 
                         20060321.00

                     Cosi fan tutte (7)

     It occurs to me that the required suspension of dis-
belief for the stage props, for the scenery, which seem so
peripheral to the artistic virtues of the opera, is none-
theless the key to the interpretation of this opera, of all
opera, and, for that matter, of all stage drama.  We accept
the scenery and props as meaningful inspite of their obvious
improvisation.  Similarly we accept the contrived improbabi-
lities of the plot in order to gain access to the mystery of
the characters' lives.  The suspension of disbelief on all
levels is in fact the admission ticket to the spiritual
treasury of dramatic art.

     The stage has not only the physical architectural
function of facilitating the public's presence at the
performance and making it possible for a large number of
audience to see and hear.  The stage also functions as an
essential frame separating the actors and the action from
nature and from the workaday world.  When this separation
fails, the emotional, intellectual, spiritual effect of the
opera is diluted; conversely, the more effective this
separation the more compelling the spiritual meaning.  An
analogy is the projected image, which requires ambient
darkness to be fully appreciated.  It is only when the lights
in the theatre or the opera house dim, that the attention is
focussed on the stage.  The stage, as a separate world,
facilitates and perhaps even makes possible the suspension of
disbelief.

     Just as in a noisy auditorium where everyone is talking
at once, the actors on the stage will be drowned out, and
silence in the hall is requisite for their being heard, so
the distractions of the familiar environment require to be
suppressed or eliminated before the meaning of the play can
be understood.  The issue is brought into focus by modern
technology which makes it possible to enact a play in a
natural setting. The corollary of my hypothesis is that the
esthetic effect of such performances is diluted to the extent
that the environment into which the action is projected is a
familiar one.  Especially where the actors appear in modern
dress, the familiarity of a seemingly natural environment
detracts from the dramatic effect, rather than enhancing it. 
I offer these notions as an experimental hypothesis which
must be tested by application to naturalistic drama such as
that of Georg Buechner, Henrik Ibsen, Gerhard Hauptmann or
Eugene O'Neill.

     DaPonte's presumption that we should be persuaded that
not Fiordigili, not Dorabella, not even Despina would recognize
the disguised lovers, that neither Fiordiligi nor Dorabella
would detect their maid, Despina, when she enters dressed as
a doctor or a notary, is quite analogous, for example, to his
presumption that we should accept the unreality of the scenery
and props on the stage, the simulated sea shores of the Medi-
terranean, the mock up of a boat that disappears in the first
and reappears in the second act.

     Contrast the tenuous contrivances of the stage with the
utter persuasiveness of the characters: Don Alfonso's grey-
haired maturity, the vainness of Ferrando and Guglielmo, their
insensitivity to the torment they inflict on the women, their
indifference to falsehood and deceit.  The pathetic immaturity
of the brides and their desperate need for husbands. Despina's
cynicism and exploitativeness, and finally, the agility of her
alibi at the end.

     The opera is not complete without the listener.  His
function as interpreter can be discharged by no one else.  It
is inconceivable that DaPonte or Mozart could have been
explicitly aware of all the nuances which are discoverable in
the libretto and in the music when one meditates on them at
leisure.  Almost certainly such critical reflection as inter-
pretation requires, was not essential for, and would indeed
have impeded the composition of both the libretto and the
score, processes that are governed by intuition and that well
like springs from the subconscious.

     Interpretation is never definitive or conclusive.  It is
as open and as wide, as fanciful and as fantastic as the
sensitivity and imagination of the listener.  The indefinite-
ness of its interpretation is inherent in the nature of art.

                      * * * * *
Copyright 2006, Ernst Jochen Meyer
