sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham

sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham

etheses.nottingham.ac.uk
from etheses.nottingham.ac.uk More from this publisher
01.03.2013 Views

his letter to Nebuška, that his work with František Bartoš on the monumental Národní písně moravské v nově nasbírané [Moravian folksongs newly collected] (XIII/3), published in 1901, had taken up most of his time between the composition of Acts 1 and 2 of Jenůfa. 25 Tyrrell argues that another factor may have been Janáček’s exposure in January 1896 to Tchaikovsky’s Пиковая дама [The Queen of Spades]. Janáček’s review of the event (Piková dáma, XV/149) shows the extent to which he was taken with this opera, 26 and Tyrrell suggests that it was Tchaikovsky’s approach to musical dramaturgy, radically different from that of the relatively untested Janáček, that gave the latter pause for thought before he set out to tackle the dramatic and expressive demands of Acts 2 and 3 of Jenůfa, very different from those of Act 1. 27 By late 1901 Janáček had resumed work on the opera, 28 with the composition of Act 2 finished by the following summer (this Act in ŠVS was completed by Štross on 8 July 1902, one of the few helpful dates in either of the two surviving scores; see CHAPTER 2, §2.1). As is well known, the later stages of composition were bound up with the illness and subsequent death, on 26 February 1903, of Janáček’s daughter Olga. 29 Just a month earlier, on 25 January, Štross had finished copying ŠVS, and on 18 March 1903 Janáček put a completion date in his copy of Preissová’s play and in ŠVS (presumably after a final check through of both ŠFS and ŠVS). 30 Some time in the following weeks, Janáček submitted Jenůfa to the Prague National Theatre. Whatever faith he had in the opera that had cost him so much time 25 JODA, JP9. 26 LD I/1 -1 , 225–7; Eng. trans. Zemanová 1989, 176–9. 27 Tyrrell 1998, 14–15, and JYL i, 423–4 and 438–43. 28 JODA, 48. The possibility of an earlier resumption of work on the full score (or at least the copying of Act 1 by Štross) is raised by an erased date at the end of Act 1 in ŠFS: see CHAPTER 2, §2.1. 29 See for example Vogel 1963, 139–41 (Eng. trans. 144–7) and Přibáňová 1984b, 57–9. 30 JODA, 48; Tyrrell 1996, iv/Tyrrell 2000, ii–iii. 7

and effort, both physical and emotional, must have been offset by a well-founded sense of trepidation. For the music director in Prague was none other than the conductor, composer and sometime harpist Karel Kovařovic (1862–1920), whose own opera Ženichové [The bridegrooms, 1882; first performed Prague 1884] had been sent up by Janáček in a satirical review (XV/70) in the journal Hudební listy in January 1887. 31 Sure enough, at the end of April the scores of Jenůfa were returned to Janáček with a curt rejection from the National Theatre’s administrative director. 32 Janáček’s wife Zdenka then persuaded him, at first with difficulty, to allow the Brno National Theatre — a much smaller and less august institution than its Prague counterpart, based in a converted dance hall and with only a tiny chorus and orchestra — to stage the work. Well aware of the limitations of the Brno theatre, the composer nevertheless eventually agreed. A letter Janáček wrote on 3 October 1903 to Camilla Urválková 33 gives the first surviving indication of any pre-première revisions to Jenůfa: 31 Hudební listy, iii (1886–7), 54; reprinted in Štědroň 1946, 111–12 and LD I/1 -1 , 122; Eng. trans. in JODA, JP12. The attack on Ženichové must have seemed all the more personal given that Hudební listy was, in effect, Janáček’s ‘own’ journal, founded and edited by him; see JYL i, 287–96. Seven years later, when Janáček submitted Jenůfa to the Prague National Theatre, Kovařovic might well have reflected that Janáček’s earlier sarcastic suggestion of stage action more suitable for the music of Ženichové — ‘full of horrible gloom, desperate screams, bodies stabbed by daggers’ — pretty well summed up aspects of the action in Jenůfa. 32 Gustav Schmoranz to Janáček, 28 April 1903, JA vii, 17; Eng. trans. JODA, JP15. 33 Janáček had met Mrs Camilla Urválková (1875–1956) whilst holidaying at the Moravian spa of Luhačovice in August 1903; she was to provide the inspiration (together with Luhačovice itself) for his next opera, Osud [Fate] (I/5). See JODA, 109 and 366. 8

his letter to Nebuška, that his work with František Bartoš on the monumental Národní<br />

písně moravské v nově nasbírané [Moravian folksongs newly collected] (XIII/3),<br />

published in 1901, had taken up most <strong>of</strong> his time between the composition <strong>of</strong> Acts 1<br />

and 2 <strong>of</strong> Jenůfa. 25 Tyrrell argues that another factor may have been Janáček’s<br />

exposure in January 1896 to Tchaikovsky’s Пиковая дама [<strong>The</strong> Queen <strong>of</strong> Spades].<br />

Janáček’s review <strong>of</strong> the event (Piková dáma, XV/149) shows the extent to which he<br />

was taken with this opera, 26 and Tyrrell suggests that it was Tchaikovsky’s approach<br />

to musical dramaturgy, radically different from that <strong>of</strong> the relatively untested Janáček,<br />

that gave the latter pause for thought before he set out to tackle the dramatic and<br />

expressive demands <strong>of</strong> Acts 2 and 3 <strong>of</strong> Jenůfa, very different from those <strong>of</strong> Act 1. 27<br />

By late 1901 Janáček had resumed work on the opera, 28 with the composition<br />

<strong>of</strong> Act 2 finished by the following summer (this Act in ŠVS was completed by Štross<br />

on 8 July 1902, one <strong>of</strong> the few helpful dates in either <strong>of</strong> the two surviving scores; see<br />

CHAPTER 2, §2.1). As is well known, the later stages <strong>of</strong> composition were bound up<br />

with the illness and subsequent death, on 26 February 1903, <strong>of</strong> Janáček’s daughter<br />

Olga. 29 Just a month earlier, on 25 January, Štross had finished copying ŠVS, and on<br />

18 March 1903 Janáček put a completion date in his copy <strong>of</strong> Preissová’s play and in<br />

ŠVS (presumably after a final check through <strong>of</strong> both ŠFS and ŠVS). 30<br />

Some time in the following weeks, Janáček submitted Jenůfa to the Prague<br />

National <strong>The</strong>atre. Whatever faith he had in the opera that had cost him so much time<br />

25 JODA, JP9.<br />

26 LD I/1 -1 , 225–7; Eng. trans. Zemanová 1989, 176–9.<br />

27 Tyrrell 1998, 14–15, and JYL i, 423–4 and 438–43.<br />

28 JODA, 48. <strong>The</strong> possibility <strong>of</strong> an earlier resumption <strong>of</strong> work on the full score (or at least the copying<br />

<strong>of</strong> Act 1 by Štross) is raised by an erased date at the end <strong>of</strong> Act 1 in ŠFS: see CHAPTER 2, §2.1.<br />

29 See for example Vogel 1963, 139–41 (Eng. trans. 144–7) and Přibáňová 1984b, 57–9.<br />

30 JODA, 48; Tyrrell 1996, iv/Tyrrell 2000, ii–iii.<br />

7

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!