On Feb 8, 2005, at 6:05 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
No one is a bigger fan of Mozart than I am. But I have always felt that the Magic Flute is incoherent *as an opera* (or Singspiel, technically speaking, I guess). If it did not have some of the most glorious music ever written, it would be a failure. But so far as I can tell, it's really just a string of great tunes held together by a rather incomprehensible narrative. That's not great opera, though it may very well include some of the greatest music ever written.
I'm actually not a big fan of Magic Flute, but I think its greatness is undeniable in spite of my own taste. I was arguing the case that that greatness is not dependent on understanding the Masonic symbolism. And yes, I think it does work *as an opera*.
It's not just a matter of great music overcoming a lousy story. There are plenty of operas which are musically brilliant but dramatically problematic, and the weight of the bad libretto either pulls it down into the lower tiers of the repertoire (eg, Gioconda, Lakme) or makes it unpresentable completely (eg, any Schubert opera). It is a commonplace in opera that a composer's best operas are not the ones with his best music (eg, Gounod).
--
On Feb 8, 2005, at 6:36 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
[answering John Howell]
And the Ring Cycle is coherent? . . .
Yes, it is. The ideas may be ludicrous and laughable, but they are at least coherent, without reference to knowledge outside the plot as related in the libretto.
The Magic Flute is senseless without the Masonic information.
Is it any less senseless *with* the Masonic information? Yes, I understand that it helps to illuminate some of Mozart's strange little excursions, but it's not as if the story suddenly makes sense when viewed through the Masonic glass. If the Magic Flute plot is incoherent, it is incoherent with or without the illumination of Masonic symbolism. Knowing about all the three-symbols in the music doesn't add anything to understanding of the plot. Having a better understanding of Sarastro's ideals and his cult's induction rituals doesn't explain why he's a bad guy in act one and a good guy in act two, nor why Tamino starts the opera wearing a Jap(v)anese costume while chased by a dragon, nor what the hell kind of creature Papageno is.
Actually, I would argue that the political situation of Mozart's time (eg, Joseph II's reform agenda, conservative reaction against Maria Theresa) is more relevant to understanding the Magic Flute story than is Masonic symbolism. Admittedly the two tend to blur together, and in both cases they don't so much explain the plot per se as explain how Mozart came to write a plot that doesn't make sense.
. . . Not if you've ever laughed your way through Anna Russell's description! All things considered I'll settle for some of the greatest music ever written, thanks.
No argument there, but as a work of musical drama, The Magic Flute is not really internally consistent or coherent.
I think there's a difference between logical consistency of the plot and a dramatically effective libretto. Trovatore, Rigoletto, and Boheme all have gaps or inconsistencies in their plots, yet every one of them is very effective dramatically. There are numerous operas in which great music is dragged down by a bad libretto, but I don't think Magic Flute is one of them.
I can't explain why, but Magic Flute works on the stage, notwithstanding its nonsensical story. The evidence for this is empirical, not theoretical. Magic Flute has persisted in the top ranks of the repertoire decade after decade. Logical or not, it works on stage, and there are hundreds upon hundreds of productions to prove it. I don't think it's just the greatness of the music. If that were the case, you'd hear a lot more concert productions.
mdl
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
