Page 345 - 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. 345
ciril debevec – the first professional opera director in slovenia
mances.49 In 1940/41, Debevec directed several new performances, among
them Ludwig van Beethoven’s Fidelio and Matija Bravničar’s novelty Hla-
pec Jernej in njegova pravica / The Bailiff Yerney and His Rights and followed
the repertoire of the director Ukmar.50 Debevec published a commentary
on Fidelio in the Gledališki list, pointing out that being an opera director
does not allow as much freedom as a drama director, as it is confined with
the rhythm, pace, dynamics, etc. He took out the important role of the con-
ductor and added that the director has the opportunity to intervene into
the visibility of the content, stage dynamics, efficient distribution of indi-
vidual characters, distinct pronunciation, etc. and added that for him Fi-
delio is primarily a musical work, “a drama of pure, completely impeccable
singing and a great mental expression and ... a sample of humanity.”51 De-
bevec’s remarks seem to be directed to “justify” the minimalist stage-set-
ting approach the audience was not familiar with yet. He also explained his
approach to Bravničar’s novelty, which he had puzzled over when he said:
As this work in its original [...] form [...] is magnificent and shock-
ing, it misses most of the important components of [...] true theatre
work, the tension of opposites, the lively attraction and sharpness
of the fighting characters, the unusual density originating from the
characters, the danger and impact of complications, conflicts and
resolutions, the dynamic diversity of the action, the fullness of ex-
ternal and internal happenings, the structure of content escalation,
and the necessity of a tragic conclusion.52
He was convinced that the music abolishes the director’s freedom and
locks in the direction, he wondered how to tackle all the literary and mu-
sical characteristics in order to make them persuasive on stage and he saw
the solution in a more rather than less “concert” tranquil direction,53 to
which he was more inclined than most of his predecessors. Before the per-
formance of Gounod’s Faust in 1941, he told about his vision of directing
opera:
49 Prim. Marijan Lipovšek, »O našem glasbenem življenju« / “About our musical life,”
Ljubljanski zvon, year 60, No. 9 (1940): 579–580.
50 Unknown, »Razgovor z ravnateljem Ukmarjem« / “Interview with Director Ukmar”,
Gledališki list / Theatre Gazette, Opera, 1940/41, year 20, No. 1: 4–7.
51 Gledališki list / Theatre Gazette, Opera, 1940/41, year 20, No. 1, 8–10.
52 Ciril Debevec, »Režijske opazke k Hlapcu Jerneju« / “Directorial remarks on The
Bailiff Yerney”, Gledališki list / Theatre Gazette, Opera, 1940/41, year 20, No. 9, 101–
102.
53 Ibid., 102.
343
mances.49 In 1940/41, Debevec directed several new performances, among
them Ludwig van Beethoven’s Fidelio and Matija Bravničar’s novelty Hla-
pec Jernej in njegova pravica / The Bailiff Yerney and His Rights and followed
the repertoire of the director Ukmar.50 Debevec published a commentary
on Fidelio in the Gledališki list, pointing out that being an opera director
does not allow as much freedom as a drama director, as it is confined with
the rhythm, pace, dynamics, etc. He took out the important role of the con-
ductor and added that the director has the opportunity to intervene into
the visibility of the content, stage dynamics, efficient distribution of indi-
vidual characters, distinct pronunciation, etc. and added that for him Fi-
delio is primarily a musical work, “a drama of pure, completely impeccable
singing and a great mental expression and ... a sample of humanity.”51 De-
bevec’s remarks seem to be directed to “justify” the minimalist stage-set-
ting approach the audience was not familiar with yet. He also explained his
approach to Bravničar’s novelty, which he had puzzled over when he said:
As this work in its original [...] form [...] is magnificent and shock-
ing, it misses most of the important components of [...] true theatre
work, the tension of opposites, the lively attraction and sharpness
of the fighting characters, the unusual density originating from the
characters, the danger and impact of complications, conflicts and
resolutions, the dynamic diversity of the action, the fullness of ex-
ternal and internal happenings, the structure of content escalation,
and the necessity of a tragic conclusion.52
He was convinced that the music abolishes the director’s freedom and
locks in the direction, he wondered how to tackle all the literary and mu-
sical characteristics in order to make them persuasive on stage and he saw
the solution in a more rather than less “concert” tranquil direction,53 to
which he was more inclined than most of his predecessors. Before the per-
formance of Gounod’s Faust in 1941, he told about his vision of directing
opera:
49 Prim. Marijan Lipovšek, »O našem glasbenem življenju« / “About our musical life,”
Ljubljanski zvon, year 60, No. 9 (1940): 579–580.
50 Unknown, »Razgovor z ravnateljem Ukmarjem« / “Interview with Director Ukmar”,
Gledališki list / Theatre Gazette, Opera, 1940/41, year 20, No. 1: 4–7.
51 Gledališki list / Theatre Gazette, Opera, 1940/41, year 20, No. 1, 8–10.
52 Ciril Debevec, »Režijske opazke k Hlapcu Jerneju« / “Directorial remarks on The
Bailiff Yerney”, Gledališki list / Theatre Gazette, Opera, 1940/41, year 20, No. 9, 101–
102.
53 Ibid., 102.
343
