A New Source for Carmen

A New Source for "Carmen"Author(s): Lesley A. WrightSource: 19th-Century Music, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Jul., 1978), pp. 61-71Published by: University of California PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/746191Accessed: 21/06/2010 16:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to 19th-Century Music.

http://www.jstor.org

A New Source for Carmen

LESLEY A. WRIGHT

The Censors' series (F18) at the Archives na- tionales of Paris preserves a largely unknown collection of documents related to musical works. The texts of operas, other forms of musical theater, and even songs were sub- jected to the scrutiny of the Censors just as were the books and plays of the same period. Recorded on the libretti in this series are both the date of deposition at the Censors' Bureau and the date on which the work was approved. With the exception of letters, these docu- ments are often the only dated materials to stem from the rehearsal periods of the operas and, as such, may supply an invaluable tool for sorting out layers of revision in a musical autograph or for recovering versions lost from

all other sources. The Censors' libretti and the related Censors' reports have received some attention from scholars working on Verdi and Berlioz, but their potential value for the study of French lyric theater in general has not been fully appreciated.

Carmen differs from all Bizet's other works in that most of the materials prepared for the original performances have been preserved. Both the manuscript score used by Deloffre, the conductor in 1875, and most of the manu- script orchestral parts were spared in a serious fire at the Opera-Comique in 1887 and were rediscovered there in the 1960s.1 To these sources may be added Bizet's autograph manu- script (Bibliotheque nationale MSS. 436-439)

0148-2076/78/0700-0061 $0.25 O 1978 by The Regents of the University of California.

1The conductor's copy and manuscript orchestral parts bear signs of having been used until at least 1890. After that they were replaced by engraved copies and stored in a

61

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC and two printed sources: the first-edition piano-vocal score and the first-edition libretto. At the Archives nationales in Paris there is one more source related to the premiere, a previously unknown manuscript libretto.

This Carmen libretto (Arch. Nat. F18 699) is stored with other libretti submitted to the Censors in the same period. Several copyists wrote in black ink on sixty folios (h. 272mm x b. 203mm) of low-grade paper enclosed in a blue wrapper. No marks were added by the censorship staff to the body of the libretto, but the stamp of the copisterie (COPIES DRAMA- TIQUES LITTERAIRES / A. DEPORTE /37 RUE ST. MARC) appears on both the wrapper and on the second folio of the copy itself. The title page of the copy, however, has a number of anno- tations: in the upper left-hand corner, a stamp (DIRECTION DES BEAUX-ARTS I/THEATRES) and within this, handwritten in black ink, "89. / 12 fiv / 1875"; in the upper right-hand corner, in the same hand and ink, "2139112 f6vrier 1875"; in the upper left quadrant of the page in a second hand, again in black ink, "Pour etre represent /I sur le Thiatre National / de l'Op6ra Comique / 12 f6vrier 1875 / Camille du Locle"; and in a third hand, scrawled over Du Locle's statement, a large "oui" and the date "2 mars 75," both in heavy blue crayon.

Since the libretto is dated 12 February 1875, it was presumably copied only a month

or less before the Carmen premiere on 3 March 1875. We might expect to find rela- tively few discrepancies between this source and the printed libretto issued about the time of the first performance. On the contrary, examination of the Censors' libretto reveals that portions of the text are quite different from that which Meilhac and Halevy pub- lished a few weeks later. These sections cor- respond instead to the first layer still visible in Bizet's heavily corrected autograph manu- script and/or the manuscript performing mate- rials. Most of these textual variants are con- centrated in the poetic sections of the libretto, that is, in the texts for musical numbers. The prose dialogue sections were for the most part taken over unchanged from the Censors' li- bretto to the first edition.2

Some of the variant readings in the Cen- sors' libretto involve only a few lines of text or a stage direction. In the "Marche et Choeur des gamins" (Act I), for example, the stage di- rection refers to the orchestral interlude that once accompanied the conversation between Don Jos6 and Morales before the reprise of the chorus. According to the reading in this source, too, Carmen was not yet using cas- tanets in the Act II duo ("Je vais danser en votre honneur") during the February rehear- sals but danced about clanking the two halves of a piece of earthenware she had broken to

cupboard at the Opera-Comique until Fritz Oeser un- earthed them. On the basis of this find Oeser prepared his supposedly critical edition of Carmen (2 vols., Kassel, 1964). His commentary volume contains much valuable information and systematically describes the music of ear- lier versions. However, every line of his reasoning must be examined with care. Oeser almost invariably depends too much on readings in the material he discovered and un- dervalues the first-edition piano-vocal score (which Bizet himself transcribed). In this way Oeser has distorted the text of the opera, placing in the body of the edition many passages that Bizet rejected and relegating final versions for the corresponding passages to the appendices or critical notes. On this edition see Winton Dean's justly critical review, "The True Carmen?," Musical Times 106 (1965), 846-55.

The conductor's score is now divided between the Bibliotheque de l'Opera,which has two volumes (Act I and Acts III and IV) under the call number Res. 2222 (vols. 1-2), and the Opera-Comique, which still has Act II. The surviving manuscript orchestral parts are also housed at the Opera-Comique.

2After the Censors' copy was submitted, Bizet's librettists made changes to keep their texts abreast of developments in the musical settings, as was true also with Bizet's other operas. Still, at some point the librettists seem to have regarded their work as finished and made no further at- tempts to bring the text into line with what was actually being performed on stage. This is the most likely explana- tion for discrepancies between the first-edition vocal score and the first-edition libretto, discrepancies that can often be associated with revised sections in the autograph manuscript. While these could conceivably point to very late rehearsal cuts, it seems significant that when early in this century Carmen was reengraved by Calmann-Levy for inclusion in the Theitre of Meilhac and Halevy, the au- thors made some small changes, mostly in stage direc- tions, but did not alter larger variant readings to conform with the by then well-known operatic text. In fact, in cases where the censor's libretto and the first-edition li- bretto preserve a lengthier text than that actually sung, it is quite possible that Bizet cut the music for these texts even before mid-February when the censor's libretto was submitted.

62

replace her lost castanets. Later in the same duet, just before Jos6's Flower Song, Carmen mockingly repeated her admirer's protestation of love ("I1 souffre de partir car jamais femme, / Jamais femme avant moi / Aussi profondement n'avait troubl6 son ame"). There are other small variants of this sort, but three readings in the Censors' libretto imply much larger re- visions late in the rehearsals. These are dis- cussed separately below and printed in the Appendix to this article.

1. Act I, no. 5, "Habanera" According to his friend Guiraud, Bizet revised Carmen's en- trance aria thirteen times during rehearsals in an effort to satisfy his prima donna, Galli- Mari6. Only three versions of the text survive, but each of these would have necessitated a different musical structure since each varies considerably in length and/or poetic structure. Guiraud may have exaggerated in mentioning thirteen musical versions-but there must have been a minimum of three.

The earliest preserved text for the Haba- nera was written by Bizet himself and sent to his librettist Ludovic Halevy in the summer of 1874.3 The Habanera must have been one of the last pieces completed before rehearsals be- gan, since much of Bizet's time that summer would have been taken up by scoring and revi- sion and by the physical process of writing out the 1200-page orchestral score. The second part of this text preserves the actual poetry that Bizet wished to use. The first section, however, looks more like what Bizet calls in his letters a "monstre"4-a sort of poetic dummy in which he indicates only syllable count, the number of poetic lines needed, and

the general sense of the quatrains which he wished written for music that was already composed.5

The rhyme scheme remains constant: an alternation of masculine and feminine rhymes, called rimes croisees, which change for each quatrain (a b a b, c d c d, etc.). The poetic structure of this version implies that Bizet's setting was a large piece in two sec- tions, probably contrasted in meter, tempo, or key. The first section is made up of alternating six- and eight-syllable lines; the second, of eight-syllable lines only. The refrain text that opens and closes the second section doubtless reflects a return of the music that began the section. Perhaps this was the piece that he and Galli-Mari6 read through when they first met on 2 October 1874. At any rate, no trace of the musical setting remains.

It is possible that music composed for the brief second text, the three quatrains in the Censors' libretto, may not survive either. However, the simplicity and brevity of the text are not so surprising when paired with the trivial twelve-measure refrain that proba- bly served as the melody for two-thirds of the piece (ex. 1). This tune is preserved only in the conductor's score on pages which were sewn together during revision of the scene.6 In this piece, which immediately follows the Habanera, Carmen herself does not sing the

LESLEY A. WRIGHT A New Source for Carmen

3For a facsimile of this document see Mina Curtiss, Bizet and His World (1958; rpt., 1974), facs. 17. 4See Louis Gallet, Notes d'un librettiste (Paris, 1891), pp. 6-7, 76, 78-79, 81. Gallet (p. 6) defines the "monstre" as a "sorte de maquette reproduisant au moyen de mots sans suite la forme musicale du morceau." This was sent to the poet after the music was written to facilitate composi- tion of the verse. Evidently Bizet preferred to have more control over his collaborator, for each monstre he sent Gallet for Don Rodrigue is related to the plot and appears in the autograph manuscript of this work only slightly re- vised by the librettist.

SHalkvy, too, regarded Bizet's opening quatrain as a suggestion only. He sent back the following lines scrib- bled in the right-hand margin of the page:

Hasard et fantaisie, Ainsi commencent les amours, Et voila pour la vie, Ou pour six mois ou pour huit jours Un matin sur la route On trouve l'amour--I1 est la. Il vient sans qu'on s'en doute Et sans qu'on s'en doute il s'en va Il vous prend, vous enleve, Il fait de vous tout ce qu'il veut. C'est un d1lire, un rave Et ca dure ce que ca peut.

The prosody is not inspired, but it does meet all the re- quirements Bizet set down and keeps fairly close to the meaning of the lines he proposed. Whether or not this text was ever set is unknown. 6See Oeser, Appendix V, for the full score of this passage and pp. 719 and 743 for his commentary.

63

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC p finement et Zlgerement

s

A I - L'a - mour est enfant de Bo - h - me, il n'a jamais connu de loi! Si

tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'ai - me! Si tu m'aimes, tant pis pour toil A Sf ft

tant pis pour toi! tant pis pour toil -

Example 1 ? 1964 by Bairenreiter-Verlag

Habanera refrain, but her co-workers repeat it as they go back to the cigarette factory.

Charles Pigot, Bizet's first major biog- rapher, also refers to a 6/8 version of the Ha- banera. Without giving a source, he states that the number was learned and rehearsed by the cast but that the prima donna did not find it to her taste because it did not produce "un grand effet" for her entrance. After hesitating for a while, she finally decided during the stage re- hearsals to ask Bizet to write another piece.7 Both Pigot's study and the presence of the simple twelve-line text in a document from mid-February 1875 tend to disprove Oeser's hypothesis that the 6/8 version was rejected after Galli-Marie's very first rehearsal with Bizet. Oeser maintains that the handwriting in the autograph manuscript of the final version is too careful to date from later than 2 October-12 November 1874, but gives no other reasons for his assertion.8

2. Act I, no. 11, "Voici 1'ordre, partez" The Censors' libretto also reveals that the

second half of the final scene in Act I was rewritten during the last month of rehearsals. The first known version of the scene is fully preserved only in the Censors' libretto and in the orchestral parts. This new libretto also adds stage directions which the copyist did not enter into the parts and which are there- fore lacking in Appendix VII of the Oeser score.

The first version (161 measures) of the scene consists of a lengthy fugato section lead- ing into a reprise of the "Au secours" chorus. The second version (119 measures) cuts out the chorus entirely and adds Carmen's reprise of the Habanera refrain (in its final form) after she has escaped her captors. Since Oeser thinks the 6/8 Habanera was cut as early as October 1874, he also dates the revision of this finale very early, because this would have spared the chorus needless study of the origi- nal version (p. 720). Presence of the final form of the Habanera refrain in the second version of the Act I finale and of the early form of the scene in the Censors' libretto both argue for revision at a much later date. There are two further revisions of the scene (108 and 133 measures) which, as they involve the rework- ing of orchestral music only, could also have been made at a late date.9

7Charles Pigot, Georges Bizet et son oeuvre (Paris, 1886), pp. 243-44. 8Oeser presents his ideas on chronology in a chapter of his commentary volume entitled Zur Werkentstehung (pp. 715-30). There are three sections: Bis zum Probenbeginn, Bis zur Urauffiihrung, and Bis zur Drucklegung. He places the first version of the Act IV finale in the very first cate- gory because it was not copied into performance materials. Revision of the Habanera and of the first act finale are assigned to the second category (early in the period: October-November 1874). Oeser assumes that all the per- forming materials were prepared in the fall and early winter of 1874.

9The passage rejected in the first revision of this scene contains some pencilled accidentals in one of the violin parts, accidentals that must have been added during a re- hearsal. Since the first orchestral rehearsals occurred at the end of January 1875, this too points to a late date for the revision.

64

3. Act IV, no. 27, Duo et Choeur final The Censors' libretto preserves still another major variant in the text for the final scene of Car- men. It completes stage directions and verse for the corresponding music in Oeser's score (Appendix XVII). The text for Carmen's "Death Song" (sung to music from the card trio of Act III) appears in this libretto, strikingly enough, even though there is no evidence that these lines were ever copied into either the conductor's score or the orchestral parts.10 Oeser (p. 772) interprets this fact to mean that the Death Song was cut very early, perhaps even before the beginning of rehearsals and certainly before the end of 1874. Again, the new evidence shows that this happened much later.

In the course of his revisions Bizet reduced the music following Jos6's fatal blow from 54 to 24 measures. He first cut out Carmen's Death Song; later he altered Jose's lines, com- pressed the orchestral interludes between each event, and substituted the earlier text for the final choral reprise of the Toreador Song. It would not have been difficult for the tenor or the orchestra to learn the new music late in rehearsals. In fact, the autograph manuscript at this point shows signs of Bizet's great haste. The only problem-the presence of the Death Song in the libretto of February 1875-causes difficulties only if we assume, as Oeser does, that the performance materials were copied much earlier in the rehearsal period. But it is perfectly possible that some of them, at least for Acts III and IV, might have been prepared as late as the first week of February, about the same time that the Censors' libretto was being copied. If a decision on the final form of the piece had not been made at that time, pre- sumably the longer, earlier text would have been submitted to the Censors. Any cuts or omissions for the stage would not have caused

trouble with the authorities; only text added later on for publication might have done so.

The conductor's score and manuscript parts have never been securely dated. Though vocal and choral partbooks would have been copied out much earlier, materials for the or- chestra and conductor were probably copied as late as possible in order to save the expense of copying revisions made during rehearsals. (Un- fortunately the documents dating official payment to the copying establishment have disappeared.) On 30 January 1875 the Livre de bord at the Opera-Comique notes that the first rehearsal with orchestra that afternoon included "Le ier acte avec les choeurs-Puis des morceaux des autres actes (sans les choeurs)." The record does not specify which pieces from Acts II, III and/or IV were re- hearsed, but it implies that some were not rehearsed; perhaps they were not yet copied. In any event, the copying for at least the first version of Act II must have been complete be- fore the soloists' rehearsal with orchestra of 6 February; and for Acts III and IV, before a similar rehearsal with the entire cast on 15 February.

Not all changes in the text took place after the Censors' libretto was copied. Quite a few details had already been altered. For example, the character "Lizzara" had become "Zuniga"; Don Jose was already a brigadier instead of a sergent, and he uses tu with Micaela instead of vous. The Seguedille text reads "Pres de la porte de Seville" (as in the first-edition li- bretto) instead of the banal earlier version "J'irai dimanche en voiture ... manger une friture." In addition, Bizet had already dropped the idea of placing a version of Morales's coup- lets in the Introduction just before Micadla's entrance.

These and other such alterations-most of them in the first act-appear in the Censors' libretto. Yet in these same spots the autograph manuscript and the conductor's score usually preserve both the earlier and later readings. Thus the Censors' libretto must have been copied later than the performance materials for at least the first act of Carmen. It appears to date from the stage rehearsal period of the work, that is, no earlier than late January 1875.

LESLEY A. WRIGHT A New Source for Carmen

10Another reference to fate, in the finale of Act III ("C'6tait ecrit! cela doit tre: i Moi d'abord et puis lui . . Le destin est le maitre") was never cut from the libretto, though the music for these lines was not copied into the performing materials and must have been cut at approxi- mately the same time as the "Death Song." This may in- dicate that the librettists opposed removing textual reiter- ation of the theme of fate even though it was redundant, particularly so in view of Bizet's musical "fate" motive.

65

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

II But to be absolutely sure, two objections

that might be raised against the mid-February dating of the Censors' libretto should perhaps be considered. First, though it is a natural as- sumption that a new libretto was copied out shortly before it was deposited at the Censors' bureau, it is at least possible that an older li- bretto was submitted to save time or expense. Second, if extensive revisions were actually made late in the rehearsal period, in early to mid-February, one might ask whether they could have been incorporated by the printer before he issued the score in mid-March.

A brief survey of censorship laws govern- ing theaters in 1875 goes far to answer the first objection. Several books summarize the various reforms and suspensions of censorship in nineteenth-century France"; furthermore, a carton at the Archives nationales (F21 1330) preserves a selection of the documents them- selves. A lengthy, detailed, stringent circulaire of 31 July 1874 had arrived at Camille du Locle's office in the Opera-Comique only a few months before the Carmen rehearsals began.12 The minister's express purpose was to remind the directors of the Parisian theaters of the principal regulations that would be in force from then on and to remind them that his

staff's surveillance would be unremitting.~3 He begins by itemizing the types of works under his jurisdiction and outlines the basic bureaucratic procedure:

Every dramatic work, before being performed, must be authorized by the administration and this authorization may always be withdrawn on the grounds of public order.

To obtain authorization to have an old or new dramatic work performed, you must, hereafter, deposit two perfectly legible manuscript copies or two printed copies of the work, whatever it may be-play, separate scene, cantata, romance, song or comic song-at the Office of Theaters, 1, rue de Valois (Palais-Royal) three weeks before the planned performance. 14

In accordance with these rules Du Locle sub- mitted the Carmen libretto slightly less than three weeks before the premiere of 3 March 1875, on 12 February. The procedural regula- tions continue:

After examination of the work (if its perfor- mance is authorized) and after a dress rehearsal in front of the Inspectors, one of the deposited copies, bearing ministerial authorization, will be returned to the director who may put on the play from then on....

The copy bearing authorization must be pre- sented upon demand to the chief of police charged with surveillance of your theater.15

"For complete histories of theatrical censorship see Vic- tor Hallays-Dabot, Histoire de la censure thdatrale en France (Paris, 1862) and La Censure dramatique et le theatre: histoire des vingt dernieres annies (1850-1870) (Paris, 1871); also Alberic Cahuet, La Liberte du thdatre en France et a l' tranger (Paris, 1902). Hallays-Dabot, who was for many years an inspector for the censorship bureau, prints the texts of many documents and com- ments objectively on the regulations of the period. Since he was the "Inspecteur principal" at the time Carmen was performed, he may well have played a role in its authori- zation. Cahuet, a lawyer at the Cour d'Appel in Paris with experience from a later period of censorship, tends to summarize the contents of the decrees and to inject his own opinion into the discussion. 12Camille du Locle was the nephew of Perrin, director of the Op6ra, and learned much about the lyric theater from his uncle. Though he knew little about music, Du Locle sponsored a large number of new works by Massenet, Saint-Saens and others. He did not confine his work to directing, however, but tried his hand as a librettist and designer of scenery and costuming as well. He wrote Don Carlos for Verdi with MWry, and was later involved in working out the plot and planning the production of Aida, both in Cairo and in Paris.

13For a few months in the winter of 1870-71 (during the siege of Paris) censorship regulations were lifted. In the spring of 1871 censorship was brought back under the mil- itary government and functioned with provisional status until 1874. Only then was the "commission d'examen des ouvrages dramatiques" formally reestablished. Finally, after the necessary funds were approved on June 24, the minister sent out the circulaire cited in the text. 14Toute oeuvre dramatique, avant d'etre representee, doit etre autorisee par l'administration et cette autorisation peut toujours tre retiree pour un motif d'ordre public.

Pour obtenir l'autorisation de faire representer un ouvrage dramatique ancien et nouveau, vous devrez, a l'avenir, deposer au Bureau des TheAtres, 1, rue de Valois (Palais-Royal), trois semaines avant la representation pro- jetee, deux exemplaires manuscrits, parfaitement lisibles, ou deux imprimes de l'ouvrage quel qu'il soit, piece, scene detachee, cantate, romance, chanson, ou chansonette. 15Aprrs l'examen de l'ouvrage, si la representation en est autorisee, et apres une repetition generale devant les In- specteurs, un des exemplaires deposes, revetu de l'autori- sation ministerielle, est rendu au directeur qui peut, des lors, faire jouer la pi..ce....

L'exemplaire revetu de l'autorisation doit tre, a toute requisition, presente au commissaire de police charge de la surveillance de votre theatre.

66

Though the copy returned to the theater after authorization was evidently lost or thrown away after the original run of performances, the duplicate was retained in the Censors' ar- chives and has become part of series F18.

And finally, the Minister of Public Educa- tion and the Fine Arts concludes with a few more regulations and a warning to the direc- tors:

The new or revived work must be advertised only after delivery of the authorized copy and with- out addition of any kind to the approved title.

As for works that, by their very nature, require numerous rehearsals and great costs for staging, you must not, in your own interest, put them into re- hearsal until after you have obtained authorization to have them performed. It has frequently occurred that in order to obtain the go-ahead despite a neces- sary interdiction, theatrical administrations have emphasized the amount of time already devoted to preparation of a work and their substantial prelimi- nary expenses, thus offering theatrical undertakings a sure means of escaping such a risk. Considera- tions of this sort will not, therefore, be able to exert any influence on administrative decisions.

I remind you, too, M. le Directeur, that the re- hearsal to which you summon the Inspectorate of Theaters must take place with scenery, costumes, properties, and complete lighting of the stage. In a word, it must be presented in a way that does not conceal any of the effects of the performance. No person who does not belong to the theater's staff may be admitted to the rehearsal specially devoted to the Inspectors.

In the event that a new work has had to undergo some important modifications, a second partial or full dress rehearsal may take place at the demand of the Administration.16

Thus directors faced the possibility of finan- cial loss through postponement or closure if the final form of the work were not approved.

Furthermore, clauses in the cahiers des charges presented to each director make it clear that the director of a state-supported theater would be guilty of breach of contract if his dealings with the censorship bureau were not scrupulously accurate.17 The Censors of the 1860s and 1870s certainly had the power to ban any work that in their opinion might endanger public morality, order, or political propriety, and all these regulations would have meant nothing if they were not vigor- ously enforced. The Second Empire was notorious for its stringent-if contradic- tory-application of the censorship laws;'8 this was the period that saw the trial of Flaubert and his publishers for Madame Bo- vary, and at the other end of the scale, autho- rization without difficulty of Offenbach's La Belle H6lTne. Some of the Censors even med- dled in works by requiring that their own ideas on drama be incorporated before author- ization was issued. In a slightly later period Bizet's L'Arlksienne opened without much ad- vance publicity because Madame Frainex, by Robert Halt, which was to begin Carvalho's 1872 season at the Vaudeville, was banned

LESLEY A. WRIGHT A New Source for Carmen

16L'ouvrage nouveau ou repris ne doit tre affiche qu'apres la remise qui vous aura 6t6 faite de l'exemplaire autoris6, et sans addition d'aucune espece au titre approuve. Quant aux ouvrages qui, par leur nature, exigent de nombreuses repetitions et de grands frais de mise en scene, vous ne devez, dans votre interet, les mettre 'a l'6tude qu'apres avoir obtenu l'autorisation de les faire repr6senter. Il est arrive frequemment que pour obtenir main lev6e d'une interdiction necessaire, les adminis- trations th6atrales faisaient valoir le temps deji consacre a l'6tude d'un ouvrage et les depenses considerables preala- bles offrant aux entreprises theatrales un moyen stir d'echapper a un tel risque, les considerations de ce genre

ne pourront done exercer aucune influence sur les deci- sions administratives.

Je vous rappelle aussi, Monsieur le Directeur, que la r6petition a laquelle vous convoquez l'Inspection des theatres, doit avoir lieu avec les decors, les costumes, les accessoires, l'eclairage complet de la scene, et de fagon, en un mot, a ne dissimuler aucun des effets de la representa- tion. Nulle personne etrangere au service du theatre ne doit tre admise a cette repetition specialement consacr6e a Messieurs les Inspecteurs.

Dans le cas ou l'ouvrage nouveau devait subir quel- ques modifications importantes, il peut y avoir lieu, sur la demande de l'Administration, a une seconde repetition partielle ou gen6rale. 17The cahiers des charges presented to Carvalho in No- vember 1862 (Arch. Nat. F21 1121) and to Adolphe de Leuven in April 1872 (Arch. Nat. AJx'11135) summarize the conditions under which each director was permitted to operate a state-supported theater. Though Carvalho directed the Theitre-Lyrique and de Leuven the Opera- Comique, large sections of their cahiers are identical. Du Locle was doubtless subject to similar regulations both while he was de Leuven's partner and after he bought out interest in 1874. 'aCahuet (La Liberte du thdatre, p. 242) also reports that "the theater under this regime had to make considerable concessions to diplomatic proprieties; it is to be noted that these proprieties changed according to the variations of imperial politics and gave rise to the most contradic- tory decisions."

67

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC only a few days before the anticipated pre- miere. Alberic Cahuet notes that "from 1870 to 1891 repressive censorship functioned at least as much as preventive censorship."'19

Though all of Bizet's theatre works were examined and approved by the Censors, none of the reports on his operas have survived; consequently, any specific influence of that office on the libretti cannot be determined. The evidence of the censorship regulations, nonetheless, makes it vastly unlikely that Du Locle would have taken the unnecessary risk of submitting a Carmen libretto substantially different from the work as it existed about 12 February 1875.

The second piece of evidence that might appear to argue against assigning so many re- visions to the last month of rehearsals is the Choudens piano-vocal score of Carmen. The score was advertised as "vient de paraftre" in Le Menestrel on 14 March 1875, only a week and a half after the premiere and a month after the Censors received their copy of the libretto. Four days later a copy of the score was actu- ally deposited at the Bibliotheque nationale.

But in fact documents associated with this edition argue not against but for the existence of late revisions. The firm of Choudens has only one document that precedes the pub- lished piano-vocal score transcribed by Bizet, the contract signed by Bizet on 15 January 1875. Here only financial matters are dealt with, not publication procedures or deadlines for proofs. There exist, however, twenty page proofs for Carmen (Bibl. Nat. Res. 2694), all bearing minor corrections by the composer. One page is from the opening chorus of Act I, another from the Smugglers' Chorus in Act III, and all the rest from Act II.20 These pages are identical in format with those of the first- edition score. Yet although the Act I proof sheet is paginated "18" as in the first edition, the next surviving page, from the "Chanson boheme" in Act II, is paginated "122," four

higher than the number anticipated.21 The other proof sheets continue to exceed by four the pagination of the first-edition piano-vocal score, but they extend only through the first number of Act III, and not through the sec- tions of Acts III and IV where further late revi- sion might be expected-namely the finales.

More than half the pieces in Act I were cut or revised at some point, early or late, dur- ing rehearsal. The evidence of pagination alone cannot specify which of them was al- tered at the last minute, though the finale would be a likely candidate. It does establish, however, that at least one cut was accommo- dated quite late in the publication procedure.22

III To reconstruct what must have actually

happened in the last month or so of rehearsals, it is also necessary to consider the types of re- vision that took place during the period. The numbers that Bizet revised repeatedly during rehearsals were the finales, which, with the exception of that in Act II, were reworked sev- eral times. In addition, Galli-Mari& apparently learned the final version of the Habanera dur- ing the last three weeks of rehearsals. Two other solo numbers, Don Jose's "Dragon d'Al- cala" couplets in Act II and Moralks's couplets in Act I, were totally rewritten after the per- formance parts were copied. These were the major revisions, and the burden of learning this new material fell largely upon those most capable of learning it quickly, the soloists.

The chorus, on the other hand, was given less and less to sing as the opera reached its final form. In the last weeks of rehearsal the chorus was completely cut out of the finale of

19Cahuet, La Liberte du theatre, p. 246. 20With the exception of one number, "Vivat le Torero," the proof sheets do not refer to heavily revised numbers, so they cannot be a partial set connected with last-minute changes. They are probably just a randomly preserved selection of a general run of proofs.

21For a facsimile of p. 18 of these proof sheets, see Mina Curtiss, Bizet, facs. 22. 22The practice of changing musical numbers in a large work up to the last minute was certainly not unique to Bizet, nor to Carmen. There is another example of a very late addition in his work. Although Act I of Les Pecheurs de perles (Choudens, pl. no. A.C. 992, 1863) contains 88 pages, Act II does not begin with p. 89 but with 85 bis. These "bis" numbers continue through p. 88, after which normal pagination reappears. Evidently the engraver did not want to alter pagination on all the first-act plates when-as is known from other evidence-the first number of Act II was extended.

68

Act I. In the finale of Act IV its triplet rhythms were simplified to eighth and six- teenth notes. The men's section of the "Choeur des cigarieres" in Act I and their counterpoint to the return of the women's theme in the same piece were cut after rehear- sal with orchestra, as was the men's part in the Act I chorus "Au secours." In Act II "Vivat le Torero" was cut to less than half its original length, and the chorus was entirely removed from the exit music for Escamillo after his famous couplets.

These cuts and others greatly reduced both the bulk and difficulty of the material the chorus had to sing. And the changes prob- ably occurred in January or February, since these pieces were all copied into the manu- script performing materials. Both Bizet's con- cern for dramatic momentum and his frustra- tion with the singers' limitations must have played a role in this revision process.23 It may be a coincidence that on 13 February 1875 Bizet wrote to Du Locle requesting more female choristers to ensure an adequate per- formance of the "Chocur des cigarieres" and the "Au secours" chorus. Halevy also reported that at one point the chorus threatened to strike, and that after two months of rehearsal they still maintained that the two first-act choruses mentioned above were impossible to sing.24 Apparently even with reinforcements and with less material to manage, the chorus barely mastered their notes and staging. On opening night they still showed "le manque de discipline et l'insuffisance d'etudes,"25 but they did manage to get through the work, thanks to Bizet's late revisions and the inten- sive rehearsals.

This new source for Carmen suggests a very different revision chronology than that proposed by Fritz Oeser in the critical notes of his much-discussed edition. While he would favor a more leisurely and methodical process, our view of Carmen's genesis should now in- corporate hectic revisions, chaotic rehearsals, and an enormous flexibility on the part of both cast and composer in the last six weeks of rehearsal. Late in January 1875 Bizet wrote apologetically to Ambroise Thomas:

Carmen ne me laisse plus un instant de repos. J'ac- compagne moi-meme-je reduis moi-meme ... Voulez-vous encore m'excuser et me pardonner mon inexactitude involontaire?

Carmen no longer leaves me an instant of rest. I do the accompanying myself; I am reducing the score myself. Will you please excuse me and pardon me once again for my involuntary unpunctuality?26

In the first two months of 1875 Bizet's days were filled with rehearsals and his even- ings with reducing his orchestral score and rewriting large sections of his opera. That his revisions under such pressure almost invari- ably resulted in musical and dramatic im- provement of his work can only increase our respect for the sureness of his judgment. It may be overly romantic to suggest (as some biographers have done) that the composer's disappointment and depression over Carmen's semi-failure contributed directly to his final illness. Still, stress and overwork in those last weeks of frantic preparations, coupled with a weak constitution and mounting personal problems, may well have been factors in Bizet's untimely death so soon after his craft had reached its zenith.27

%.

LESLEY A. WRIGHT A New Source for Carmen

231n "The True Carmen?" Winton Dean suggests very rea- sonably that another explanation for the late rehearsal cuts in Carmen might be the sheer length of the opera. Even in its shortened form it lasted past midnight on opening night, in defiance of Parisian tradition. Presuma- bly cuts for reasons of length would also have been late, perhaps in February, after the cast (including chorus) could smoothly rehearse an entire number or scene with- out major interruption and it could be timed. 24Ludovic Hal6vy, "La Millieme Repr6sentation de Car- men," Le Thgatre, no. 145 (January 1905), p. 8. 25Charles Pigot, Georges Bizet et son oeuvre (Paris, 1886), p. 275.

26Autograph letter at the Stiftelse Musikkulturens Frim- jande in Stockholm. 27I wish to thank Mme. Labat-Poussin and Elizabeth C. Bartlet for their help in locating materials referred to in this article.

69

19TH CENTURY

MUSIC

APPENDIX

1. Act I, no. 5, "Habanera"

8 vers pareils aux quatre premiers, le second, 4me, 6me, 8me, 10me et 12me commen- ?ant par une voyelle!!!

2 0d 0t (D' OCD w(D p rA. (D (D C

PAGE SENT BY BIZET TO HALEVY, SUMMER 1874

L'amour est un rebelle Et nul ne peut l'apprivoiser. C'est en vain qu'on l'appelle Il lui convient de refuser

L'amour est enfant de BohAme... Il ne connfit jamais de loi. Si tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'aime! .. Si tu m'aimes. . . tant pis pour toi! ..

L'oiseau que tu croyais surprendre Battit de l'aile et s'envola.- L'amour est loin-tu peux

l'attendre- Tu ne l'attends plus-il est Ia.- Tout autour de toi vite, vite Il vient-il s'en va-puis revient Tu crois le tenir-il t'evite Tu crois l'eviter-il te tient!

L'amour est enfant de Boheme I1 ne conni^it jamais de loi. Si tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'aime! Si tu m'aimes,-tant pis pour toi!

CENSORS' LIBRETTO, f.[10r-v]

(Elle voit Don Jose et le regarde.) L'amour est enfant de Boheme Il n'a jamais connu de loi Si tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'aime Si je t'aime, prends garde a toi. (Repondant aux regards et aux

gestes suppliants de ses adorateurs.)

Rien n'y fait menace ou priere L'un parle bien, l'autre se tait Et c'est I'autre que je pr6ffre Il n'a rien dit mais il me plait! . . .

L'amour est enfant de BohAme Il n'a jamais connu de loi Si tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'aime Si je t'aime, prends garde a toi.

FIRST-EDITION LIBRETTO, 1875, pp. 10-11

L'amour est un oiseau rebelle Que nul ne peut apprivoiser, Et c'est bien en vain qu'on

l'appelle S'il lui convient de refuser

Rien n'y fait; menace ou priere L'un parle bien, l'autre se tait; Et c'est l'autre que je prefere, Il n'a rien dit, mais il me plait.

L'amour est enfant de Boheme, Il n'a jamais connu de loi; Si tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'aime; Si je t'aime, prends garde a toi! .. L'oiseau que tu croyais surprendre Battit de l'aile et s'envola... L'amour est loin, tu peux

l'attendre; Tu ne l'attends plus... il est li... Tout autour de toi, vite, vite, Il vient, s'en va, puis il revient... Tu crois le tenir, il t'evite, Tu veux l'eviter, il te tient.

L'amour est enfant de Boheme, Il n'a jamais connu de loi; Si tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'aime; Si je t'aime, prends garde a toi!

2. Act I, no. 11, "Voici l'ordre, partez"

CENSORS' LIBRETTO, f.[21r]

Les m~mes, le Lieutenant, puis les Ouvrihres, les Soldats, les bourgeois. Le Lieutenant. Voici l'ordre, partez et faites bonne garde. Carmen (bas a' Jose.) Sur le pont je te pousserai Aussi fort que je le pourrai... Laisse-toi renverser. . . le reste me regarde.

FIRST-EDITION LIBRETTO, 1875, p. 23

(The opening section of the scene is exactly the same.)

70

(Elle se place entre les deux dragons. Jose derriere elle, les femmes et les bourgeois envahissent la salle et se remettent a chanter aux oreilles de l'officier.)

La Manuelita disait Et repetait a voix haute etc. etc.

(Au milieu du vacarme Carmen arrive au pont. Elle donne un coup de poing a Don Jose, celui-ci se laisse tomber a' la renverse, Carmen ecarte alors les deux soldats et se sauve, le vacarme redouble.)

Choeur general. Ah! Ah! Ah! Monsieur I'Officier Vous gardez mal votre gibier. FIN.

Elle se place entre les deux dragons. Jose ' c6te d'elle. Les femmes et les bourgeois pendant ce temps sont rentrds en scene toujours maintenus a distance par les dragons... Carmen traverse la scene de gauche a droite allant vers le pont...

L'amour est enfant de Boheme, II n'a jamais connu de loi; Si tu ne m'aimes pas, je t'aime, Si je t'aime, prends garde a toi.

En arrivant d l'entrde du pont a droite, Carmen pousse Jose qui se laisse renverser. Confusion, desordre, Carmen s'enfuit. Arrivee au milieu du pont, elle s'arrote un instant, jette sa corde a la volee par-dessus le parapet dul pont, et se sauve pendant que sur la scene, avec de grands eclats de rire, les cigarikres entourent le lieutenant.

LESLEY A. WRIGHT A New Source for Carmen

3. Act IV, no. 27, Duo et Choeur final

CENSORS' LIBRETTO, f.[59v] Don Jose, la frappant. Eh bien, damnee...

(Carmen tombe. . . elle est mourante. . . appuyde sur son bras gauche... Du bras droit elle fait le geste d'etaler ses cartes par terre, comme au second acte et chante d'une voix qui s'eteint.)

Carmen. Mais si tu dois mourir, si le mot redoutable Est &crit par le sort La carte le dira, la carte impitoyable Repetera la mort.

(Elle meurt.) Don Jose, se jetant sur elle. Carmen, ma Carmen adoree!..

(Les fanfares sonnent dans le cirque, eclatantes et joyeuses. Le velum s'ouvre. Parait Escamillo entoure de la foule qui l'acclame.)

Reprise du choeur. Victoire! Victoire! etc. Don Jose. Vous pouvez m'arreter... c'est moi qui l'ai

tuee! ... (On arrete Don Jose. Le rideau tombe. Mercedes et Frasquita sont a genoux pres de Carmen.)

FIRST-EDITION LIBRETTO, 1875, p. 68

Jose, le poignard la main, s'avanqant sur Carmen. Eh bien, damnde...

Carmen recule... Josd la poursuit... Pendant ce temps fanfares et choeur dans le cirque.

Choeur. Toreador, en garde, Et songe en combattant Qu'un oeil noir te regarde Et que l'amour t'attend.

Josd a frappe Carmen... Elle tombe morte... Le velum s'ouvre. La foule sort du cirque.

Jose. Vous pouvez m'arreter... c'est moi qui l'ai

tu. e... Escamillo paraft sur les marches du cirque... Jose se jette sur le corps de Carmen.

O ma Carmen! ma Carmen ador6e! FIN.

71

Article Contentsp. 61p. 62p. 63p. 64p. 65p. 66p. 67p. 68p. 69p. 70p. 71

Issue Table of Contents19th-Century Music, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Jul., 1978), pp. 1-91Front Matter [pp. 1-2]Beethoven Scholars and Beethoven's Sketches [pp. 3-17]Schubert's Sonata Form and Brahms's First Maturity [pp. 18-35]The Historical Structure: Adorno's "French" Model for the Criticism of Nineteenth-Century Music [pp. 36-60]A New Source for "Carmen" [pp. 61-71]Ives and Mahler: Mutual Responses at the End of an Era [pp. 72-81]Performers and InstrumentsReview: Zwirnknulerl: A Note on the Performance of Johann Strauss et al. [pp. 82-84]

ReviewReview: untitled [pp. 85-87]

Comment & Chronicle [pp. 88-91]Back Matter