Read an Excerpt
Janácek's Operas
A Documentary Account
By John Tyrrell PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS
Copyright © 1992 John Tyrrell
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-691-09148-8
CHAPTER 1
Šárka
In the revolt of the women against men's rule recorded in Czech mythic history, Šárka was the boldest and most zealous of the women warriors. Her chief opponent was the young hero Ctirad, whom she tricked into an ambush. She let him find her tied to a tree in the forest, seemingly defenceless and rejected by the women. As he untied her he fell in love with her. She disarmed him and then summoned her warriors hiding nearby to finish him off. However, she had fallen in love with him and in remorse ended her own life.
The name of Šárka first appears in the oldest Czech verse chronicle, the so-called 'Chronicle of Dalimil' dating from the beginning of the fourteenth century. The story of Šárka's erotic and tragic confrontation with Ctirad became a popular subject in early nineteenth-century German and Czech literature and later in the century attracted all the major Czech composers. The third tone poem of Smetana's orchestral cycle My Fatherland is called 'Šárka', as is Fibich's penultimate opera. Dvorák, Smetana and Janácek all had contacts with a Šárka libretto written by Julius Zeyer (1841–1901), one of the leading Czech symbolist poets.
Zeyer's attraction to this mythical world is evident in his five-part epic poem Vyšehrad, published in 1880 and dedicated to his friend, the poet J. V. Sladek. According to Zeyer (SRII), he was invited by Dvorák through the good offices of Sladek to write an opera libretto for him, and seems to have done so by adapting the fourth part of Vyšehrad, entitled 'Ctirad' (written in January 1879). Many lines are common to both poem and libretto: it is more likely that they went from the poem to the libretto rather than the other way round. Much of the Indo-European mythology with which Zeyer fleshed out the original Czech legend is incomprehensible in the libretto without a knowledge of the poem.
Reports soon began to circulate that Dvorák was working on a new opera, Šárka. The first, in the periodical Hudební a divadelní vestník of 20 February 1878 (SRI) mistakenly indicated that the libretto would be by 'J.O.V.'(Josef Otakar Vesely, the librettist of Dvorák's opera The Cunning Peasant). Another, in Dalibor over two years later, was rather nearer the mark:
SR2 'Short reports'
Antonín Dvorák will compose a new opera for which our excellent poets, Messrs Zeyer and Sladek, are writing the libretto. We look forward to Dvorák's latest work being an effective enrichment of the operatic repertory worthy of our national theatre!
Dalibor (10 August 1880)
These reports of Dvorák's composition were premature. From a brief remark in a letter from Sladek to Zeyer a month later (SR3, 27 September 1880), it is clear that Dvorák had not yet begun: 'I was at Dvorák's place. He likes Šárka a lot, and is full of fire for the work'. Sládek's report may have been wishful thinking. There is little reason to believe that Dvorák would have accepted a libretto with so few opportunities for the sort of set-piece opera that he was still writing at the time. In Zeyer's words (SRII), 'He did not agree with my views on opera.' In his libretto to Šárka Zeyer included choruses, but specified the combination of solo voices only in the Act 2 duet between Šárka and Ctirad, and as part of the ritual of the last act. In contrast, Dvorák's next opera, Dimitrij (composed 1881–2), has ensembles and concertato finales, among other set pieces. It was not until his extensive revisions of Dimitrij in 1894 that a more 'Wagnerian' direction to Dvorák's work can be discerned. Zeyer came from a cultured, cosmopolitan family and during his extensive travels would have had more opportunity than most Czechs of his generation to get to know a wide variety of foreign operas. It is clear from his Šárka libretto that he took a Wagnerian view of opera. He described it as a 'music drama' and filled it with many Wagnerian allusions: a chorus of Valkyrie-like women warriors, magic weapons held in waiting for the hero, a love-union in the immolation of hero and heroine.
Perhaps because of Dvorák's lack of interest, the libretto also found its way to Smetana, as is documented by the two following letters from authors both refusing to supply Smetana with librettos on the grounds that he already had two at his disposal:
SR4 Eliska Krásnohorská to Bedrich SmetanaPrague, 23 February 1882
[...] I know for certain that you had in your hands two librettos with which you would have been able to carry out your ideal, i.e. of continuing in the style and musical character of Libuše; you dream of Czech pagan subjects. I cannot therefore explain why you did not see fit to choose one of these librettos, and I think that you made a mistake if you have completely turned them down. I know one of them [Pippich's Death of Vlasta..... The other [Šárka] I don't know but it comes from someone with a knowledge of music and one could presume therefore that it would be musical and operatic. Possibly it may have been more Wagnerian than Wagner, possibly it had its faults—but surely both these librettos are better than Wenzig's, for instance his Libuše, or are at least as good as it? [...]
Jaroslav Vrchlicky to Josef Srb-DebmovPrague, 11 July 1882SR5
In reply to your esteemed letter of 30 June I am honoured to inform you that as far as I know a libretto Vlasta exists, by Dr Pippich, and then a libretto Šárka by Julius Zeyer. On this point I allow myself the humble observation that if Smetana is not satisfied with the libretto of Mr Pippich, who is a music specialist, or even with the libretto by Mr Zeyer, who is a distinguished poet, my libretto would hardly find favour in his eyes and I would not care to be overtaken by the fate of Mr Zeyer, whose libretto wandered from Ananias to Caiaphas for a whole two years without his receiving from the famous composer any lines of acknowledgement or thanks for such unrewarding work. Do not take it ill if I have no trust in similar enterprises and if I tell you my opinion frankly.
After a decade Zeyer must have realized that it was futile waiting for Dvorák and he published his Šárka as a 'music drama' in three instalments, one for each act, in the new theatrical fortnighdy, Ceská Thalie (1 January, 15 January, 1 February 1887). It was here that the young Leoš Janácek saw it. Three years earlier, in 1884, a Czech theatre had opened in Brno, and its productions were regularly reviewed by Janácek himself in Hudební listy, the journal that he had founded that year. Janácek had already contemplated a couple of operatic projects, including a somewhat unlikely setting of Chateaubriand's Les aventures du dernier des Abencérages.
Šárka seems to have awakened Janácek's imagination and he set to work quickly. Within a few months, by August 1887, he had completed his setting of Zeyer's text in vocal score and, like several other works of this period, sent it off to his friend and mentor Antonín Dvorák for an opinion. If Dvorák was surprised to see the text he was meant to be setting surfacing in this way, his letters to Janácek do not show it.
Janácek's autobiography (1924) SR6
Cukmantl [Zuckmantel, now Zlaté Hory] in Silesia. Dr Andel, the owner of the spa, maintained a Czech society. In the district there was said to be just one Czech – a chemist. I sent off the vocal score of Šárka from here to Antonín Dvorák in Prague.
SR7 Antonín Dvorák to JanácekVysoká u Pribrami, 6 August 1887
I've received your opera. Looking through it will need much time. I'll give you a report later.
SR8 Antonín Dvorák to Janácek[undated, postmarked Prague, 25 October 1887]
Forgive me for not replying for so long, but I imagine that you are in no great hurry over the matter, and then I also hope that you may perhaps come to Prague so that we could have a talk about a weighty matter like this. It's not so easy to write about it. So do come, but no sooner than the 29th, for I go off tomorrow for about three or four days to Berlin.
Though Janácek reported (SRIO) that Dvorák's assessment went 'quite well', Dvorák cannot have been wholly enthusiastic, since Janácek then wrote the piece again, leaving little of the first version intact. Before he did so he wrote to Zeyer for permission to set his text.
SR9 Julius Zeyer to JanácekVodnany, 10 November 1887
I much regret if this will be unpleasant for you but I cannot consent to your composing music to my Šárka. Believe me, I have very strong reasons.
Besides, you yourself can take some of the blame in this matter. Allow me to say to you that you should surely have asked me first before sending into the world your outline for an opera to my text. Your music will certainly not be lost because of this; you can use it in some other way. In any event, my name would only harm you with the management of the National Theatre since I have only opponents there.
Forgive me if I have possibly caused you a nasty moment, remember that you have also caused me one.
Janácek's comment (1924) SR10
It was a misunderstanding! I did not know whether I would make a success of my first opera, so I kept quiet – and worked at it for myself. I then sent the finished vocal score to Dr Dvorák for his verdict. It turned out quite well. Only then did I ask Mr J. Z. for his permission. My work was thus not 'in the world' – as J. Z. thought.
Julius Zeyer to JanácekVodnany, 17 November 1887SR11
It seems that you did not receive my first letter and so it becomes my very unpleasant duty to tell you once again that I do not give my consent for you to use my Šárka as a text for your opera. I have very serious reasons for this, which have absolutely nothing to do with you personally and therefore there is nothing in my conduct to cause you offence. As to your talent I have certainly not the least doubt.
But I must tell you frankly that your conduct is not proper. You take a mistaken attitude when you think that every wretched poet is gratified when some composer or other takes pity on a poem of his. Rather, he can be glad when it is announced to him 'subsequently' (as you write). All 'changes' and all 'arranging' are then graciously put to him 'for approval'.
Thank you, sir. You probably do not know how offensive you are.
I must add that either Mr Dvorák or you are mistaken. I did not offer either him or anyone else my Šárka. He invited me, through the good offices of Prof. Sládek, to write a text for an opera for him. I was glad to comply with his wishes. He did not agree with my views on opera, he did not like my text and so did not compose Šárka. I could not really hold this against him and we remained good friends.
So much by way of explanation.
By the date of this letter Zeyer had had three plays produced at the National Theatre but all of them were taken off after two or three performances. In refusing permission to Janácek, Zeyer may have had this in mind, though as Artuš Rektorys suggests, a hostile review of his most recent play, Libuše's Anger, published earlier that year in Janácek's journal Hudební listy, may also have played its part in his decision. The fact that Dvorák appeared to be recommending Janácek's setting rather than getting on with his own could not have helped. Later, Dvorák became more enthusiastic about Zeyer's libretto, if Sládek's letter to Zeyer can be believed.
SR12 J. V. Sládek to Julius ZeyerPrague, 15 April 1889
[...] Yesterday Dvorák met me and launched into a long conversation with me.
He asks you, he says, to allow him to compose Šárka and not to offer it to anyone else. He spoke sincerely. He says that when you gave him the piece years ago, 'he was not ready for it yet!' Now he feels that he is at full strength, that he has the courage to take on something so big and also that he understands it. He is completely taken by it and once he begins work on it, he says, he will soon be finished, because the text itself dictates the music to him. He has already described individual scenes to me and generally spoke in a way I have never heard him speak before. He asked me to write to you at once, which is what I am doing.[...]
Dvorák, however, never did compose Šárka, though in the mid-1890s, on his return from America, he seems to have sketched a 'Ctirad motif', later used in a changed form for Jirka in The Devil and Kate.
It is puzzling that in what must have appeared hopeless circumstances Janácek nevertheless continued to complete his second version (the fair copy of the vocal score is dated 18 June 1888 in Josef Štross's hand), and then to orchestrate the work. He completed two acts in full score and then gave up. Buoyancy over the birth of his son Vladimír (on 16 May 1888) may have sustained Janácek at a time when the project now seemed so hopeless, but why, having got so far, did he not finish it? Possibly the third act, with its lack of vital dramatic features, held little to engage the composer's interest in these changed circumstances. Another factor may have been Janácek's growing enthusiasm for Moravian folksong. His collaboration on a new collection with Frantisek Bartos at about this time, and the fresh possibilities it opened up, seem to have put everything else out of his mind. It was almost thirty years before Šárka surfaced again.
SR13 Janácek to Gabriela HorvátováBrno, 14 January 1918
[...] I was looking for something in the chest and I found the full score of Acts 1 and 2 of Šárka. I didn't even know that it was finished in full score! [...]
The 'chest' was the famous painted peasant chest, mentioned in the reminiscences of Janácek's servant Marie Stejskalová, who described how Janácek saw it in an antique shop, acquired it and had it repaired and painted. Janácek kept his manuscripts in it and, according to Stejskalová, Mrs Janácková carefully collected up music which the composer had discarded, and also put it into the chest. This saved many early compositions, including Šárka. Janácek himself thought that the work had been lost and, according to Rektorys, that he had burnt it. Indeed he seems not to have responded to the request for information about it by the Dvorák scholar Otakar Sourek in 1917, a year before its discovery.
Otakar Šourek to JanácekPrague, [25] January 1917SR14
I learnt from my friend Roman Vesely and also from Dr Löwenbach that you have completed an opera on Zeyer's libretto Šárka. This was a very surprising, important and joyful piece of news for me, since in the next volume of my work on the life and works of Antonín Dvorák am currently concerned with Dvorák's intention to set this libretto (in the years 1878–81). Besides, in a forthcoming volume of Dvorák's correspondence, I also have letters addressed to you in which there is mention of your opera.
I would thus, highly honoured Maestro, be enormously grateful to you if you could kindly let me know a few facts about your work, partly in regard to its composition, and, above all, also something about the features and character of the work and what Dvorák, to whom you sent the work for his scrutiny, thought of it at the time. I almost fear to express the request that I might take a look at the score although I think that during one of your visits to Prague even that would not be impossible.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Janácek's Operas by John Tyrrell. Copyright © 1992 John Tyrrell. Excerpted by permission of PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
