Nabokov, Nicolas [Nikolay]
Yüklə 10,2 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- WORKS (selective list) stage
Napoli, Jacopo(b Naples, 26 Aug 1911; d Ascea, Salerno, 19 Oct 1994). Italian composer. He studied composition with his father, Gennaro Napoli, and the organ and piano with Cesi at the Naples Conservatory. He taught at the conservatories in Cagliari and Naples and was director of the Naples (1954–62; 1976–8), Milan (1962–72) and Rome (1972–6) conservatories. He was a member of the Accademia di S Cecilia and of the Consiglio Superiore delle Antichità e delle Belle Arti, and was artistic director of the Teatro dell'Opera in Rome and the Teatro S Carlo in Naples. In 1972 he founded a school of piano, violin and woodwind teaching in Cremona. Napoli's output includes numerous operas along traditional lines, characterized by a broad melodic style. Some of these have the quality of a vignette, such as Miseria e nobiltà, on a typically Neapolitan subject, while others are more intensely dramatic, e.g. Mas'Aniello. In his later stage works, including Il barone avaro and Dubrowski II, Napoli responded, albeit in a limited way, to some of the linguistic and formal innovations of contemporary music theatre. However, his instrumental and vocal output remained cautiously conservative, if rich, varied and fluid. WORKS(selective list) Op: Il malato immaginario (M. Ghisalberti, after Molière), Naples, 1939; Miseria e nobiltà (V. Viviani, after E. Scarpetta), Naples, 1946; Un curioso accidente (Ghisalberti, after C. Goldoni), Bergamo, 1950; Mas'Aniello (Viviani), Milan, 1953; I pescatori (Viviani), Naples, 1954; Il tesoro (Viviani), Rome, 1958; Il rosario (Viviani, after F. De Roberto), Brescia, 1962; Il povero diavolo (Viviani), Trieste, 1963; Il barone avaro (M. Pasi, after A. Puškin), Naples, 1970; Dubrowski II (Pasi, after Puškin), Naples, 1973; A San Francisco (Viviani, after S. Di Giacomo), Naples, 1982Inst: Preludio della campana, orch, 1975; Partita sopra passacaglia, orch, 1979; Gui Conc., gui, orch, 1981; Tempo di ciaccona, vn, 1983Vocal: La passione di Cristo, orat, chorus, 1951; Terre lontane, 1960–78; Piccola cantata per il Venerdi Santo, chorus, 1963; Munasterio (cant, Di Giacomo), chorus, 1969; Via Crucis e Resurrezione, orat, 2 S, Mez, Bar, insts, 1984Edns.: ops by Cimarosa, Paisiello, Piccinni, Raimondi BIBLIOGRAPHYDEUMM (A. Trudu) J. Napoli: Tecnica degli accordi (Milan, 1947) G. Vigolo: ‘Il tesoro’, Mille e una sera all'opera e al concerto (Florence, 1971), 391–3 ROBERTA COSTA Napolitana(It.). A shortened form of ‘villanella alla napolitana’, hence another term for Villanella. Nápravník, Eduard (Frantsevich)(b Býšť, nr Hradec Králové, 24 Aug 1839; d Petrograd [now St Petersburg], 10/23 Nov 1916). Russian conductor and composer of Czech birth. The son of a village schoolmaster, he studied music as a child with one of his father's colleagues and later with his uncle, Augustin Svoboda, precentor of the cathedral church in Pardubiče, where young Eduard played the organ. He was left an orphan upon his father's death in 1853 (his mother had died of consumption in 1850), and soon thereafter he enrolled in the Prague Organ School, taking organ lessons with Blažek and studying elementary theory, harmony, counterpoint and fugue. In 1855 he began piano lessons with Peter Maydl (1817–96) of the Maydl Institute, making such rapid progress that he subsequently taught at the institute for five years, 1856–61. In these years too he took private lessons in score reading and orchestration from Johann Friedrich Kittl (1806–68), director of the Prague Conservatory. By the age of 25 he had composed several substantial works, including a symphony, a violin sonata and several piano pieces and songs – all despite his lack of formal training in composition. In 1861 Nápravník was offered the post of associate director in Frankfurt, but went instead to St Petersburg to become the director of Prince Nikolay Yusupov's serf orchestra. Two years later Yusupov disbanded his orchestra in the wake of Aleksandr II's emancipation of the serfs. Nápravník then joined the staff of the Mariinsky Theatre as the result of a happy accident. At a performance of Glinka's Ruslan and Lyudmila the staff pianist failed to appear. Nápravník took over at a moment's notice, sight-reading the part with great skill, whereupon he was hired, by the Mariinsky's chief conductor, Konstantin Lyadov, as theatre organist and répétiteur the moment his contract with Yusupov had expired. In 1867 he was appointed assistant conductor of the Mariinsky, and succeeded Lyadov as chief conductor at the end of the 1868–9 season; he held his position at the Mariinsky, one of the most important in Russian musical life, until his death in 1916. Also in 1869 he succeeded Balakirev as conductor of the Russian Musical Society's concerts in St Petersburg, but his choice of programmes and his interpretations were frequently criticized in the press, and he resigned in 1881 after a particularly hostile article by N.F. Solovyov. Thereafter he conducted Russian Musical Society concerts only occasionally, to mark special events. During the 1870s and 80s, he conducted the concerts of the Mariinsky Theatre Orchestra, the concerts of the Russian Merchants Assembly (given during Lent) and court concerts in the Winter and Marble palaces; he also participated as organist or pianist in musical evenings at the private homes of high-ranking personages. An industrious and conscientious musician, Nápravník possessed both a fine musical memory and an unusually keen ear. His accomplished professionalism brought artistic standards at the Mariinsky Theatre up to the level of the best opera houses in Europe, even though his performances at times were criticized as mechanical, too brisk and emotionally disengaged. A strict disciplinarian and wily diplomat, he showed great acumen in controlling the business side of the theatre. When in 1882 the theatre's budget was increased by 70%, from 167,000 rubles to 284,200 rubles, he immediately expanded the orchestra to 102 players and the chorus to 100 singers. He also concerned himself with improving the financial position and social standing of performing musicians, even risking the loss of his position in 1876 to obtain a full bénéfice for the theatre's chorus and orchestra. Though himself a composer of four operas (of which Dubrovsky, after Pushkin, is the most likely to be encountered today), Nápravník is of greatest importance as a conductor. He led the world premières of many of the late 19th-century Russian operas that today constitute the basic international Russian repertory, including Rimsky-Korsakov's The Maid of Pskov (1873), May Night (1880), The Snow Maiden (1882), Mlada (1892) and Christmas Eve (1895); Tchaikovsky's The Oprichnik (1874), The Maid of Orléans (1881), The Queen of Spades (1890) and Iolanta (1892); Dargomïzhsky's The Stone Guest (1872) and Musorgsky's Boris Godunov (1874). He also directed many foreign works, among them Fidelio, Carmen, Tannhäuser, the complete Ring cycle, Rigoletto, Aida and Falstaff; he found the last affected and forced, adding, ‘No comic streak can be found in Verdi's bold operatic talent’. Relations between Nápravník and The Five grew cool at an early date, thanks to Rimsky-Korsakov's snide review of the conductor's opera Nizhegorodtsï (‘The Nizhniy-Novgoroders’; 1868). But it is an exaggeration to suggest, as some Soviet writers once did, that the conductor was implacably hostile toward The Five. Of Musorgsky, for example, Nápravník wrote (Kutateladze, 1959, pp.48–9): Musorgsky … stood out … because of his originality. He had great natural gifts and was antagonistic towards any formal training: he was almost a musical illiterate. He had a realistic and revolutionary approach to music; nonetheless, at all times and places, he was true to his own genius…. Had he followed Rimsky-Korsakov's example and enthusiastically studied elementary theory, harmony, counterpoint, instrumentation, and so forth, one can only imagine what talented works he would have created in operatic literature! Though his remarks show no real understanding of Musorgsky's work – just as his view of Falstaff shows little understanding of that opera – they probably should not be construed as ill-disposed. For over half a century Nápravník was a leading figure in Russian musical life. Although his primary career as a conductor gave him little time to compose, Kutateladze (1959) cites 77 works in all genres, published and unpublished, dating from Nápravník's years in Prague to 1906. By temperament Nápravník was drawn strongly to Glinka and Tchaikovsky, whose influence is apparent in both the lyric and dramatic moments of his music. His four operas were produced successfully in both St Petersburg and Moscow, and Tchaikovsky thought well of the historical grand opera Harold (1884–5), set in the period of the Norman conquest of England. Nápravník's Piano Trio op.24 took first prize at a Russian Musical Society competition in 1876. His Violin Sonata in G major op.52 (1890) is a well-crafted and idiomatic work with a brilliant and colourful scherzo; the sonata's finale takes as its second theme the same folktune used by Musorgsky for Marfa's aria in Act 3 of Khovanshchina. The opera Dubrovsky, however, is ‘Nápravník's emblematic score and his one palpable hit. In its way this far from negligible work stands as monument to the golden age of the Imperial Russian opera, testifying to the magnificent company Nápravník assembled and trained and to its distinguished level of routine’ (Taruskin, GroveO). But despite the composer's technical fluency, most of his music now exists only on the fringes of the repertory. Nápravník's primary legacy in Russian music remains the high standard he achieved as an executant. WORKS(selective list) stageall given at St Petersburg, Mariinsky Theatre
orchestral
chamber
other works
BIBLIOGRAPHYGroveO (R. Taruskin) N.A. Rimsky-Korsakov: ‘“Nizhegorodtsï”, opera Ė. Napravnika’, S.-Peterburgskiye vedomosti (3 Jan 1869); repr. in Polnoye sobraniye sochineniy: Literaturnïye proizvedeniya i perepiska [Complete works: Literary works and correspondence], ed. N. Shelkovy (Moscow, 1963), ii, 13–18 ‘Dubrovsky: novaya opera Ė.F. Napravnika’, RMG (1895), no.1, pp.53–6 N. Findeyzen: Ėduard Frantsevich Napravnik (St Petersburg, 1898) RMG (1913), no.37 [issue commemorating Nápravník's 50th-anniversary jubilee] E. Closson: ‘Edouard Napravnik’, ReM, nos.171–4 (1937), 22–5 G. Bernandt: ‘Kapel'meyster russkoy operï: Ė.F. Napravnik’ [The Russian opera's Kapellmeister], SovM (1939), no.8, pp.91–2 Ė. Stark: Peterburgskaya opera i yego mastera 1890–1910 [St Petersburg opera and its masters] (Leningrad, 1940) Ye. Gordeyeva: ‘Dubrovskiy’ Ė.F. Napravnika (Moscow, 1949, 2/1960) L. Kutateladze, ed.: Ė.F. Napravnik: avtobiograficheskiye, tvorcheskiye materialï, dokumentï, pis'ma [Autobiographical and creative material, documents, letters] (Leningrad, 1959) N. Malko: ‘Napravnik and the Russian Opera’, A Certain Art (New York, 1966), 105–22 N. Savinov: ‘Napravnik i yego vremya’ [Nápravník and his times], Muzïkal'naya zhizn' (1983), no.8, pp.6–7 R. Taruskin: ‘“The Present in the Past”: Russian Opera and Russian Historiography ca. 1870’, Russian and Soviet Music: Essays for Boris Schwarz, ed. M.H. Brown (Ann Arbor, 1984), 77–146, esp. 104–10 L. Mikheyeva: Ėduard Frantsevich Napravnik (Moscow, 1985) M. Malkiel: ‘Polveka tvoreniya’ [A half-century of creative work], SovM (1990), no.3, pp.92–8 ROBERT W. OLDANI Yüklə 10,2 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|