Page 218 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2021. Opereta med obema svetovnima vojnama ▪︎ Operetta between the Two World Wars. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 5
P. 218
opereta med obema svetovnima vojnama
Drašar continued this trend even in his activities in Slovakia, e specially
by engaging the operetta ensemble he had brought over from Olomouc,
which was to replace Nedbal’s ballet ensemble. However, the Folk Theatre
did not bring the desired profit and it was closed in the spring of 1931. All
the operetta shows were then transferred back to the main theatre build-
ing. From his appointment onward, Drašar attracted a wave of criticism not
only for his preference for operetta over drama or opera, for securing the fa-
vourable spots for operettas during prime time on Saturdays and Sundays,
and for costly sets for the operetta shows, but also for his preference for
Berlin revue operettas (R. Benatzky, J. Gilbert, R. Stolz, J. Beneš) and add-
ing Hungarian operettas to the repertoire (N. Brodszky, P. Abraham), for
which he received generous commissions and royalties. After a year, such
criticisms were also accompanied by resentment over the fact that he had
become the art advisor of the Modern Operetta in the Variété in Prague.
Moreover, objections about the unsuitability of operettas for the stage of the
Slovak National Theatre were still ongoing. In one of the many discussions
aimed against Drašar and operetta, the following was said:
Director Drašar introduced operettas into the Slovak National The
atre, operettas which have no worth artistically, which are kitschy
and, on top of that, Hungarian. He was criticised for this at the first
meeting, and has been criticised publicly in magazines and dai
lies, pointing out that operettas, especially in their current form,
do not belong to the representative national stage, as they suppress
true art to a subordinate level, dull refined taste for fine arts in the
audience, etc. Previously, there were no operettas, except for some
classical ones. High art was cultivated, the theatre stood on a cer
tain height from an artistic aspect, and this is proven also by the
fact that prominent artists emerged in the Slovak National Theatre
who then proceeded to other major stages, e.g. to Brno and Prague.
Operettas are played elsewhere, one might say, but not in a na
tional theatre, not on national stages. That is not the case either in
Prague, or in Brno; actually, nowhere else, I should say.14
Drašar’s plan with operettas was well considered and, as it soon turned
out, his primary interest was not education or the establishment of a good
ensemble with the prerequisites for continuous development, nor stag-
ing operettas in the Slovak National Theatre to gain funds for running it.
14 Terézia Ursínyová, Cesty operety (Bratislava: Opus, 1982), 48–9.
216
Drašar continued this trend even in his activities in Slovakia, e specially
by engaging the operetta ensemble he had brought over from Olomouc,
which was to replace Nedbal’s ballet ensemble. However, the Folk Theatre
did not bring the desired profit and it was closed in the spring of 1931. All
the operetta shows were then transferred back to the main theatre build-
ing. From his appointment onward, Drašar attracted a wave of criticism not
only for his preference for operetta over drama or opera, for securing the fa-
vourable spots for operettas during prime time on Saturdays and Sundays,
and for costly sets for the operetta shows, but also for his preference for
Berlin revue operettas (R. Benatzky, J. Gilbert, R. Stolz, J. Beneš) and add-
ing Hungarian operettas to the repertoire (N. Brodszky, P. Abraham), for
which he received generous commissions and royalties. After a year, such
criticisms were also accompanied by resentment over the fact that he had
become the art advisor of the Modern Operetta in the Variété in Prague.
Moreover, objections about the unsuitability of operettas for the stage of the
Slovak National Theatre were still ongoing. In one of the many discussions
aimed against Drašar and operetta, the following was said:
Director Drašar introduced operettas into the Slovak National The
atre, operettas which have no worth artistically, which are kitschy
and, on top of that, Hungarian. He was criticised for this at the first
meeting, and has been criticised publicly in magazines and dai
lies, pointing out that operettas, especially in their current form,
do not belong to the representative national stage, as they suppress
true art to a subordinate level, dull refined taste for fine arts in the
audience, etc. Previously, there were no operettas, except for some
classical ones. High art was cultivated, the theatre stood on a cer
tain height from an artistic aspect, and this is proven also by the
fact that prominent artists emerged in the Slovak National Theatre
who then proceeded to other major stages, e.g. to Brno and Prague.
Operettas are played elsewhere, one might say, but not in a na
tional theatre, not on national stages. That is not the case either in
Prague, or in Brno; actually, nowhere else, I should say.14
Drašar’s plan with operettas was well considered and, as it soon turned
out, his primary interest was not education or the establishment of a good
ensemble with the prerequisites for continuous development, nor stag-
ing operettas in the Slovak National Theatre to gain funds for running it.
14 Terézia Ursínyová, Cesty operety (Bratislava: Opus, 1982), 48–9.
216
