The politics of opera in late seventeenth-century London

Abstract

To what degree does late seventeenth-century English opera contain politics? Some recent critics have assumed that political commentary conveyed by allegory is a pervasive feature of ‘Restoration’ masques and operas. Is this true? Quite a few political interpretations of particular works have been published but no one has systematically enquired to what extent allegory and/or ideology was presumed to be built into operas mounted in late seventeenth-century London. Theoretical statements of the time about opera are scant and contradictory, their authors disinclined to take up political issues. Some of the political content is glaringly obvious (the allegory in Dryde'ns and Grabu's Albion and Albanius); some of it is sharply disputed. How should we read a work like Dryden's and Purcell's King Arthur? Is it essentially a muddled adventure story? An expression of British nationalism rising above current politics? A piece of covert Jacobite propaganda?

Taking the Oaths: The Directors of the Royal Academy of Music Swear Allegiance to King and Country

“…19 In contrast, Robert Hume has warned that 'the oft-cited hypothesis that opera protagonists must be identified with the reigning monarch is not borne out by scrutiny of the texts' . 20 These two views are not, however, incompatible. In his fine book Fiction as History: Nero to Julian, the classicist Glen Bowersock demonstrates, in the chapter 'Truth in Lying' , how the 'overt creation of fiction' provides a way of 'rewriting or even inventing the past, and for us .…”

Addison's Theater of the Aesthetic

“…Working in what Robert Hume describes as "less a genre than … a mode of production," a mode defined by its marshalling of spectacular visual effects, Addison's opera consciously experiments with theater as a medium both of visual thinking and for thinking the visual. 7 Here, the spectators on stage are profoundly transformed by what and how they see in a scenographically elaborate drama that parses the constitution and possibilities of its own spectacularity. In short, Rosamond returns the theater to Addison's aesthetic thought.…”