Grove's dictionary of music and musicians

'
SPONTINI 659
very graceful composition to the same words
(1811).!
Conaidering his great poation, Spontini did
not accompli5i much for music in Berlin. At
the opera he made the band play with a fire, an
expression, and an ensemble, hitherto unknown,
forced the singers to throw themselves dramatically
into their parts, and used every exertion
to fuse the different elements into one coherent
whole. He endeavoured to improve the existing
school for singers and founded one for the
orchestra. But his efforts as a rule were concentrated
on the operas which he himself conducted—that
is to say, his own, Gluck's
'Arniida,' and 'Don Juan.' These works,
through his genius, his influence on his
subordinates, and his almost absolute power,
he brought to a perfection then unequalled.
The pieces directed by his vice-conductors went
badly, partly because Spontini exhausted the
singers, and partly because he took little interest
in the general repertoire. He had, too, no power
of organisation or administration. As long as
the excellent material lasted which Bruhl transferred
to him in 1820 this defect was not glaring,
but when his solo-singers began to wear out and
had to be replaced, it was found that he had not
the judgment, the penetration, nor the impartiality
necessary for such business. Up to
the autumn of 1827 he only concluded one engagement
himself, and in that instance it was
a solo-singer who proved only fit for the chorus.
On the other hand he lost Sieber, a good bass,
by insisting on reducinghis salary to 100 thalers,
and had shortly afterwards to re-engage him at
200, as there was no bass in the company capable
of taking the parts in his own operas. The art
of divining the taste of the public, of at once
meeting it, elevating and moulding it—the art,
in fact, of keeping the exchequer fuU without
sacrificing artistic position—this was wholly out
of his reach. At the King's theatre, the audiences
'steadily fell off, especially after the opening of
the Konigstadt theatre in 1823. At times
Spontini seems to have felt his incapacity, but
unfortunately he was deluded by his own vanity
and domiiieering temper, and the insinuations
of so-called friends, into believing that the decline
of the opera was owing to Bruhl, whereas
Briihl might have retorted that everything he
proposed was met by a despotic and unreasoning
veto. The Count at length, in 1828, wearied
out by the unceasing opposition, resigned, and
was succeeded by Count Redem, who received
from the King a fresh code of instructions,
somewhat circumscribing Spontini's powers, and
concentrating those of the management. Opportunities
for fresh differences still constantly
arose,
and Count Redem had much to contend
with in Spontini's increasing irritability and inconsistency.
In time even the admirers of his
1
Ledebur glvea a tolerably complete catalogue of Spontini'a
Bmaller works ; see p. B70. Also Marx, in the Berlvner Allg. MvA.
Zeittmg (or 1828, p. 306.
music felt that his personal influence was bad,
and that the opera would never prosper as long
as he remained at its head,
Spontini was to have the receipts of the first
nights of his own operas for his annual benefit,
or in default of such representations a sum of
4000 francs. In the latter case he might give
a concert, and in fact he gave a considerable
number, both vocal and instrumental. 'My
concerts, in his own words, ' are dedicated to
'
the gi-eat masters, whose memoiy I strive to
keep alive with the public, while testifying my
own respect by performing their works in the
most brilliant and complete manner possible. *
'
His progi'ammes consisted principally of German
music, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.
The first performance in Berlin of Beethoven's
Symphony in A was at a concert of Spontini's
on May 12, 1824, and on April 30, 1828, he
gave Beethoven's minor Symphony, the Kyrie
and Gloria from his Mass in D, the overture to
' Coriolan,' and the Credo from Bach's B minor
Mass. As Bach's Mass had only just been
published by Nageli of Zurich, Spontini was the
first to inti'oduce a portion of it to the public
of Berlin, as he had been to acquaint them with
Beethoven's Masses. The performance itself
seems to have been a poor one, and indeed it could
hardly be otherwise, Spontini not having much
in common with Bach ; but the attempt was
praiseworthy.' Another point to his credit was
that he gave his support to Miiser's concerts.
The King's band could not play without his
permission, so he might have made difficulties
if he had chosen.
As we have already mentioned, Spontini's
late operas had no success outside Berlin . Except
a couple of stray performances of Olympia ' '
at
Dresden and Darmstadt, they did not even gain
a hearing. Occasionally he conducted one of
his own works, as for instance the Vestalin
'
at Munich* (Oct. 7 and 11, 1827), and Hamburg*
(Sept. 18, 1834). But such personal
contact does not seem to have led to sympathetic
relations. Speaking generally, the ' Vestalin '
and Cortez ' ' were the only operas of his
appreciated in Germany.
In Berlin itself, each year added to the number
of his opponents. In 1824 Marx entered
the lists in his behalf in his Zeiiung, and was
seconded by Dom ; but Dom left Berlin in
March 1828, and Marx, though' sincerely attached
to Spontini, occasionally admitted adverse
criticisms. Spontini was morbidly sensitive to
public opinion, and the loss of his defenders
was a serious one. Against the advice ofjudicious
friends he replied in person to anonymous attacks,
suffered flatterers to use unpractised pens
in his behalf, and even called in the Censorship.
2 Gubitz's Erlebniege, iii. 242.
3 Marx, Berliner Allg, ilvi. Zeiturtff, 1828, pp. 146 and 152.
4 Orandaur, Cltrtmik des kSnigl. Theaters in MUmchen, p. 106.
Munich, ]87a
^ Baiimi&Va DenJcvrierdigkeitm. Edited by TJhde, Part ii. p. 314.
Stuttgart, Cotta, 1878.