Page 219 - 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. 219
oper ettas staged by the slovak national theatr e dur ing the years 1920–1938
Instead, he was interested in theatre entrepreneurship. This could be seen
especially after his appointment as art advisor of the Modern Operetta in
Prague, when the interactions between these two institutions became liveli-
er, to the extent that they exchanged soloists and choir members, rehearsed
the same repertoire, and shared their collections, especially those of the
Slovak National Theatre. This entrepreneurial character of Drašar was no-
ticed by the above-mentioned Ivan Ballo, who, although praising Drašar’s
abilities and entrepreneurial skills, noted that he lacked any artistic qual-
ifications whatsoever. Just like in the previous period under Jeřábek, even
now he addressed the issue of the operetta itself very sharply, saying that it
demoralised the audience and killed even the last vestiges of its taste and
sense for true and valuable art.15
However, Drašar was a very different director from Oskar Nedbal – he
was a hard-headed businessman and an adamant pragmatist, who did not
lose perspective and withstood this enormous pressure. Drašar’s activities
had their advantages, too. Besides dividing drama into separate Czech and
Slovak ensembles, he could implement, mainly thanks to the profit gained
from staging operettas, an experimental dramaturgy, including contempo-
rary works that were financially risky and often turned out to be financially
unviable because of their low attendance. This was admitted by another
prominent critic and organiser of musical events, Gustáv Koričánsky, too:
After all, we must count on that damned capitalist money to fi
nance contemporary opera and, since operettas are relatively lu
crative according to Drašar’s reliable figures, nothing else remains
but to make use of them financially in favour of the opera. It does
not sound nice, I know! However, the realm of the operetta is not
that of the opera, so I do not worry about the operetta at all. I want
to be fair even to the operettas though. It is secondary, maybe even
parasitic art, but it does not always have to be the worst. Classical,
or partly even modern, operettas, have inventive melodies envied
by many symphonists. At the same time, operettas, a type of a con
venient pseudo-art of townspeople, may have quite an entertain
ing, light esprit.16
For Drašar’s era, it was typical that the members of the ensemble, the
dancers, musicians of the orchestra, and conductors, had to perform in all
15 Ibid., 50.
16 Ibid., 47.
217
Instead, he was interested in theatre entrepreneurship. This could be seen
especially after his appointment as art advisor of the Modern Operetta in
Prague, when the interactions between these two institutions became liveli-
er, to the extent that they exchanged soloists and choir members, rehearsed
the same repertoire, and shared their collections, especially those of the
Slovak National Theatre. This entrepreneurial character of Drašar was no-
ticed by the above-mentioned Ivan Ballo, who, although praising Drašar’s
abilities and entrepreneurial skills, noted that he lacked any artistic qual-
ifications whatsoever. Just like in the previous period under Jeřábek, even
now he addressed the issue of the operetta itself very sharply, saying that it
demoralised the audience and killed even the last vestiges of its taste and
sense for true and valuable art.15
However, Drašar was a very different director from Oskar Nedbal – he
was a hard-headed businessman and an adamant pragmatist, who did not
lose perspective and withstood this enormous pressure. Drašar’s activities
had their advantages, too. Besides dividing drama into separate Czech and
Slovak ensembles, he could implement, mainly thanks to the profit gained
from staging operettas, an experimental dramaturgy, including contempo-
rary works that were financially risky and often turned out to be financially
unviable because of their low attendance. This was admitted by another
prominent critic and organiser of musical events, Gustáv Koričánsky, too:
After all, we must count on that damned capitalist money to fi
nance contemporary opera and, since operettas are relatively lu
crative according to Drašar’s reliable figures, nothing else remains
but to make use of them financially in favour of the opera. It does
not sound nice, I know! However, the realm of the operetta is not
that of the opera, so I do not worry about the operetta at all. I want
to be fair even to the operettas though. It is secondary, maybe even
parasitic art, but it does not always have to be the worst. Classical,
or partly even modern, operettas, have inventive melodies envied
by many symphonists. At the same time, operettas, a type of a con
venient pseudo-art of townspeople, may have quite an entertain
ing, light esprit.16
For Drašar’s era, it was typical that the members of the ensemble, the
dancers, musicians of the orchestra, and conductors, had to perform in all
15 Ibid., 50.
16 Ibid., 47.
217
