censorship operas in rome
Post on 01-Mar-2018
227 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
1/34
Social Control and the Censorship of Giuseppe Verdi's Operas in Rome (1844-1859)Author(s): Andreas GigerSource: Cambridge Opera Journal, Vol. 11, No. 3 (Nov., 1999), pp. 233-265Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/823611.
Accessed: 21/10/2014 11:17
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Cambridge University Pressis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Cambridge
Opera Journal.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/823611?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/823611?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
2/34
Cambridge
pera
ournal,
11, 3,
233-266
?
1999
CambridgeUniversity
Press
Social control
and the
censorship
of
Giuseppe
Verdi's
operas
in Rome
(1844-1859)1
ANDREAS GIGER
In the
1840s
and
1850s,
four
operas
by
Giuseppe
Verdi
(I
dueFoscari,La
battaglia
di
Legnano,
I
trovatore,
nd Un
ballo
n
maschera)
remiered
at the
theaters
Argentina
and
Apollo
in Rome.
Two of
these works
(I
dueFoscari
and Un
ballo
n
maschera)
ad
been
rejected
at other theaters
because the
authorities
did
not
consider
them
concordant
with the
censorial
requirements,
and
none
of
the
four would
have been
permitted
in
Rome had
the
authorities
applied
the
usual criteria.
That
they
accepted
them
anyway suggests the process of censorship did not follow strict rules but was
handled
arbitrarily.
These
premieres
are
even
more
astonishing
when we
take into
account
that
Rome,
in
contrast to most
other
cities
on
the
peninsula,
had
very
rigorous
standards of
censorship.2
The
Vatican's concern
with
censorship
is
evident in an
1853 article
published
in
the
Jesuit
semimonthly journal
Civilta
Cattolica,
which
strongly
denounced contem-
porary
operatic
compositions
and
consistently
referred
to
works
by
Verdi
as bad
examples
of
taste
in
matters of
politics,
religion,
or
morality:3
Where
do we
find,
for
example,
a
pair
of
brothers like Carlo
and
Francesco
in I
masnadieri?
Where a
humor so
festive,
so
cruel,
so
amorous,
and
so
wicked as
depicted
in
[the
character
of]
Rigoletto,
on
some
stages
renamed
Viscardello?
Where do we
find a
woman's
dissimulation
continuing
for
such a
long
time,
such
deep
hate,
and
burning
desire
for
vengeance
as
appears
n
Azucena from I
trovatore?
he one who
invents
types
such as ...
de Silva
[in
Ernani]
[and]
the
Loredani
[in
I
due
Foscan]
certainly
did not
intend to
take his
models
from
Nature,
in
order to
present
them
in
an
embellishedand
perfectedway
to
public
contemplation.
[Rather]
he
narrated
dreams
of
sickness or the
deliriums
of a
wounded
mind.4
I
would ike
to thank
Philip
Gossett for his
helpful uggestions
n an
earlier
ersionof
this
article. wouldalso like to thank he Indiana
University
MusicologyDepartment
or a
travel
grant
allowing
me
to
conductresearch
n
the
Archiviodi
Statoand
the Archivio
Capitolino
in
Rome.
2
The
only
other
city
with
standards
omparable
o
those of
Romewas
Naples.
See David
R.
B.
Kimbell,
Verdin the
Ageof
ItalianRomanticism
Cambridge,
981),
23 and
26.
According
to
the
Eniclopedia
ello
pettacolo,
d. Silvio
d'Amicoet
al.,
9
vols.
(Rome,
1954-68),
s.v.
'Censura',
ensorship
was
particularly
igorous
during
he
reign
of
Pius
IX
(1846-78).
3
Although
he Civilta
Cattolica
as not the
official
papalnewspaper,
t
usually
ook the
role
of
defending
he state
against
political
nd
religious
ccusations.
Only
one
paper,
he
Giornalei
Roma,
ppeared aily,
but
it
contained
nly
announcements.ee
Raffaele
De
Cesare,
Roma
lo
stato
del
Papa
dal
ritornoi Pio IX
alXX
settembre,
vols.
(Rome,
1907),
I:
311-13.
4
'Dovetrovare, eresempio,unacoppiadi fratelli omeCarloe Francesco eiMasnadieri?
Dove un
umoresi
festoso,
si
crudele,
i
amoroso
e
si
scellerato
ome
e
depintoRigoletto
che
fu
poi
ribattezzato
u
qualche
cena
per
Viscardello? ove
dissimulazionei
donna
tanto a
lungo protratta,
dio tanto
profondo,
desiderio
anto
pungente
di
vendetta
quanto
appare
nell'
Azucenadel
Trovatore?
hi
imagino
tipi
...
dei
de
Silva,
dei
Loredani,
on
intendeva
erto di
prendere
suoi
modelli
dalla
natura,
d
abbelliti
perfezionati
orgerli
lia
comune
contemplazione.
arro
sogni
d'infermo,
delirii
di
menteoffesa.'
Del
teatro
italiano',
Civiltd
Cattolica,
(1853),
261.
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
3/34
Andreas
Giger
The
Civilta Cattolica
complains
about
the
consistent
portrayal
of rulers as wicked
(citing
Rigoletto,
Macbeth,
I
trovatore,
masnadieri,
Al/ira,
and
I
lombardi)
and the
fact
that the
operas
instruct
listeners
how to commit crimes
cleverly,
even
placing
the
criminals in a good light (citing I masnadieri nd Rigoletto).5The journal draws three
conclusions
from the
character
of
such
operas:
(1)
society
needs
censorship
in
order
to
prevent
moral,
political,
and
religious
decadence;
(2)
the
promoters
of
evil, i.e.,
the authors
(not
necessarily
the
theaters
themselves),
have to be
banned;
and
(3)
audiences
should
stay away
from
such
pernicious
works.6
Even
Verdi,
who since the 1840s had
enjoyed
a
reputation
as the
greatest
Italian
opera composer,
faced the
rigors
of
censorship.
The effect of
his
operas
on
audiences
of
the time was
generally
not
diminished,
however,
because Verdi
usually
managed
to
maintain his essential dramatic
concept,
even with the
numerous
changes required by the censors. Nevertheless, it was exactly these fundamental
dramatic
concepts
to which the
Civilta
Cattolica
objected
because
they
were
incompatible
with the
ideology
defended
by
the censorial
system.7
Why,
then,
did
Rome
premiere
several
of
the most
important
Verdi
operas?
And how could the
Teatro
Apollo stage
the first
performance
of
Un
ballo
in
maschera,
which
had
been
completely
rejected by
the
Neapolitan
authorities? This article will
place
the reasons
in
a
broad
context,
introducing
new sources
concerning
the
censorship
of
Verdi's
operas.
We can
advance several
possible explanations
for
the
inconsistencies
of
Roman
censorship.
First,
opera
was an essential element of Italian culture, and its
outright
suppression
would have caused
protests
or
riots.
Second,
Verdi
was the
most
famous Italian
composer
and
opera
houses
eagerly sought
to
premiere
his
works.
Third,
most
government
officials themselves loved to
attend
operatic
performances
and did not want to be
deprived
of
their
most
important
cultural
pleasure.
In
addition,
censorship
itself
was
inconsistently
regulated:
on the one
hand,
the
censors
enjoyed
considerable
freedom;
on the
other,
their
arbitrary
decisions were influ-
enced
by
higher
officials.
Finally,
the
opera
house served as
a
meeting
place
where
the
authorities could observe
intellectual
circles
in
a
carefully
controlled
environ-
ment:
the
seating arrangement,
which reflected the
hierarchical social
order
from
aristocracy
to middle
class,
effectively
worked
toward a mental
consolidation of the
status
quo,
thus
serving
as a
powerful political
tool
in
the
hands of
any
government.
John
Rosselli
first
suggested
such a
function,
but
without
analyzing
this
process
and
without
explaining
how a
famous
composer
such as
Verdi
contributed
to
this
5
Ibid.,
266-9.
6
Ibid.,276-7.
7
For
a document with
guidelines
for the
censorial
system,
see,
for
example, Luigi
Vannicelli,
'Osservazioni sulla revisione
delle
produzioni
teatrali
(1842)',
published
in
Elvira
Grantaliano,
'La
censura nella Roma
pontificia
dell'ottocento:
Tipologie
ed
esempi',
in La
musica
a
Roma attraverso
lefonti
d'archivio:Atti
del
convegno
nternationale
Roma
4-7
giugno
1992,
ed.
Bianca Maria
Antolini,
Arnaldo
Morelli,
and
Vera Vita
Spagnuolo
(Lucca,
1994),
287-97,
331-3.
Alessandra
Campana
will
publish
a
study
of
this document
in
a
forthcoming
issue
of
the Verdi
Newsletter.
234
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
4/34
Social control and the
censorship
of Verdi's
operas
in Rome
system.8
I will show that in
nineteenth-century Italy,
the
opera
house
emerged
as
the
link
between
famous
composers
such as
Verdi,
who
guaranteed
that
citizens
attended
operas,
and
the
government,
which used the institution of
opera
as
an
effective tool to consolidate the social hierarchy. Of particularrelevance here are (1)
the different kinds of
pressure
put
on
the
government
and its censorial
system by
Roman
opera
audiences,
who demanded
frequent performances
of
high
quality,
and
by
the
reputation
of a
composer
such
as
Verdi,
whose
works
were
needed to
satisfy
that
audience;
(2)
the
flexibility
of the
censorship
system
in
general;
and
(3)
censorial
leniency
with
respect
to Verdi's
operas.
Roman
society,
opera
audiences,
and
Verdi's
popularity
Roman
history
between
the
liberation of
Pope
Pius VII
(1800-23)
from
Napoleonic
captivity
in
1814
and the Italian
unification
in
1859 can
be
characterized
as
tending
toward
greater
control of the
government
over all
aspects
of life.9
Towards the
end of
this
period Pope
Pius
IX
(1846-78)
finally
seemed to
give
in
to
some liberal
tendencies. The Statuto
fondamentale,
he new
constitution
of
1848,
promised
some
power
to the
rich
laity,
but in
reality
it
secured
full
ecclesiastic
control.10
Nevertheless,
during
the 1848
revolution,
Pius
lost
political
control and
fled to
Gaeta
on
24
November.
On
9
February
1849,
the
revolutionaries
proclaimed
the Roman
Republic,
but it lasted
only
until 4
July
when the French
helped
the
Pope
reconquer
the
city.
Pius did not
immediately
return to
Rome but left
the
restoration
of
order
to
three
conservative
cardinals,
who
proceeded
so
rigorously
that the
population
nicknamed them
'triumvirato
rosso'.
Upon
his return
on 12
April
1850,
the
Pope
embarked on a
very
conservative
course,
abolishing
the
Statuto
fondamentale
and
extending
artistic
censorship,
which hitherto
had concen-
trated
on
religious
and moral
issues,
to
political
matters.
Thus,
the
Papal
States
entered a
state of
'pre-agony'
in
which the
population
was
interested
mainly
in
entertainment.
1
Roman
society
of the time can be described as
consisting
of ecclesiastic and
lay
pillars,
each
comprised
of three
levels.
At
the
top
were the
College
of
Cardinals and
8 John
Rosselli,
The
Opera
ndustry
n
Italy
rom
Cimarosao
Verdi:TheRole
of
theImpresario
(Cambridge,
1984),
40.
The
following
sources
provide
a historical
background
of
Roman
history
for the
period
under
consideration:
Luigi
Pompili
Olivieri,
II
senato
omano
elle ette
epoche
i svariato
governo
da Romolo
fino
a noicolla erie
cronologica-ragionata
ei senatori ell'anno 1143
fino
al
1870,
3 vols.
(Rome,
1886);
Alfred von
Reumont,
Geschichteer
Stadt
Rom,
vol.
3,
part
2
(Berlin,
1870);
Giuliano
Friz,
Consumi,
enore i vita e
prezi
a Roma
dal 1770 al
1900
(Rome,
1980);
Raffaele
De
Cesare,
The
Last
Days
of
Papal
Rome,
1850-1870,
abridged
with the
assistance of
the
author
and
translated
by
Helen
Zimmern
(London,
1909);
and Mario
Caravale,
Lo
Stato
pontificio
a Martino
V a Pio IX
(Turin,
1978).
See Pius
IX,
Lo
Statuto
fondamentaleelgoverno
egli
tati di S. Chiesa
Rome,
1848).
11
Friz,
Consumi
see
n.
9),
211
and
216.
235
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
5/34
Andreas
Giger
the
aristocracy
respectively,
followed
by
the
prelacy
and
the
citizens
(la
borghesia),
with the third
social stratum
for
the inferior
clergy
and 'the
people'.
The
ecclesiastic
pillar
was considered
superior
to the
lay
at
all
levels.l2
Although
the two sides
as
wholes had little interaction, the corresponding levels on each side remained in close
contact. Cardinals
frequently
honored
noble
families with their
presence
at social
events,
whereas
they
would have no
direct contact
with the rich
bourgeoisie.13
Where
the
aristocracy
was
concerned,
the
church tried to
maintain
ideological
control. Private
tutors,
usually
descendants of
Popes
and
cardinals,
often
instructed
noble
youths,
who
accordingly
had little
interest
in
the
liberal movement that led to
the 1848 revolution.14
Dependent
on a
politically
apathetic nobility,
the
Pope
could
not
very
well
deprive
this
important
social
group
of
opera,
its most
important
entertainment.
Various forms of theatrical entertainment existed in Rome during this period: the
lowest forms included
equestrian spectacles,
acrobats,
and
performing
monkeys;
the
mid-level ones
consisted of
spoken
plays;
and the
most
prestigious
forms included
the
various forms
of
opera,
which
belonged
mainly
to
the
upper
classes.15
Opera
eria
was
performed
in
the
two most
prestigious
Roman
theaters,
the
Teatro
Apollo
and
the Teatro
Argentina,
with the
government
assuring
the
aristocracy
and
diplomatic
corps
of
the
best
seats.16 Members of
the
upper
classes
occasionally
attended
12
De
Cesare,
The
Last
Days
of
Papal
Rome
(see
n.
9),
85. Prelates are
ecclesiastical
dignitaries
who
can
occupy
various ranks between
the cardinaland
the
priest.
The
prelacy governed
the
temporal
aspects
of
church and state. See
RaffaeleDe
Cesare,
Romae lo
Statodel
Papa,
2
vols.
(Rome, 1907),
I:
102-5;
and
Rosselli,
Opera
ndustry
n. 8),
45. The
account of the
lay
hierarchy
as
reported by
the French
ambassador
n
Rome,
the Count of
Harcourt,
matches
De
Cesare's
description.
See
Friz,
Consumi
n. 9),
217.
Leopold
G.
Glueckert
(Between
Two
Amnesties: ormerPolitical
Prisoners
nd Exiles in
the Roman
Revolution
f
1848
[New
York,
1991], 3)
subdivides the
society
of
the
Papal
States
(not
just
of the
city
of
Rome)
according
to
profession:
Clergy (all levels) 2%
Nobility
and untitled
landowners
10.2%
Professionals
(doctors,
magistrates, eachers)
1.8%
Commercial
people
4.5%
Artisans,
tradesmen,
and
skilled workers
13.0%
Servants,
unskilled
workers,
and
unemployed
16.2%
Peasant-owners,
sharecroppers,
and tenants
50.0%
Soldiers
1.0%
Students
1.3%
Of the
lay
pillar,
the
'untitled
landowners'
(mercanti
i
campagna)
ade
up
the
only
group
of
the
borghesia
hat could
become
rich. The
'people',
from
the
artisans
downward,
and even
some
members of the
lower
borghesia,
epended
to various
degrees
on
charity.
13
De Cesare, TheLastDays of PapalRome(see n. 9), 85.
14
Calls
for
liberal
reforms came
mainly
from the
middle
class,
which
according
to
the French
ambassador n
Rome,
the
Count of
Harcourt,
was
influenced
by 'dangerous
foreign
elements'.
See the
report
of the
Count of
Harcourt to his
government,
quoted
in
Friz,
Consumi
see
n.
9),
217.
As we will
see in the
last
part
of
this
study,
the
government
had
a
great
interest in
having
the middle
class
represented
in
the
opera
house as well.
15 RosseUi,
Opera
ndustry
see
n.
8),
40.
16
For detailed
information
on this
process,
see
'Controlling
the audience'
below.
236
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
6/34
Social control and the
censorship
of Verdi's
operas
in Rome
productions
at second-rank
theaters for
amusement,
but
night
after
night,
they
went
to the
opera.
The
opening
of
the Teatro
Apollo
for the Carnival season
(26
December
through
Shrove Tuesday) was the most important social event of the year.17 During
Carnival,
the
government
required performances
on
every
day
except
Fridays.18
In
spite
of the
Jesuits'
condemnation
of
opera's
moral,
religious
and
political
decadence,
the
impresario's
contract with the
city
of Rome
required
a
minimum
number of
performances
per
season.
If
an
impresario
did not meet the
minimum,
he had
to lower
the
ticket
prices,
and his theater would receive a
smaller
subsidy.
If it
was his
negligence
that caused the reduction
of
the
performances,
he had to
pay
a
fine.19
Every
season,
the contract
also called for at
least one
opera
by
a
major
composer
newly
written
specifically
for
a
theater
in
Rome. These circumstances put Verdi in a powerful negotiating position. By the end
of the
1840s,
he had achieved a
reputation
that
allowed
him
to choose the theater
for which he
would write a new work. And with
Bellini
and Donizetti
dead,
Rossini
no
longer writing
operas,
and Mercadante
past
his
peak,
Verdi
no
longer
had
any
serious
competition
in
Italy.20
In
addition,
taking
into account both the
large
number
of
opera
houses
in
Italy
in
the nineteenth
century
-
Rome alone had two
first-rate
opera
houses
-
and Verdi's transcendent
popularity,
we can
imagine
the
impresarios'
efforts
in
convincing
Verdi to
choose their theaters
for
first
performances.
In a
position
to
ignore
offers of the Teatro alla Scala in
Milan,
one of the most
reputable
houses,
to
premiere
his
operas,
as he did
between
1845
and
1869,
Verdi
could
also
influence terms
in
the contracts
with
his
publisher
Ricordi.
Publication
17
De
Cesare,
Roma
lo
Stato el
Papa see
n.
12),
301. The
Carnival as
of enormous
importance
or the
Roman
population.
Even
during
imesof
political
unrest,
he
government uaranteed
he
celebration
n
order
not to
irritate he inhabitants
ven
more.
See Friz, Consumi(n. 9), 211.
18
'Prodotto he
sia lo
spettacolo
dovra
proseguire
ompleto,
senza
alcuna
nterruzione
ino
al
termine
di
Carnevale,
sclusi
soltanto
venerdi,
gli
altri
giorni
nei
quali
n Romasono
vietate
e
rappresentenze
eatrali.'
Once
he
work
s
produced,
t must
proceedcomplete
and without
any nterruption
ntil
the end of the
Carnival,
ith the
exception
of
Fridays
and the other
days
during
which n
Rome
theatrical
epresentations
re
forbidden.]
'Capitolato
iguardante
'appalto rivativo
elle
opere
seriee deiballidi Romanelle
stagioni
di Carnevale elle
opere
n
musicadadarsisenza
privativa
elle
stagioni
di
primavera
d
autunno
1853-56]',
Rome,
Archiviodi
Stato,
Direzione
generale
i
polizia,
ordine
pubblico,
busta
33,
no. 884.
19
'Capitolato1856]per
l'appalto
e' teatri
regj
di Roma
[Specification
f the Contract
Concerning
he
Royal
Theaters
n
Rome
(between
he
City
of Romeand the
Impresario)]',
reprintedn Tirincanti,
/
Teatrorgentina
Rome,
1971),following230.
20
Paragraph
of
the
'Capitolato',
eprinted
n
Tirincanti,
rgentina,
ollowing
30.
This
contract
dates from
1856,
but contracts f the sametitleexisted
or
the
completeperiod
n
consideration ere.See
Alberto
Cametti,
1
Teatroi
Tordinona
oi
di
Apollo,
vols.
(Tivoli,
1938),
I:
248,
251, 254,
and
257.
The Teatro
San
Carlon
Naplesspecified
Verdi,
Saverio
Mercadante,
nd GiovanniPacini
as
maestriprimari.
ee
'II
maestroVerdie la
impresa
del
teatroS.
Carlo'.
Rome,
Archiviodi
Stato,
Miscellanea
arte
politiche
riservate,
usta
140,
fasc.
5111,
no.
1582.
237
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
7/34
Andreas
Giger
was
an
important
matter because after the
premiere
of an
opera,
the
composer
normally
lost
control over its
performances, especially
with
regard
to
censorship.21
In
order to
discourage
censorial
distortions
in
subsequent performances,
Verdi
specified an additional paragraph in the contract for La battaglia di Legnano,
prohibiting
even the
smallest
changes
in
the
score;
for
every performance
at
any
theater in
which the
censors
required changes,
Ricordi
would have to
pay
Verdi
a
fine of
1,000
francs.22
The
history
of the
theaters
Apollo
and
Argentina gives ample
evidence of
the
struggle
for
compositions by
renowned
masters.
In
order to
reduce such
compe-
tition,
the
impresario
Vincenzo
Jacovacci
controlled as
many
as three Roman
opera
houses
(the
Apollo,
Argentina,
and
Valle)
by
1846.
Although
this
accumulation of
positions
did not
eliminate
competition
altogether,
it
at least
allowed
him to
reduce
expenses by sharing productions among the institutions.23
Impresarios
were also
under
pressure
from
the
audience,
for
if
it
did
not
like the
performance
or the
piece,
it
expressed
its
dissatisfaction,
and
such
manifestations
could
escalate
into
violence.24
When,
for
example,
the
Neapolitan
censors
required
drastic
changes
in
Verdi's
Un ballo in
maschera,
he
composer
withdrew the
piece.
After
the
opera
disappeared
from
the
announced
schedule,
the
public
began
to
protest.
The
government
intervened,
urging
a
review of the
agreements
between
theater and
composer,
but
Verdi
remained firm.25
As a
consequence,
the
theater
involved
him
in a
lawsuit,
referring
to
the 'horror
of an
awful libretto'
(1'
orrore
del
pessimo libretto').26 The court conceded that the numerous censorial emendations
might negatively
affect the
music,
and
the
composer
was released from
the
contract,
providing
he
returned
with Simon
Boccanegrafirst
performed
1857
in
Venice)
in
the
fall.
Censorship
notwithstanding,
the
government
never
considered
closing
an
opera
house
in
order
to
protect
its
audiences from the
decadence of
operatic
plots;27
opera
was too
essential
to
those social
segments upon
which
the
government
relied.
The
expectations
of the
opera
audience and the
meaning
of
opera
to the
culture
enabled
a
composer
such
as Verdi to
put pressure
on the
censorial
system.
21
Luke
Jensen,
Giuseppe
Verdi
&
Giovanni
RicordiwithNotes on
Francesco
ucca:From
'Oberto'o
'La traviata'
(New
York,
1989),
182.
22
Paragraph
8 of the
contract
concerning
La
battaglia
i
Legnano.
Gaetano
Cesari and
Alessandro
Luzio,
eds.,
I
Copialettere
i
Giuseppe
Verdi
Milan,
1913;
repr., Bologna, 1963),
39.
23
Cametti,
Tordinona
(see
n.
20),
I: 251.
24
Rosselli,
Opera
ndustry
see
n.
8),
87.
25
Franco
Abbiati,
'Gli
Anni del
Ballo
n
maschera',
erdi,
1
(1960),
15.
26
Ibid.,
16.
27
The
closing
of the
Teatro
Apollo
in
1849
resulted from
a
shortage
of
money
and
staff,
as
well as
'French
hostilities'
during
this
revolutionary
period,
not from a
papal
decree.
See
Cametti,
Tordinona
n. 20),
I:
256.
238
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
8/34
Social
control and the
censorship
of
Verdi's
operas
in Rome
The
organization
of the Roman
censura
Censorship
has
usually
been treated
as
a black
box,28
the
content
of which
has
only
recently received some attention.29 The documents reveal that the organization of
this
system
was neither
simple
nor clear. Under
normal
circumstances,
censorship
functioned on
two levels.
First,
the censors
examined
the
scenario,
the
libretto,
costumes,
and
staging, largely disregarding
the
music,
which did not
seem
to
have
much
potential
to harm the
people.30
Then,
representatives
of the
government
frequented
the
theaters and checked
whether the artists followed the directions of
the censors and other
authorities. This
controlling
body
consisted
of
a hetero-
geneous
group
of
people
with
very
different
degrees
of
power.
On
the
political
side,
the director of the
police
headed the
so-called
Deputation
of
Public
Performances
(deputazionedeipubblicispettacoli)and oversaw various other police officials
respon-
sible
for
matters of
security;
on
the
ecclesiastic side these
duties
belonged
to the
domains of
the
luogotenente
el tribunale
criminale
(a
lawyer)
and the
ecclesiastical
censor,
both
representing
the Cardinal Vicar
(see
Tables
1
and
2).
The
division of
spheres
of influence
was
not
always
clear and
occasionally
led to
disputes.31
The
tendency
toward
decentralization and
greater
participation
of the
municipal-
ity
initiated
by
Pius IX's
assumption
of
power
led to a
reorganization
of the
Deputation
in
1847.
Its
members were elected
from within the
Communal
Council
with
the
mayor
(senatore)
as their
chair.32This
emphasis
on
the
municipality
gave
the
illusion of balance with the ecclesiastical
side,
thereby
diverting
audience
hostility
from
the
Pope
and
his
cardinals without
significantly reducing
their
control.33 The
28
The
term
'black box' is used
by
cyberneticians
to
denote
a
system
of
processes
too
complex
to be
understood,
usually
indicated in
diagrams
by
a
simple
box,
of
which
only
the
input
and
output
are considered. Bruno
Latour,
Science n
Action:
How to Follow Scientists
and
Engineers
through
Society
Cambridge,
Mass.,
1987),
2-3.
29
The
short articles
covering
some
of
the
organization
and
function of Roman
censorship
include
Maria
Calzolari,
'La
censura nella Roma
pontificia
dell'ottocento:
il
ruolo
predominante della Direzione Generale di Polizia', in La musica a Roma attraversoefonti d'
archivio
(see
n.
7),
287-97;
Renata
Cataldi,
'La censura
sugli
spettacoli
nella Roma
pontificia
dell'ottocento: Le
licenze del cardinal
vicario',
in
ibid.,
299-320;
Paola Pavan and Michele
Franceschini,
'La
deputazione
dei
pubblici spettacoli
e il
suo
archivio',
Architettura
storica
e
documenti,
(1986),
97-100;
and
Angela
Montano,
'Introduzione
[to
the
catalog
of the
documents
in
Rome,
Archivio
Capitolino,
titolo 15
(1848-1870)]'
(typescript,
1997).
Luigia
Rivelli's
study
'G.
Gioacchino Belli
"censore" e il
suo
spirito
liberale',
Rassegna
storica del
Risorgimento
1923),
318-93,
did not
approach
the
topic systematically
and includes mistakes.
Other
studies,
such
as Rosselli
(Opera
Industry
[see
n.
8])
and Di
Stefano
(La
censura
eatrale
in
Italia
1600-1962
[Bologna, 1964]) only
refer
to isolated
aspects
of the Roman
system.
30
Philip
Gossett,
'Becoming
a Citizen: The
Chorus
in
Risorgimento
Opera',
this
journal,
2
(1990),
46-7
discusses this
curiosity,
referring
to an
instance
in
Rossini's L'
Italiana in
Algeri
where
an obvious occurrence of the Marseillaiseeither
escaped
the censors or did not bother them.
31
See Antonio
Somai's letter
to his successor
Antonio
Ruggieri
(quoted
in
Cataldi,
'La
censura'
(n.
29), 308),
in
which
he reminds him of
his
rights
vis-a-visthe
luogotenente.
32
The
Communal Council
was
appointed by
the
Pope.
The
members elected
the nine
conservatori
ho made
up
the
magistratura
omana
(i.e.,
the Roman
Senate).
From the
first
three
elected,
the
Pope
chose the senatore.
Pompili
Olivieri,
II
senato
romano
(see
n.
9),
II:
56-62.
33
See
Rivelli,
'Belli'
(n. 29),
337.
239
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
9/34
Table 1. Political
censorship
in
Rome
before the
Reform of October
1847*
Direttore
generale
di
polizia
and
Governatore
di
Romat
Deputazione
dei
pubblici
spettacoli
6
Deputies
('cavalieri'
appointed
by
the
Segreteria
di
Stato)
1.
Accounting
2.
Machines,
3.
Ballet,
with
(contabilita
e
illumination,
corresponding
cassa)
security,
and
attributions in
cleanliness of terms of cos-
the
theaters,
tumes,
decora-
especially
the
tons,
and
stage
political censor-
ship
Personne
4.
Operas,
with
corresponding
attributions
5.
Spoken
theaterand
sign-
ing
of the mani-
festos
6.
Supervision
of
the archive
Legal
co
Secretar
Archivist
Employe
3 Doctor
3
Surgeo
Architect
2 Censor
Painter f
Notary
*Based on
Rome,
Archivio
Capitolino, Deputazione
dei
pubblici spettacoli,
busta
6,
no.
XXVII/211;
Pavan and
Franceschini,
'La
d
Montano, 'Introduzione',
4n.
tPro-governatore
ince the
appointment
of
Giuseppe
Morandi on 19
July
1847.
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
10/34
Social control and the
censorship
of Verdi's
operas
in Rome
241
Table 2. Ecclesiastic
censorship*
CardinalVicario
represented
by:
Luogotenente
del tribunale
riminale
a
lawyer)
Deputato
revisore
ecclesiastico
Functions are
mainly
administrative:
Functions
mainly
concern
censorship (revisione):
(1)
Authorization or
public performances licenZa)
(1)
Preventive
censorship
of
all
aspects
of
performances
in terms of
time and
place
(2)
Enforcementof the
'Regolamento'
(2)
Ordering
arrests
and
imprisonments
(3)
Attending
dress
rehearsals
o
censor
aspects
other than
printed
exts
*Basedon
Cataldi,
La
censura',
301-3.
reorganization
led to
considerable
confusion as to
who controlled the
Deputation.
With the
papal
motu
proprio
of
12
June
1847,
the
governatore
i
Roma,
who
also
functioned
as
president
of the
Deputation,
lost his
judiciary
powers
while
retaining
control
over the
capital's
government
and the
police
of
the entire
state,
now
under
the
designation
pro-governatore.
n 29
December,
Domenico
Savelli,
who had
held
the office since
13
November,
became
minister of the
police,
losing
both title and
position
ofpro-governatore.34
he
Pope
transferred control
over Rome to the
presidente
di Roma
e
Comarca,
appointing
Cardinal Ludovico
Altieri.
Although
this
change
was
supposed
to be
complete
by
31
October,
it
remains unclear
when
exactly
the
pro-governatore
elinquished
the
presidency
of the
Deputation;35
the
papers
were not
actually
moved to their
new location on
the
Campidoglio
until 24
January
1848,36
and the
duties of the
various authorities were
poorly
delineated.
Only
in
1850 did
a
regolamento
larify
the
respective
competencies
of the
presidente
and the senatore:
control over the
police
and thus
law
and
order
in
the
opera
house
fell into the
hands
of the
presidente,
.e.,
once
again
a
prelate
(see
Table
3).37
Both before and
after the
reorganization,
Rome's
censorship
was
preventive,
which meant
that librettos
had to be
approved prior
to
performance.
The
composer
or
librettist
sent
copies
of the
programma
prose
outline)
and the
libretto
(usually
through
the
impresario)
to
the
president
of the
Deputation,
who then
normally
transferred them
first to the
ecclesiastic
censor and
then to a
political
one,
both of
whom
made
appropriate
emendations.38 After
the final
decision,
the
president
returned the
documents to the
impresario,
who
either
handed them
back to the
34
Nicolo
del
Re,
Monsignorgovernatore
i Roma
(Rome, 1972),
57.
Nevertheless,
Savelli
kept
using
the
tite
pro-governatore.
35
See
Pompili
Olivieri,
I
senato
romano
(n.
9),
II: 45.
36
Calzolari,
'La
censura'
(see
n.
29),
292.
37
See the
'Progetto
di
regolamento
da
osservarsi nella
citta di Roma
per gli
spettacoli,
rappresentanze
e
giuochi compilato
con
superiore
autorizzazione
dagli
incaricati
dell'Autorita
Ecclesiastica,
Governativa e
Municipale',
Rome,
Archivio
di
Stato,
Ministero
dell'Interno,
busta
1025,
no. 18980.
38
Rivelli,
'Belli'
(see
n.
29),
383-7.
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
11/34
Table 3. Political censorship since 1848*
Control over Public
Performances
Before
16
January
1855 After 1
Presidente
di Roma
e Comarca
(law
and
order)t
President:
Direttore
Gen
President:
Senatore
di Roma
(administration)
Vice-President:
Conservatore del
Deputazione
dei
pubblici
spettacoli
9
Deputies
(Communal Councilors)
One
deputy
in
turn
presides
as
'Inspection
Deputy
for
the
Evening'
over
each
performance
in
the first order
5
Special
Deputies
elected
from within
the
Deputation (according
to the
regolamento
f
1856)
1.
Deputy
for
proper
be- 2.
Deputy
for the
ballets
3.
Deputy
for the
operas
4.
Deputy
for
the
spoken
5.
Deputy
fo
havior on
stage,
illumina-
theater
tion,
and
safety
and
cleanliness
of
the theaters
*This excludes the
period
of
the short-lived
Roman
republic
(24
November 1848-4
July
1849)
and
the
period
of the commissione
spe
The information contained
in the
table
is
based on
Montano,
'Introduzione',
and the
'Regolamento
sulla
parte
d'ordine e di esecuzio
[6
December
1856]',
Rome,
Archivio
di
Stato,
Direzione
generale
di
polizia,
ordine
pubblico,
busta
33,
no. 80662.
tThe
competencies
of the various authorities
(presidente,
enatore,
nd even the director of the
police)
were not
always clearly distingui
dell'interno, teatri e spettacoli, busta 1025, fols. 155 and 167. See also Montano, 'Introduzione', 8-10.
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
12/34
Social
control
and
the
censorship
of Verdi's
operas
in
Rome
Table
4.
Stamps
in
Verdi's
librettos
printed
in Rome 1850-6
Opera
Date
Stamps
[with
date of
publ.]
[stamps]
Ecclesiastic
Political
Municipal
Guglielmo
ellingrode
[Stiffelio];
ome:
Puccinelli,
1851)
1850-1
Ruggieri
Doria
Viscardello
Rome:
Olivieri,
1851]
1851
Ruggieri
Macbeth
Rome:
Menicanti,
n.d.]
1852
Ruggieri
ll
trovatore
Rome:
Olivieri,
1853]
No dates
Ruggieri
Doria
Pulieri
Violetta
Rome:
Olivieri,
1854]
No dates
Ruggieri
Doria Cardelli
Giovannae
Gugman
Rome:
Olivieri,
1856]
1856
Ruggieri
Doria Cardelli
librettist or composer for revisions or submitted them for examination to the
printing
censorship.39
Rome
employed
three
censors,
one
ecclesiastic
(controlling
aspects
of
religion,
good
customs,
and
public
morals),
one
political (controlling
aspects
of
politics
and
proper
respect
toward other
people
and the
laws),
and
one
representing
the
Deputation.
All
of them
in
theory
had to
approve
the
texts
and confirm the
approval
with a
stamp
(visto),
but
in
practice
the
three censors
had
very
different
weight.
The
ecclesiastic and
political
representatives occupied
much
higher
posi-
tions than
the
representative
of the
Deputation,
who
remained
very
much
in
the
background. Questions about the number and precise function of the various
Roman
censors
have
repeatedly
led to
misleading
explanations.
Several sources
mention that
by
1851,
Rome
employed
a third
censor,
municipal
or
communal,
who
controlled
'philological
and artistic'
aspects
of the
performances.'40
It
seems,
however,
that this
third
censor was
none other
than
a
representative
of
the
Deputation
whose
stamp
had
already
appeared
on
librettos
predating
the
period
of
reforms,
for
example,
the
manuscript
libretto
of
Filippo
Meucci's
Gusmano
di
Medina
(1846)
and the
original printed
libretto
of Verdi's
I
due Foscari
(1844).41 Only
the
affiliation
of this third censor
had
changed,
however: before the reforms he had
to
respond to the Segreteria di Stato, after the reforms to the municipality.42
The attributes
'philological
and
artistic'
for
the
municipal
censor
perfectly
reflect
the
vagueness
of his
function,
and some
documents
even
neglect
to
mention
him,
39
Calzolari,
'La
censura'
(see
n.
29),
296n. For a short discussion
of the
printing
censorship,
see
ibid.,
291-2.
40
'.
. .
ci6
che si riferisce
alla
parte
filologica
ed
artistica
degli
spettacoli.'
See,
for
example,
Calzolari,
'La
censura',
294;
and
Rivelli, 'Belli',
331
(both
n.
29).
For
a
short
description
of the
three
levels
of
censorship,
see Art. 17
of the
'Regolamento
da
osservarsi nella
citta di Roma
per
gli spettacoli,
rappresentanze
e
giuochi
compilato dagli
incaricati dall'autorita
ecclesiastica,
governativa e
comunale',
Rome,
Archivio
Capitolino,
titolo
15,
busta
14,
fasc. 3
(1851).
41
Manoscritto del dramma lirico
Gusmano
di
Medina di
Filippo
Meucci
(1846)',
Rome,
Archivio
Capitolino,
Pubblici
spettacoli,
busta
7,
no.
XXXI/309;
and
Francesco
Maria
Piave,
I
due
Foscari,
Tragedia
irica
osta
in
musica
al
Maestro
Giuseppe
Verdi
el
teatro
di
Torre
rgentina
l'autunno
del 1844
(Rome,
[1844]),
38. The
responsible deputy
was in both cases L.
Duca
Bonelli.
42
See
Rome,
Archivio
di
Stato,
Ministero
del
interno,
titolo
152,
busta
1025,
fol.
155;
and
par.
4
of
the
'Regolamento
da osservarsi
nella citta di
Roma
per gli
spettacoli',
Rome,
Archivio
Storico
Capitolino,
titolo
15,
busta
14,
fasc.
3
(1851).
243
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
13/34
Andreas
Giger
thus
hinting
at his irrelevance.43
Furthermore,
Verdi's librettos
printed
in
Rome
during
the
years
following
the Roman
Republic occasionally
lack
the
stamp
of
the
municipal
censor
and,
surprisingly,
sometimes even that
of
the
political
one.44
(See
Table 4.)
Not
only
missing
stamps
of
approval
but also
instances
of
high
officials
circumventing
the censorial
process
show the
system's
flexibility.
On 22
December
1850,
for
example,
the Minister of the
Interior,
Domenico
Savelli,
instructed the
Director of the Police as follows: 'For the
best
outcome,
the
undersigned
Minister
of the Interior does not
omit
repeating
in
writing
to
Monsignor
Direttore
Generale
di
Polizia what he
has
already
told
him
orally,
that if at
any
time the musical score
of Ernani is submitted
for
approval by
the
impresarios
of
the
capital,
[the
approval]
must be
absolutely
denied'.45 As we will see
later,
high
officials could also intervene
in favor of a work, especially if the premiere of a Verdi opera was at stake.
Verdi's
struggle
with the
censors in Rome
How Verdi's
operas
came to
satisfy
censorial standards
in Rome
is a
question
that
remains
largely
unanswered. Censored
librettos
cannot
provide
all the
answers,
since
they
document
only
the
censors' emendations and not the
means
by
which
fundamentally
objectionable
librettos
eventually
managed
to
pass
the censorial
hurdles.
Documents that could
shed
light
on
this
question
-
namely
correspon-
dence
of
the
personnel
involved
in
the
decision-making
process
-
are
either rare
or
have not
yet
come to
light.
However,
some
newly
discovered sources of
this kind
concerning
La
battaglia
di
Legnano
and Un ballo in
maschera,
ogether
with
a
new
reading
of
previously
known
documents,
support
the
picture
of a
censorial
system
that could
turn
a blind
eye
when it suited the interest
of its officials.
Verdi's first
work for
Rome,
I
due Foscari
(3
November
1844),
is a case
in
point.
The
composer originally
intended the
opera
for the
Teatro
La Fenice in
Venice,
while
waiting
for Rome
to
accept
a more
daring subject
entitled
Lorengino
de' Medici.
Although
enthusiastic about the latter
subject,
Verdi
anticipated
difficulties with the
43
Paragraph
11 of
the 1856
Capitolato,
for
example, requires
the visti
only
of the ecclesiastical
and
political
censors:
'The
impresario
must
present
.
.
.
the
opera
librettos furnished with
the ecclesiastic
and
political
stamps
. . .'
'Capitolato',
reprinted
in
Tirincanti,
Argentina,
(n.
19)
following
230.
Another document
requires
the
stamp
of the
'deputato
per
la
prosa' only
for
printed
materials. See
[Matteucci's]
letter
of 24
December 1857
[with
no
addressee],
quoted
in
Rivelli,
'Belli'
(n. 29),
370-2. This observation
would
agree
with Calzolari's
('La
censura'
[see
n.
29],
292)
listing
of
the 'censore
filologo'
under the
printing censorship.
44
I
would like to thank
Professor
Matin
Chusid
(director)
and
Francesco
Izzo
(archivist)
of
the American
Institute
for
Verdi Studies at New York
University
for
generously
making
these librettos available.
45
'Per ogni buon fine il sottoscritto Ministro dell'interno non lascia di ripetere in scritto a
Monsignor
Direttore Generale di
polizia
quanto
gia
verbalmente
gli
accenno,
e
cioe
che
qualora
dagl'Impresari
Teatrali nella
Capitale
si
presentasse per
l'approvazione
lo
spartito
Musicale
l'Ernani
deve
questa
venire
assolutamente
negata.'
Rome,
Archivio di
Stato,
Ministero
dell'interno,
busta
1025,
no.
36060,
fols. 49 and 50. Fol. 49 shows the
draft
(probably by
Savelli
himself)
and fol. 50 a clean
copy
by
a
scribe.
The
clean
copy
has
subsequently
been modified
by
a third
hand
to the effect of a
qualified permission.
For a
similar
letter
concerning
Rigoletto,
see
Rivelli,
'Belli'
(n.
29),
366-7.
244
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
14/34
Social
control and the
censorship
of Verdi's
operas
in Rome
Roman
police,
which
proved
to be
justified.46
As the
programma
of
I
due Foscari
awaited
approval
from the
censorship
in
Venice,
Verdi
asked Francesco Maria
Piave,
his
librettist,
to withdraw the
piece
in
order to
offer it to Rome as a
substitute
for Lorengino,now rejected.47As it happened, Venice refused to accept I due Foscari
because it made
reference to
Venetian
noble families such as the Foscari and the
Loredani;
the
authorities feared
that even
though
the
story
dated
from
the fifteenth
century,
it would incite
gossip
and
political
unrest since these names still existed
among
Venetian
aristocracy.48
Venice's refusal was not an
insignificant
matter:
Piave,
who lived
in
Venice
(an
Austrian
territory),
informed
Ricordi on 9
September
1844 that the Austrian
government
would not allow its citizens to
publish anything
abroad
if it
had not received
approval
from one
of
the
censors
in Austrian-
controlled
territory.
Upon
Verdi's
suggestion,
Piave therefore asked Ricordi to have
the libretto approved in Milan (which was also under Austrian control), in order to
make
a
publication
in Rome
possible.49
The
progress
of events
suggests
that
Milan
approved
the libretto.
In
May
1844,
the
impresario
of the Teatro
Argentina,
Antonio
Lanari,
accepted
I
due
Foscari,
and the Roman
censorship
also
gave
its
permission
-
without
requesting
any
changes, according
to Piave.50 The
original
libretto includes the
printed approval
of Antonio
Ruggieri
(the
ecclesiastical
censor)
in the name of the
Cardinal Vicar
and
of
L.
Duca
Bonelli in
the
name of
the
Deputation.
The
political
censor
(Giovanni
Carlo Doria or
Giuseppe
Berardi)
either never saw the libretto
or
his name was omitted in the
production
of the
printed
version. In this
case,
Verdi
did not
worry
too much
about the
Roman
rejection
of Loren-ino since he could
immediately
offer
an
adequate
substitute.
He had not
yet
written
any
of the music
of
LorenZino
nd was not
pressured
for time.
Furthermore,
giving
it
up
for
the
time
being
did not mean
giving
it
up altogether;
Verdi
hoped
to
save
it
for better
political
times.51
That
Rome
objected
to
Lorengino
because of
the
portrayal
of
tyrannicide
on
46
It is interestingthat Verdi here does not refer to the 'censors' but to the 'police'. This
observation
reinforces the fact
that the
composer
knew that at this time the director
of the
police
(who
at the
same time was
the director of the
Deputation)
and
not the censor
gave
the final
approval.
See letter to
Francesco
MariaPiave
(Verdi's
librettist
for
I
due
Foscari)
of
18
April
1844,
quoted
in Franco
Abbiati,
Giuseppe
Verdi,4 vols.
(Milan,
1959),
I:
513.
47
The
programma
efers to the detailed
plot summary,
not the
libretto.
Not until
14
May
in a
letter
to
Piave does Verdi
say:
'At this moment
I
receive
I
dueFoscari.
A
nice,
a
very
nice,
a
beautiful drama 'Letter
quoted
in
ibid.,
I:
514.
48
Rosselli,
Operandustry
see
n.
8),
94.
49
Piave's
letter
to Ricordi of 9
September
1844;
quoted
in
Abbiati,
Verdi
see
n.
46),
I:
521.
50
Letter
of
9
September
1844.
Piave writes: 'The Roman
censorship
has licensed
the whole
[libretto]
without
changing
a comma'.
Quoted
in
ibid.,
I:
521.
The sentence
'Cedi, cedi,
rinunzia al poter' (Give in, give in, renounce the throne) in Act III scene 11 had to be
changed
only
when in
1859
the survivalof the Vatican State became
endangered.
Di
Stefano,
Censuraeatrale
see
n.
29),
59.
51
Piave's
Lorenzino as
eventually
accepted
in
Venice and set
to
music
by
Giovanni
Pacini.
See
George
Martin,
Verdi:
His
Music,
Life
and
Times,
th ed.
(New
York,
1992),
118.
The
fact
that each
city,
Rome
and
Venice,
refused a libretto
accepted
in
the other
one is not
indicative of the
standards
of
censorship.
Venice
rejected
I
dueFoscari
because the
opera
portrayed
the
city's
own
nobility
on
stage
but
accepted
a much more
daring
subject
instead.
245
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
15/34
Andreas
Giger
stage
is not
surprising;52
however,
it
raises
questions
about a censorial
procedure
that
would
permit
I
due
Foscari,
an
opera
featuring
both
a
plot
in
which
a leader
is
forced to
renounce
the
throne and
evil
prevailing
in
the form of a
corrupt political
figure who triumphs over a good-natured one. Moreover, in 1843, the year before
the
premiere
of
I
due
Foscari,
Giuseppe
Mazzini and his
revolutionary
movement had
staged
an
unsuccessful
uprising
in
Bologna
(one
of the
principal
Vatican
cities),
and
it
is
astonishing
that the
opera
was
permitted
during
the
Risorgimento
without
emendations.
Two
explanations,
perhaps
related,
are
possible.
First,
the Piave
family
could
count
Pope
Gregory
XVI
(1831-46)
among
its
friends,
a
connection that
may
have
facilitated
the
approval process.53
Second,
the
printed
libretto does not include the
permission
of a
political
censor but
only
that of
Antonio
Ruggieri
and the final
nihil
obstatof the Deputation.54 Of course, the political censors may have examined the
programma
nd an
earlier
copy
of the
libretto.
But
it
is
possible
that
Piave, Verdi,
and
Lanari
managed
to
push
a
libretto
through
the
censorial
system
with the
help
of
connections to
ecclesiastical officials
and
perhaps
even the
Pope
himself,
despite
the
failure
of the libretto to
meet
the
moral or the
political
standards
of
the state.
The
revolutions
of 1848
inspired
Salvadore
Cammarano and
Verdi to collaborate
on a
deliberately
patriotic
work,
La
battaglia
di
Legnano.
The librettist
decided
to
use
as a
foundation
Joseph Mery's
La
battaillede
Toulouse nd
graft upon
it the historical
events
of
Barbarossa's defeat
by
the
Lombard
League
at
Legnano
in
1176. The
new
opera
not
only promoted
an
independent
Italy
but
conjured up
religious
sentiments
through
the
inclusion of
settings
of
verses from
Psalm
82
and the Te
Deum.
Verdi
seems to have
expected production
of his
opera
in a
more
liberal
or
even
unified
Italy,
but with the events
taking
a turn
for
the
worse since
July
1848,
he could
no
longer realistically
sustain such
hopes.
Considering
the
political
turmoil in much
of
Italy,
Verdi
decided to write the
opera
for Ricordi and
not as
a
commission.55
Ricordi would then
arrange
for a
performance
in
whatever theater he
deemed
appropriate.
Verdi must have had enormous confidence in his ability to have the opera
approved by
the
censors,
wherever
the
premiere
would take
place.
Rome
certainly
did not lend itself
to a
premiere
of La
battaglia
di
Legnano:
n
his allocution of 29
April
1848,
the
Pope
refused
to
take
any part
in
the
Risorgimento,
in
spite
of his
possible
personal sympathy
for the
cause,
and
urged
all Italians
to remain
loyal
to
their
princes.56
Verdi's common
sense
led him
to
consider
possible
changes
in
case
of a
censorial veto.
To Cammarano he
wrote:
'if
by
chance
the
censorships
do
not
permit
[the
opera],
do
you
think we
could,
by
changing
the
title,
the
locality,
etc....
52
Accordingo Budden TheOperasf Verdi,: 175)Loren#inoeaturedyrannicide.
53
See
Mary ane
Phillips-Matz,
erdi
Oxford,
1993),
153.
54
Piave,
dueFoscari
see
n.
41),
38.
55
See
Verdi's etter
o
Cammaranof 31
May
1848.
Copialetteren. 22),
53n.
56
Martin,
Verdi: is
Music,
ife
and
Times
see
n.
51),
186. The
Pope's
official
opposition
o
the
Risorgimento
oes not
preclude personal
ympathy
or the
cause,
but it
does indicate
his
priority
f
securing
he
papacy
ver
Italian
unity.
See
Giulio
Andreotti,
Ore
13:
II
ministro
deve
morire
Milan,
1974),
40;
and
Glueckert,
etween
wo
Amnesties
n. 12),
55.
246
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
16/34
Social control and the
censorship
of Verdi's
operas
in
Rome
retain all
or
nearly
all the
poetry?
For the moment
we had better
go
ahead
and
agree
on it the
way
it
is.'57
Cammarano did
not
send
Verdi,
who was
living
in
Paris at the
time,
the
fourth
act of La battagliadi Legnanountil 29 October.58 Sometime during the first half of
November,
several
days
-
if
not
weeks
-
before the
Pope
fled to
Gaeta,
Tommaso
Corsini
(the
president
of the
Deputation
and
Mayor
of
Rome)
accepted
the 'score'.
Vincenzo
Luccardi,
a Roman
sculptor
and
friend of
Verdi's,
conveyed
the news
to
the
composer,
who
responded
indignantly:
You tell me
that the
[Roman]
Senate
has
accepted
y
score
Accepted?
.. but
who offered
[it]?
...
No no:
I
cannot and
must not
yield
to
so much.
In
accordancewith an old
contract,
I
owe
Ricordi a
score: once
[it
is]
written,
my
obligations
are fulfilled.At
his
request,
I
agreed
to
come to
Rome,
taking
a
personal
loss,
since the
thousand francs
I
asked for are
certainly
not
enough
for the
trip
from Paris to Rome and from Rome to Paris.... I am indebtedto
the
good
intentions
of
all
my
friends,
but
I
cannot
yield
gladly
to this
kindness,
to this
favor
shown
me
of
accepting
ne of
my
scores.59
It
seems that Luccardi
did not have the
actual
score
in
mind since Verdi
did not
complete
it
until
December. He
probably
meant the
production
as a
whole,
the
libretto,
or
both,
especially
since no
opera
could be
produced
without
approval
of
the
libretto
first
by
the
censors and then
by
the
Deputation.60
In
light
of
the
Pope's
allocution,
it
hardly
seems
possible
that the
political
censor would
have
approved
the libretto's
spirit
of the
Risorgimento.
How, then, could the
Deputation
have
acted as it
did?
Several
possibilities
may
be
advanced.
In
mid-September,
Pius
IX
appointed
the liberal count
Pellegrino
Rossi minister
of the
interior and
finance,
and
Rossi made financial
and
democratic reforms
his first
priorities.61
He
undoubtedly
knew
of
the
Pope's continuing
weakness for the
Risorgimento
movement and
the
Deputation may
not
have
had to fear later
reprimand
by
ecclesiastical
authorities.
It
is
also
possible
that
Giovanni Carlo
Doria
(the
political
censor)
never
received
the
libretto,
which therefore
would not
have been
examined
from
a
political
stand-
point.62
And even if
the
minister was
consulted,
he
would
hardly
have forbidden the
57
'[C]aso
mai le Censurenol
permettessero
redetevoi che si
potra
cambiando
itolo,
ocalita
etc.... ritenere
uttao
quasi
utta a
verseggiatura?
l
momentoconviene
andare
vanti
fissarlo osi.'Verdi n an
undated etter o
Cammarano,
opialettere
see
n.
22),
56.
58
Abbiati,
Verdi
see
n.
46),
I:
772.
59
'Tu mi
dici che
il
Senato
di
Roma]
ha
accettato
l
mio
spartito
ccettato?.. Ma
chi
ha
offerto? .. No no: io non
posso
ne
devo
sottomettermi
anto.
A
Ricordi
n
forzadi
vecchio contrattodevo
uno
spartito:
na volta
scritto ono
finiti miei
obblighi.
Dietro sua
preghiera
o
accondiscendeva
enirea
Romacon mio
sacrifizio
erche
mille
franchi he
ho chiestonon
bastano
ertamente
el
viaggio
da
Parigi
Roma,
e
da Romaa
Parigi
...
Sonoobbligatissimoellebuone ntenzionidi tutti mieiamici,ma nonposso
sottomettermi
i buon
grado
a
questo
favore,
a
questa
grazia
he mi si
vuol faredi
accettare
un mio
spartito.'
Verdi o
Luccardi,
1
November
1848;
quoted
n
Abbiati,
Verdi
see
n.
46),
I:
775.
60 Luccardi'statement hat
the scorewas
acceptedby
the
senatecannotbe
entirely
orrect.
Such decisionshad to
be made
by
the
Deputation,
he head of
whichwasthe
senatore.
61
Andreotti,
Ore13
(see
n.
56),
39-41.
62
Ruggieri,
n
the other
hand,
did,
as becomes
clear rom
his letter
o Corsini
quoted
below.
247
This content downloaded from 200.16.86.36 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:17:03 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
7/26/2019 Censorship Operas in Rome
17/34
Andreas
Giger
libretto;
he
must
have known that
in
times
of
great
political
unrest,
it would
have
been detrimental to
the
state's interest
not to
allow
a
production
that
would
surely
have
been
the
climax of the
upcoming
Carnival season.
With the Pope's escape to Gaeta, the censorial system changed only in part.
Although
on
the level
of the
state,
the
Pope gave
way
to a new
government
(consisting
of
Carlo
Armellini,
Giuseppe
Mazzini,
and Aurelio
Saffi),
the
municipal
council and
thus the
personnel
of the
Deputation
was
not
replaced
until
after the
premiere
of
La
battaglia
di
Legnano.63
n
addition,
Doria and
Ruggieri
remained
in
their
positions
as
political
and
ecclesiastical
censors
respectively.64
With Rome
transformed
into a
republic,
ideas
reflecting
the
Risorgimento
no
longer
offended
the
government,
and
any
objection
from Doria's
side would not have
received
a
favorable
hearing.
Violation
of
religious
standards,
however,
still concerned
some
members of the Deputation. In the case of La battagliadi Legnano,one of the
inspectors,
Vincenzo
Jacovacci,
brought
attention to
the final scene
in
the
cathedral
of
Milan,
whose text included without mention some
verses of the
Te
Deum.
On
23
January,
four
days
before
opening night, Jacovacci
wrote to Ottavio
Scaramucci,
member of
the Senate and
the
Deputation:65
I
forewarnYour
Excellency
to be
informed
that
in
the
final scene of Maestro
Verdi's new
opera,
which will be
performed
at
the
[Teatro]
Argentina
this
Saturday
or the
first
time,
they
want
to
depict
the altarof the
Milanese cathedral
n
the
middle,
and that
top related