Theater Architecture at the Time of Purcell and Its Influence on His “Dramatick Operas”

Abstract

L ATE seventeenth-century English opera is generally regarded with skepticism by present-day audiences. These operas-or semi-operas, as they are somewhat disparagingly called-do not conform to our contemporary esthetic, which requires a text that is continuous in its development of a coherent plot. The disjunction of spoken dialogue and musical masques as well as digressions in the story line for the purpose of scenic display are generally regarded as flaws in the typical semi-opera, or dramatick opera, as the seventeenth-century writers called these entertainments. Of the composers who made significant contributions to this genre, Henry Purcell must be reckoned the supreme master. Nevertheless, Purcell's only work that has remained a staple in the operatic repertoire, Dido and Aeneas, is atypical of Purcell's extended theater pieces because of its very limited orchestral resources and its consistent use of stile recitativo for the delivery of the narrative texts. The fact that this opera was composed for Josiah Priest's school for young gentlewomen in Chelsea rather than for the public theater in London also sets it apart from Purcell's other extended dramatic compositions, all of which were composed after Dido and Aeneas. That Purcell's dramatick operas were greatly admired by the theater goers of his time can be easily documented. What is more difficult to explain are the reasons why these theatrical masterpieces were successful during the seventeenth century, whereas in our day productions of the dramatick operas usually