Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays:...

22
scottish music review Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016) Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781). Lawrence Mays November 17, 2016 Abstract In the twenty-first century, we are remote from the period when recitativo semplice and recitativo accompagnato were fresh, innovative and imaginative vehicles for the communication of drama through a synergetic combination of words and music. The form emerged within the late Renaissance consciousness of rhetoric, which is no longer a prominent element of artistic or intellectual thought. To perform recitative effectively or to appreciate it fully as a listener, we need to be aware not only of the ideas that the librettist created, but also of the composer’s aims in superimposition of music on the text. We need to attempt to understand how the additional element of music resulted in a form of communication that had a unique power to imply dramatic parameters, such as character emotion, intent and interaction. One way to gain such understanding is to compare two eighteenth-century composers’ settings of recitative text from a very well-known opera libretto, La Serva Padrona set by G B Pergolesi and G Paisiello. I have attempted to show that the differential application of music compositional devices that were included in the musical language of recitative of the period resulted in two different theatrical works. There is clearly considerable scope for further interpretation of dramatic parameters in performance. However, I believe that this type of analysis may provide a rationale for an understanding of the way in which composers used music to clarify, colour, amplify or even subvert the meanings inherent in opera libretti. To perform recitative effectively, musicians need to attempt to recapture both the ideas that the librettist has invented, and the emotions with which the composer sought to imbue the text. They need to understand the ideas and emotions on the one hand, and the compositional elements used to express them on the other (Beghin 2007). Recitative in opera developed as a new vehicle for the rhetorical delivery of text in a synergetic combination with music. Its purpose was to communicate the flow of emotions within characters through the use of ‘speech song’. 1 Late Renaissance humanists were strongly influenced by the concept of the ‘musicalisation’ of speech in the service of rhetoric, as advocated by Quintilianus. 2 For recitative to achieve this communication of emotions effectively, it should have a number of elements in common with the creation and delivery of an oration. Delivery of an oration should be a culmination of the stages in its creation, namely inventio (new ideas), dispositio (ordering of ideas), elecutio (expressing ideas through suitable words), and memoria (memorisation). Recitative requires another stage for its creation, namely, the superimposition of music. Algarotti (1763) described the libretto as: “the plan of the construction, the canvas on 1

Transcript of Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays:...

Page 1: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

scot

tish

mus

ic re

view

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733)

and Paisiello (1781).

Lawrence Mays

November 17, 2016

Abstract

In the twenty-first century, we are remote from the period when recitativo semplice andrecitativo accompagnato were fresh, innovative and imaginative vehicles for the communicationof drama through a synergetic combination of words and music. The form emerged within thelate Renaissance consciousness of rhetoric, which is no longer a prominent element of artisticor intellectual thought. To perform recitative effectively or to appreciate it fully as a listener,we need to be aware not only of the ideas that the librettist created, but also of the composer’saims in superimposition of music on the text. We need to attempt to understand how theadditional element of music resulted in a form of communication that had a unique power toimply dramatic parameters, such as character emotion, intent and interaction. One way to gainsuch understanding is to compare two eighteenth-century composers’ settings of recitative textfrom a very well-known opera libretto, La Serva Padrona set by G B Pergolesi and G Paisiello. Ihave attempted to show that the differential application of music compositional devices that wereincluded in the musical language of recitative of the period resulted in two different theatricalworks. There is clearly considerable scope for further interpretation of dramatic parametersin performance. However, I believe that this type of analysis may provide a rationale for anunderstanding of the way in which composers used music to clarify, colour, amplify or evensubvert the meanings inherent in opera libretti.

To perform recitative effectively, musicians need to attempt to recapture both the ideas that thelibrettist has invented, and the emotions with which the composer sought to imbue the text. Theyneed to understand the ideas and emotions on the one hand, and the compositional elements usedto express them on the other (Beghin 2007). Recitative in opera developed as a new vehicle for therhetorical delivery of text in a synergetic combination with music. Its purpose was to communicatethe flow of emotions within characters through the use of ‘speech song’.1 Late Renaissance humanistswere strongly influenced by the concept of the ‘musicalisation’ of speech in the service of rhetoric,as advocated by Quintilianus.2 For recitative to achieve this communication of emotions effectively,it should have a number of elements in common with the creation and delivery of an oration.Delivery of an oration should be a culmination of the stages in its creation, namely inventio (newideas), dispositio (ordering of ideas), elecutio (expressing ideas through suitable words), and memoria(memorisation). Recitative requires another stage for its creation, namely, the superimposition ofmusic. Algarotti (1763) described the libretto as: “the plan of the construction, the canvas on

1

Page 2: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

which the poet has designed the picture, which is then to be coloured by the composer”. The aimof this comparison of two composers’ settings of identical recitative texts is to highlight how anunderstanding of compositional elements in recitative can inform its effective delivery.

Giovanni Battista Pergolesi and Giovanni Paisiello set Gennaro Antonio Federico’s libretto: LaServa Padrona in 1733 and 1781 respectively.3,4 Hucke and Monson (2007) suggest that Federico’slibretto provided composers with a vehicle which facilitated a natural expression by the charactersof their emotions and intents. It has the characteristic plot of the Neapolitan intermezzo of theearly eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina) cunningly tricks her oldermaster (Uberto) into marrying her (Lazarevich 1971). Against the background of a variety ofcharacter intents and emotions that could be drawn around these two protagonists, composers hadconsiderable license with regard to how to respond to the text. Focussing on recitative as the mainvehicle for plot development, I believe it is interesting to speculate on whether the superimpositionof different music on the same text could result in the creation of different dramatic parameters. Forexample, did the composers portray different characters, different emotional messages and differentrelationships between characters?

For the purposes of this comparison, I have compiled typologies of compositional devices used inthe two settings under the headings: rhythm, melody or pitch, harmony, keys, and any combinationof these attributes (Mays 2013:49–58).5 The compositional devices and the names I have given themare derived from eclectic sources. These include relevant published theses, especially those of Monson(1983) and Glixon (1993). I have also referred to writings on recitative in the Baroque and Classicperiods, such as those of Lazarevich (1971, n.d.), Downes (1961), Monelle (1978), Tomlinson (1981,1982), Rosen (1971) and Agawu (1991) In addition, I have extrapolated from concepts within MusicaPoetica, as described by Bartel (1997).

The use of free verse in recitative text, opens up a large range of possibilities for its setting interms of rhythm (Glixon 1993). Phrases can contain as many words or syllables as desired, resultingin emphasis, de-emphasis, allowing, for example, time for meanings to be absorbed. The recitativetext excerpts referred to in this comparison are with one exception prose.6 They are not versi sciolti,but rather prose with occasional interpolations of phrases characteristic of Italian verse, includingverso piano and its variations verso tronco and verso sdrucciolo.7 Carter et al. (n.d.) has describedthe implications of these types of phrase.

De’Ath (2009) provides an analysis of the way in which Italian text can be set to music, basedon its rhythmic prosody. I believe this method is particularly relevant to recitative texts that arefor the main part prose. It is based on the presence of “rhythmic units” and “sense groups” inthe spoken language. The method takes into account various features of the language, such asstress-timed rather than syllable-timed rhythm, the tendency of the spoken language to fall intoduple rhythm and the variable placement of primary and secondary stresses depending on context.According to De’Ath, spoken Italian can be said to have three types of stress: strong, secondaryand weak (Figure 1). Syllables with strong stresses should be separated by no more than threeweakly stressed syllables. However, if there are more than three weakly stressed syllables betweenstrong stresses, a secondary stress occurs. A “rhythmic unit” contains one strong stress, which fallson the penultimate syllable. “Sense groups” contain words that belong together grammatically, forexample, an adverbial clause. Sense groups contain as many rhythmic units as there are strongstresses. Figure 2 shows an excerpt from the libretto of La Serva Padrona divided into rhythmicunits and sense groups. The phrase Gran fatto! is the first sense group. The following phrase: Io

2

Page 3: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Figure 1: Types of stress in spoken Italian

Figure 2: Rhythmic Units and Sense Groups

m’ho cresciuta questa serva picina is the second sense group. Rhythmic units are delineated by finewhite vertical lines.

During the eighteenth century, the dynamic of a note appears to have been determined in partby its metrical position in the bar - ‘metrical accentuation’. Drawing on De’Ath’s work, the relativeaccentuation within a 4/4 bar depends on the positions of the crotchet beats and on subdivisionswithin these beats. It should be noted that, for the purposes of this comparison, this relativeaccentuation refers to the notation of scores, rather than to the placing of stresses in performance,which may be varied at the singer’s discretion. Table 1 shows a hierarchy in descending order ofmetrical accentuation. In the comparison, I will analyse how the two composers have used placementof strongly stressed syllables in various metrical positions to indicate relative emphasis on particularwords. I will also make use of the “sense group” concept with regard to the composers’ continuityor fragmentation of phrases for possible dramatic purposes.

Although recitative is intended to be speech-like, it is usually melodic in nature. As such, itproceeds in phrases and complies with many of the standard features of melodic design - such asleaps being compensated by returns in direction, phrases having contours with carefully determinedhigh and low points, resolutions toward the tonic being prepared by melodic contours that emphasizethe leading note and the seventh. Koch’s 1878 “Mechanical Rules of Melody” (Koch 1983), whichinclude “melodic punctuation” and phrases of various length, are relevant, although primarily aimedat instrumental music on its own. However, in recitative setting, melodic compositional devices

MetricalAccentuation

Crotchet beat 1 1Crotchet beat 3 2

Crotchets beats 2, 4 3Quavers between crotchets 4

Semiquavers between quavers 5

Table 1: Hierarchy of metrical accentuation in a 4/4 bar

3

Page 4: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

superimposed on text can be used to clarify, subvert or amplify its meanings.Johann Joseph Fux proposed that recitative be allowed to deviate from the rules of harmony

as laid down in his 1725 treatise Gradus ad Parnassum. He noted that since the bass does notmove in the manner in which dissonances are usually resolved, the harmony cannot proceed towardsresolution in the usual manner. He explained that this dispensation could be allowed because in therecitative style one aims not so much at the satisfaction of the rules of harmony but at the expressionof emotions (cited in (Hansell 1968:236)). Unlike rhythmic devices, those related to harmony canprovide an immediate effect, as they do not interfere with the flow of text. Glixon (1993:66) adds tothis that the possibility of exploring tonal areas that are loosely related “keeps the musical actionin motion, and avoids tedium in recitative”. She also suggests that tonal ambiguity is an inherentfeature of recitative, and that composers are free to exploit this.

Steblin (2002) discusses the use of individual keys to signify specific moods or meanings, althoughit is unclear how relevant this is to the rapid, transient touching on key centres that occurs inrecitative. However, the tuning system used for the keyboard instruments may have had an influenceon composers’ choices of harmonies and keys. Pergolesi and Paisiello may have intended theirworks to be performed with keyboard instruments tuned to Meantone or Well temperaments. Bothhave triads with sounds ranging from the very consonant to tense, jarring or unsettled, which thecomposers may have wanted to exploit (Gann 1997).

Compositional devices from the foregoing typologies are often used simultaneously. For example,Downes (1961:61) describes a number of stereotypical combined melodic/harmonic devices used toindicate questions. These include the falling fourth followed by a rising second, the falling secondfollowed by a rising third. The accompanying harmony could be an imperfect, Phrygian or deceptivecadence (cadenza d’inganno). Similarly, a musical representation of parenthesis or an aside in thetext can be achieved in a number of ways, including vocal arpeggiation, shift in tessitura, harmonicshift and combinations of these.

The settings of the first recitative excerpt are shown in Figures 3 and 4 with the translation inFigure 5.8 Uberto bemoans Serpina’s increasing disobedience, arrogance and haughtiness. He tellshis manservant to go and see why she’s late with his chocolate. The settings illustrate contrastsin the use of rhythmic, harmonic, melodic and key devices. The settings may be heard in AudioExamples 1 and 2 .

The most striking contrast is in the harmonies used. Pergolesi does not use any minor tonalities,whereas Paisiello uses minor tonalities in bars 4 and 5. The placements of grazia on an E minorchord and fretta (hurry) on an A minor chord in Paisiello’s setting serve to emphasize Uberto’sfrustration. The sudden move to a B major triad on the accented syllable of the word aspetto (I amwaiting) in Paisiello’s setting also emphasizes Uberto’s frustration. A B major triad in Meantone orWell temperament has a rather unpleasant or unsettled sound.

I believe that Paisiello’s harmonic treatment creates a different kind of emotion from that ap-parent in Pergolesi’s setting. The minor tonalities impart a brooding, almost ominous mood. TheB major triad adds to the impression of Uberto’s distress at the loss of his usual routine. It helpsconvey the impression that things are out of the ordinary. The apparent superficiality of Pergolesi’ssetting, by contrast, could be in keeping with the imperative that an intermezzo had no time tocreate too much depth early on in the work. It had to grab the audience’s attention quickly.

The descending bass line with parallel movement in the vocal line in bars 1–6 of Paisiello’s settingemphasizes the movement to the dramatic climax of Uberto’s exclamation Oh flemma benedetta!

4

Page 5: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Figure 3: G B Pergolesi

5

Page 6: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

Figure 4: G Paisiello6

Page 7: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Uberto:Questa è per me disgrazia; son tre ore che I find this a disgrace; I’ve been waiting 3 hours,aspetto, e la mia serva portarmi il cioccolatte and my servant girl hasn’t deigned to bring mynon fa grazia, ed io d’uscire ho fretta. O flemma chocolate, and I’m in a hurry to go out. Ohbenedetta! curses!Or sì, che vedo che per esser sì buono con costei, Now yes, I see that by being so good to her I’mla causa son di tutti i mali miei. Serpina ... Vien the cause of all my troubles. Serpina... she’lldomani. come tomorrow.(A Vespone): E tu altro che fai? A che quieto ne (To Vespone): And you, what are you doing?stai come un balocco? Come? che dici? eh sciocco! Standing mute like a statue? Eh? What do youVanne, rompiti presto il collo. Sollecita; vedi che say? Eh twit! Go, shake a leg. Stir her up; seefa. what she’s doing.

Figure 5: Uberto’s First Recitative

Similarly, the stepwise ascending bass line in bars 8–11 ending on the cadenza d’inganno to F majortonality emphasizes a dramatic climax - Uberto states that Serpina is the cause of all his troubles.This climax leaves space for his attempt to summon her. The expected final chord of the I-IV-V7progression in these bars would be A. Pergolesi uses a similar device in bars 7-9, with a I-IV-V7progression in C ending on a cadenza d’inganno to a first inversion E major chord.

However, Pergolesi’s setting does not employ as strong a stepwise movement in the bass line. It isnoteworthy that both composers use a cadenza d’inganno at the same point, with the bass rising by asemitone, albeit to a different destination harmony. This could suggest that both composers respondto the text in the same way, that is, both want to highlight a change from Uberto’s introspection tohis physical action in summoning her. Perhaps both wished to set the scene for a demonstration ofSerpina’s intransigence. It could also suggest that Paisiello, being well-versed in Pergolesi’s setting,and chose to create the drama at this point in a similar way.

With regard to rhythm, the noticeable difference in the settings of the first sentence is that theaccented first syllable of the word serva (female servant) is placed on the beat 4 in Pergolesi’s setting,while Paisiello places it on beat 1. This placement on a beat with a stronger metrical accentuationcould suggest that Paisiello wants to emphasize the master servant aspect of Uberto’s relationshipwith Serpina. Figure 6 shows a comparison of the metrical accentuation positions.

Figure 6: A Comparaison of Metrical Accentuation Positions

The settings of the repetition of Serpina’s name when Uberto attempts to summon her aresignificantly different. In both settings, the text is preceded by a cadenza d’inganno in the samemetrical position. The following differences in the settings of the text could suggest that Paisiellowanted a different effect in terms of dramatic pacing. Pergolesi spreads the repetition of Serpinaover 6 beats, with a minim on the accented syllable Serpina in bar 10. This is shown in Figure 7.

7

Page 8: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

Figure 7: Pergolesi’s setting of Serpina

Paisiello, by contrast, sets the two words over fewer beats. He sets the repetition on a V 4/2chord. Downes (1961, p. 66) provides evidence that that V 4/2 chords were commonly used foremphasis in the recitativo semplice of eighteenth-century opere serie. Paisiello’s setting is shown inFigure 8.

Figure 8: Paisiello’s setting of Serpina

By spreading these words over a longer time Pergolesi’s setting serves to emphasize the inherentdrama in Serpina’s lack of response, allowing a heightening of the sense of Uberto’s frustration. Thesettings have a subtly different significance in terms of the meaning of the Italian text. Pergolesi’stext means ‘Serpina, Serpina! She’ll come tomorrow’. Paisiello’s text Serpina. Serpina vien domanimeans ‘Serpina. Serpina will come tomorrow’. Pergolesi’s setting allows more space for Serpina’s lackof response to sink in. At this point, I believe that Pergolesi’s setting creates the dramatic situationof Serpina’s disobedience more clearly. Nevertheless, Paisiello may have intentionally set this textwith fewer pauses in order not to detract from the impression of Uberto’s agitated impatience.

The increase in harmonic rhythm in Paisiello’s setting when Uberto is addressing Vespone —from balocco onwards — reinforces the perception of Uberto’s frustration and agitation. I believe thatPaisiello’s harmonies more effectively signify the dramatic situation — namely Uberto’s emotions— at this point.

The excerpt that follows continues on from the preceding recitative text (Figures 9, 11, and 12).The excerpts may be heard in Audio Examples 3 and 4 . Beginning with the words Gran fatto!,Uberto reveals his tenderness for Serpina, although acknowledging that he will have to do somethingabout her bad behaviour before too long. This text is pivotal to the exposition of Uberto’s character.It sets the scene for the plot of the work — the maidservant becoming mistress.

Uberto reflects on his experience of raising his maidservant, providing some information aboutthe history of their relationship. There is an opportunity for the setting to help define Uberto’sfeelings for her — that is, how he has felt about her in the past, and how he feels about her recentchange in behaviour. In the final sentence, Uberto refers to his manservant Vespone as a baboon.This description defines Uberto’s attitude to his manservant, and depending on how it is set, canalso emphasize his frustration.

The most noticeable devices in Paisiello’s setting of this section are in the harmonies used to createmood and imply emotion, the use of rhythmic devices to emphasize the master-servant relationship,and a combined melodic and harmonic device to create a dramatic climax at the end of the passage.

Paisiello again uses a B major triad, continuing the unsettled mood. The use of minor triadson the accented syllables of piccinina (little girl) and ora (time) adds emphasis to these words and

8

Page 9: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Uberto:Gran fatto! Io m’ho cresciuta questa serva What a situation! I’ve raised this little girl ser-piccina. vant myself.L’ho fatta di carezze, l’ho tenuta come mia figlia I’ve caressed her, I’ve held her as though she werefosse! Or ella ha preso perciò tanta arroganza, my own daughter! Now she’s taken on such ar-fatta è sì superbona, che alfin di serva diverrà rogance, become so haughty, that she’ll go frompadrona. being maid to mistress.Ma bisogna risolvermi in buon’ora ... e quest’altro Well I’ll have to do something soon ... and thatbabbion ci è morto ancora? other baboon, has he died already?

Figure 9: Uberto reveals his tenderness for Serpina

(a) G. B. Pergolesi

(b) G. Paisiello

Figure 10: Metrical Accentuations

emphasizes Uberto’s brooding, self-pitying mood. By contrast, Pergolesi uses only major tonalities.Figure 10 shows the placement of syllables in the first sentence. The placement is subtly different

between the settings. The word cresciuta (past participle of crescere — to bring up or raise) is spreadover a full two crotchet beats in the Pergolesi setting, while the same word takes two quavers inthe Paisiello setting. The first syllable of the word serva (maidservant) has a stronger metricalaccentuation position in Paisiello’s setting.

In bars 9-10, Paisiello places the accented syllables of both serva (servant) and padrona (mistress)on metrical position 1, wheras Pergolesi places them on the metrically weaker positions 3 and 2 (bars24-5). In addition, Paisiello places rests after serva and diverrà. This intentional use of silence servesto focus the listener’s attention on these words. Pergolesi’s setting, by contrast, runs the phrasewithout any interruption. This raises the issue of notation versus expected performance practice.For Pergolesi’s setting, it would be up to the performer to insert pauses if he wished to highlight thisaspect of the drama - that is a servant rising to the position of mistress of the house. It may be thatPergolesi would have expected a performer to do this. Nevertheless, Paisiello’s setting indicates thathe clearly wished to guide the performer to insert the pauses and ensure the placement of strongemphases.

An interpretation of the differences in these settings is that Pergolesi implies that Uberto’spredominant feeling for Serpina is tenderness. By contrast, Paisiello’s setting implies that Uberto’spredominant consideration is that Serpina is a servant, and that her rising to the position of mistresswould be a threat to his social standing. The rise in station from maid to mistress is the centralparadox of the drama in this work. Paisiello’s setting could be interpreted as an invitation to theperformer to emphasize the contrast between maidservant and mistress in a comic manner as a way

9

Page 10: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

Figure 11: G B Pergolesi. Audio Example 3

of anticipating the ensuing drama. These differences in the settings may also be a reflection ofthe expectations of the intended audiences for the works - the commercial theatre-going public forPergolesi’s work versus a court audience for Paisiello’s.

Pergolesi’s setting of the word tenuta (past participle of the verb tenere — to hold) is an exampleof mimesis. The accented second syllable is given a full crotchet on the metrically strongest position.This holding of the syllable is a metaphor for Uberto cradling Serpina. The word is given noparticular emphasis in Paisiello’s setting. This adds to the impression of a stronger emphasis onUberto’s tenderness for Serpina in Pergolesi’s setting.

In the following excerpt, Serpina reveals her agenda (Figures 13, 14 and 15). She has begun toberate and hit Vespone because, at his master’s bidding, he has told her to hurry up with preparationof the chocolate. Uberto scolds her for chiding a fellow servant in his presence. She assertively statesthat she is no longer prepared to be treated as a servant. She reveals her agenda to climb the socialladder and be treated as the mistress of the house. This recitative section is pivotal to the expositionof the plot. Performances of the settings may be seen in Video Examples 1 and 2.

I believe that the composers portray Serpina’s character differently in their settings of this section.In Pergolesi’s, she is more strident and overt about her intentions, as though she doesn’t mind Uberto

10

Page 11: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Figure 12: G Paisiello. Audio Example 4

being aware of them. She doesn’t hesitate to openly express her ambitions in his presence. Thisis consistent with an existing rapport between them, which is more apparent in Pergolesi’s work ingeneral. By contrast, in Paisiello’s setting, her intention is less forthright, more subtle, and probablyaimed more at the audience than at Uberto. She appears more calculating, emotionally aloof.

A very noticeable contrast in the settings is the difference in devices used to convey Serpina’sintent. Pergolesi’s use of a combined melodic and harmonic device is a metaphor for Serpina’s ascentof the social ladder. This consists of a melodic sequence rising in a stepwise fashion underpinnedby a chromatically ascending figured bass line. The harmonies are a chain of secondary dominants.This combined device emphasizes the climax on the accented syllable of the word padronissima(the exalted mistress). This climax is heightened by the tense B dominant 7th chord, and by thesubsequent cadenza d’inganno.

Paisiello uses a sudden harmonic shift to F minor tonality to emphasize Serpina’s intent to berespected (rispettata), revered (riverita), as though she were the mistress (padrona). The passage

11

Page 12: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

Serpina:Adunque perch’io son serva, ho da esser sopraf- So... just because I’m a servant, must I be tram-fatta? Ho da essere maltrattata? No signore, pled on? Do I have to be maltreated? No sir, Ivoglio esser rispettata, voglio esser riverita come want to be respected, I want to be revered as if Ifossi padrona, arcipadrona, padronissima. were the mistress, the great mistress, the exalted

mistress.

Figure 13: Serpina reveals her agenda

Figure 14: G B Pergolesi (Video example 1 )

reaches a melodic climax on archipadrona (the great mistress). The B harmony, the dominantof a cadence to E on padronissima (exalted mistress), is extended over bars 9–10 for emphasis.This final word is on a metrically and melodically weaker position than archipadrona. Compared toPergolesi’s setting, this almost seems an anticlimax. However, it could be interpreted as an aside, a‘wink and a nudge’ to the audience.

In the final section for this comparison, Uberto is in turmoil (Table 2, Figures 16, and 17; AudioExamples 5 and 6 ). Serpina has announced that she is engaged to ‘Capitan Tempesta’ — amilitary man with a fierce temper. In reality, her fiancée is the manservant Vespone in disguise.(Serpina has indulged in emotional blackmail.) In this recitative, Uberto weighs up the socialconsequences of marrying a lowly born servant against his strong affection and protective feelingsfor her. He is in a state of moral vexation. Although it is a soliloquy, Uberto is in dialogue withhis censorious superego. This is implied tongue-in-cheek at the end of the text by the phrase e

12

Page 13: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Figure 15: G Paisiello (Video example 2 )

siam da capo (and we are back to the start). Each composer uses different devices to signal theinterjected comments by the superego. Table 2 shows the text, versification analysis, rhymingscheme and translation. The first 18 bars of Paisiello’s setting are shown in Figure 16a and 16b,while Pergolesi’s setting of the entire text is shown in Figure 17.

This is the only section of the libretto written in verse. It may be a reference to the libretti ofopere serie, particularly those of the preceding century, whose recitative texts consist of long tractsof verse. This is a deliberate interpolation of a different style of text to the libretto. It appears to bean intentional poking fun at opera seria. One of the aims of Neapolitan intermezzi was to provide acontrast to the artificiality and gravitas of the serious operas into which they were interspersed. Thecomposers have the opportunity to exploit this difference by using a musical setting which contrastswith the rest of the recitative.

Both composers set the section as recitatitivo accompagnato. However, Paisiello’s setting is dif-ferent in style, being an instrumental arioso with interjections of recitativo accompagnato. Geiringer(1925) comments that recitativo accompagnato in opera seria was exclusively reserved for passagesof great importance. Lazarevich (1971, p. 313) notes that the function of recitatitivo accompagnatoin the intermezzo was to satirize or parody similar passages in opere serie. On the other hand, Troystates that in general composers of intermezzi reserved the style for similar situations to those inwhich they employed it in opere serie, namely for references to the supernatural or “in conditionsof extreme moral torment” (Troy 1979:109). It is significant that Paisiello chose the same section ofthe libretto as Pergolesi to set as accompagnato. It is further evidence that Paisiello may have beenwell-versed in Pergolesi’s work.

13

Page 14: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

UbertoText Versification Rhyme Translation

(Ah! poveretta lei!)Per altro io penserei ...ma ella è serva ...ma il primo non saresti ..dunque, la sposeresti?Basta! Eh no, non sia.Su, pensieri ribaldi,andate via!

Piano,

io me l’ho allevata,So poi com’ella è nata ...Eh! che sei matto!Piano di grazia!Eh, non pensarci affatto!Ma io ci ho passione! ...E pur quella meschina ...Eh torna ... O dio! ...E siam da capo!Oh! che confusione!

Sett. p.Sett. p.Quin. p.Sett. p.Sett. p.Sett. p.Sett. p.Quin. p.

Sett. p.Sett. p.Quin. p.Quin. p.Sett. p.Sett. p.Sett. p.Sen. p.Quin. p.Sen. p.

AABCCBCB

AABABCABBC

(Oh! the poor little thing!)On the other hand, I could considerbut she’s a servant ...well it wouldn’t be the first time ...so, would you marry her?Enough! Oh no, it mustn’t be.Away, foolish thoughts,Go away!

Calm down,

I brought her up,I know where she was born ...Oh! you’re so crazy!Quiet, for goodness’ sake!Oh, just don’t think about it!But I have a passion for her! ...And yet such a lowly woman..Oh it’s circular ... Oh God! ...And we’re back to the start!Oh! what confusion!

Sett. = Settenario; Quin. = Quinario; p. = verso piano; s. = verso sdrucciolo; t. = verso tronco.

Table 2: Text, versification analysis, rhyming scheme and translation

14

Page 15: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Figure 16: G Paisiello: Audio Example 5

(a) Start

15

Page 16: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

(b) Conclusion

Paisiello’s setting takes more time to create a brooding, indecisive, troubled character. This isconsistent not only with the character he has implied for Uberto in earlier recitative sections, butalso with the stand-alone performance mode for which his work was composed. It is noteworthythat Paisiello omits the word io in the first line. In so doing, he converts the line to a standard versopiano. Pergolesi, in contrast, adheres to the text, setting the final diphthong –ei as one syllable.The difference here could be seen as a contrast between Paisiello’s arioso or song-like setting andPergolesi’s pure recitativo accompagnato style. Paisiello’s setting implies that the superego is a sincereconcerned persona, to be taken seriously rather than mocked. This is achieved by straightforwarddirectional harmony and by repeated syncopated dotted rhythm chords in the orchestration —“march-like flourishes”. The latter were stylistic markers of authority in the period.

The settings suggest different characters for Uberto. As in previous sections, Pergolesi impliesa buffoon-like character, albeit with some emotional depth. Pergolesi’s instrumentation is almostbeyond the bounds of good taste. His setting uses varied rhythms to indicate changes in Uberto’slevel of agitation, and declamatory passages with tirate to signal the interjections of the superego.The tirate seem to create a caricature of the profundity of the censorious superego to the extentof mocking it. The composers have the opportunity to emphasize the rhyming scheme, therebyimplying a dialogue between Uberto and his censorious superego. Pergolesi’s exploitation of therhyming scheme is more clearly delineated, with a rapidly changing mood.

The second part of this section has a change of mood — Uberto is trying calm himself, to berational about the consequences of his designs on Serpina. In Pergolesi’s setting this change is markedby an harmonic shift from D minor to E major tonality. The word matto (crazy) is emphasizedmetrically and by a tirata. In the last part of this section, Pergolesi implies Uberto’s conflictingemotions by alternating between major and minor tonalities. Beginning on the unexpected G minorin bar 17, he goes to F major in bar 19, quickly changing to F minor, then finally to a cadence in Cmajor. The final two phrases, Oh Dio! E siam da capo... and Oh! Che confusione... are “reciprocal

16

Page 17: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

phrases”, emphasising melodically that Uberto is thinking in circles. Both composers set the finalsenario in the same way. The effect seems to be a final comment from the superego.

Figure 17: G B Pergolesi. Audio Example 6

(a) Start

17

Page 18: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

(b) Concluded

18

Page 19: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

The overall effect of the settings of this passage of verse is markedly different. Pergolesi’s settingimplies a more compelling crescendo of emotional turmoil in Uberto. He achieves this by a fastharmonic rhythm, rapidly alternating major and minor harmonies, and dramatic if not melodramatictirate. Paisiello’s setting also implies emotional turmoil, but perhaps more subtly, with a brooding,troubled mood implied by the minor tonalities, and at a slower pace. The instrumental arioso withinterjected recitativo accompagnato passages seems to allow more time and space for the listenerto perceive Uberto’s state of mind. The listener is drawn into his frame of mind gradually, albeitinexorably.

ConclusionRecitative, I believe, is a heightened form of the language used in an opera libretto. In analysing twosettings of recitative passages from a very well known eighteenth-century libretto, I have aimed toinvestigate whether the superimposition of music on the text can result in creation of two differenttheatrical works. I have attempted a search for dramatic values in the notation of recitative, informedby study of its history and development up to the late eighteenth century, and by an understandingof the context in which the works were written and performed. As discussed by Addison (1995),music on its own can convey emotion, but it can neither fully indicate the intent and psychologicalaction occurring within characters, nor place an interpretation on the actions occurring on thestage. It takes a combination of music with another medium, such as words, to clearly define thethought or action that the music may suggest. Conversely, the superimposition of music can clarifyambiguities in the text and add meaning to what can be understood from the words alone. Incomparing the settings of several sections of recitative where pivotal plot or character developmentsoccur, I have drawn conclusions about Pergolesi’s and Paisiello’s interpretations of the drama. Theirinterpretations of the two protagonsists, Serpina and Uberto, are clearly different, although thereremains considerable scope for further elaboration of dramatic parameters in performance. My hopeis that this type of analysis may help persons who listen to these works or who are involved in theirperformance, to understand the composers’ interpretations of characters and their actions more fully.

Notes1. In the foreword to his opera Euridice, Jacopo Peri indicated that the structure of his stile rappresentativo involved

using the bass to move from one harmony to another in correspondence with the notes sung on significant words inthe text. This movement “followed the passions” mirroring the way in which inflections and accents are used in speechto indicate emotions (Peri 1601).

2. For more information on Quintilianus, see: Thomas J. Mathiesen. “Aristides Quintilianus.” Grove Music Online.Oxford Music Online. Oxford University Press. Web. 16 Nov. 2014. www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/01244, and also Weiss, P., & Taruskin, R. (2008). Music in the Western World, a History inDocuments. Thomson Schirmer.

3. Pergolesi composed La Serva Padrona as two intermezzi to be performed between acts of his opera seria: Il PrigonierSuperbo. The first performance was in 1733 at the San Bartolomeo theatre in Naples. In 1781, Paisiello set Federico’slibretto with the intention that it would be performed on its own before a court audience in St Petersburg.

4. A letter to Queen Catherine II, written in Paisiello’s hand is included in the manuscript of his La Serva Padrona heldin the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Musiksammlung in Vienna. It suggests that he knew Pergolesi’s settingwell.

5. The typologies and discussion of their derivation are available at URL: hdl.handle.net/1885/9861

6. The exception is the text for the accompanied recitative: Per altro penserei.

19

Page 20: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

7. For a more comprehensive discussion of versification in the Italian language, see: Carter et al. (n.d.).

8. Translations are by the author.

Music SourcesThere is no autograph manuscript score in existence for Pergolesi’s setting of La Serva Padrona.The most authoritative score I was able to access for Pergolesi’s setting is the mini-score referencedas follows:

Pergolesi, Giovanni Pattista. La Serva Padrona = Die Magd als Herrin = La servante maitresse.Foreword by K. Geiringer (Philharmonia Partituren ; no. 84 Mini score, Wien: Universal Edition,1925)

This score is based on an edition compiled after a performance in Paris in 1752. The WernerIcking Music Archive website provides public domain scores based on this mini-score. These areavailable at URL:

http://icking-music-archive.org/ByComposer/Pergolesi.phpI have used excerpts from the portable document format scores on this website. I have checked

them for consistency with the mini-score.There is only one printed edition of Paisiello’s setting:Paisiello, Giovanni. La Serva Padrona (1781) Intermezzo comico in due parti. (Pro Musica

Camerata, Warsaw: Edition, 1993)This edition is based on a complete manuscript preserved in the music library of the Lancut

Palace in Poland. In the foreward to the edition, Marta Pielech suggests that the manuscript isprobably a copy made soon after the first performance in St Petersburg. It provides a realisedkeyboard part for the recitatives, but does not indicate bass figures.

Performers in the audio and video examplesJessica McMillan — Soprano

Lawrence Mays — BaritoneAnthony Smith — Keyboard continuo

The orchestral accompaniments in Audio Examples 4 and 5 were created by the author usingdigital audio workstation software and a sampled orchestra.

BibliographyAnthony Addison. Staging the Music: Notation and Techniques for Singers and Directors. National

Opera Assoc., 1995. [19]

V Kofi Agawu. Playing with signs: A semiotic interpretation of classic music, 1991. [2]

Francesco Algarotti. Saggio sopra l’opera in musica, volume 56. Fantechi, 1763. [1]

Dietrich Bartel. Musica poetica: musical-rhetorical figures in german baroque music. U of NebraskaPress, 1997. [2]

Tom Beghin. Delivery, Delivery, Delivery! Haydn and the Performance of Rhetoric, pages 131–71,2007. [1]

20

Page 21: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Lawrence MaysThe Australian National University

Tim Carter et al. Versification. The New Grove Dictionary of Opera, 4, n.d. www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/O008300. [2, 20]

Leslie De’Ath. Text rendering in eighteenth century recitativo secco. Journal of Singing, 65(5):577,2009. [2]

Edward OD Downes. “Secco” recitative in early classical opera seria (1720-80). Journal of theAmerican Musicological Society, pages 50–69, 1961. [2, 4]

Kyle Gann. An introduction to historical tunings, 1997. http://www.kylegann.com/histune.html.[4]

Beth Lise Glixon. Recitative in seventeenth-century Venetian opera: its dramatic function andmusical language. UMI Dissertation Services, 1993. [2, 4]

Sven Hostrup Hansell. The cadence in 18th-century recitative. The Musical Quarterly, 54(2):228–248, 1968. [4]

Helmut Hucke and Dale E Monson. Pergolesi, giovanni battista. Grove Music Online. Oxford MusicOnline, 2007. www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/21325. [2]

Heinrich Christoph Koch. Introductory essay on composition: The mechanical rules of melody,sections 3 and 4. Nancy Kovaleff Baker (New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press).Originally published as Versuch einer Anleitung zur Composition, 1878, 1983. [3]

Gordana Lazarevich. The neapolitan intermezzo and its influence on the symphonic idiom. TheMusical Quarterly, 57(2):294–313, 1971. [2]

Gordana Lazarevich. La serva padrona, n.d. www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/O007587?q=la+serva+padrona&search=quick&pos=1&_start=1-firsthit,accessed October 29, 2014. [2]

Lawrence John Mays. An investigation of the creation of drama in recitative through comparativeanalysis: La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781). 2013. hdl.handle.net/1885/9861. [2]

Raymond Monelle. Recitative and dramaturgy in the dramma per musica. Music and Letters, 59(3):245–267, 1978. [2]

Dale Eugene Monson. Recitativo semplice in the opere serie of GB Pergolesi and his contemporaries.PhD thesis, Columbia University, 1983. [2]

J Peri. Source Readings in Musical History, volume Volume III: The Baroque Era ed. O. Strunk,chapter Foreword to Euridice. New York: Norton and Company, 1601. [19]

Charles Rosen. The classical style: Haydn. Mozart, Beethoven (New York, 1971), 435, 1971. [2]

Rita Steblin. A history of key characteristics in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. 2002.[4]

21

Page 22: Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative. A ...scottishmusicreview.org/Articles/4/Mays: Decoding... · early eighteenth century: a domineering young maidservant (Serpina)

Scottish Music Review Volume 4 (2016)

Decoding Eighteenth-Century Italian Opera Recitative.A Comparison of La Serva Padrona set by Pergolesi (1733) and Paisiello (1781).

Gary Tomlinson. Madrigal, Monody, and Monteverdi’s “Via Naturale Alla Immitatione”. Journalof the American Musicological Society, 34(1):60–108, 1981. [2]

Gary Tomlinson. Music and the claims of text: Monteverdi, Rinuccini, and Marino. Critical Inquiry,8(3):565–589, 1982. [2]

Charles E Troy. The comic intermezzo: a study in the history of eighteenth-century Italian opera.Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1979. [13]

22