I was reading a review in
BBC Music Magazine of a performance of the Mendelssohn Violin concerto that used the original version and the question came to mind: is the composer always right?
For example, Verdi's opera
Stiffelio (1850) had difficulty in finding performances because the subject was a German Protestant minister whose wife was unfaithful and the final scene took place within a church service. This was not a suitable subject for Catholic Italy and on repeat performances the libretto was changed.
Verdi, who preferred to wield the knife himself when his operas were altered, undertook a wholesale revision, with a new libretto.
Stiffelio became
Aroldo (1850), an English crusader. The storyline was similar, but the final scene in the church became a new act on the banks of Loch Lomond.
Verdi destroyed the score and parts to
Stiffelio and it was only in the late 1960's that the work was reconstructed and performed. Yet, I believe that Verdi, in this case, was wrong.
Stiffelio is a major work and should be performed more often. On the whole I find it superior to
Aroldo and yet, in just a few places where the music is similar, Verdi's later thoughts do improve the score.
So what does one do? Do you update the similar music in
Stiffelio to reflect the changes made in
Aroldo, while retaining the original, superior, story? Do you ignore
Aroldo entirely and stick to the more concise (and dramatic)
Stiffelio? Or do you perform
Aroldo and hope the audience can overlook the libretto.
Now don't get me started about
Don Carlo(s).
