Page 166 - Weiss, Jernej, ur. 2019. Vloga nacionalnih opernih gledališč v 20. in 21. stoletju - The Role of National Opera Houses in the 20th and 21st Centuries. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 3
P. 166
vloga nacionalnih opernih gledališč v 20. in 21. stoletju
no saw as an allegory of “the decomposition of the operatic form”5, contin-
ues this quest.
Since its creation, the genre of opera has developed in two ways:
– On the one hand, through a traditionalist aesthetic, the ‘official
art’, rigidified for too long in academic forms, which evolves ex-
clusively between the walls of the classical opera theatres, and the
new staging of which is just a superficial renewal.
– On the other hand, through circumstantial performances, much
more experimental, and thus of a much shorter existence. They
are often given in less important halls, accessible only to com-
posers too young or not yet well enough known to have access
to the Grand Opera. Yet they are the most faithful witnesses of
their time: for example, of the political situation and propaganda
as in French operas after the Revolution, or of advances in musi-
cal language and practices, as in the modern operas of the twen-
tieth century, so heterogeneous and difficult to classify that “the
term itself poses a problem”6.
Ballet has the same double face, with classical or academic ballet on the
one hand, which leaves little room for innovation, and on the other hand,
contemporary dance which has quickly distanced itself from the walls of
the opera theatre to evolve without institutional constraints by developing
a multitude of forms, styles and languages. It is significant that at the begin-
ning of the 20th century the Paris Opera “does not want to receive Diagile-
v”7, who therefore presents the Russian Ballets at the Paris Chatelet theatre,
and that towards the end of the same century Maurice Béjart “repeatedly
refused to take the direction of the Ballet de l’Opéra, motivating his attitude
by the rigidity of the structures and the weight of the traditions which, he
judged, prevent creation”8. Between those two cases, while contemporary
music and modern dance evolved throughout the twentieth century, opera
and ballet failed to renew their content and stayed away from innovation.
Modern opera has always been poorly adapted to classical theatre, in
which, according to Albéra, “creation is often an alibi [...] it conforms to the
5 Theodor W. Adorno, Le caractère fétiche dans la musique et la régression de l‘écoute
(Paris: Allia, 2001), 81.
6 Albéra, “L’opéra,” 377.
7 Paul Bourcier, Histoire de la danse en Occident (Paris: Seuil, 1978), 212.
8 Ibid., 308.
164
no saw as an allegory of “the decomposition of the operatic form”5, contin-
ues this quest.
Since its creation, the genre of opera has developed in two ways:
– On the one hand, through a traditionalist aesthetic, the ‘official
art’, rigidified for too long in academic forms, which evolves ex-
clusively between the walls of the classical opera theatres, and the
new staging of which is just a superficial renewal.
– On the other hand, through circumstantial performances, much
more experimental, and thus of a much shorter existence. They
are often given in less important halls, accessible only to com-
posers too young or not yet well enough known to have access
to the Grand Opera. Yet they are the most faithful witnesses of
their time: for example, of the political situation and propaganda
as in French operas after the Revolution, or of advances in musi-
cal language and practices, as in the modern operas of the twen-
tieth century, so heterogeneous and difficult to classify that “the
term itself poses a problem”6.
Ballet has the same double face, with classical or academic ballet on the
one hand, which leaves little room for innovation, and on the other hand,
contemporary dance which has quickly distanced itself from the walls of
the opera theatre to evolve without institutional constraints by developing
a multitude of forms, styles and languages. It is significant that at the begin-
ning of the 20th century the Paris Opera “does not want to receive Diagile-
v”7, who therefore presents the Russian Ballets at the Paris Chatelet theatre,
and that towards the end of the same century Maurice Béjart “repeatedly
refused to take the direction of the Ballet de l’Opéra, motivating his attitude
by the rigidity of the structures and the weight of the traditions which, he
judged, prevent creation”8. Between those two cases, while contemporary
music and modern dance evolved throughout the twentieth century, opera
and ballet failed to renew their content and stayed away from innovation.
Modern opera has always been poorly adapted to classical theatre, in
which, according to Albéra, “creation is often an alibi [...] it conforms to the
5 Theodor W. Adorno, Le caractère fétiche dans la musique et la régression de l‘écoute
(Paris: Allia, 2001), 81.
6 Albéra, “L’opéra,” 377.
7 Paul Bourcier, Histoire de la danse en Occident (Paris: Seuil, 1978), 212.
8 Ibid., 308.
164
