“The Magic Flute”: a Dialogue with Gluck
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The article is devoted to the intertextual analysis of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s opera “The Magic Flute,” revealing allusive connections with Christoph Willibald Gluck’s opera “Orfeo ed Eurydice.” The principle of intertextuality is interpreted in it as the method of parody, inherent to Mozart’s epoch, to which the composer himself was not indifferent – a rethinking of the image created by another artist in a new artistic context. Parody as a means of construction of the artist’s sovereign space and the creation of encoded epistles, asserting the author’s idea by the complexity of the organization of the meaning-generating structure, makes it possible to approach the answer to the question sacramental for “The Magic Flute”: what is this opera about? It does not lose its relevance in view of the ceaseless discussions around the ambiguity of the composition’s content. The multifold turning to the same source (connections to Gluck’s opera are revealed in the song to the text of Johann Georg Jacobi, “An Chloë”) makes it possible to perceive its special significance for Mozart and to glance anew on the attitude of the composer of “The Magic Flute” towards his great predecessor, who not only was his antipode in terms of operatic reform, but one of his idols. The music of Gluck presented for Mozart more than once an object of attraction and a motive for creating profound psychological revelations.
Keywords: parody, allusion, intertext, Cluck, Mozart, Johann Georg Jacobi, Orpheus, “Orfeo ed Eurydice,” The magic Flute”, “An Chloë”
Article Details
Copyright
The rights on the results of intellectual activity and equated means of individualization are protected in accordance with Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The authorship, author's name, executor’s name, inviolability of the work and result of execution are protected by the rules of Part IV of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation of the author or executor, regardless of providing legal protection of such results of intellectual activity at the time of their forming.
Copyright laws regulate the civil legal relations for using works of science, literature and art. Such relationships are formed as the result of the author’s writing his or her texts. In this case the author can rightfully claim copyright of the work.
The author has certain rights to reuse the work (see: “Ethical Aspects in Terms of Multifold Publications).
Licenses
All copyrights on the articles belong to their authors. The author transfers the rights on using the article the publisher.
PDF versions of scholarly articles of the journal PMN are published by using the license Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives cc by-nc-nd, allowing loading and distributing works on the assumption of indicating the authorship. The works may not be changed in any way or used for commercial interests.
Criteria for Authorship, Co-authorship
The term “author” refers to all persons (co-authors) who have made a substantial contribution to conducting the research and creation of the manuscript and responsible for its content. The person (author) who has submitted the manuscript to the editorial board shall bear responsibility for the complete list of the group of authors and the changes made to the manuscript in accordance with the results of the peer reviewing and editing.
1. Authorship is based on the following criteria:
1) The author made a substantial contribution to the research activity and development of concept, collected the data, made analysis and interpretation of the data.
2) The author carried out the writing of the text of draft articles and edited it attentively and substantially.
3) The author approved the final version of the article prior to its submission.
4) The author bears responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.
2. The authors shall guarantee that the submitted manuscript is the original work.
3. Scholarly reviews for some issue or other should be objective, present material in a wide range and at the same time take into account the views of the author of the review.
4. The authorship of scholarly publications is obligated to reflect accurately the contribution of individuals to the research activity, with specific information about the authors.
5. The authors may not mislead the readers by publishing acknowledgements of gratitude to people who were not actually involved in writing the work. Other persons who made contribution to the work, but are nevertheless not the authors, may be listed in the rubric of “Acknowledgements,” with indications of the type and extent of their activities.
6. Authors are obligated to provide a description of their contribution to the publication.
7. The order of authorship must be a joint resolution of co-authors. The authors should be ready to explain the order of their enumeration and listing.
8. The authors shall be entirely responsible for the correct definition of authorship acting in accordance with the rules adopted in their institution.
9. Investigators must ensure that only those persons who meet the criteria for authorship (that made a significant contribution to the work), shall be considered the authors, and the researchers who do not merit authorship will be excluded from the list of authors.
References
2. Kirillina L. V. Orfizm i opera [Orphism and Opera]. Muzykal’naya akademiya [Musical Academy]. 1992, No. 4. pp. 83–94.
3. Kirillina L. V. Reformatorskie opery Glyuka [The Reformist Operas of Gluck]. Moscow: Klassika– XXI, 2006. 384 p.
4. Konen V. D. Epigraf velikoy simfonii [The Epigraph of the Great Symphony]. Muzykal’naya zhizn’ [Musical Life]. 1990, No. 13, рр. 19–20.
5. Kreynina Yu. V. Utselevshiy iz Transil’vanii: Rekviem Ligeti kak zerkalo katastrofy evreyskogo naroda [A Survivor from Transylvania: Ligeti’s Requiem as a Mirror of the Disaster of the Jewish People]. URL: http:// www.21israel-music.com/Ligeti.htm.
6. Lotman Yu. M. Semiosfera [The Semiosphere]. St. Petersburg: Iskusstvo–SPB, 2000. 704 p.
7. Lutsker P., Susidko I. Motsart i ego vremya [Mozart and His Time]. Moscow: Klassika–XXI, 2008. 624 p.
8. Orfey. Mify Drevney Gretsii [Orpheus. Myths of Ancient Greece].
URL: http://www.101mif.ru/orfey.htm.
9. Khokhlov Yu. N. Krasota i pravda vyrazheniya [The Beauty and Truth of Expression]. Muzykal’naya akademiya [Musical Academy]. 1992, No. 2, рр. 189– 193.
10. Chigareva E. I. Opery Motsarta v kontekste kul’tury ego vremeni. Khudozhestvennaya individual’nost’. Semantika [Mozart’s Operas in the Context of the Culture of His Time. Artistic Individuality. Semantics]. 2nd edition. Moscow: Еditorial URSS, 2001. 277 p.
11. Batley E. M. A Preface to the Magic Flute. London, 1969. 175 p.
12. Branscombe P. W.A. Mozart, die Zauberflöte. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1991. 264 p.
13. Buch David J. Die Zauberflöte, Masonic Opera, and Other Fairy Tales. Acta Musicologica 76 (Kassel etc.: Bärenreiter), 2, 2004, pp. 193–219.
14. Buch David J. Mozart and the Theater auf der Wieden: New attributions and perspectives. Cambridge Opera Journal. 9, 1997, pp. 195–232.
15. Chailley Jacques. The Magic Flute Unveiled: Esoteric Symbolism in Mozart’s Masonic Opera. 1992. 368 p.
16. Heartz Daniel. From Garrick to Gluck: The Reform of Theatre and Opera in the Mid-Eighteenth Century. Proceedings of the Royal Association, 94th Sess. (1967–1968), pp. 111–127.
17. Howard Patricia. Gluck and the Birth of Modern Opera. St. Martin’s Press: NY, 1964. 118 p.
18. Chailley J. The Magic Flute unveiled: Esoteric Symbolism in Mozart᾽s Masonic Opera. New York, 1971. 368 p.
19. Weisman L. J. L᾽arbore di Diana (Preface). Martin y Soler V. L᾽arbore di Diana, dramma giocoso in due atti (Reducciones para canto y piano). Madrid: ICCMU, 2003. P. IX.