Julia gives a list of

>significant operas written in the 20th century...

and invites comments:

>1909. Strauss. Elektra.
>
>The breakdown of tonality, the violence of the theme and the music all
>proclaim something entirely new in opera.  A case can also be made for
>Salome, which came earlier, but I think Elektra is the better opera.  It
>has all the vitality of the earlier work, and the dramatic power of the
>music has a closer fit with the theme.

Definitely Elektra.  But I'd also put in a word for Rosenkavalier, the
libretto as well as the music, which to me has a sensibility very much a
part of the 20th century.  In Elektra, we have a Romantic libretto with
very "modern" music.  With Rosenkavalier, we have the opposite.  The levels
of irony and regard in Rosenkavalier, the sense of people adrift, all
strike me as quite modern.

>Now come three amazing years:
>
>1924. Janacek. The Cunning Little Vixen.
>
>A unique opera in its expressive pantheism.  Man and his interraction with
>and dependence on Nature; the first opera for environmentalists!

The late operas of Janacek are all amazing.  Some (like the Adventures of
Mr. Broucek) I've never heard and have only read about.  But they all in
some way seem to redefine the notion of what opera is.

>1925. Berg. Wozzeck.
>
>One of the towering masterpieces of the century, IMHO.  Partial use of the
>12-note scale, lack of key signatures, use of sprechstimme - all proclaim
>a new approach to dramatic scoring.  And here we meet for the first time
>that archetypal 20th century figure: the unhappy, isolated, oppressed
>individual.

I'd add Lulu, particularly since the rediscovery of Berg's third act.

>1926. Puccini. Turandot.
>
>The last gasp of Italian romantic melodrama.

A great opera, no doubt, but not terrifically modern.

I'd like to add operas which, in my opinion, changed the way we think about
opera.  This is not to say that I don't find other operas worthwhile, but
that they follow paths already known.  To a large extent, this has to do
with collaboration between composer and librettist.  It's not all the
composer's show.

Prokofiev: Love of Three Oranges.  On the surface, a fairy-tale opera a la
Rimsky.  But there is an element of post-modern self-regard.

Thomson: Four Saints in Three Acts; The Mother of Us All.  Two great
operas, both pioneering works which showed the way for most "poetic" operas
which followed, including Nixon in China and Klinghoffer.  Narrative is
lost and pure juxtaposition takes its place.  The music reacts immediately
rather than builds long dramatic spans.

Weill: To me, the great genius of opera in the century.  Throughout
the Twenties and into the early Thirties, he produced several works,
collaborating with poets like Kaiser and Brecht, none of which create drama
in exactly the same ways, and all of which show different relationships
between text and music.

Dallapiccola: Julia mentions Il Prigionero, but all of Dallapiccola's
operas (Volo di Notte, Ulisse) are brilliant, profound works.  Again,
none creates drama in the same way as its sibs.  Ulisse accomplishes the
incredible feat of concentrating the Odyssey's 24 books into 3 acts.
Amazingly, Dallapiccola served as his own librettist.

Martinu: His operas are not very well known and they range from more or
less conventional dramas like The Greek Passion to the surrealism of Ariane
and Julietta to the medievalism of Miracle of Our Lady, in which church
play merges with opera.

Orff: I love the operas of Orff.  To my mind, Orff stands as one of
the great theater experimenters of the century.  The libretti aren't
particularly modern.  However, the music and its creation of drama is.
Orff learned just about everything from Monteverdi, at a time when
Monteverdi's music was little known.  He was also able to create something
similar with music that remains radical, even in the sense of going to the
root of things.  Die Kluge, Der Mond - the Bavarian comedies - and the
series of operas on the Theban cycle deserve revival.

>1945. Britten. Peter Grimes.
>
>Great dramatic vocalism and an overpowering story.  The isolated outsider
>once more.

To me, Britten's most "modern" opera is Noye's Fludde, the setting of the
Chester miracle play, with the later church parables also in that category.
The rest of his output, undoubtedly distinguished musically, nevertheless
doesn't really push dramatic form.

>Of course I am aware that there is a great hole in the second half of the
>century.  What are the operas from mid-century to the end that will make
>their mark? Perhaps the John Adams operas; perhaps those of Philip Glass.

I haven't seen or heard a lot of opera from this period, and I suppose
I've heard more than most.  I believe much of the conservatism Julia hints
at comes from opera audiences and houses.  In the United States, at any
rate, opera is in a terrible way.  I'm sure composers want to write for it,
but it's "priced itself" out of experimentation.  I can't think of a major
American opera company, not even Houston, that would risk a really new
work, whereas in the nineteenth century an opera house couldn't survive
without new work and composers had almost immediate access.  Today, one
has essentially works of succession: Previn's Streetcar (neo-verismo),
Adams's Klinghoffer and Nixon (neo-Stein), and Glass's neo-Orff.  Opera
is no longer a hot spot of primary creative activity.  It may be nice for
a composer to write an opera, but it's certainly not essential.

Great thread, Julia!

Steve Schwartz