We use cookies to enhance your experience on our website. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Find out more

Contents

Music In The Seventeenth And Eighteenth Centuries

DIDO AND AENEAS AND THE QUESTION OF “ENGLISH OPERA”

Chapter:
CHAPTER 3 Courts Resplendent, Overthrown, Restored
Source:
MUSIC IN THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES
Author(s):
Richard Taruskin

He came closer still in Dido and Aeneas, his single stage work that, while still technically a masque, was meant to be sung straight through from beginning to end. The plot was adapted by the poet Nahum Tate from the fourth book of the Aeneid, the Roman poet Virgil’s epic poem that tells of the hero Aeneas’s return from the Trojan War. On the way he stops at Carthage, in North Africa, where the Queen, Dido, having given him hospitality, conceives a passionate love for him. But the gods send Mercury to bid the hero continue on his journey (in Virgil, that is; in the libretto it is a false Mercury sent by scheming witches) and Aeneas departs, leaving Dido bereft. She dies (that is, kills herself) out of grief and shame.

The one documented performance of this little opera took place in 1689 at a London girls’ school (“Mr. Josias Priest’s Boarding-School at Chelsey,” as the libretto’s title page says); but as historians now mostly agree, that performance was probably not the first. Tate, the librettist, was a prominent figure who was chosen poet laureate by William and Mary a few years later. It seems unlikely that he and Purcell would have collaborated on a major work for so lowly a venue; but then again, Dido and Aeneas, as a through-composed if miniature tragic opera, was not a work that would have been welcomed on the Restoration stage. For its time and place it was an anomaly, probably meant for court performance (around 1687, for James II), and—as scholars now contend—embodying a now obscure political allegory favorable to the ill-fated king.22

Even so, it was not entirely without precedent. If by “English opera” one means a continuous musical setting of a dramatic text in English in more than a single act, then Dido and Aeneas was probably the fourth of its kind. The earliest surviving one is Venus and Adonis (1683) by John Blow (ca. 1649–1708), another of Purcell’s teachers, who served as the Westminster Abbey organist both before and after his famous pupil’s tenure. It consists of a kind of sing-song melodic recitative modeled on those of Locke, alternating with danced choruses à la Lully.

Charles II could not have liked it very much, because he snubbed its composer a couple of years later in conspicuous and painful fashion. After weathering a political crisis and an attempted assassination in 1681, Charles decided to commission a grandiose operatic allegory of his restoration and reign to celebrate the deliverance of the house of Stuart. Poet laureate Dryden concocted a libretto called Albion and Albanius, in which the two title characters (both of whose names were derived from archaic names of England) stood transparently for Charles and his brother, the later James II. The action depicts the defeat of the three nefarious opponents of Christian monarchy, namely Democracy, Zelota (“Zeal,” meaning Puritanism), and Asebia (Atheism).

When it came to commissioning the music, though, all native-born composers were passed over in favor of Luis Grabu, a Spaniard then living in Paris, who years earlier had already aroused the envy of English musicians when Charles II appointed him to a brief term as Master of the King’s Musick. In the event, Grabu’s operatic panegyric to the king was ill-fated. On 6 February 1685, days before its scheduled première, Charles II suddenly died, and its rescheduled run in June was cut short after six performances by another political crisis (the Duke of Monmouth’s Rebellion). Nevertheless, despite its musical sterility, the Albion and Albanius episode is historically significant for the way the resentment it stimulated led to the first expressions of musical nationalism, as we understand the word today.

The chief cause for nationalistic disparagement was always Grabu’s asserted inability to set English words correctly. The specialness of English prosody has been a critical watchword ever since, and Purcell has always been looked upon as its greatest master. The difficulty of setting English is said to consist in the language’s unusual accentuation patterns, in which stressed syllables and long syllables do not necessarily coincide, the way they do in Italian. (And indeed, Grabu’s recitatives, in mixed meters adapted directly from Lully, would have been better suited to a language that, like French but unlike English, does not have a heavy tonic stress.) But Purcell’s musical prosody in recitatives was not his original discovery; it derived from that of his teachers, Blow and Locke.

Dido And Aeneas And The Question Of “English Opera”Dido And Aeneas And The Question Of “English Opera”

ex. 3-14 Henry Purcell, Dido and Aeneas, recitative and dance song

The very first recitative in Dido and Aeneas—Dido’s exchanges with her handmaiden Belinda and a second woman about Aeneas’s virtue, and her fear of unrequited love—is an ideal introduction to this idiosyncratic English declamation (Ex. 3-14). In most ways the setting follows the conventions of Italian recitative as we have observed them as far back as Peri and Monteverdi at the dawn of opera. There are a few residual madrigalisms: rapid melismas on “storms” and “fierce,” a melisma in regal dotted rhythms on “valour,” and the like. There is also a great deal of conventionally affective harmony, such as the chromatic inflection on “woe.” Where the setting is syllabic, however, it follows the rhythms of English speech very strictly, as we may still confirm by testing our modern English pronunciation against Purcell’s notation. Another English feature, taken over from Lawes and Locke, is the characteristic progression in the bass line from long notes into “walking” quarters and eighths (the kind of thing that we now call “arioso”).

The most conspicuously “English” prosodic effect is the frequent use of short–long rhythms (“Lombards” or “Scotch snaps”) on accented beats to reflect the distinctive English short stress. In the very first measure, the rhythm of “so much” is fastidiously distinguished in this way from the rhythms that precede and follow it. Other short–long pairs occur on “did he” in m. 3 and “full of” in m. 10. And in the typically masquelike (hence typically English) dancing-air-plus-chorus that follows the recitative (“Fear no danger to ensue”), the short–long rhythm, alternating with its opposite, is turned into a characteristic metric pattern.

For the most part, however, the “Englishness” of Dido and Aeneas consists of an original synthesis of French and Italian ingredients that is more attributable to Purcell’s individuality (and to his exceptional familiarity with, and receptivity to, foreign trends) than to his nationality as such. In his case, an apparently insular style was really cosmopolitanism in disguise. It is easy enough to catalogue the imported ingredients. Group activities—choruses, dances, orchestral numbers—are governed by French conventions, as often observed, and solo behavior by Italian.

And yet the French and Italian strains were not wholly discrete in the seventeenth century. Both made conspicuous use of ground basses, for example; and ground-bass numbers, for which Purcell had an uncanny gift, are one of the special glories of Dido and Aeneas. The ending of act I puts a French spin on the device, that of act III, the opera’s final scene, puts an Italian one; both, however, are at the same time inimitably Purcellian.

Act I ends with a celebration by the chorus of the title couple’s as-yet-undeclared love. After singing, they do a “Triumphing Dance” in the form of a chaconne, the customary celebratory dance of the French lyric stage. Like most of the numbers in Dido and Aeneas, it is a miniaturized adaptation of its model, but it has lots of tonal and rhythmic variety. The twelve statements of the four-measure bass are organized into two little ternary forms around modulations to the dominant (3 + 1 + 3; 1 + 1 + 3). In between come two surprising bars that have no bass at all and throw the measure count delightfully off symmetry.

The second scene of act III, the opera’s dénouement, consists of a dramatic recitative in which Aeneas takes leave of the forlorn and lovesick Queen, a sadly sympathetic comment from the chorus, and Dido’s suicide aria (Ex. 3-15), to which a final chorus of lamentation is appended. Dido’s diminutive aria is usually called her lament, because it is written in the style of a Venetian lamento, a form we have traced from its Monteverdian origins (see Ex. 1-5, the “Lamento della Ninfa”). By the end of the seventeenth century it had become a virtual cliché. Purcell is true to the established convention in his choice of a descending tetrachord as ground bass, and he is also conventional in the chromatic interpolations that turn the tetrachord into the standard passus duriusculus.

Dido And Aeneas And The Question Of “English Opera”Dido And Aeneas And The Question Of “English Opera”Dido And Aeneas And The Question Of “English Opera”

ex. 3-15 Henry Purcell, Dido and Aeneas, Act III, sc. 2, Dido’s lament

Altogether unconventional and characteristic, however, is the interpolation of an additional cadential measure into the stereotyped ground, increasing its length from a routine four to a haunting five bars, against which the vocal line, with its despondent refrain (“Remember me!”), is deployed with marked asymmetry. That, plus Purcell’s distinctively dissonant, suspension-saturated harmony, enhanced by additional chromatic descents during the final ritornello and by many deceptive cadences, make the little aria an unforgettably poignant embodiment of heartache.

Notes:

(22) See John Buttrey, “Dating Purcell’s Dido and Aeneas,” Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association XCVI (1967–68): 52–60; also Purcell, Dido and Aeneas, ed. Curtis Price (Norton Critical Scores; New York: Norton, 1986), pp. 6–12.

Citation (MLA):
Richard Taruskin. "Chapter 3 Courts Resplendent, Overthrown, Restored." The Oxford History of Western Music. Oxford University Press. New York, USA. n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2019. <https://www.oxfordwesternmusic.com/view/Volume2/actrade-9780195384826-div1-03012.xml>.
Citation (APA):
Taruskin, R. (n.d.). Chapter 3 Courts Resplendent, Overthrown, Restored. In Oxford University Press, Music In The Seventeenth And Eighteenth Centuries. New York, USA. Retrieved 20 Nov. 2019, from https://www.oxfordwesternmusic.com/view/Volume2/actrade-9780195384826-div1-03012.xml
Citation (Chicago):
Richard Taruskin. "Chapter 3 Courts Resplendent, Overthrown, Restored." In Music In The Seventeenth And Eighteenth Centuries, Oxford University Press. (New York, USA, n.d.). Retrieved 20 Nov. 2019, from https://www.oxfordwesternmusic.com/view/Volume2/actrade-9780195384826-div1-03012.xml