX A

CZECH AND GERMAN CHARACTER NAMES

35 Czech Characters: German Characters: Mařenka Marie Jeník Hans Krušina (Father of Mařenka) Kruschina Ludmila (Mother of Mařenka) Kathinka Mícha (Father of Vašek and Jeník) Micha Háta (Mother of Vašek and Jeník) Agnes Vašek (son of Mícha) Wenzel Kecal (marriage broker) Kezal

36 APPENDIX B

THE BARTERED BRIDE PLOT SUMMARY

The Bartered Bride is a comic opera set in a small Bohemian village that centers around a young peasant girl, Marie, who is in love with Hans. The two have agreed to marry, Marie expresses concern that she does not know much about Hans’ past, so he reveals that after his mother passed away and his father remarried, his stepmother banished him from the house—to which he has never returned. Marie divulges that years ago, her parents, Kruschina and Kathinka, borrowed a large sum of money from Micha and Agnes. They had signed a contract offering her hand in marriage to their son as collateral. It is now time for repayment and Kezal, the village marriage-broker, convinces Marie’s parents to let her marry Micha’s son, Wenzel. After eavesdropping on their conversation, Marie enters and refuses to marry the stranger as she is in love with another. In Act II, Wenzel comes to the village alone to meet his bride. Marie takes advantage of their lack of acquaintance and, pretending to be someone else, successfully convinces the prospective bridegroom to marry her instead of Marie, as the latter is in love with another and will have him murdered as soon as they are married. Back at the inn, Kezal offers

Hans 300 gulden to relinquish his claim on Marie. Hans agrees, but with the stipulation that

Marie must marry a son of Micha. At the start of Act III, Wenzel becomes distracted from his concern over his parents’ marriage deal when the circus comes to town. When the star attraction, the great American “bear,” is too drunk to perform, the seductive Esmerelda convinces Wenzel to take his place with the promise that she will be his. Before the show begins, the typically submissive Wenzel informs his parents that he refuses to marry Marie. When he finally meets his intended bride and discovers that she was the maiden who convinced him to change his mind, he promptly agrees to the marriage. Marie, however, is informed of Hans’ deal with Kezal and is too heartbroken to go through with the marriage immediately. Hans enters and attempts to explain the situation to his furious love, who refuses to listen. When the town comes together to

finalize the deal between the two families, Hans reminds everyone of the stipulation that Marie must only marry a son of Micha and shocks the town by declaring that he is the son of Micha’s first wife. While the town is in an uproar over what they believe to be Kezal’s dirty trick, Wenzel runs into town in the bear costume and his mother declares that he is too foolish to be a husband.

Micha then blesses the marriage of Marie and Hans and the whole village celebrates.

39 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources: Newspapers and Periodicals

• Evening Post

• The Globe

• Musical America

• Musical Courier

• New York American

• New York Daily Tribune

• New York Evening Post

• New York Press

• New York Times

• New York World

• The Sun

• The Telegram

Secondary Sources

Ahlquist, Karen. Democracy at the Opera. Chicago, Il: University of Illinois Press, 1997.

Beckerman, Michael. “In Search of Czechness in Music.” 19th-Century Music 10, no. 1 (1986): 61-73. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/746749.

⸻⸻⸻. “Henry Krehbiel, Antonin Dvořák, and the Symphony ‘From the New World.” Notes 49, no. 2 (December 1992): 447-473. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Capek, Thomas. The Čechs (Bohemians) in America: A Study of Their National, Cultural, Political, Social, Economic and Religious Life. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1920.

⸻⸻⸻. The Čech (Bohemian) Community of New York, with introductory remarks on the Czechoslovaks in the United States. New York, NY: America’s Making, Inc., 1921.

Chroust, David Z. “Texts after Community: The Case of Czechs in America.” Slavic & East European Information Resources 16 (2015): 130–140. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2067/.

⸻⸻⸻. “Bohemian Voice: Contention, Brotherhood and Journalism Among Czech People in America, 1860-1910.” PhD diss. Texas A&M University, 2009. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2165/.

Dudek, J. B. "The Bohemian Language in America I. Czechoslovakia." American Speech 2, no. 7 (1927): 299-311. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Eaton, Quaintance. The Miracle of the Met: an informal history of the Metropolitan Opera, 1883- 1967. New York: NY, Meredith Press, 1968.

Eisler, Paul E. The Metropolitan Opera: the first twenty-five years, 1883-1908. New York: North River Press, Inc., 1984.

Everett, William A. “Opera and National Identity in Nineteenth-Century Croatian and Czech Lands.” International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music 35, no. 1 (2004): 63-69. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Fitzgerald, Gerald. Annals of the Metropolitan Opera: the complete chronicle of performances and artists. New York: Metropolitan Opera Guild: 1989-.

Grant, Madison. The Passing of the Great Race, 4th ed. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1936.

Holzknecht, Václav. Ema Destinnová. Praha: Panton, 1974.

Horowitz, Joseph. “Henry Krehbiel: German American, Music Critic.” The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 8, no. 2 (April 2009): 165-187. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40542775.

Keener, Andrew D. “Gustav Mahler as Conductor.” Music & Letters 56, no. 3 (1975): 341-355. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Kolodin, Irving. The Metropolitan Opera, 1883-1966; a candid history. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1966.

La Grange, Henry-Louis de. Gustav Mahler, vol. 4, A New Life Cut Short (1907-1911). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Lowenbach, Jan. “Czechoslovak Composers and Musicians in America.” The Musical Quarterly 29, no. 3 (1943): 313-328. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Martorella, Rosanne. “The Relationship between Box Office and Repertoire: A Case Study of Opera.” The Sociological Quarterly 18, no. 3 (1977): 354-366. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Mattfeld, Julius. A Handbook of American Operatic Premieres. Detroit, MI: Information Service, Inc., 1963.

McKnight, Mark. “Wagner and the New York Press, 1855-76,” American Music 5, no. 2 (1987): 145-155. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Mitchell, Donald. “Mahler and Smetana: significant influences or accidental parallels?” In Mahler Studies, ed. Stephen E. Hefling, 110-121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Ottlová, Marta, Milan Pospíšil and John Tyrrell. “Smetana, Bedřich.” Grove Music Online, ed. Deane Root, 2001. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2147/.

Penn Museum. “A History of Craniology in Race Science and Physical Anthropology.” Morton Cranial Collection. Accessed September 12, 2019. https://www.penn.museum/sites/morton/craniology.php.

Prchal, Tim. “The Bohemian Paradox: My Ántonia and Popular Images of Czech Immigrants.” MELUS 29, no. 2 (2004): 3-25. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2389/.

Roman, Zoltan. “Mahler and Opera in America.” The Opera Quarterly 13, no 2. (January 1996): 39–54. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2089/.

Shadle, Douglas. Orchestrating the Nation: The Nineteenth-Century American Symphonic Enterprise. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Shawe-Taylor, Desmond. “Leo Slezak.” Grove Music Online, ed. Deane Root, 2001. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2147/.

Sokol, Martin L. The New York City Opera: an American Adventure. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1981.

Steiner, Edward A. On the Trail of the Immigrant. New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1906.

⸻⸻⸻. “The Bohemian in America.” The Outlook 25 Apr. 1903: 968-972.

Taruskin, Richard. Defining Russia Musically: Historical and Hermeneutical Essays. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.

Tyrrell, John. Czech Opera. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

⸻⸻⸻. “The Bartered Bride.” Grove Music Online, ed. Deane Root, 2002. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu:5982/.

Vacha, J. E. “Dvorak in America.” American Heritage 43, no. 5 (1992): 78. Accessed October 11, 2019. http://libproxy.library.unt.edu:2066/.

Vlha, Marek. “’What is the Bohemian nation?’ Geneze povedomí o ceském národu ve Spojených státech amerických do pocátku 20. Století” ["’What is the Bohemian Nation?’ A Genesis of the Awareness of the Czech Nation in the United States of America up to the Beginning of the 20th Century”]. Cesky Casopis Historicky 113, no. 2 (2015): 381-417.

Vojan, Jaroslav E.S. “Czechoslovak Art and Literature in America” In Czechs and Slovaks, 1933. The Newberry Library: The Foreign Language Press Survey. Accessed September 14, 2019. https://flps.newberry.org/article/5418478_3_0368.

Von Deck, Marvin Lee. “Gustav Mahler in New York: his Conducting Activities in New York City, 1908–1911.” PhD diss., New York University, 1973.

Wingfield, Nancy M. Flag Wars and Stone Saints: how the Bohemian Lands became Czech. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007.