sign in sign up
<<
Home , Adolphe Nourrit, Guillaume Tell (Grétry), Le comte Ory, William Tell (opera)

GUILLAUME TELL

GUILLAUME TELL

In copertina Giuliano Vangi Studio per scultura (1998) Matita su carta (Collezione Elio Giuliani, Pesaro) GUILLAUME TELL

Rossini Festival 2013 GUILLAUME TELL

Opéra en Quatre Actes di Victor-Joseph-Étienne de Jouy e Hippolyte-Louis-Florent Bis

Musica di

Personnages

Guillaume Tell, Suisse conjuré Arnold Melcthal, Suisse conjuré Walter Furst, Suisse conjuré Melcthal, père d’Arnold Jemmy, fils de Guillaume Tell Gesler, gouverneur des cantons de Schwitz et d’Uri Rodolphe, chef des archers de Gesler Ruodi, pêcheur Leuthold, berger Mathilde, princesse de la maison de Hapsbourg, destinée au gouvernement de la Suisse Hedwige, femme de Guillaume Tell Un chasseur Trois Fiancés et leurs compagnes, Paysans et Paysannes des trois cantons, Chevaliers allemands, Pages, Dames d’honneur de la princesse, Chasseurs, Gardes de Gesler, Soldats autrichiens, Tyroliens et Tyroliennes

Prima rappresentazione Parigi, Théâtre de l’Académie Royale de Musique 3 agosto 1829 One in a Thousand 3

One in a Thousand

Paris and the Académie Royale had been the order of the day for all de Musique musicians – Italian and otherwise – If we are to understand the events whether in writing for the theatre or involved in the composing, the pub- in supplying sacred music for use in lishing and the subsequent success churches with a regular musical tra- in the theatre of so symbolic an dition, rarely took into consideration opera as Guillaume Tell, we shall the possibility that anyone might have to consider the way the opera want to change his music because houses of France, and in particular of any second thoughts about try- the Académie Royale de Musique ing to improve it from an aesthetic (commonly referred to as the Opéra), point of view. As a result there are were managed: it was very different very few cases in which authentic from the Italian system. In the count- revisions made by Rossini after less Italian theatres of Rossini’s the first performances of any of his day, which devoured unheard-of (that is, changes written out quantities of new operas, the com- by Rossini himself) show either an poser was in the main answerable explicit or even an implicit intention to the impresario alone and to the of improving the former version. In company of singers engaged for the this very limited group of composi- season in which his opera was to be tions we might perhaps include the produced. Above and beyond this Ferrara version of , which his one obligation was to respect the introduced the famous tragic end- principles laid down by the censor- ing together with other changes that ship in each of the different states, were certainly made at the request and they obviously interfered only of the new cast, but which decidedly in the initial phases of submitting improve the internal architecture a draft of the for approval. of the opera. Rossini was probably Once its first season of performances inspired to change to a tragic ending had come to an end, the opera, if it by his friendship with Luigi Lechi, a had been successful, was free to try man of letters, but it met with scant its luck in other theatres and other success and was rapidly discarded. cities, where it would be adapted When he staged to the needs and the whims of each for the first time in Naples, Rossini individual company without the re-wrote those pieces that for lack composer’s having to bother with of time he had asked an illustrious it, or even being able to interfere at colleague of his, Giovanni Pacini, all. It obviously happened that if the to compose for him for the première composer were in town, he might of the opera in Rome, and we might be invited to make the necessary attribute this to a sudden flaring-up adaptations himself: in this case of amour propre. This was also an he might write some new numbers, exception to the rule, because various making the work more suited to the other operas of Rossini’s were going new cast. This manner of procedure, the rounds of the theatres including redolent of craftsmen in the strictest pieces that had been tacked on by meaning of the word, and which anonymous collaborators, and the 4 Guillaume Tell composer never bothered to replace the situation in the French theatres, them with definitive pieces of his especially the Opéra, was altogether own writing. This manner of work- different. Here the repertoire was ing easily explains why Rossini, drawn up with a view to fulfilling after the first year or two in which an endless and bothersome list of he himself might travel round to requirements, in the hope of satisfy- present his operas in their first ing the wildly differing demands of performances in important cities, important people, and also starting showed a total lack of interest (at from the basic assumption that every least so far as composing additional new production would remain a long numbers was concerned) in his own time in the repertoire and so pay for works, which none the less continued itself. All this, apart from the reduc- in their triumphant career on all the tion in number of possible contracts leading stages of Europe. In 1826 and various other trials, was not not even Giuditta Pasta succeeded to a composer’s disadvantage. In in beguiling him into writing her fact, the composer who succeeded an extra aria to sing in the Finale in lodging an opera firmly in the of Tancredi, which was performed repertoire was awarded salary and everywhere with all sorts of inter- pension calculated on the number polations by all sorts of composers. of performances achieved. But, in It is also significant that although Paris, who took the place of that Rossini did not give the Diva a colourful, possibly coarse but on the new aria, he did write her embel- whole kind-hearted figure, the Ital- lishments for the aria by Nicolini ian impresario? It is impossible to that she introduced in place of the define who or what took his place, or original one. One might say that this reduce it to a simple entity like “The represents a singular lack of amour King” or his delegate, the Minister propre, but it also demonstrates a of the Royal Household. The fact is lack of interest in mere commercial that the theatres were governed by a exploitation. In those days Italian shrewd and demanding policy which composers enjoyed absolutely no missed no detail, from the choice of royalties on revivals of their works, the libretti to be set to music to the so nobody could ever have imagined building of the scenery, the compo- the sublime effrontery of such a great sition of the music and every tiny “artisan” of twentieth-century music step in its progress towards actual as Igor Stravinskij, who set about performance. It operated directly, re-orchestrating or re-organizing all but also through working groups his earliest compositions when they or committees (such as the jury de threatened to fall into the public lecture which approved or rejected domain, and did not bother to con- the poetical texts to be set to mu- ceal the fact that his sole aim was to sic) within which various pressure ensure continued payments of royal- groups would in their turn make ties that otherwise would have dried their presence felt (the local com- up (obviously, this procedure could posers were not the least of these). very easily yield artistic results of the As would happen with increasing highest class). This was the Italian frequency later on, equally strong way of doing things that Rossini left pressures would be brought to bear behind him on the day after the first by the press, by economic potentates performance of in 1823, and by rival clans, making it essen- when he girded up his loins to face tial for the composer to be able to a new career in Paris. count on support in high places or to The French musical market and have himself reached a strong posi- One in a Thousand 5 tion in the internal administration poser); Verdi was quite right when, of the theatres. Though this situation in his wrath, he coined the happy was in an evolutionary phase when term “grande boutique” to describe Rossini arrived in Paris (whilst be the Opéra. Composers like Spontini was there a new committee was set and Meyerbeer, who were cut out of up, the comité de mise en scène the same cloth as the members of the which supervised the staging), it was administration (that is, for them it of course nothing new, but it went was natural to be constantly assailed back in time considerably and was by doubts and second thoughts), a symptom of the “Royal” origins of fared much better at the Opéra. the Académie. Given the prestige of Both of them succeeded in getting the Opéra and its widely-recognized the theatre administration in the importance, such a manner of con- palm of their hands, the former by ducting its affairs led to endless his frequently renewed and tortu- consequences not limited to any ous pretentions and with ceaseless particular epoch. In fact, everyone corrections to the scores of Fernand knows how decisive was the influ- Cortez and Olympie, the latter with ence exerted by opposing factions in his exasperating reluctance to au- the famous quarrel between the ad- thorize the first performances of his mirers of Gluck and Piccinni when operas, sometimes years after they the eighteenth century was at its had been written. height. (Few people, however, would All of this easily explains Rossini’s commit themselves by admitting cautious approach to , that the conclusive victory of Gluck a career which began with cancelled has led to the over-estimation of one projects, the withdrawal of music composer at the expense of the other, that had been composed and suc- the effects of which are still felt to- cessfully performed (Il viaggio a day. In the present writer’s opinion, Reims), continued with re-workings a close inspection of real musical of earlier Italian operas and culmi- values will not substantiate the glib nated in only two “definitive” works, decision of history). and Guillaume Tell. We need not be at all surprised, It also explains Rossini’s determina- then, by the difficulties experienced tion to ratify his definitive contract by individual composers in their (or, perhaps, one of his contracts), relations with the Opéra, or by the which, just as if it were an opera real exasperation that a composer destined for production at the Paris might be goaded to. In the stormy Opéra, was subject to continual re- cauldron of concessions and prohi- vision and re-negotiation, to be cast bitions, in the continual bubbling in its final form at last at the same up of requests and second thoughts, time as, and in close connection masterpieces that had been worked with, the première of Guillaume Tell. on for years, like Le Duc d’Albe or Paradoxically, there turned out to be Jeanne la folle by Donizetti, might nothing definitive either in the score drown or be burnt out, careers might or in the contract, since the opera be wrecked and all sorts of delusions was subjected to further adjustments might be created. Everyone knows of differing nature and importance, the humiliations and worries that and as for the contract, which was Wagner was subjected to over Tan- supposedly of lifelong duration, little nhäuser and over the libretto to the over a year later it crumpled beneath Flying Dutchman (the libretto was the sad blow of the July Revolution. accepted but the job of setting it to In any case it would be wrong to music was assigned to another com- restrict this parallel between crea- 6 Guillaume Tell tive activity and contractual activ- dealing with a people’s struggle for ity to the merely financial side of liberty, and the opportunities it of- possible motivation. Rossini (who fered for scenic splendour and the at certain moments proved capable re-creation of a spectacular natural of being tough almost to the point of setting. When Rossini decided to set blackmail) certainly felt the need to it to music (we do not know exactly create and to maintain for himself when, but certainly at least as early a position of power and prestige so as the beginning of 1828) the libretto as to make himself strong enough was already several years old and to face up to any kind of pressure. therefore in need of revision, which, He who would occasionally have as Jouy was an old man and in to suffer from this was the man precarious health, Hippolyte-Louis- who wrote to him on behalf of the Florent Bis, a dramatist who had administration, that very Vicomte recently attracted the attention de La Rochefoucauld, Minister of of audiences, was called upon to the Royal Household since 1824, furnish. Expectation for the great in whom Rossini found a fervent new French opera of Rossini’s ran admirer and a powerful protector so high that, whilst the revision of in difficult moments, although in the libretto was still going on, the no wise disposed to give up any of scenery was already being prepared his own prerogatives. We know very and the chosen scene-designer, the fa- little of the private relations between mous Cicéri, was sent to the two, but they could be a key to at the administration’s expense to understanding certain aspects of get inspiration from the landscape. his tormented last days as an opera Meanwhile quotations were hur- composer and even of the reasons riedly solicited, for it was hoped to behind his giving it all up. mount the opera by the end of 1828. With regard to the music, Rossini Avant la première himself must have hoped to finish it The most recent studies and, above by this date, seeing that for a while all, the preparation of the critical he encouraged the idea of giving the edition of Guillaume Tell and the first Italian performances of it in new edition of Rossini’s letters have, Parma in the spring of 1829. How- on the one hand, stripped the ups ever, he would scarcely have begun and downs of the composition of his to work on it before having brought greatest work of many a legend and out Le Comte Ory at the Opéra, the inaccuracy, whilst they have also great success of which on 20 August given us rather more precise infor- 1828 must have given him the last mation about the gestatory period spurt of encouragement to begin his of the work and the vicissitudes it greatest opera, upon which he start- suffered after its first performance. ed working in the quiet seclusion of It all began with a libretto by Victor- Petit-Bourg, the villa he had recently Joseph-Étienne de Jouy (the poet acquired from his friend Aguado. who had already collaborated with But it was at this very moment that Rossini on the Paris adaptation of there began, on one side the vicis- Mosè) based largely on Schiller’s situdes and on the other the sales Wilhelm Tell. Despite the prolixity of mechanism and propaganda all over the treatment, the subject was highly a work that was very far from being suitable to the taste then gaining finished. Elizabeth Bartlet, who has ground in the Parisian theatres of edited the critical edition, has been the day, the day in which grand- able to shed a great deal of light on opéra was dawning, given the story this initial, convulsed phase of com- One in a Thousand 7 position. When, at the end of August the first two acts, limiting his inter- 1828, a meeting of the comité de mise vention to a few cuts and changes en scene was summoned to resolve to the poetry and other details. The various problems about the staging, real problem turned out to be the Rossini had still not handed in a third, and especially the fourth act. single page of the score. Likewise, Throughout the whole month of De- acting merely upon the assumption cember the jury de lecture and the that he was selling “un ouvrage de Vicomte de La Rochefoucauld busied la plus grande importance” (a work themselves with the problems aris- of major importance), and “celui ing from the desire to cut down the auquel il [Rossini] attache sa répu- Finale and all the last part of the tation en France” (the one which opera: some episodes would have to Rossini intends shall make his name be cut and others heightened in order in France), the publisher Troupenas, to give more dramatic impact to the to whom the composer had granted whole. A job that naturally fell to Bis, exclusive printing rights, busied but which went far beyond anything himself in September dealing with that he had done in Acts One and his colleague Artaria for the con- Two. Since the elderly Jouy reserved cession of these rights in Germany. the right to withdraw hic libretto In other words, before it had been (and thus wreck the entire project) written Guillaume Tell was being everything had to be arranged described as the composer’s greatest without hurting his susceptibilities. work. Rossini himself took this line The Vicomte mediated between the when, in November, he declined an parties with excellent diplomacy and invitation to give succeeded in convincing Jouy. As a at Parma, announcing: result Bis was given a free hand to subject everything that was left to a No score of mine except would be more thorough revision. His efforts worthy of shining in circumstances so bound did, in fact, change the face of the sec- up with my country’s glory. ond part of Act Three and, even more, the whole of Act Four. Here, even In turning his back on all his pre- where some lines and suggestions vious works and in sounding this from the original version were left, patriotic note, Rossini burnt his the young collaborator’s contribution boats and beat the clairvoyants to was fundamental. Many legends the winning post. It is a remarkable have grown up about these back- example of prediction, even more so stage vicissitudes, and various other when you consider that there was supposed collaborators on the text very little of a concrete nature to go have been mentioned, among them on. In fact, by the end of November Armand Marrast and Isaac Adolphe Rossini had handed in the skeleton Crémieux (two future opposers of score (that is, the vocal parts only Louis Philippe’s government) who, with a mere sketch of the orchestral it is said, helped Rossini, who was accompaniment) of Acts One and unhappy about the oathtaking, to get Two only, and the Opéra copyists be- this famous scene to his liking. As gan to copy out parts for the singers far as can be learned from surviv- from this. There had, in fact, been a ing documents it does not seem that first hold-up because the drawing- these two men were really involved up of the libretto itself was far from with the opera, and perhaps the leg- complete; quite the reverse, it was end, supported by Michotte, was cre- having a rough passage. Bis had ated after the event in an attempt to more or less followed Jouy’s text for invent a nobly patriotic origin to this 8 Guillaume Tell key scene which, truth to tell, was tion, but the composer withdrew already there in Jouy’s original text. the parts again in April. Only after Likewise, it does not seem that Emile this second manoeuvre did Charles Barateau really had anything to do X, on 8 May, sign one of the most with it, although Azevedo, among favourable contracts ever obtained others, names him as a collaborator. by a composer. However, not even On the other hand it seems highly all this could satisfy the composer, likely, as Miss Bartlet hypothesizes, who was determined to wring every that , who created possible advantage from his power- the role, and was not only a great ful position. In the month of July he singer but also an educated and succeeded in obtaining, in the face of cultured man, might have helped all precedent, the pension that was Rossini with the versification of an- awarded to composers who had had other memorable scene, Arnold’s aria three operatic premières staged at at the beginning of Act Four. Truth the Opéra and which had been per- to tell these lines were subjected to formed more than forty times. It had considerable modification and re- been necessary to overlook the fact working even after Rossini had set that of the three operas named in the them to music. application (Le siège de Corinthe, It was only when the libretto had Moïse and Le Comte Ory) two were been finally completed that Ros- revisions of works already existing. sini could think about setting the third and fourth acts to music. This About the First Night presumably happened in the early Whilst the contract was being hag- months of 1829. Other delays were gled over, Cinti gave birth to a son caused by the preparation of the (destined to live only a few weeks), scenery and by the fact that Laure the press was trumpeting forth Cinti-Damoreau, for whom Rossini daily indiscretions, and rehearsals was writing the role of Mathilde, were frantically going on with, as was now in the late stages of preg- was usual at the Opéra, an endless nancy. When all attempts to replace series of changes along the route the popular favourite had failed, which continued even after the first it was decided to await her return performance and which it would be to the stage before mounting the worth while to give an abbreviated opera. However, aside from all these account of here. problems relating to the prepara- Meanwhile, where Guillaume Tell tion of the opera, the worst delays is concerned (and one might say were due to the negotiations for the the same of many works written for renewal of Rossini’s contract with the Opéra) it is essential to make a the Royal Household, a contract distinction between changes made that, as we have seen above, should to the words, to the vocal line and in theory have assured the composer to other minor details during the an income for life. Rossini seemed course of rehearsals (at which both capable of anything in order to Rossini and Bis were present) and get the most advantageous terms. which certainly aimed at improving In February, when the singers had the effect of both words and music, already learned the first two acts and those changes which affected the and had just received copies of the construction of the opera. Changes of last two and were about to get down the first type, quite well documented to learning them, Rossini withdrew from our sources (principally the au- the parts. Rehearsals were resumed tograph score and the copyists’ work, thanks to the Vicomte’s interven- but also to some extent the printed One in a Thousand 9

Troupenas score) are of interest only whole, may well appear as unified to the musicologist or whoever wants as possible, and yet presents an in- to trace Rossini’s creative methods in finite variety of facets in its detail. his last opera, so different from those To guide the listener we should, per- that he had been able to turn out in haps, whilst still discussing the first a few days for some Italian theatre. performances in Paris and taking as A lot more importance must be at- our starting point an ideal Urtext tached to the other kind of change, including all the music written at some of which aimed at reducing that time, mention two fundamental the excessive length of the opera, mile-stones corresponding to two but also at increasing its dramatic different scores: the one performed tension, and which often involved at the première on 3 August 1829 (al- cutting and transferring and even ready much whittled down) and the the sacrificing of whole numbers one (even more ruthlessly trimmed) of remarkable musical value. The that Rossini left behind him on the publication of the critical edition day before he left Paris for Italy the of the score now allows performers day after the sixth performance. to restore these numbers if they feel like doing so, or even to try for as As it became obvious during the July complete a performance as possible; rehearsal period that the opera was however, this could never include too long, several important numbers all the music written for Guillaume had already been cut out before the Tell. In fact, leaving out of considera- dress rehearsal (put off more than tion the music Rossini subsequently once and then finally held on 1 Au- added to the two three-act versions of gust), including an aria for Jemmy the opera (one French, the other Ital- inserted into the apple scene in the ian), it would not even be possible to Finale to Act Three, immediately be- perform all the music composed for fore William Tell’s celebrated recita- the first run of the opera in Paris. tive and aria “Sois immobile”. An- As we shall see later on, the project other cut sacrificing a magnificent would be frustrated by the existence piece of music but helping to make of alternative numbers that can- the Finale of the opera more concise not be made to neatly overlap one was that of a and prayer another. for Hedwige with chorus inserted Other problems have to do with the in the very heart of the Act Four kind of cuts practised. Of course, as Finale. Besides these, many other we have hinted, in some cases all numbers in the opera were modified that was desired was to shorten the and shortened. The ballet, which opera, but in others dramatic inten- gave Rossini an enormous amount tions must have prevailed. However, of trouble, a favourite with the Pa- it is not always possible to distin- risians but the cross borne by every guish where one or other of these unhappy composer, merits separate intentions might have operated, mention. The choreographic diver- and, above all, we can never know tissements, although made up of the whole intentions of the author music of the finest quality, were seen or authors. The modern performer, at once to be too many in number, therefore, is faced with alternative and were subjected to endless re- possibilities requiring a free choice thinkings, cuts and modifications; among a mare magnum (an ocean) some dances were even switched of music all of which, or nearly all, from one act to another (tradition- is of the finest quality as befits a ally grand-opéra was establishing masterpiece which, if viewed as a the custom of having a ballet in 10 Guillaume Tell the first act and a longer one in the ent. In consequence she was cut out third). To effect these modifications of the Act Four finale, with the result Rossini went on composing linking that the unhappy princess disap- passages, such as the chorus that peared altogether from the last act, ends the pas de trois (which was sparing herself the scarcely credible just that piece transferred from Act transformation from aristocrat into Three to Act One). He went on having republican. Having made these last second thoughts even in the two days cuts and having received the Legion between the dress rehearsal and the of Honour from the King, Rossini, first night, and he decided to cut leaving for Bologna at the end of the pas de six out of the Act One di- August, was able to leave behind vertissement. Further details about him a score notably whittled-down these and later changes are listed (about four hours of music) which in Elizabeth Bartlet’s summing up, might in some ways be thought to taken from the Preface to the criti- represent his last word on the subject cal edition and reprinted at the foot and which may certainly represent of the Italian version of this article. the most readily accessible basis for After all these modifications the a modern performance. This did not opera finally reached its First Night prevent other cuts being made in his on 3 August, a gala evening to which absence even during the remaining all Paris flocked and which was a performances in the 1829-30 season, personal triumph for Rossini. De- not to mention what happened later. spite the admiration lavished on the Meanwhile, starting off a parallel music, however, there was no lack saga that would have an enormous of criticism where the libretto was influence unon the later history of concerned, and the opera was gener- Guillaume Tell outside Paris, the ally considered to be too long; it was publisher Troupenas had hurried thought that revision was needed to to get the opera into print. The vocal adjust and correct some defects, such score was on sale a few days after as the weakness of the last two acts the première. This hurry, spurred on in comparison with the first two (a by commercial rather than by musi- fact pointed out by several critics). cal impulses, ended in the printed And so they set to work upon a fur- score’s not corresponding at all in ther series of modifications which many places to the authors’ final were effected in three stages: after the decisions. As Elizabeth Bartlet has First Night, after the second and af- written, we shall not find this score ter the sixth. These mainly concerned to be a consistent version of Guil- the ballet: the pas de trois was moved laume Tell; it does not correspond back to Act Three and a pas de deux either to the original text, nor that was cut out of Act One. This served used on the First Night, nor the one to shorten the first act. Apparently, that became current later on, after too much so (one had to consider the the numerous revisions. The many vanity of the leading dancers, male misprints do not help. And yet fate and female!) seeing that Rossini decreed that performances of Guil- decided, in place of the two dances laume Tell outside Paris would be that he had ommitted, to re-insert based on this flawed edition (with the pas de six that had been excised sporadic and partial exceptions) after the dress rehearsal. Later a trio and one of the main merits of the for women’s voices was cut out of the critical edition is in offering us a fourth act: one of the reasons for this basis for finally getting rid of the cut was that the figure of Mathilde pestilential influence of the old had been judged weak and inconsist- Troupenas score. One in a Thousand 11

The three-act version of Tell If, in the last resort, Rossini himself Once the opera had entered into the was responsible for these changes, regular repertoire of the Académie undoubtedly preferring to do the Royale, it was the singers who began work himself rather than leave it to to make further changes in the score. be done by less expert hands, other Already from January 1830 it had modifications were made in later become usual in the Parisian opera years when the opera enjoyed a real house to cut Mathilde’s aria (N. 13) resurrection thanks to Duprez’s from the beginning of Act Three. taking over the role of Arnold. The Arnold’s great air at the beginning great (who had created the of the fourth act became even more role in Italy at the first performances a victim to singers’ caprices. Nourrit in Lucca in 1831), from the time of did not always sing all of the terribly his triumphant assumption of the difficult music assigned to him here, role at the Opéra in 1837, not only but it was only much later that other introduced changes in the vocal style went so far (not always, it of the music that caused a revolution must be confessed) as to eliminate N. (like the famous “chest high C”), but 18 completely, thus sacrificing one of also other tamperings, some of them the most superb pieces in the entire scarcely acceptable. The Duprez operatic repertoire. These particular version, however, had the merit of problems had to do with individual keeping the opera in the repertoire singers and their greater or lesser even when, with Nourrit and other vocal prowess, but other problems members of the original cast no arose from, as always, the inordinate longer in the company, its survival length of the opera. The four hours would have become precarious. of music in Guillaume Tell obviously Rossini made his last important constituted a serious obstacle if, on alteration to his own “definitive” the same evening, following the cur- opera in Bologna in 1840. In Italy, rent fad, a separate ballet were to too, the opera had always seemed too be performed. For this reason the long and, furthermore, had suffered directors of the theatre were already ruthless mangling from the censors, proposing, in the spring of 1830, an and so, after having been introduced edition of the opera in only three in Lucca under its original title, it acts, and Rossini and Bis sat down had subsequently been turned into to write this in the spring of 1831. In Vallace (Milan, 1836) or, rather this version only Act Two remained more often, Rodolfo di Sterlinga. intact. On the other hand large cuts The Bolognese public were able to were once again made in the diver- admire the opera under this guise on tissements, other numbers were 3 October 1840, the evening also in- eliminated or cut down in length, cluding a ballet in six acts entitled I others were moved: Arnold’s great Veneziani in Costantinopoli! The op- aria, for example, was transferred era was successful, the ballet too, but to the beginning of Act Three. This the whole thing was obviously too version, first produced on 1 June long, and as nobody seems to have 1831, ended with the original Finale contemplated cutting I Veneziani, to Act Three but re-worked, with the Rossini, after all a local resident, addition of an ending based on the was persuaded to take pen in hand pas redoublé of the . An to reduce his opera once more to a effective ending, certainly, but in no three-act version. Probably Rossini’s way justifying the sacrifice of the readiness to comply was due to the original Finale of the opera which fact that the Arnold in Bologna was breathes cosmic air. Nicola Ivanoff, a protégé of Rossini’s 12 Guillaume Tell and for whom the composer did not ers), the four-act version was finally disdain to act as agent in the full revived. The cast included only one meaning of the term. Since there singer left over from the 1829 First was not enough time to rehearse Night, Prévost, who again sang his the Parisian finale from the earlier old part of Leuthold. The revival three-act version or get the chorus of all four acts was not, however, to learn it, the composer wrote a painless, as it involved a whole new new one, even shorter, which closed series of cuts. However, it served to the opera snappily and with the re- renew the success of a score that had quired festive air. This was the only always been admired, even after so addition to Tell that Rossini wrote many of Rossini’s serious operas with Italian words. In this version had been dropped from the reper- Rodolfo enters and in a few bars toire. The rest of the world followed announces that the tyrant is dead. suit, even though in Italy the opera The chorus immediately burst into was admired more then it was per- rejoicing, and this version, too, uses formed. Even during the last years the theme of the pas redoublé of the of Rossini’s life the opera was still Overture. It seems that the Bolognese given, though with the modifications were perfectly satisfied with this. that we have referred to. In 1860 the Opéra engaged Carlotta Marchisio God and genius to sing the role of Mathilde, which It is not easy to imagine what Ros- led to a head-on collision between the sini thought, and how sensitive he Paris tradition and the performing may have been, about these frequent tradition based on the Troupenas tamperings with his masterpiece, score. The singer wanted to revive with the very opera to which he had the third act aria that had not been wanted to entrust his eternal fame sung in Paris since 1830 and the as an opera composer, at the end of theatre supplied the parts used by his career. We know that he fretted Cinti-Damoreau in the original a long time over the Italian transla- performances. But Marchisio was tion and that he ordered one from familiar with the version performed Luigi Balocchi, which however was in Italy and the Opéra had to bow heard in Dresden and not in Italy, to her will. The composer was then where Calisto Bassi’s translation passing his extraordinary old age in gained ground; this changed the Paris and, as usual, avoided going original text rather more, though to the Opéra. However, the news- purging it (not always, as we have papers reported that the cadenzas seen) enough to pass muster with the introduced into the two arias by the local censorship. It was used for ver- singer had been “rehearsed” chez sions “in disguise”, too, like Rodolfo Rossini. This could have been true, di Sterlinga. When the composer had but perhaps it was just an attempt stopped writing for the theatre he to give a semblance of authenticity had the satisfaction of seeing Guil- to the performance. Rossini had one laume Tell still included in the rep- last direct contact with his inter- ertoire of theatres all over the world preters, if not with his opera, on and especially at the Opéra, where it 10 February 1868 when the Opéra was continually being resurrected in celebrated the 500th performance of one form or another. We have already the work. When the performance was mentioned Duprez’s version. Another over, in the freezing Paris night, the was given on 20 August 1856 when, Faure, the conductor, the after many repeated and useless chorus and some orchestral players requests (from Berlioz among oth- went over to the Chaussée d’Antin One in a Thousand 13 to play a serenade under the old rightly in our view) demonstrated composer’s windows (he would die a superior vitality, being frequently a few months later). Rossini was performed on its own. Not only had able to appear briefly at his win- it resisted attacks from the pruning dow, whilst it was Olympe’s duty to shears and from singers’ whims, but go down to the street to thank the it had taken on a higher meaning musicians and invite them to come directly connected with the solemn upstairs. Here, in the name of all the declaration of liberty and also of staff of the Opéra, a laurel wreath the Godhead. It is no accident that was presented to the composer as a when someone asked Donizetti’s memorial of the evening. A few days opinion about Guillaume Tell, he is later – it was leap year – Rossini’s supposed to have exclaimed: “The last birthday was celebrated with first and third acts were written by an avalanche of messages from eve- Rossini, the second by God!” (he obvi- rywhere in the world, testifying to ously knew the three-act version). If the glory to which Guillaume Tell we want to draw a lesson from this had contributed so much and so supremacy and hierarchy within worthily. When all is said and done, the higher spheres themselves, we the tamperings, though many and must draw the conclusion that only complex, were nothing more or less God’s works are unchangeable, than the result, or one of the results, whilst the works of genius demand of that glory: the only thing you can- a perpetual living contact with those not tamper with is inert matter. The who perform them and those they work’s enormous vitality allowed of benefit. Today’s listeners will be able its being subjected to changes and to establish this contact in a more accretions, which the critical edition knowing way. Not only do we know has engaged to put in order, giving the composer’s intention, or rather, performers the necessary guidelines. the composer’s intentions much Alongside interpolations that can be better now that we have the critical firmly thrown out there remains a edition, but Guillaume Tell is no wide range of possible alternatives, longer, as it was in the second half but including some things which of the last century, an honourable must remain firmly fixed. As often and applauded residue from a large happens with Rossini, one possible number of important and forgotten reaction in the face of so many vicis- works allowed to languish unstudied situdes in performance is mirrored and even despised. Our knowledge, in an anecdote, we do not know how gained through the study and the authentic, related by Radiciotti: revival of the other serious operas of Rossini and the great master- One day, whilst he was in Paris for his well- pieces that he had composed before known lawsuit, Rossini met the Director of the Guillaume Tell ought, paradoxical Opéra in the street, who said to him: “Maestro, though it might seem, to infuse new I hope you won’t complain of my treatment of vitality and a different vitality into you now; this evening we are performing the that one opera out of all the long line second act of William Tell”. “Really?” – an- of works that had been thought to swered the Maestro – “All of it?”. have a vitality of its own.

Whether this witticism be true or false, the fact remains that the Bruno Cagli second act of this opera-of-so-many- Translation by Michael Aspinall versions had always remained prac- tically intact and had even (quite