Rameau experts!

[french frank]

How many performances did baroque operas commonly get? Dardanus was said this morning to have had "only" 26 performances in 1739/40, but Wikipedia states that Castor et Pollux was a 'success' with 20 performances.

[aeolium]

I am very far from an expert but I think Castor et Pollux, Rameau's most successful opera in terms of C18 performances, probably outstripped any other Baroque opera in popularity. The liner notes for the Opus Arte DVD I have of the opera mention a total of 254 performances up to 1785. Rinaldo, Handel's most popular London opera, recorded 53 London performances (including revivals), to which should be added a number of performances in other European cities.

[french frank]

I am very far from an expert but I think Castor et Pollux, Rameau's most successful opera in terms of C18 performances, probably outstripped any other Baroque opera in popularity. The liner notes for the Opus Arte DVD I have of the opera mention a total of 254 performances up to 1785. Rinaldo, Handel's most popular London opera, recorded 53 London performances (including revivals), to which should be added a number of performances in other European cities.

That's interesting - though still slightly ambiguous, if C&P "only" had 20 performances in its opening run, while Dardanus, apparently, had 26. Rameau revised Dardanus considerably for the new productions in the 1740s and 1760s, so the opera would have had a greater number of performances later on.

[doversoul1]

In what context was this ‘only’ used?

[french frank]

In what context was this ‘only’ used?

Wikipedia: "It received 26 performances, mainly because of the support from Rameau's followers in the dispute between the styles of Rameau and Lully.

"Critics accused Rameau's original opera of lacking a coherent plot. The inclusion of the sea monster also violated the French operatic convention of having a clear purpose for encounters with supernatural beings."

R3: "Critics accused it of lacking a coherent plot and were apparently very vexed by the inclusion of a sea monster which violated the French operatic convention of having a clear purpose for encounters with supernatural beings. It only ran for 26 performances."

[aeolium]

I don't have a copy of Dardanus or any biography of Rameau which would shed more light on this, but I located this booklet online provided as accompanying notes to a recording by Pinchgut Opera (I hope it's OK to link to it here):

http://www.buywell.com/booklets/4765844.pdf

This mentions the dispute between the supporters of Lully and those of Rameau and goes on to say "It would seem that there were indeed deficiencies in the original [1739] version because for its revival in 1744, Rameau and his librettist Le Clerc de la Bruère reworked the plot and the opera as a whole...There is little to inform of the work's success in its revised form but by 1760, when Dardanus was revived yet again, it was generally considered to be among the finest of Rameau's stage works."

[vinteuil]

... my copy of Cuthbert Girdlestone is still in store; I hope to get it back next week. If he has any info on this I shall let you know.

[french frank]

This mentions the dispute between the supporters of Lully and those of Rameau and goes on to say "It would seem that there were indeed deficiencies in the original [1739] version because for its revival in 1744, Rameau and his librettist Le Clerc de la Bruère reworked the plot and the opera as a whole...There is little to inform of the work's success in its revised form but by 1760, when Dardanus was revived yet again, it was generally considered to be among the finest of Rameau's stage works."

I read a couple of reviews of Minkowski's recording (incl. Gramophone, I think - I can no longer access the site, though I'm sure I did yesterday) where they praised it for preferring the 1739 version, only importing Lieux funestes from the later one as being indispensable.

[aeolium]

I read a couple of reviews of Minkowski's recording (incl. Gramophone, I think - I can no longer access the site, though I'm sure I did yesterday) where they praised it for preferring the 1739 version, only importing Lieux funestes from the later one as being indispensable.

Yes (I think there were a few other arias imported but that was the most significant). On the other hand, the notice for this scheduled production for May 2015 in Versailles based on the 1744 version (plus later revisions) seems to think Rameau's reworking was justified:

http://www.chateauversailles-spectacles.fr/en/spectacles/2014/rameau-dardanus

The notice also claims that the 1744 version has never been revived on the stage in modern times, which I find surprising.

[MickyD]

... my copy of Cuthbert Girdlestone is still in store; I hope to get it back next week. If he has any info on this I shall let you know.

I treasure my old copy too, but I think a revised version appeared not long ago. It's still the Rameau Bible!