Subject: A Case for the Symphony K98
From: dennis
To: All
Date Posted: 10:57:23 04/28/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
Of the 49 symphonies and 4 individual symphony movements
printed in the AMA edition of Mozart's works from 1879 to 1910,
all have been recorded but one. In addition in the past 100 years
or so six originally believed lost symphonies have been found--all
recorded. In addition to this a few symphonies misattributed to
Mozart have been recorded. This posting attempts to make a case
for some record company to rectify this omission.
The Symphony in question is the F-major Symphony, listed by
Köchel in his Mozart Thematic Catalogue as K98. This is a 4-
movement symphony consisting of an Allegro, Andante, Menuetto
with Trio, Presto. Ludwig Köchel did not know the symphony in
orchestral form, only in an arrangement for 2-pianos made in
Vienna by Ludwig Gall. Köchel accepted the symphony as
authentic on the word of Aloys Fuchs and Gall, claiming the
symphony had "the instrumentation, the size and possibly also the
thought content of similar works of about 1770".
In Series 24 (Supplement) of the AMA issued in 1888 the
symphony was considered authentic and published from a set of
parts in the possession of the Steiermärk Musical Society in Graz.
It was instrumented for 2 Violins, Viola, Bass, 2 Oboes and 2
Horns. The editor, Paul Graf Waldersee, noted "the tuneful, catchy
shapes of the melodies are characteristic only of him [Mozart].
Rounded in form it is however not free of a few irregularities in the
part-writing, which shows then that this work belongs to a period
in which Wolfgang had not yet acquired the security which even
the most gifted attain only through practice. It is a youthful work,
but even as such it will be not unwelcome to the devoted admires
of the Mozartean muse."
In 1912 Wyzewa/St.Foix published the first volumes of their
monumental Mozart biography. The French scholars not only saw
Italian characteristics in the symphony, but also the influence of
Joseph Haydn--especially in the finale--and thought it was
sketched before the trip to Italy, thus before Aug 13, 1771, and
was completed in Milan in autumn 1771.
In 1919 Abert, in his revision of the Jahn-Mozart biography, stated
the symphony appeared doubtful. He was not convinced by the
theory of Wyzewa/St.Foix. Abert listed many things that did not
correspond to other Mozart works, and found too many
characteristics of the Mannheim composers. He even saw a
favorite phrase of Stamitz in the beginning of the Trio of the
Minuet.
in 1927 C.B.Oldman purchased an anonymous manuscript
catalogue of Mozart works which probably was made up in the
early to middle 19th Century. By our symphony in F-major is a
note "1771, Milan, Nov". [Neal Zaslaw in his 1989 book on
Mozart's Symphonies believes it possible the writer of this note
got the idea from Nissen's biography on Mozart in which a letter
of Leopold Mozart's was reproduced that tells of a concert on
November 22 or 23, 1771 in Milan in which Mozart participated,
and speculated Mozart composed a symphony for this occasion].
Einstein summarized all this in K3, and added that the type of the
theme used in the finale of the symphony could be compared to
the spurious String Quartet K.Anh 210. He decided not to put the
work in the main portion of his edition of the Köchel Catalogue,
placing it in the Anhang (223b) for Doubtful Works.
By the time of K6 in 1964 nothing new had been discovered on the
symphony, except a few more copies of the orchestral score in the
Berlin State Library and in Brünn. With the reorganization of the
Anhang C section of K6 our symphony landed under Anh C11.04.
In his 1982 book on Mozart's symphonies, Robert Dearling gave
us one paragraph describing K98. He wrote of a "superficial
similarity between the equally doubtful Neuer Lambacher
Symphony in the opening of the first movement". He further tells
of the untypical (for Mozart) reliance of triplets in the 1st and 4th
movements of the work. Also the Trio is in the tonic key of the
Menuet, an indication perhaps that the symphony is not a work of
Mozart. Dearling doubts "that Mozart would have been so
unimaginative" as the author of this symphony was.
Back in 1978 the Hoboken Catalogue of the works of F.J. Haydn
listed this symphony in the Addenda under the misattributed
symphonies as Group I:F16. In the Pfarrkirche in Weyarn a copy
was found headed "Symphonia del Signore Haydn". This score
lacks Oboes. Zaslaw in his book on Mozart's symphonies believed
it likely this attribution is to Michael Haydn, rather than Joseph.
But as Zaslaw points out, Michael Haydn's symphonic output is
about as well documented as his brother's, and it does not appear
to have originated directly from him or his circle. And Charles
Sherman, the Michael Haydn catalogue editor, communicated "it is
not even remotely possible that the work is by Michael Haydn"
because of the shaping of the themes and the regular rhythmic
structure of the symphony. Zaslaw states the work does not
resemble Mozart's symphonies of any period either.
In his 1986 dissertation on the Symphonies of Leopold Mozart.
Cliff Eisen gives an account of the manuscripts available of K98.
The copy in the Hochschule für Musik und darstellende Kunst und
Landesmusikschule in Graz (that which the AMA used as a model)
was once part of the collection of Heinrich Eduard Josef von
Lannoy. This copy derives from the Vienesse music dealer Johann
Traeg. It is possibly one of the "14 Sinfonias by Mozart" advertised
by Traeg in the Wiener Zeitung on April 21, 1792, or the "15
Sinfonias" advertised on August 11, 1792. Traeg had offered a
number of Mozart symphonies in 1784, but then none until 1792.
It is quite possible Traeg purchased some works by Mozart from
Constanze Mozart after her husband's death. When Leopold
Mozart died in 1787, Nannerl Mozart had sent her brother almost
all of Wolfgang's compositions still in Salzburg. Now in 1792
Constanze could send numerous symphonies to Traeg from
Mozart's Salzburg period, accounting for this high number of
symphonies offered. Unfortunately, even if K98 was one of the
works Traeg received from Constanze, it does not guarantee its
authenticity, as she was not sufficiently expert to distinguish
Mozart's works from others that she found in his library--we do
know a symphony in Bb by Leopold Mozart derived from Mozart's
estate, as did the autographs of some songs. As a matter of fact in
a 1989 article regarding the Symphonies K16a and K76 we find
the original attribution to the Symphony K98 in Graz was only to
"Mozart", and later changed to "W.A. Mozart". Eisen does not see
our Symphony in F being by Leopold Mozart though.
Admittedly there is no proof that the Symphony in F K98 is by
Mozart. However the source location for this symphony is no
worse, and probably even better than a number of symphonies
listed in the main part of the 6th edition of the Köchel
Catalogue--and more to the point of this posting, a number of
symphonies that have been recorded numerous times. K76/42a,
K81/73l, K97/73m, K75, K96/111b are all in main portion of K6
with only one source attributing them to Mozart. K74g, even
though it had a similar source situation, was banished to Anh C
status. K84/73q has two sources attributed to Wolfgang, but
others attributed to Leopold and one attributed to Dittersdorf. The
recently found K16a in a-minor has only one copy attributed to
Mozart, and not even Wolfgang--only Signor Mozart.. All these
symphonies have been recorded at least 2 to 5 times.
The Symphony in F K98 has two copies attributed to Mozart, and a
catalogue entry attributing the composition to him and even
giving a date and location. Even though all the copies and
catalogue entry are suspect, that should be enough for a least one
record company to see fit to record it. I imagine if it was in a
minor key, had some sort of nickname, or would be rediscovered
in some dusty attic by an aspiring conductor or musicologist of
this century it would get a chance. But as it was catalogued over
150 years ago and out of favor for almost 100, it stands little or
no chance. Too bad. Anyone out there with connections to the
recording industry willing to take up the gauntlet?
dennis
Subject: LORENZO DA PONTE - MOZART'S LIBRETTIST.
From: Agnes Selby
To: All
Date Posted: 22:45:27 04/26/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
LORENZO DA PONTE - MOZART'S LIBRETTIST.
On 20th August 1838, while the trees in the Roman Catholic cemetery
swayed gently in the breeze, a distinguished group of New York citizens
gathered around an open grave bidding farewell to the scholarly old
gentleman who had died peacefully in his ninetieth year. He had been the
first Professor of Italian Literature at Columbia University and had
endowed Columbia's library with a large collection of rare Italian
books.
Exceedingly handsome even in his old age, he had looked patriarchal
with a mane of glistening white hair and piercing eyes. He had been a
popular citizen of New York, his children had married into the best
American families, and his wife, who had died before him, was remembered
as a gentle, ladylike creature of exquisite beauty.
The distinguished citizens did not mourn the old man too deeply. He
had died of old age and had lived a long and fruitful life. Some even
smiled to themselves as they remembered his little lies, boasting of
writing librettos for the immortal Mozart, counting the Emperor Joseph
II of the Holy Roman Empire amongst his friends and knowing Casanova
intimately. Oh, he could tell some stories... and added to his little
fibs was the gossip that he had once been a practicing priest. This
gossip, they believed, was spread by his Italian enemies. On top of all
that, the gossips said he had been born a Jew.
A large laurel wreath, as befitted a poet, was placed on the freshly
covered grave. The distinguished citizens departed the cemetery with the
knowledge of having been blessed to meet such a remarkable man, a man
whom they loved and whom they had known so well, and who had touched
their lives with his own magical presence.
But they knew him not at all. Not even his name!
He was born in Ceneda, a solitary Venetian outpost, on 10th March
1749, in the Jewish ghetto. His name was Emanuele, the son of Geremia
and Rachele Conegliano. He was the oldest child, soon to be followed by
brothers Baruch and Anania. The family had a history of scholars and
doctors amongst its members, notably a Dr. Israel Conegliano who was a
physician and statesman involved in the Venetian and Turkish diplomatic
sqabbles. He was rewarded for his services to the Venetian state by
being exempted from their harsh anti-Semitic regulations. Emanuele's
father, however, was a humble tanner by trade without any intellectual
pretensions.
When Emanuele was five years old, his mother died. For the next nine
years the child ran wild. He barely learned to read and write. He
nonetheless became bar mitzvah (the Jewish rite of initiation into
manhood); but soon thereafter, his father, now forty, fell in love with
a sixteen-year-old gentile girl, Orsola Pasqua Paietta, and decided to
marry her.
In order to get permission for the marriage, the father and his three
sons were baptised into the Catholic faith on 29th August 1763. The
ceremony was performed by Monsignor Lorenzo Da Ponte, and Geremia,
according to the custom of the day, adopted the name of his sponsor and
became Gaspare Da Ponte. His sons Buruch and Anania changed their names
to Girolamo and Luigi respectively, while Emanuele took the bishop's
name as well. From this moment on, he was known as Lorenzo Da Ponte.
Despite his strong Jewish beliefs at this time, coming so soon after his
bar mitzvah, he very seldom referred to his Jewish background. There
were others, however, who were only too happy to remind him of it.
Lorenzo's father eventually sired ten more children with his new
bride. He dedicated his three sons by his first wife to the Church in
gratitude for the blessings brought to him by his conversion to
Catholicism. Lorenzo never quite forgave his father for dedicating him
to the Church. In his autobiography
he said, that this decision led him "to embrace a way of life entirely
opposed to my temperament, character, principles and studies, thus
opening the door to a thousand strange happenings and perils, in the
course of which the envy, hypocrisy and malice of my enemies made me a
pitiable victim for more than twenty years". Nevertheless, he
financially supported
his father's ever-growing family until his move to the New World and his
struggles in America distanced him from his family in Italy.
He was ordained a priest in the seminary of Portogruaro. Although the
priesthood did not suit Lorenzo Da Ponte's temperament, he profited
greatly
from his monastic education. Already in 1770 he was made instructor, in
the following year professor of languages and in 1772 vice-rector of the
seminary.
In 1773 he threw up his post and moved to Venice where he began a
life of debauchery, fathering a number of children, gambling, and even
running a dance hall which was merely a front for a brothel. Da Ponte
was a man of conflicting personalities: on one hand he delighted in the
life of pleasure which characterised Venice in her last years as a
republic, on the other hand he loved poetry and literature and there is
no doubt that he was a teacher of genius. His life of dissipation came
to an end when the Venetian ruling Council of Ten finally expelled him.
During his sojourn in Venice he had met the great poet Caterino
Mazzola, who was the official poet to the Dresden court. Mazzola
promised Da Ponte to let him know if a similar position became available
at the court, and when shortly thereafter Da Ponte received a letter
from Mazzola inviting him to Dresden, Da Ponte arrived full of
expectations at Mazzola's residence. To his astonishment, Mazzola denied
ever having written a letter of invitation to him; Da Ponte then
attributed the letter to the machinations of his enemies.
For a short time Da Ponte remained in Dresden, closely studying
Mozzola's art of writing librettos for operas and even trying his hand
at writing some librettos himself. Mazzola watched with growing
trepidation Da Ponte's machinations at the Dresden court and made it
clear to Da Ponte that his presence in Dresden was no longer welcome. Da
Ponte decided to try his luck in Vienna. On the day of his departure
from Dresden, Mozzola, perhaps feeling a little guilty, handed him a
letter which was to change Da Ponte's life forever. It read: "Friend
Salieri, my good friend Da Ponte will bring you these few lines. Do for
him everything that you would do fo me. His heart and his talent merit
whatever help you can give him..."
Da Ponte arrived in Vienna late in 1781. He could not have arrived at
a better time nor chosen a better patron than Salieri. The Emperor,
Joseph II, was personally involved with the daily running of the opera.
An enlightened despot, Joseph II believed in intellectual freedom,
religious tolerance and equal justice for all. Under the reign of his
mother Maria Theresa, Da Ponte would not have had the chance to succeed
in his chosen profession. Maria Theresa would not have tolerated a Jew
as poet at her court, albeit a baptised one. Her Jewish advisers and
financiers could speak with her only separated by a screen, for fear
that she might be exposed to the evil in their eyes. Joseph II, however,
considered all his citizens equal as long as their actions profited the
state. Da Ponte's patron, Antonio Salieri, was influential at court,
having been Joseph II's chamber music partner from the time he had come
to Vienna at the age of forteen.
Through the good offices of Salieri, Da Ponte secured the position of
poet to the Viennese Italian opera. Da Ponte's first interview with
Joseph II was not to ask a favour but to thank him for the appointment.
Da Ponte wrote: "He asked me how many plays I have written, and when I
said frankly, 'None Sire', he replied with a smile, 'Good, good! We
shall have a virgin muse'!"
When Da Ponte met the little man whose genius would inspire him to
write his masterpieces is not known. They probably met at a dinner given
by Baron Wetzlar von Pinkenstern, himself a baptised Jew. The young
Mozarts when first married occupied an apartment in Baron Wetzlar's
house and the family remained friends until Mozart's death and beyond.
Mozart and Da Ponte were two of the most unlikely collaborators in
the history of music, yet together they created the most enduring and
beautiful masterpieces of the operatic repertoire. History remains
silent on the subject of their friendship and their artistic
collaboration. In Da Ponte, Mozart found a poet whose mind was perfectly
attuned to his own. Da Ponte responded to Mozart's music as he did to no
other composer. Essentially, when it came to their collaboration they
were kindred spirits. Mozart wrote to his father on 13th October 1781,
well before his collaboration with Da Ponte had begun:
"The best thing of all is when a composer, who understands the stage and
is able to make suggestions, meets an able poet, that true phoenix; in
that case no fears need be entertained as to the applause even of the
ignorant. In Da Ponte, Mozart found such an "able poet".
Their first collaboration was on "The Marriage of Figaro".
Beaumarchais' comedy had been banned in Paris for three years, as it
quite openly attacked the "ancien regime". In Vienna the staging of the
play was prohibited, although the play was freely available in bookshops
and Mozart himself owned a copy, listed among his possessions at the
time of his death. Mozart suggested the play as a possible text and the
composer and librettist completed the opera in six weeks. (Da Ponte
claimed this short period for the writing of the opera but historians
formerly dismissed his claim as pure fantasy. Most modern scholars now
agree that Da Ponte's claim was correct.)
At first, Baron Wetzlar offered to finance the production at some
place other than Vienna but Da Ponte approached the Emperor in his
charming manner and recorded the following conversation:
The emperor: "I fobade the German Company to perform this 'Nozze di
Figaro'".
Da Ponte: "Yes, but since I have written an opera and not a play, I have
had to omit many scenes and shorten others, and I have omitted and
shortened anything which might offend the delicacy and decency of
spectacle at which Your Majesty would be present. As for the music, so
far as I can judge it seems to me marvellosuly beautiful".
A carriage was sent for Mozart immediately so that the Emperor could
hear the music. Soon after this the
libretto and the music were given to copyists. But the cabal within the
theatre had just begun. According to Da Ponte, the Italians connected
with the opera theatre did not want the opera to succeed.
Joseph II had recently forbidden ballets to be performed at the opera
and when the Italians found that "The Marriage of Figaro" contained a
ballet scene, they ran to the director of the Opera House, Count
Rosenberg who summoned Da Ponte and tore the libretto and music to
shreds.
Mozart was in despair. Da Ponte, however, instructed the rehearsal to
go ahead in the presence of the Emperor. With no music being played
during the dance scene, Count Almaviva's and Susanna's gesticulations
made the scene appear like a puppet show. The Emperor was mystified by
such bizarre goings on, and when the situation was explained to him by
Da Ponte, the Emperor immediately send for the dancers and re-instated
the ballet.
Mozart's collaboration with Da Ponte continued with "Don Giovanni".
The opera was commissioned by the Prague Opera House, where Mozart's
music enjoyed immense popularity. The first perfomance of the opera
was scheduled for mid-October 1787. Both Mozart and Da Ponte were in
Prague for the rehearsals. Here Mozart met Casanova, Da Ponte's old
gambling friend who no doubt offered advice on the persona of Don
Giovanni as his handwriting appears on the original manuscript.
Da Ponte returned to Vienna before the premiere of "Don Giovanni".
While writing the libretto for "Don Giovanni", he also wrote "Tarare"
for Salieri and "L'Abore di Diana" for Martin y Soler.
When he informed Joseph II of his plan to work simultaneously on these
three libretti, the Emperor exclaimed: "You won't succed!"
"Perhaps not," Da Ponte replied, "but I shall try all the same. I
shall write for Mozart at night, which will be like reading Dante's
"Inferno". In the morning I shall write for Martin, and that will be
like studying Petrarch. In the evening I will write for Salieri, and he
will be my Tasso."
The last opera Mozart and Da Ponte worked on was "Cosi Fan Tutte". It
received its premiere on 26th January 1790. In "Cosi" Da Ponte's skill
in the use of rhyme reaches new heights. His libretto is inspired. It is
his original work, not based on any other opera or a text by another
writer. Designed for a carnival, it is charming, witty and perceptive.
Emperor Joseph II died on 20th February 1790. Da Ponte was shattered
by the Emperor's death and it seems he mourned him for the rest of his
life. Da Ponte's magical life in Vienna was virtually at an end. During
the short reign of Emperor Leopold II, Da Ponte completed three libretti
but he sensed a change was coming. Da Ponte's application to the Emperor
to join Martin y Soler in St. Petersburg was denied. In the end,
however, intrigues in the theatre and his own unfortunate affair with a
married opera singer resulted in his reputation being tarnished in the
eye of the new Emperor. His Semitic background and his bad reputation in
Venice did not help either.
It is not clear whether Da Ponte was dismissed from his post as court
poet to the Italian Opera or resigned of his own volition. Da Ponte
found himself at the end of 1791 in Trieste where he experienced the
bitterest moments of his life. He had fallen on hard times, and it had
been a fall from a great height. His beloved Emperor and Mozart were
dead and a new era descended upon Europe.
It was in Trieste that Da Ponte met his beautiful Nancy, who remained
his great love until her death in America. He describes her in his
autobiography:
I was introduced to a young English girl,the daughter of a rich
merchand who had lately arrived in Trieste. She was said by everyone to
be extremely beautiful, and to unite gentle manners with all the graces
of a cultivated mind. Her face was covered with a black veil, which
prevented me from seeing her, so, wanting to find out if the reality
matched her reputation I said, as if in jest, 'Mademoiselle, the style
in which you are wearing your veil is not a la mode'". Not realising
what was in my mind, she enquired: 'What is the present fashion?' 'This
signorina' and taking her veil by the edge I drew it over her head".
The face he saw beneath the veil must have pleased him immensely, and
although Nancy left the room offended by his boldness, she too was
impressed by the still handsome man. It seems it was love at first
sight.
Nancy's father, John Grahl, was born in Dresden and his wife was
French. Grahl had converted from Judaism to Anglicanism and Nancy was
born in England where she spent her first sixteen years. It is
surprising that her family would have given her hand in marriage
to an ageing, unemployed poet, who by his own admission possessed no
more than five piastres in the whole world.
There are no records in Trieste to prove that a marriage actually
took place between the former Roman Catholic priest and his "beautiful,
fresh and loving companion", only Da Ponte's statement that she became
his after "social ceremonies and formalities". From the verses that Da
Ponte addressed to her after her death and from the trials and
tribulations they faced together throughout their marriage, it seems
that the love that bound them remained strong to the end. There is no
evidence that Da Ponte was ever defrocked or gave up his priesthood. It
is my personal belief that his priestly episode was one he remembered
with distaste and it receded in his mind just as one life's experience
amongst many.
For a short while they settled in London. After a period of financial
difficulties, Da Ponte finally became poet to the King's Theatre in
Haymarket. Here again he became embroiled in the theatre's many cabals.
Nancy, however, ran the "coffee room" at the theatre so succefully that
she amassed a small fortune. A bookselling business Da Ponte established
while working at the theatre went bankrupt. The catalogue of his books
is today in the British Library. It shows what a remarkable collection
he had, with almost every author in the Italian language being
represented.
Nancy's family emigrated to America and settled in Pennsylvania. On
20th Septmber 1804 Nancy also departed for America with their four
children. Da Ponte accompanied them as far as Gravesend. As he looked at
his wife and children (he writes): "I seemed to feel a hand of ice seize
my heart and tear it from my breast". He had given Nancy permission to
stay in America for one year. She carried with her a considerable amount
of money; it is just possible that Da Ponte wished this money to be kept
in a safe place and not fall victim to his own bankruptcy.
Despite Da Ponte's entreaties to his wife to return to London, Nancy
remained in America. Da Ponte's situation in London became intolerable
and on 4th June
1805 he arrived in Philadelphia having lost all his money gambling with
a fellow passenger on the journey.
Da Ponte found his family settled in New York. With the help of
Nancy's money, he invested in a grocery shop, at first in New York and
later in Elizabethtown in New Jersey, where he and his wife with their
four children remained until 1807, by which time he had lost all his
money.
Da Ponte returned to New York hoping to make a living for his family.
In a bookshop he met Clement Clarke Moore, then a young man, who was
later to become America's most distinguished Hebrew scholar and
lexicographer, the founder of the General Theological Seminary and the
Trustee of Columbia College. He is better remembered today as the author
of the classic children's poem, "The Night Before Christmas". At Moore's
suggestion, Da Ponte opened the "Manhattan Academy for Young Gentlemen".
The school became immensely popular and soon Nacy opened "the Manhattan
Academy for Young Ladies". Nancy taught French and Italian as well as
the art of artificial flower making and engaged teachers to give lessons
in drawing and music.
All in all the academies were a great success. Da ponte, full of
intellectual enthusiasm, instructed his students in such an
unforgettable way that they remembered his lectures for the rest of
their lives.
Arthur Livingston, the American editor of Da Ponte's "Memoirs",
wrote:
"There is no doubt that this was an important moment
for the American mind. Da Ponte made Europe, poetry, painting, music the
artistic spirit, classical lore, a creative classical education, live
for many important Americans as no-one, I venture, had done before".
In 1811, Lorenzo Da Ponte became an American citizen and gave up his
lucrative teaching career and the life he so thoroughly enjoyed and
moved to Sunbury, Pennsylvania where he again opened a grocery shop.
Nancy's aged parents lived in Sunbury, which was then a charming town
set in a beautiful countryside. But Da Ponte hated every moment of the
seven years he spent in Sunbury, longing for the bookshops and
stimulation of New York.
Surprisingly, Da Ponte succeeded in business the second time around.
He opened a millinery store, ran a carrier service between Sunbury and
Philadelphia, established a distillery in Sunbury and in 1814 built
there a thre-storey residence. He became the second highest taxpayer in
the county.
By 1818 Da Ponte had wearied of the countryside and moved back to New
York where he spent the rest of his life, selling and buying Italian
books. In his teaching he had found he was hindered by the lack of good
Italian books and imported them from Italy.
In 1825 he received a signal honour by being appointed Professor of
Italian at Columbia University.
He retained this title until his death.
On 29th November 1825 the first season of Italian opera in America
opened at the Park Theatre. The Garcia family, a Spanish operatic
company had just come from a successful opera season in London. On 23rd
May 1826 Da Ponte was overjoyed when the Garcia company premiered
Mozart's "Don Giovanni".
Following the success of the Garcia company's tour, Da Ponte
undertook to provide a permanent home for Italian opera in New York. Da
Ponte was able to raise a large amount of money which enabled the city
to build its first Opera House. It was opened under Da Ponte's
management on 18th November 1833. It was a magnificent theatre. The dome
was painted with a represenation of the nine Muses by Italian artists
especially brought to New York to execute it. It was a huge success. In
1836 the Italian Opera House was renamed the National Theatre and Da
Ponte was replaced as manager. The National Theatre burned to the ground
in 1839, but the idea of going to the opera had become so popular in New
York that soon the Astor Place Opera House and later the Academy of
Music staged many successful opera performances. Finally, the
Metropolitan Opera House opened in 1883, in no small measure the result
of the enthusiasm generated by Da Ponte's original vision of an opera
house in New York.
In August 1838 the old man died. A priest was summoned and Da Ponte
made peace with the church. Like Mozart, he was buried in an unmarked
grave; in 1912 the coffins from the cemetery where he was laid to rest
was removed to Calvary Cemetery to make room for 11th Street in New
York.
Copyright Agnes Selby.
By courtesy of "Quadrant". This article was first published by
"Quadrant" in January 1997.