Review

Reviewed Work(s): Shakespeare & Opera. by Gary Schmidgall

Review by: Russ McDonald
Source: Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 2 (Summer, 1992), pp. 247-250
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2870895
Accessed: 01-05-2019 15:21 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Shakespeare Quarterly

This content downloaded from 181.46.133.41 on Wed, 01 May 2019 15:21:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 BOOK REVIEWS 247

and ending with a vision of Iago's punis

of orderly time or erases the protracte
the film-but his sympathetic and insig
rebuttal to those who find the film on
The brief conclusion to Still in Movem
Buchman has not written the book h
of every chapter, he identifies his met
approach that highlights "the intera
Buchman never forgets about the spect
the assumption that the process of film
reception. But Still in Movement is n
process of spectatorship, particularly
of "suture" (the insertion of the viewer
of the experience of film as a repet
development; nor are the strongest
comments on the transaction betwe
consistently interesting record of B
comments, always thoughtful, well-i
Movement an important contribution t

Shakespeare & Opera. By GARY SCHM

ford: Oxford University Press, 1
cloth.

Reviewed by Russ MCDONALD

Shakespeare & Opera is not mainly a
although it ends with some essays of
length and in detail the shared charac
(p. xii). The field of comparison is fairl
by composers from Mozart to Strauss,
Samuel Barber and Aribert Reimann o
Shakespeare in these pages is Giusepp
parallel studies conducted before no
operatic appropriations of Shakespear
Schmidgall's comparative method is
cal; it is also, and this is surprising g
ticated. His main strategy is to consi
critical instruments and vocabulary
paragraph is devoted to a Shavian qu
despair made stage-sublime,'" and "'s
march [used] to redeem a poverty o
skewer the conventions of nineteenth-c
plays of Shakespeare. Throughout, Sh
in musical metaphors, and moments in
they were Shakespearean confrontatio
is reasonably productive. Schmidgall b
"Style," by enlarging on the connot
"operatic." As might be supposed, the
properties as tonal extravagance, larger
oricity. In Part II, "Dramaturgy," Sch
more specific areas of dramatic and m
arias and soliloquies, for example, an
strategies for achieving variety, intens

This content downloaded from 181.46.133.41 on Wed, 01 May 2019 15:21:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 248 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

to be the primary unit of Shakespearean construction, Schmidgall

of scenic arrangement in the thirty-five plays he considers in
Shakespearean and compares the principles of construction to
mainstream operatic works, from Aida to Die Zauberfiite.
The parallels between the two forms of theater turn out to be m
indicated by the title of Chapters 9 and 10, "Soliloquy, Set Speech
places the set piece, the big speech, at the center of Shakespeare's
argues that such passages are among the dramatist's principal m
extravagance or emotional extremity. He classifies various Sha
according to function, exemplifies these kinds from the play
operatic equivalents. Noting that Shakespearean characters oft
with a kind of formal declaration corresponding to the great aria
nineteenth-century operatic tradition, Schmidgall links such s
"Is this a dagger that I see before me," Shylock's "Hath not a Jew
"Do not think so, you shall not find it so," and Prospero's "Ye elve
show-stopping numbers as Fiordiligi's "Come scoglio" (Cosi Fan
"Marten aller arten" (Die Entfihrung), Leonore's "Abscheulicher!" (
quella pira" (II Trovatore), and Gioconda's "Suicidio." To enumer
to indicate the shortcomings of the argument, however, in that t
between theatrical and operatic expression are not pursued in deta
comes down to a couple of briefly annotated lists of characters wh
emotional speeches in extremis. Look here upon this picture, and o
In other words, the transposition of disciplinary vocabularies do
far. Once we have seen, in the chapter called "Operatic Bard,
Richard III is put together according to principles that would beco
nineteenth-century librettists, and that in II Trovatore Verdi and
structural economy to achieve a Shakespearean kind of intensi
more to say. Schmidgall does bring these structural ruminat
conclusion when he "almost begins to wonder whether similar
rather than Shakespeare's sublime poetry and observations of
explain the longstanding appeal of his plays to composers" (p.
identification and description of structural likenesses produce
more compelling and stimulating analysis. In wishing for greater
tivity, I am not asking that the argument be larded with quotatio
and Irigaray; but the comparative instruments employed here
they don't yield results exciting enough tojustify the repetitions
discussion.
The most successful feature of this book is its insistence on the presentational
quality of Shakespearean and operatic drama and its articulation of the vocal basis of
Shakespeare's art. We are reminded-on this, as on many other points, Schmidgall
summons Shaw-that "Shakespeare's is a thoroughly and preeminently aural the-
ater" (p. 17), and there is a convincing emphasis on the kinetic power of passionate
expression, that is, on the capacity of music (whether verbal, instrumental, or vocal)
to sweep an audience through a dramatic narrative. Schmidgall insists on the non-
naturalism of the Shakespearean and operatic styles, assumes what he calls a "shared
unreality" (p. 10) about both, and seeks throughout to keep his reader's attention
fixed on the pleasures of artifice and the artistic conventions that support it. The
rewards of this emphasis accrue most obviously in the five chapters grouped together
in Part III, "Performance." Schmidgall effectively develops the idea that the heroic
exertions required of the actor playing King Lear and the soprano singing Norma
shape our response to the respective characterizations, that the roles' inherent
virtuosity constitutes a form of semiosis signalling greatness of spirit. In the chapter
called "Technique and the Gemini Factor," he impressively articulates that double
awareness experienced by the theater audience, the simultaneous consciousness of a
performer's self and of the role being embodied, our pleasure in artifice and
suspension of disbelief. This profitable line of inquiry derives from Granville-Bark-

This content downloaded from 181.46.133.41 on Wed, 01 May 2019 15:21:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 BOOK REVIEWS 249

er's argument that the Renaissance

speech' " (p. 218), and such a convicti
of the opera house.
The author's learning and especia
strengths. He has certainly done his
exhibits a sufficient and properly dist
speare studies, and his reading in ninet
dramatic criticism helps to vivify his
the works of an earlier. One of his la
from its vulgar connotations, and he d
Schmidgall cites a wide range of sch
Brooks in The Melodramatic Imaginatio
istic theatrical effects are melodramat
dependent on simplification, striking
ism." For all his commitment to loc
transhistorical sources of theatrical
lowed Shakespeare in exploiting, Sch
historical specificity, particularly an u
atrical decisions are determined by soc
stance. For example, Francesco Berio's a
not only the influence of the contemp
returns to Cinthio and motivates Iag
in its promotion of Roderigo to son
Othello, the vital role of the operati
I think that what Berio and Rossini want
aristocratic, heroic characters as rivals, for
fine tenors in the stable of the great N
David and Andrea Nozzari. (Indeed, the p
be explained by the fact that the Barbaia
(p. 307)

We are reminded of other instances in which an operatic composer wrote for a

particular theater and the artists associated with it (Handel at the King's from 1720
to 1728, Richard Strauss with the Dresden Opera), and such collaborative efforts are
likened to Shakespeare's working with a consciousness of the talents of Burbage and
Kempe and Armin. Such historical details fortify the presentational bias that informs
the argument. The last of the book's four sections, "Operas from Shakespeare,"
consists of intertextual essays on specific adaptations, with some chapters given over
to several musical treatments of a text. Many of these pieces, happily, examine works
that have not suffered from too much study, at least in nontechnical circles-e.g.,
Rossini's Otello, Barber's Antony and Cleopatra, Bellini's I Capuleti e i Montecchi, Wag-
ner's adaptation of Measure for Measure (Das Liebesverbot), treatments of The Merry
Wives of Windsor by Otto Nicolai, Gustav Hoist, and Ralph Vaughan Williams. At times
these essays seem mechanical, with much space expended on what's in and what's out
in an unfamiliar treatment of a familiar play, but there is some rewarding analysis.
The book is written in a peculiar style, with the wealth of specialized learning
presented in a breezy, journalistic fashion. There is noticeably more name-dropping
than the general reader would expect. Page 70, for example, contains the following
proper names in the following forms: "A former music critic of the New York Times,
Harold Schonberg," "Sir Donald Wolfit," "Corelli" [Franco], "Burbage," "Richard
Brome," "Shaw," "Victor Capoul," "Actor Robert Loraine," "Puccini," "Knight" [G.
Wilson], "Bertolt Brecht." On this page and others, some of the numerous names
appear in quotations from other writers, which increases the sense of their abun-
dance, but still the author's knowledge seems eager to advertise itself. On the other
hand, there is an easiness and informality that will be unsettling, and not only to
specialists: Santayana is referred to as "a stuffily Apollonian philosopher" (p. 42);

This content downloaded from 181.46.133.41 on Wed, 01 May 2019 15:21:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 250 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

Kate and Petruchio are said to "have had a brief scene alon
genuine 'item' " (p. 266); and in reading the end of Shrew, we
of critics "takes this 'ironic' reading and runs with it for a fe
268). This kind of slack writing appears also in the frequ
thoughtless phrases-"Still and all," "center around," "giving vo
spectacular reign," "What on earth, one wonders, [attracte
Measure]"-and these are accompanied by mistakes and over
annoying but that also generate doubts about the author's
Richard of Gloucester's opening speech is quoted as "This
discontent" (p. 72); Richard II is said to speak "of graves, or
73); The Comedy of Errors is mistitled (p. 259). There are p
proofreading ("principle" for "principal" more than once), the
which occurs when a promised musical quotation from Das Lie
Wagner gave Isabella to plead for her brother's life is pur
my copy by a large blank space (p. 375n.).
I wanted to like this book. It concerns my two favorite subj
well-equipped to perform the comprehensive investigation pro
book's politics are refreshingly wrong, in that it treats the Sh
texts as works of art, as sources of theatrical pleasure. The fi
disappointing, and for all its ambitions and incidental achie
feeling vaguely unsatisfied.

The European Tragedy of Troilus. Edited by PIERO BOITA

ford: Clarendon Press, 1989. Pp. xiv + 316. $66.00 clo

Reviewed by LINDA CHARNES

This collection of essays traces the development of the Tr

in European literature, concentrating primarily on the ve
Boccaccio, Chaucer, Lydgate, Henryson, Shakespeare, and
the editor of the anthology, asserts in the preface that "th
book to the European tragedy of Troilus are so obvious that on
never been done before" (p. v). One does wonder why it has
But the reasons Boitani offers are anything but obvious a
obscure as one considers the nature of the claims being made b
more important, for the story "itself." Boitani, explaining
suggests that there is a certain transhistorical, transnational c
peanism" and tragedy; and furthermore, that we all kno
volume's contributors, we learn that "All approach the theme
the tragedy of Troilus transcends single historical periods,
cultures to become a typically European tragedy" (p. vii). As co
may sound, none of the essays (including Boitani's concluding
addresses what it actually means. Given the book's emphasi
of the story (Chaucer's and Shakespeare's texts being the
England's history of resistance to geographical, cultural, o
with things "typically European" (one need only think of
England over the channel tunnel or about an EEC "common
divided the British are over anything that might render Brita
one really wonders is whether any kind of story could b
European.
Boitani means to justify the publication of the volume on the grounds that it offers
a new meta-perspective on the story, one that is long overdue. Unfortunately this
claim is neither supported norjustified by the essays gathered here. The real value of
this book, however, to someone working with or interested in the story of Troilus and

This content downloaded from 181.46.133.41 on Wed, 01 May 2019 15:21:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms