Opera on the Move in the Nordic Countries during the Long 19th ...

170 Ulla-Britta Broman-Kananen
Emilie Bergbom, who took care of the practical matters in connection with
the rehearsals, also recognised the change from the fairly stable practices
of earlier years to the hectic and occasional arrangements with a new and
inexperienced company, at least with regard to general routines.
<strong>Opera</strong> at the New Theatre, 1871–1880
The New Theatre, built in the centre of Helsinki in 1866, was a manifestation
of many dreams – dreams of a luxurious and exclusive structure for the
Swedish-speaking bourgeoisie and Finland’s upper class, who could meet
in its foyer and in the opera restaurant and discuss politics and other matters
of the day. Many scholars (e.g. Habermas 1984 and Sennett 1976) have
pointed to the importance of a theatre in constructing and creating a bourgeoisie
public space in European urban centres (cf. also Pikkanen 2010).
<strong>Opera</strong> houses became a vital sign of European civilization and education all
around Europe during the nineteenth century, where hopes, fantasies and
technique merged and were reflected, onstage as well as offstage.
A permanent theatre company with actors from Sweden had begun already
in 1867 at the New Theatre with Nikolai Kiseleff as its director. Kiseleff
was a skilled amateur musician and opera enthusiast, even though his
chief employment was at his family’s sugar refinery. He was also acutely
aware of the theatre’s financial limitations, as he had to cover deficits out of
his own pocket. Hence, he was careful to balance drama and opera on the
stage. For this reason he did not want to expand the number of opera performances
at the cost of dramatic plays, as both had to share the same stage
at the New Theatre – unlike the Finnish opera company, which had the
Arkadia stage to itself. This meant that Bergbom outbid Kiseleff every time
the latter tried to hire a domestic singer for the theatre, since Bergbom
could always offer the singers more productions, and consequently, a higher
salary. Kiseleff did not venture out to assemble a separate opera company;
thus, for him, the ideal artist was an actor who could sing or a singer who
could act. 28 Kiseleff engaged the theatre’s actors from Stockholm’s various
stages, mostly beginners but occasionally more experienced artists. From
Stockholm he also acquired plays (in Swedish), scores and librettos. 29 The
28 Kiseleff’s dilemma can be traced, for example, in the Finnish tenor Bruno Holm’s
negotiations with both Kiseleff and Bergbom. Bergbom easily outbid Kiseleff because
Bergbom could offer Holm more performances than Kiseleff could (or wanted to).
(Holm to Bergbom, 15 March1876, FLC/LA.)
29 Kiseleff’s contact in Stockholm was Fredrik Björklund. whose correspondence with