Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION Compiled by Nick Sales May 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1. General Thoughts About the Opera 1.1 - Not as good as..... 1.2 - Too many cooks? 1.3 - I should like to do it handsomely 1.4 - Old associations 1.5 - Gone abroad? His address? 1.6 - I don't think I ever met him 2. The Plot 2.1 - There is no plot! 2.2 - No coming together 2.3 - Problems with the love stories 2.4 - Abhorrent to stockbrokers? 2.5 - Too close to the bone? 2.6 - I've a borough or two..... 3. The Score 3.1 - General feelings about the score 3.2 - Was Sullivan unable to rise above a feeble libretto? 3.3 - Today he is not well 3.4 - Where's the overture? 3.5 - Was Sullivan running out of steam? 3.6 - Music we love to love 3.7 - Music we love to hate 3.8 - Of native music the cream? 4. The Libretto 4.1 - General feelings about the libretto 4.2 - The real meaning of "Ulahlica!"? 5. The Characters 5.1 - General feelings about the characters 5.2 - Who's the baddest baddy? 5.3 - You gotta have a patter man 6. Stagecraft 6.1 - General feelings about staging 6.2 - Costuming expense 6.3 - To bare or not to bare? 6.4 - Drawing-Room names 6.5 - Ethnic casting - a good idea? 6.6 - Alternative productions 7. To Cut or Not to Cut? 7.1 - Ought we to rearrange? Cut? If so, what? 7.2 - Ought we to add something? 7.3 - Durham Savoyards Utopia (Un)limited 7.4 - A solution? 8. The Finales 8.1 - The Act 1 Finale 8.2 - The Act 2 Finale 9. The 1975 Centenary Performance 9.1 - Reminiscences and thoughts on the 1975 D'Oyly Carte performances 10. Appendix 10.1 - Acronyms, etc. explained 10.2 - "Who and where? - The protagonists named Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION Introduction Utopia Limited was the 12th Gilbert and Sullivan opera. It was first performed on the 7th October 1893 at the Savoy Theatre, London, and ran until the beginning of June, 1894, by which time there had been 245 performances. The following discussion is a compilation of the thoughts and opinions of subscribers to the Savoynet Electronic Mailing List on Utopia Limited which took place during the months of February and March 1997. Please note that all views expressed in this document are those of the individual contributors to which they are credited. The names of the individual contributors are represented in bold type, and any comments by me in my position as the compiler are in italics. Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 1. General thoughts about the Opera 1.1 - Not as good as..... 1.2 - Too many cooks? 1.3 - I should like to do it handsomely 1.4 - Old associations 1.5 - Gone abroad? His address? 1.6 - I don't think I ever met him 1.1 - Not as good as...... David Craven, who was undertaking the role as moderator at the time of the Utopia discussion, opened the debate as follows: Utopia Ltd. would appear, on first blush, to have all of the elements necessary for success. It was the reuniting of a highly successful team whose last several shows had all been well received. The show was set in an exotic location. The cast was large and talented and the set was both lavish and state of the art. At least one critic of the day, George Bernard Shaw, thought it to be a brilliant success. He stated: "I enjoyed the score of Utopia more than that of any of the previous Savoy operas" Yet, today, Utopia is a rarely performed show AND is generally regarded by many G&S aficionados as one of their weakest works. So why is Utopia today regarded as one of the weakest of the G&S canon? (Many attributed this to weaknesses in either the plot or the score, or both. These discussions can be found in sections 2 and 3 respectively) Amongst those falling over themselves to answer this was Tom Shepard, who said: Because there are few "numbers" in it; the show spends to much of its musical time in elucidating plot details, there are few lyrics that really soar, the characters are not particularly well-invented, and the object of the satire may be a bit too far-reaching. It is almost "heartless"--- we have too few characters to really care for and to root for. The music is weak too much of the time, the plot lets too many threads dangle, --- I could go on............Tom was supported by Ron Orenstein thus: because it is poorly constructed, sloppily paced, with a great deal of prolix and turgid dialogue, often wooden lyrics and feeble music (by comparison, of course). The ideas in Utopia, and the satirical intent, are great but their execution leaves a lot to be desired - Gilbert blunted his own point. Marc Shepherd: It is true, as the opera's supporters will point out, that the underlying premise of the story is a clever one, and that many of its satiric barbs hit the mark. Unfortunately, in Utopia a promising idea is poorly executed. The story meanders aimlessly, as if the librettist never could decide what he wanted his opera to be about. Other G&S operas have satire as pointed as Utopia's while clothing it in a plot that goes somewhere. This is where Utopia fails. Arthur Robinson said: At their best, Gilbert and Sullivan complemented each other perfectly. In Utopia, it seems to me that Sullivan has had to subordinate himself to Gilbert even more than usual. Utopia is the only opera in which I think Gilbert's libretto is definitely better than Sullivan's music--but I don't think it was Sullivan's fault. Robert Jones pointed out that the partners had been through a very public and unpleasant fight, and the new piece was somewhat of a departure into untested waters (although perhaps it didn't start out that way). Such a reunion must have been a gamble at the outset, especially when popular tastes can change considerably in a few years. Tom Shepard: I STILL think that a point once raised about Utopia rings true, which is that their eagerness and their still-open wounds made Gilbert and Sullivan deal with one another in such a scrupulously tactful fashion, that neither one was any longer able to REALLY speak his mind about rewrites, etc. Marc Shepherd: I am convinced that the earlier operas in the partnership succeeded because Gilbert and Sullivan enjoyed a healthy relationship of give-and-take and mutual criticism. In a word, they trusted each other. The carpet quarrel destroyed all that. Each was, to a degree, dissatisfied with the other's work, but this time they were unable to find common ground. Their well-publicized tribulations over the finale are perhaps the best illustration of this. Bruce Miller: My problems with Utopia can be summarized simply: I find the dialogue boring and redundant, and the music is often substandard (for Sullivan). However, I do find the opera interesting in its relationship to the rest of the canon, and there are certain musical numbers which are worthy of being ranked among G & S's best. Marc Shepherd: Mind you, with the right cast and director, Utopia can work in the theater. This is Gilbert and Sullivan, after all. But, for the reasons I've given, I think it's the feeblest of their creations. 1.2 - Too many cooks? Ed Glazier: In my opinion, one of the things that makes this show extremely difficult to do is the number of principals required. All of the canon can benefit from good performers in any role, but the more popular shows are strong enough to be entertaining even if every role is not brilliantly performed. Utopia, because of the many weaknesses that have already been mentioned, can work but more so than the rest of the canon requires a creative, inventive director and a large number of extremely talented performers. Oh, yes, and a large pair of scissors and/or judicious use of the editing pencil. (Note: for an in-depth discussion of this last point, see section 7) Marc Shepherd: Ed mentions that one of the difficulties of Utopia is the large cast required. This is NOT what makes it a mediocre opera, but it is another reason why amateur companies have an even HIGHER mountain to climb when they mount a production. 1.3 I should like to do It handsomely David Duffey: UL had the reputation as being the most lavishly produced of all to date - large cast, magnificent costumes, scenery, staged numbers and so on. Yet this after a break in the partnership resulting from a quarrel which, whatever its underlying reasons, seems to have been ignited by Gilbert's perceptions of lack of financial control. Yet no expense was spared in the production of UL. Could the difference have been that, whereas previously he had shared net profit, Gilbert was now on a percentage of gross? Marc Shepherd: It's an interesting theory, but I don't think so. All of the Gilbert & Sullivan operas were staged as realistically as possible. As the settings became more exotic, production costs rose. I think just about every opera was more expensive than its predecessor. Gondoliers was certainly no cheapie. With Utopia, I don't think the changed agreement affected how it was staged, because lavish stagings were what the D'Oyly Carte productions were about, and the carpet quarrel was NOT about those kinds of costs. David Duffey: I'll stick to my guns for a little longer. The "I have had a difficulty with Carte" letter of Gilbert to Sullivan certainly starts with him being appalled at the preliminary expenses of the Gondoliers. Later in the correspondence Carte accuses Gilbert of "ordering blind" - i.e. with no estimates, and he (Carte) deferring to this as he considered the expense to be in pursuit of artistic excellence. I agree wholeheartedly that the 'carpet quarrel' was a matter of principle for WSG. The point I am trying to make, however, is that, such secondary matters having come into consideration, WSG might have been expected to have regard to them in the staging of the opera, but, being on gross terms for UL, had something of a "Oh, what the hell" attitude. With the large cast and lavish staging, of course the running costs must have been the greater, and this may have influenced the decision to take it off, although the initial run was respectable enough. Bruce I. Miller: Marc is right on this one, I think. He neglected to mention that not only did the courts find in Gilbert's favor, but the independent auditor assigned by them discovered that Carte had, indeed, been cooking the books - Gilbert was owed about 1,000 pounds more than he had been paid for his share of Gondoliers. Gilbert's questioning of the expenses had less to do with his concern about mounting them too extravagantly, but more to Carte's alleged shenanigans (including paying too much for certain services and waste of expensive items, thus cutting into the profits). Carte naturally had counterclaims, as David mentioned, but in the end it was Gilbert who won the argument. Trying to rationalize the comparative failure of Utopia with this excuse just doesn't wash. Certainly it was extravagantly mounted, but then so were The Mikado and The Gondoliers. The reason Utopia didn't last were its bloated, meandering libretto and often-anemic score. Had the authors been able to muster their former sharpness of focus, the show might well have been one of their more brilliant successes - rather than, as most of us acknowledge, a misfire - tantalizing for what might have been. David Duffey: I nevertheless think that WSG was sufficient of a businessman to realise that costs had to be kept under control while he was on a share of net profit while that on a percentage of gross he could not lose. 1.4 - Old associations Sam Clapp wrote: Gilbert and Sullivan each went off and found NO success; therefore, Utopia relates back to all the previous successful operas. (Note: Sam went on to give extensive examples (words and / or music) from all of the operas with the exception of Trial By Jury, although this was rectified by Clive Woods, who spotted a link between "Oh Joy Unbounded" in Utopia's act I finale and the finale of Trial.) Marc Shepherd: I think the most critical point about all of these connections is that, in 1893, there simply didn't exist the large body of aficionados who knew every word by heart. Therefore, aside from the Mikado and Corcoran references, I find it hard to believe that it was deliberate. I take the many "reminiscences" in the libretto and score as just uninspired writing. Ronald Orenstein: I think no one would doubt that Utopia is full of resemblances to earlier works. Sam's data supports that - but it says nothing about whether these were deliberate allusions (though the Corcoran and Mikado references clearly were) or simply the result of lack of inspiration. To do more you would have to either show that the references are structured in a way that indicates that the reference to the earlier work fits the context of the new (good luck!) or come up with documentary evidence that G&S intended these references and introduced them deliberately. Paul McShane: And of course, that's the problem with later operas. The fact that there may be similarities with earlier operas doesn't mean that the later operas are of lesser merit - just that they were written afterwards. I suspect that you'll find similar comparisons if you scan later offerings of a number of series, from Mozart operas to Rogers and Hammerstein. Sam Clapp: Oh, silly me. I had so much data, I forgot to wind it up properly. The phrases that Gilbert used reveal volumes to me: in my earlier posting, please note the use of catch-phrase. I think that's different than the simple quotation of oneself. For example, who among us would NOT catch a "That is the idea I intended to convey" thrown in amongst the heap of words.... or a "Without any doubt of any kind" Such ones as these were probably the ones for whom such tidbits were written. I think the reappearance of Corcoran (if that is indeed the same man) and the Mikado were even prompted by public demand! Ron Orenstein: There is absolutely no doubt (whatever) about this. But notice how carefully these two references, to some of the most famous bits (indeed, with Corcoran, probably THE most famous bit) from G&S's greatest successes, are set up and placed in the opera. The other "reminiscences" seem tossed in much more casually - to my eye, more as though Gilbert was simply recycling his verbal stock-in-trade rather than expecting audiences to catch the references. Sam Clapp: There have been die-hard G&S fans like us from the get-go, people. Why do you think he wrote about people who write for autographs in Mikado? I know I'd be pestering him if he were alive right now. Ron Orenstein: I take your point, but I have often wondered whether Gilbert's admirers in his day would have been quite in, if you'll pardon my saying so, our league. We have opportunities WSG's contemporaries did not have to hear the operas over and over on tape or CD, read them collected in annotated volumes, and most importantly, perform them and see them with great frequency. We treat them as, not just a repertoire, but a canon (the sacred implications are intended!). As such it would not surprise me in the least to learn that we are on far greater terms of familiarity with each and every line than Gilbert's most fervent admirers in the 1890's. The problem is, then, twofold: (a) with almost EVERY line at our beck and call for quotation, which are the "catch phrases"? and (b) Are we assuming too much about Gilbert's audiences? I have always held a belief that deliberate-reminiscence-hunting is a difficult, not to say dangerous, thing to attempt. Tom Shepard: I completely agree. Why should we ever be penalized for occasionally revisiting something which we have done before. It isn't fair to aesthetically judge Utopia because we already know about Iolanthe, any more than we have a right to project the destiny of G&S if all we know of are the first three works they wrote. 1.5 - Gone abroad? His address? Derrick McClure: Does anybody else find that one of the things wrong with Utopia is that the setting - Utopia - is curiously ill-defined and ill-focused, both musically and dramatically? Sullivan has, of course, a brilliant talent for evoking a location: Japan, Italy, Germany, Spain, Persia, Ireland, or even England; but the music of Utopia fails signally to suggest either an exotic locale or anything else. The opening chorus suggests a Patience-like (VERY Patience-like) languorous atmosphere, but it doesn't suggest the South Seas. Is this because there was no authentic tradition of native music for Sullivan to base his style on (or else he didn't know it if there was)? Or is it because Gilbert likewise failed totally to make his Utopia credible? The lyrics of Phylla's solo are charming, but the picture they evoke is not remotely like anybody's image of Polynesia - ivied towers? lowing herds? The King, the Wise Men and the Public Exploder are not based on any REAL political system in the history of the South Seas or anyplace else - and where the deil did DYNAMITE come from in pre-colonial Polynesia? Even an imaginary world has to have some logic and consistency to it! Sheldon Brown: We are used to think of Utopia as a generic South Pacific isle, but on reading a volume of the essays of Mark Twain, I came upon his report from "The Sandwich Islands" (Hawaii). This originally appeared in the New York Tribune in 1873. I am led to believe that Hawaii was the specific inspiration for Utopia, and Kamehameha V for Paramount (Note: Sheldon then went on to quote Mark Twain's essay at some length, giving excerpts which showed remarkable similarities with the Utopia created by W.S. Gilbert.) Ron Orenstein: I can't lay my hands on the reference, but I distinctly recall that Hawaii had its equivalent to Princess Zara too - a Hawaiian princess who came to England and was presented to Victoria, but I can't find the details. Around the time of Utopia, there was a fair bit of tussle in Hawaii between pro-British and pro-American factions. As for putting Utopia in the Pacific at all, I wonder if Gilbert might also have been thinking of Erewhon, which is supposed to be in the Australia/NZ region? David Craven: As for there being equivalents to Princess Zara, that is quite correct. In fact, one of the Kings, in fact, made a state visit to England and on this visit both he and his wife died..... Bill Snyder: One last salvo in the attempt to nail down Utopia to a geographic location was fired this evening by a sometime Savoyard and now a graduate student in geography. He had asked what exactly everybody here (is this really a HERE?) talked about, so I gave some examples, notably where exactly did WSG envisage Utopia. His response was that he had always assumed that it was in the archipelago known as the Gilbert Islands (!!) I dunno. Maybe he's right! (not sure, but aren't they called something different now?) Ronald Orenstein: They used to be known as the Gilbert and Ellice Islands (a great opportunity lost!), but are now called Kiribati. That isn't really much of a change when you realize that the "ri" is meant to be pronounced as "L" and the final "i" is silent. Similarly, the Pacific Ocean Christmas Island is now called Kiritimati, pronounced, roughly, "Krismas". 1.6 - I don't think I ever met him" - Is a lack of familiarity to blame? David Craven, suggesting another possible reason for Utopia's lack of success: Is it due to a lack of familiarity with the show? Paul McShane: Yes, definitely. Today, Utopia is generally perceived to have been a failure. But was it really? It ran initially for 245 performances, comparable with Princess Ida (246) and Ruddigore (288) and much better than Sorcerer (178). In fact, Utopia was not a failure. The problem was that, unlike these other three operas, the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company chose not to revive it. One can speculate that the lack of a revival was chiefly due to the expense of doing the show properly and/or potential casting difficulties, but the inevitable consequence was a perception that it couldn't have been very good, otherwise the Company would have revived it, wouldn't it? This led to a self- perpetuating 'failure' myth because amateur companies, in turn, were fearful of reviving it because firstly they has no professional guidelines to assist them in staging the show and secondly they were afraid that its perceived unpopularity would lead to financial ruin. Tom Shepard: Is its perceived failure due to a lack of familiarity with the show? Not necessarily. Ron Orenstein: I think this is a consequence of the above, not a cause of it. Utopia is also very cumbersome and difficult to bring off and can be very expensive to stage, not to mention the huge cast requirements - another reason it is a comparative rarity in amateur theater, which is where most G&S gets done. Robert Jones: Is the problem a lack of familiarity with the show? Unlikely, I say. I have friends who can take or leave G&S and who would enjoy, say, Pirates on first viewing; but I don't think they'd consider UL to be a good night out. Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 2. The Plot 2.1 - There is no plot! 2.2 - No coming together 2.3 - Problems with the love stories 2.4 - Abhorrent to stockbrokers? 2.5 - Too close to the bone? 2.6 - I've a borough or two..... 2.1 - There is no plot David Duffey, quoting George Bernard Shaw's first night review: "The book has Mr Gilbert's lighter qualities without his faults. ... There is, happily, no plot; and the stage business is fresh and well invented." Paul McShane: One point that tends to be overlooked in dissecting Utopia Limited is the fact that, compared to the other G&S operas, it is in a special class of its own - just as Yeomen is. What makes it special is the fact that its plot is entirely related to its satire - not much of a plot, perhaps, compared with its siblings, but a plot nonetheless. Several of the songs are devoted entirely to the development of the satire. And the satire is excellent: better, funnier and more to the point than in the other operas (after all, it IS the crux of the plot). What little storyline and characterisation exists is there to advance the satire motif. It would be appropriate to compare Utopia to 'Cats', which has no plot or storyline whatsoever, but nevertheless made a very successful musical. The attributes which modern audiences apply to 'Cats' in deciding whether it is successful or unsuccessul, good or bad, or whatever, can also be applied to Utopia. Nick Sales: The Plot: yes, it's complicated, rambling, unsatisfactory, disjointed, raggedy - to those who care - but I Don't! I honestly don't give two hoots for the plot. I can't honestly say that I've ever been to the theatre and seen something and come away dissatisfied because of weak plot/development etc. As long as I've enjoyed myself in the experience as a whole, the fact that a particular romance hasn't been resolved doesn't bother me in the least. If that makes me a dimwit, so be it (I am a tenor, after all); but I'd be willing to guess that a fairly large proportion of the theatregoing public attach similar importance (or lack of it) to plot - reference Paul McShane's erudite comment re: "Cats" and its enduring success. Andrew Crowther: But Shaw has also has been quoted as approving of this lack of plot. Indeed, it can be viewed as an advantage. Look at it this way: Utopia, Limited is really a series of linked satirical scenes on the theme of England and its institutions. In this far-off kingdom English ideas are aped and exaggerated, and shown up as idiotic. (And without an offensive patronising of the native Utopians, which one can imagine most other writers of this era would have fallen into.) English manners, English institutions, English customs are all shown us through this distorting (refining?) lens. Girls behave prudishly, commerce takes over the island, ceremonial is paramount. There is comparatively little need for a connected plot, because it is really beside the point. The point is for Gilbert to tell his audience: "This is what you are." Arthur Robinson: I agree; it's not Sullivan at his best musically, but it's right dramatically. Thinking over Utopia the last few days, I think it's an opera with a lot of brilliant ideas and terrific parts that don't quite add up--I like it a lot but I wouldn't recommend it to someone new to G&S. I believe it's a play that doesn't really lend itself naturally to music, as most of Gilbert's libretti did. Tom Shepard: I think that this is remarkably to the point; I never thought of it that way before: I just kept thinking that WSG could have been more loving, more tender, more clever, whatever. But I think I agree with this: the fundamental problem is that the libretto does NOT cry out for musical setting most of the time. This is not to say that Sullivan couldn't have done better---he certainly could have----but I think that much of the time Utopia is not enhanced by being musicalized. Yet for reasons hard to explain, I always enjoy listening to it, perhaps because I know who wrote it and what it represents in their histories. Also, it was so hard to come by when I was a kid. Its unavailability gave it some special cachet, and when I finally heard it (I was about 22 at the time) it was like tasting forbidden fruit. Neil Ellenhof: I think the plot and satirical thrusts are excellent. Certainly overlong but Gilbert was throwing darts at several targets in British society. I think it is much more interesting than Pinafore, for example. 2.2 - No coming together Marc Shepherd: In Utopia, most of the plot strands never come together. Threads come out of nowhere (the Goldbury/Dramaleigh/Nekaya/Kalyba scene), while others just disappear (the Zara/Fitzbattleaze/Scaphio/Phantis affair). I have also pointed out before the dramatic importance of setting up situations in Act I and then exploring them in Act II. We see this in all of Gilbert's successful operas, indeed in successful theater generally. Despite the multiplicity of plot strands in The Gondoliers, Gilbert sets them all up in Act I and then embellishes them in Act II. This is what makes Gondoliers a competent libretto, and Utopia not so. (Note: The following section, also from Marc Shepherd, is taken from a later Savoynet discussion of The Gondoliers, but is relevant to this section of the Utopia discussion) Marc Shepherd: Regarding the lack of plot advancement in Act II (of the Gondoliers), I think Bruce Miller answered this best: the act is about what happens when "everyone is somebodee, and no one's anybodee." All things being equal, the opera would have been better if more happened in Act II. But, the piece holds together because of Gilbert's skill at bringing all the pieces together in the end -- something he never manages in Utopia. 2.3 - Problems with the love stories David Craven: Does Utopia's perceived failure relate to the very weak love story which, in turn, is imperfectly resolved? Tom Shepard: Somewhat. Robert Jones: Another of many small weaknesses. Marc Shepherd: There are at least four love interests in Utopia (depending on how you count), none of which has a proper beginning, middle and end. Even the major conflict in the story -- Scaphio and Phantis vs. the King -- suffers an abrupt change of course. In the first act, the driver of the conflict is Phantis's interest in Princess Zara. In the second act, the conflict takes a left turn, the driver becoming the wise men's need to expel the Flowers of Progress. Mike Nash: Obviously, Pinafore, Pirates, Ida and Gondoliers (and others) are what may be described as "romantic comedies", but Utopia Ltd. is meant to be a political satire. Romance is irrelevant. Certainly in Utopia's case, all these romantic tangles just slow down the story and blunt the satire. A 90-minute Utopia Ltd., concentrating on the politics with razor-sharp wit, could have been a big hit. Instead we have all this guff between the King and Lady Sophy, and between Princess Zara and Cpt. Fitzbattleaxe - who cares? It isn't as if it was satirizing specific romantic engagements between real people. Andrew Crowther: There's been a lot of criticism of Utopia's structure - the fizzling out of the Zara/Fitzbattleaxe plot, f'rinstance. Arthur Robinson: This is a problem. In Gilbert's original version, reprinted in John Wolfson's FINAL CURTAIN, there is a second-act scene and song resolving this (not Gilbert at his best but I thought it funny, especially giving the soprano the chance to act out banging things with a poker etc.). Paul McShane: The first printing of Utopia's libretto, about 3 months before opening night, survives in the British Library - as you would imagine, it was cut, added to and amended several times before the first performance. In this first layout, the Scaphio/Phantis/Zara love interest was, as Arthur says, COMPLETELY RESOLVED! - Immediately after the 'capital plot' trio, Scaphio and Phantis remain on stage to receive Fitzbattleaxe's half-yearly report on his guardianship of Zara. In a quartet, Fitzbattleaxe reveals that, although Zara is very warm-hearted, she is very high-spirited '..the crockery flies at your ears and your eyes..' and jealous '..she'll use her stiletto if no prussic acid's convenient!' At this, the Wise Men decide '..she's a little too much for a councillor wise. For we are not as young as we used to be..' and are content to leave her with Fitzbattleaxe. Sullivan wasn't happy with this scene at all, and with the partners bending over backwards to accommodate each other's wishes, the dialogue, quartet and solo were all dropped. It really would have tied up the main love interest nicely, be we'll never know if it would have worked, because Sullivan did not set the music.' Mike Nash: I think there IS a main plot of sorts - the opera is essentially about a paradise (Utopia) being spoiled by British civilization. But there are too many distractions, most especially all the romantic liaisons. Andrew Crowther: There's a good case for saying this is true, I think. Mike Nash: Which raises a question: why did Gilbert feel it was necessary to include romance in every G&S opera, even when the basic premise of the story has nothing to do with it? Was it essential for all Victorian writers (or at least, writers of opera librettos) to major on the subject? Or was it just a Gilbertian obsession? Andrew Crowther: Certainly it is not a specifically Gilbertian obsession. It's a convention of drama, certainly throughout Victorian times. And surely we find the same thing well into this century - think of all those films in which a romantic subplot is brought in, regardless of whether it's at all appropriate. Even today, I'm sure there are very few films in which there is no "love interest" (or love boredom, as in most cases it should be called). Tom Shepard: Utopia's emphasis on commerce rather than upon the interrelationships of the characters is what tends to make it seem so didactic politically and economically. 2.4 - Abhorrent to stockbrokers? David Craven: Does Utopia's perceived failure relate to the show's opposition to the abuse of the corporate system and, as today, abuse of the corporate system is not only tolerated, but encouraged, we now find such attacks similar to the burning of a flag? Tom Shepard: I don't think so. Robert Jones: No, I think this is incidental. Once again, there's too much said about it (especially in the otherwise fine Act I finale), but I can't see it generating particularly strong feelings, except perhaps amongst stockbrokers or fraudsters (same thing, really!). Robert Jones: David Craven asked whether pacing or timing of Utopia could be improved by changing the location of the Act break or by dividing it into three acts instead of two, or re-ordering the scenes. My answer is yes, just as it could have been improved if WSG had spent another three months on it. For all its wanderings, the plot is linear and reordering scenes would probably do more harm than good. Bill Snyder: I have the weird suspicion that one of the attractions of UTO (& GD)...is that they AREN'T perfect jewels such as Mikado is. You need to play around with them and play on their weaknesses and strengths in relationship to your cast to make it work. You get to write your own Gilbert and Sullivan operetta, starting with pretty good raw material! Derrick McClure: I think Calynx's first speech is symptomatic of a lot that's wrong with the whole show. First, it's unrelated to what precedes it. The opening chorus is all about the joys of Lazyland - no mention whatever of the King, his daughter, or (come to that) anything whatever relating to the plot as it's going to develop. Second, it's frantic, almost hysterical, in tone: before the languid strains have the chance to die away, a character comes barging onto the stage yelling "Good news! Great news!", and proceeds with a speech in which the words come tumbling over each other almost incoherently. Third, it's unrelated to what FOLLOWS it: a few sentences about Calynx's great news, and then ANOTHER character comes barging onto the stage yelling "Lalabalele talala!", and a whole new element is introduced into the development of the drama. Finally, it's said by a character who thereafter is never heard of again - being instantly eclipsed by a character who ALSO is never heard of again - well, not for an act and a half. Gilbert was patently not himself when he wrote that opening. 2.5 - Too close to the bone? Derrick McClure: This may stir up some flames, but I'll post it all the same. Coming from a country which has suffered from the imposition of "English tastes, English institutions, and oh, English fashions", I can't deny that I have a visceral feeling against Utopia - which is TOTALLY UNRELATED to my relatively low critical estimate of its libretto and music! An opera which deals with a colonised people rushing headlong to ape the manners and customs of the colonisers, even when the theme is treated satirically, is just a wee bit too close to the bone. (THE EMERALD ISLE is the opposite case - there I indulge in a visceral shout of HOORAY for a libretto in which the colonised people RESIST the colonial power!) Andrew Crowther: I agree absolutely with the premise - that no country has the right to impose its customs on another country - but I can't agree with the conclusion that Utopia is offensive on this score. Of course, as Derrick says, the theme is treated satirically: we're left in no doubt that these English ways are no better than the Utopian ones. (Though Gilbert, with pessimistic democracy, implies that they're no worse, either.) To show the Utopians embracing English ways, rather than resisting them, is all part of the Gilbertian ironic method. His style insists that a satirical point should be made through a system of distortions and inversions: the point is never spoken straight out. (Well, hardly ever....) In any case, by treating the matter in this way, rather than as a case of brutal oppressors resisted by plucky islanders, he addresses the rather good point that this kind of cultural takeover can be voluntary. I believe I'm right in saying that many outposts of the British Empire did genuinely embrace British/English customs. (Oh dear, I see my terms are becoming vague. I suppose in this case we are really talking about English customs.) This does not imply that such a takeover is morally right. Bruce Walton: Derrick McClure pointed out that as victims of English colonialism ourselves, Scots may find UL a bit 'close to the bone'. While taking his point, it doesn't quite catch me that way - after all, one of the things I like so much about the whole canon (including Utopia) is how remorselessly stupid WSG makes the English look! Andrew Crowther: I ought to add that this kind of cultural takeover is still going on today. It's a clich‚, but a fact, that American culture is invading Britain and threatening the British cultures. And I scowl horribly whenever I hear of non-Western cultures being "dragged, kicking and screaming, into the twentieth century" - a phrase which really means turning them into clones of Western society. (Note how that phrase implies that non-Western cultures are anachronistic.) It never seems to occur to anyone to wonder whether these people are right to be kicking and screaming while this is going on. Bruce Walton: The thing which does catch me on the raw is the indiscriminate use of 'England' for 'Britain', which is endemic in Utopia. so I webbed to the search engine and did a survey. There are 14 uses of 'Britain' with or without 'Great' in the Savoy canon (not counting the chorus repeats in Mountararrat's song), 7 of which are in UL. By way of comparison, there are 37 uses of 'England', no less than 25 of which are in UL. Putting my patriotic prejudice to good work, I examined them to see how many are incorrect or inappropriate. The criteria I used to judge this were as follows. Anything which refers to England geographically ('She sailed for England 3 months ago') or historically ('I know the Kings of England'), or which relates to England's Legal system ('Sir, you are England's Lord Chancellor'), will pass muster with even the most sensitive Caledonian pedant (In case anybody isn't familiar with the fact, England and Scotland still have completely separate legal systems, even though we share a parliament). In addition, all the references in Yeomen are absolutely correct as Scotland and England were different countries back then. However, there are also references which clearly refer to Britain and as such are 'Politically Incorrect' ('the bulwark and foundation of England's greatness'). Perhaps the worst example is Dick Dauntless saying 'By the flag of old England' but waving a Union Jack around! However, on the whole there are fairly few. I found only 12 of the 37 usages of England indefensible, and offensive to my pride (I was born sneering, you know). Whoever would have thought that WSG would rate so high on political correctness? It's a shame that this concept wasn't around in the nineteenth century - I'm sure he would have done a wonderful satire on it! Chris Wain: It was of course pretty standard in the 19C, so we mustn't blame WSG personally. Gladstone did it all the time, despite living in Wales, sitting for a Scottish seat, and doing his best to devolve power to Ireland! 2.6 - I've a borough or two.... - the effect of one's political views David Craven: Do ones political views have any impact on the perception of the libretto? Robert Jones: Possibly, but you'd have to feel very strongly about commerce to be affected either way. Tom Shepard: My political leanings don't seem to get in the way. Ron Orenstein: As most of the criticisms levelled at Utopia relate to things like the "love interest", I don't think political leanings have an effect - I have NEVER heard anyone suggest that Utopia's weakest stuff was the politics. I repeat my criticisms. Utopia is a fine satire, but a very cumbersome operetta. Marc Shepherd: For one thing, I don't find Utopia as politically extreme as David does. Most of the G&S operas contain biting satire. I don't think Utopia goes that much farther -- if, indeed, it goes farther at all--than many of Gilbert's other efforts. David Craven: It would seem, based on prior discussion, that individuals of a conservative to libertarian political view are of the (strong) opinion that the libretto is no good, that individuals who don't have strong political views or are in the middle of the road generally have no strong opinions about the libretto and those from the liberal to the progressive end of the political spectrum are of the (strong) opinion that the libretto is pretty darn good. Andrew Crowther: I don't think I fit into this theory. My opinions waver to and fro, but by and large I'm a red-faced reactionary - Damme, Sir, the country's going to the dogs! (etc.) Yet I enjoy the satire immensely. My reasons for doing so are, I suppose, on the pinko-liberal side: I enjoy Gilbert's satire on the assumptions of colonialisation, that the British are a naturally superior race. At the same time I see, in this, support for my tiresomely-repeated opinions on the Victorian age, that if they had faults, at least they knew about them. It is a good thing that an age as proud of its material progress as that should have its critical voices. Paul McShane: I am in the same boat as Andrew - as one of conservative bent, who enjoys Utopia and its satire immensely. One of us, perhaps, may have been the exception proving the rule, but with two of us, it tends to dent the theory a little. Bruce Miller: As one whose political leanings are definitely in the right, as opposed to in the left, direction, I have to say I could not understand the suggestion that one's personal political beliefs would color his or her perception of Utopia, either positively or negatively. The satire isn't particularly well executed, nor is it really so dominating that it matters so much. But there's no need to recapitulate analysis which has been so well done by some of the contributors here such as Marc, Ron and Tom. I simply want to put on the record that my problems with Utopia do not include disagreement with the thrust of its political satire, and would not even if it were more successfully carried out. Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 3. The Score 3.1 - General feelings about the score 3.2 - Was Sullivan unable to rise above a feeble libretto? 3.3 - Today he is not well 3.4 - Where's the overture? 3.5 - Was Sullivan running out of steam? 3.6 - Music we love to love 3.7 - Music we love to hate 3.8 - Of native music the cream? 3.1 - General feelings about the score David Craven, who at the time was overseeing the Utopia discussion, posed a few "starter" questions, of which this was one: - Does anyone have any passionate feelings about the score? Robert Jones: Yes, I passionately feel that much of it is simply dull. I don't believe he's lost his touch (he certainly has it in GD), but he's not there ALL the time. On the other hand, I passionately adore much of the music, particularly: 'Oh maiden rich' (the 'Knightsbridge nursemaids' chorus is one of my favourites in the entire canon); much of the Act I finale, especially the "posterity" song and ending; the minstrel song; the Court Entrance and Drawing Room music; 'Eagle High' of course; 'When but a maid.' (and I may be alone in this one!); the tarantella; Act II finale. Neil Ellenhof: I think the main problem with the music is Sullivan's failure to change his musical style as time went on. It was very much the mixture as before. The one exception is the minstrel scene and to me that is the one place in the opera when there is some excitement. I think G and S tapped the market for a new good but not exceptionally good opera. Also an opera that opens with lazy langour doesn't augur well. Ron Orenstein: Patience opens a LOT more languidly than Utopia. Anyway, Basil Hood must have liked it - the opening line of THE ROSE OF PERSIA is "As we lie in languor lazy..." David Duffey, quoting George Bernard Shaw's review: "I have only one fault to find with Sir Arthur's luxurious ingenuity in finding pretty timbres of all sorts, and that is that it still leads him to abuse the human voice most unmercifully. I will say nothing of the part he has written for the unfortunate soprano, who might as well leave her lower octave at home for all the relief she gets from the use of her upper one.", and later still: "A composer who uses up young voices by harping on the prettiest notes in them is an ogreish volupuary; and if Sir Arthur does not wish posterity either to see the stage whitened with the bones of his victims or else to hear his music transposed wholesale ... he should make up his mind whether he means to write for a tenor or a baritone, and place the part accordingly." Nick Sales: Whilst being far from an authority, I would suggest that Utopia's strengths lie principally in its musical numbers, and blame the larger part of the failure on Gilbert. David Craven again: Can any of Utopia's fans argue a "different bloom" in its music? Marc Shepherd: The score of Utopia Limited certainly takes Sullivan in a new direction, though I have always seen it as a retrogression. 3.2 - Was Sullivan unable to rise above a feeble libretto? Marc Shepherd: Some composers could write inspired pages even when presented with feeble material. Sullivan wasn't like that: he rarely rose above the raw material. Arthur Robinson denied this, pointing out THE CHIEFTAIN as an example. Robert Jones: It has been said that Sullivan may have lacked inspiration because of Gilbert's uncertain libretto. But AS received the song lyrics before the dialogue was filled out, so it's unlikely that he was aware of the deficiencies of the final work until he'd set most of the songs. 3.3 - Today he is not well - Sullivan's ill-health and its effect on the score. Bruce Miller: One factor no one has yet mentioned was the state of Sullivan's health and emotional outlook during the period Utopia was composed. He was a very ill man - in fact, he nearly died during a severe attack, when he had only about half-completed the score. Slowly and painfully, he finished it, but he was now almost 15 years older than when he overcame similar difficulties when writing Pinafore, and the libretto for Utopia was no Pinafore. Ron Orenstein: Absolutely. I have always felt (with no proof whatever) that you can hear this in "Haddon Hall". Sullivan almost died during its composition, and the score is wildly uneven - some glorious things contrasting with real bilge. I often wonder if the break in his ability to put his health problems aside while composing happened then, and we still hear it in Utopia. Nick Sales: No, I can see the logic behind it, yet the evidence of his earlier heroics (Pinafore, Iolanthe etc.) whilst suffering suggests this idea is a non-starter for me, however old he was at the time. 3.4 - Where's the overture? Neil Ellenhof: I am sure many of you know but I don't. Whatever became of the Overture to Utopia? I think one using the tunes would be helpful in making them more attractive to the listener as they occur in the opera. Also, a more exciting recording than the 1975 D'oyly Carte would be helpful. I remember being very grateful for the recording when it came out (I still am) but I think some less moribund company would be able to draw more interest out of the melodies such as they are. Bill Snyder: Was there ever one? I ended up just writing one for the second production I directed. Bruce I. Miller: The authentic Introduction to Utopia is the one played on the 1975 D'Oyly Carte recording. Its authenticity has been confirmed via two separate sources, although unfortunately Sullivan's autograph full score has not been seen since it was auctioned off during the first World War. As to why it was not published in the vocal score is anyone's guess; perhaps it was withdrawn after the earliest performances, because the opera was found to drag and the Introduction did little to enliven the proceedings. The vocal score was no doubt issued at least a week or two after the premiere, so if the decision to excise was made early enough, the excision would have been reflected there. 3.5 - Was Sullivan running out of steam? Neil Ellenhof: The only composer I can think of whose popularity lasted through 12 or 13 works is Verdi. His style changed a great deal along the way. There was Sullivan when opera composers were writing verismo, Broadway was just about at George M. Cohan and Sullivan was offering the same musical style as 20 years before. His other works of the 90s are no more interesting. Here and there a good number. He spent an enormous amount of time and effort on The Beauty Stone (much more than on the Mikado) and I have never been able to finish listening to it. Its as if he was frozen in time about 1870 Ron Orenstein: A lot more than 12 or 13! Anyway, Offenbach remained pretty popular through some 70-90 stage pieces, depending on how you count them, though certainly not every one was a hit. Donizetti and Rossini also wrote lots more than a dozen without falling off noticeably. 3.6 - Music we love to love Marc Shepherd: Clearly, SOME numbers caught Sullivan's imagination -- 'Society has quite forsaken', 'A tenor, all singers above', 'Eagle high', and so on. Tom Shepard: There are some numbers ('Although of Native Maids'; 'Society has quite forsaken') which I like tremendously, but I also like some energetic moments like 'A Company promoter'. Mike Nash, though expressing his extreme indifference to the score as a whole, wrote: 'Sweet And Low' is a gorgeous duet. Arthur Robinson: Reviewing the songs, I found that much as I like the score, there are only four numbers that I consider G&S at the top of their form--'Let all your doubts take wing', 'Although of native maids the cream,' 'A tenor all singers above,' and 'Society has quite forsaken'. There are also several songs with brilliant ideas that don't lend themselves well to music; Sullivan has set them in a dramatically suitable way, and as well as I can imagine anyone doing, but they aren't exuberant like the best G&S. A few examples: 'Bold-faced ranger,' 'First you're born,' 'It's understood I think,' 'Some seven men,' 'With wily brain'. It's almost as if the lyrics are restricting Sullivan's musical fertility. Some of Sullivan's most glorious music in Utopia is written to (IMO) rather mundane and irrelevant lyrics, such as 'Words of love' and 'Eagle High'. Paul McShane: We've all experienced feelings where we watch or listen to a G&S performance, and feel that special ecstasy as a well-loved piece of music sweeps over you - we wouldn't be wasting our time in Savoynet otherwise! You know what I mean about these special pieces - if you're listening to them on the car's tape deck, you immediately rewind to hear them a second time. The magic moments for my unsophisticated musical ear in Utopia are: 'Society has forsaken', which for my pleasure knows no peer in G&S. The 'Knightsbridge nursemaids' ensembles. The end of Act I (despite Marc's dissatisfaction with it) , particularly when the music 'winds up' to bring all the cast into the number, joining Zara, Fitzbattleaxe, Scaphio, Phantis and Tarara. I rank these last two up there with the Iolanthe Act I finale and Climbing over Rocky Mountain as the ensemble pieces which give me most enjoyment in the series. Bill Snyder: That really good raw material, IMHO, includes 'O make way' (I like the change from 3/4 to 6/8), 'Although of native maids the cream', 'Bold-faced ranger', 'Subjected to', the Finale I from 'Well, at first sight..' to the end, and most of Act II except 'A wonderful joy.' I have to admit that lots of that I like because I've had singing actors who could make it work. Chief among these is 'Words of love', which is the only truly erotic love duet Sullivan ever wrote. It isn't the Chapel Scene from MANON, or "O, soave fanciulla" from BOHEME, but in context, with the right singers, it can be really stirring. Nick Sales: Yes, O.K., there are a good few numbers in which Sullivan didn't exactly cover himself in glory (Note: see below) and I don't really blame Gilbert for any of them. On the other hand, there are numbers in Utopia which I love intensely, and would fiercely protect. They are: Entrance of Nekaya and Kalyba "How fair! How modest!'; Duet 'Although of Native maids'; 'First you're born'; Entrance of Zara & CF & Lifeguards and the whole 'Knighstbridge Nursemaids' passage; 'It's understood, I think, all round'; both soprano/tenor duets; Finale Act I - all (even tho' Goldbury does seem to go on for ever) 'Oh Zara/A tenor, all singers above'; 'Society has quite forsaken'; 'Eagle High'; Finale Act II. Most of these I would place extremely high up in my top 50 G&S songs, shall we say. I know I shall never tire of hearing them. Ron Orenstein: IMHO the best musical moments are: 'In lazy languor' (I love the orchestral "vamp" just before the first entry, which gives that languid tune some vigour); Oh make way (the clever switch from 3/4 to 6/8, even if the duet itself does sound like 'For everyone who feels inclined'); the whole scene from 'Quaff the nectar', EXCEPT 'A king of autocratic power'; Lady Sophy's waltz is a personal favourite and the girls' duet is one of the best things in the score. FIRST YOU'RE BORN!!; the lovely little orchestral waltz between Dramaleigh's and Blushington's arrivals; 'Words of love' - a most interesting and effective accompaniment. Well, the Christy minstrel number, sure; 'with wily brain' (great fun in both words and music, except for "don't be unhappy/It's still on the tapis" - is that the best Gilbert. could do?). 'Oh sweet surprise' - so wonky that it works; 'Oh the rapture unrestrained' 3.7 - Music we love to hate Marc Shepherd: Sullivan...disappoints. Yes, there are several individual numbers that satisfy, but the score as a whole does not stand up. In Utopia, one senses that Sullivan was largely disinterested. Clearly, SOME numbers caught his imagination, yet, there are so many others of mind-numbing mediocrity -- 'A king of autocratic power', 'Quaff the nectar', 'Upon our sea-girt land', 'With fury deep we burn', 'When but a maid of fifteen year', etc. While the best numbers in Utopia match the G&S of old, there are too many that are far below that level. Tom Shepard: Sullivan did about as well as he could for most of it, but even he got incredibly banal with 'Wise Men' and 'A King of Autocratic Power'. It's as though he said "the hell with it" and didn't give himself the time to be more clever or inventive or charming. David Duffey: If you promise me faithfully not to mention this to a single person, not even to your dearest friend, I don't think "Eagle High" rollicking. Although it is fun to belt out, I think it is Sullivan at his churchy worst. Robert Jones: Perhaps Gilbert was consciously taking the piss out of him (Sullivan) when he came up with the second verse. Nick Sales: My candidates are: 'Subjected to your heavenly gaze'; 'Then I may sing and play' (particularly the middle passage); 'When but a maid of fifteen year'; 'Ah, Lady Sophy - then you love me!'; 'Oh the rapture unrestrained'; 50 - 75 % of 'Some Seven Men'; 'A wonderful joy' I wouldn't delete anything else song-wise, I really wouldn't. On reflection, if sitting at home listening to the CD armed with the remote control unit, those are the only cuts I'd make - and I would make them almost every time. 3.8 - Of native music the cream? Derrick McClure: Does anybody else find that one of the things wrong with Utopia is that the setting - Utopia - is curiously ill-defined and ill-focused, both musically and dramatically? Robert Jones: Yes, I find that. Yesterday, I sat down and played the entire vocal score of Utopia and decided that I like ALL the music (even when played by me). I also decided that Sullivan maintained a consistent theme almost throughout the piece. However, that theme certainly does not conjure up images of South-Pacific islands in my mind. It made me think rather of the Minstrel song. Bruce Miller: Derrick, you have hit on one of the score's problems - by no means its only one, but a significant one. Someone here recently suggested Hawaii as the locale. Hawaiian music (which is, after all, directly related to what we now call Polynesian music) had not penetrated British consciousness by 1892; it started to become something of interest to the American public via the phonograph and gramophone shortly after the turn of the 20th century. Had Sullivan known of this music, he might very well have integrated aspects of it into Utopia, as he did with the Japanese music in Mikado (and Italian and Spanish dance music in Gondoliers). Indeed, it might have provided for him a measure of interest and excitement in the composition which he seems not to have had. Ron Orenstein: I think Sullivan does attempt to evoke a Utopian locale in patches...... Marc Shepherd: .......but the attempts are nowhere near as successful as in The Mikado, The Gondoliers, or even The Grand Duke. Also, too many of the numbers are in triple meter, which contributes to the overall sense of boredom in the score. Ron Orenstein: The contrast between such Act I passages as the rather simple unison of "O Make Way for the Wise Men" and the somewhat loose- limbed music of "Quaff the nectar" with the four-square harmonies of "Eagle High" and the prettified but rather "cultured" drawing-room music seems to me to point exactly to the stuffier aspects of anglicization - note that when the Utopians finally rebel they do so in another near- unison (or certainly simple harmonically) chorus - returning to their roots, as it were. Nick Sales: I would agree that Sullivan's use of Unison singing (Ullallicah! and elsewhere) represents his attempt to at least differentiate between the natives and the Immigrants - and I would say it works - to all except those who are bothered that it's not genuine South Sea Island Music. Bruce Miller: Ron: You say that Sullivan attempted this. How do you asses the extent of his success? Derrick's original suggestion was that Sullivan was less focused than usual, a point with which I would agree. While recognizing what you've elaborated, I would also point out the rather four-square harmonies in the chorus at the end of "A King of autocratic power we" as betraying the original Utopian musical language which you suggest Sullivan may have been setting up. Sullivan seems to be trying, as you suggest, to do this, but it is a rare instance of him not seeming able to give his score that vivid identifying sound which marks nearly all of his other operas with Gilbert. Ron Orenstein: I would agree with this - I was merely trying to point out that I think he was aiming for a deliberate effect. I suspect he had not quite satisfied himself about what "Utopian" music should sound like. Bruce Miller: Those "rather simple unison passages" really do lack, it seems to me, a strong sense of a distinguishable musical culture David Craven: Interesting. That is exactly how I would describe much of the authentic Polynesian music which is normally performed by a single chanter accompanied by percussive hits on various percussive instruments.... (Called an Ulili, but the spelling may be a bit wrong...) The music of old (pre-missionary Hawaii) was rather unison. The music of post missionary Hawaii was rather "churchy"... (again not the tin pan alley Hawaii music of the US 20's) David Craven: I'll follow up in a bit more detail on Hawaiian Music and Hawaiian history. As for the comments on Hawaiian music.... the music which 1920's American associated with Hawaii and Polynesia is not really true "Hawaiian" music. The native music is much more of a chant. The Uke is, after all, from Portugal, not Hawaii... In fact, much of the music which would have been popular in Hawaii would have been quite "churchy" in nature. If one listens to Hawaii Aloha or Hawaii Ponoi one will very clearly hear touches of Sullivan Hymnody. In fact, the "Hawaiian" Hymnal is very much a collection of hymnody of the early to middle 18th century. Bruce Miller: You'll have to be more specific in your linking of "authentic" Hawaiian music to what Sullivan provided in Utopia. I hear nothing in Sullivan's score such us you suggest - a chanter with rhythmic percussive accompaniment, unless you're referring to "Oh, make way for the Wise-men," which seems to me an isolated incidence. For Mikado, Sullivan had a number of authentic Japanese musical models (some of which he actually used in his score), supplied to him by at least one person knowledgeable on the subject. He was able to incorporate this material with great imagination into the score of The Mikado, albeit perhaps in a naive manner. Do you know if anything like that obtained while Sullivan was composing Utopia? If not, and one has to go only on the music of Utopia Limited as Sullivan left it to us, any so-called Hawaiian or Polynesian musical links seem tenuous at best. David Craven: Hawaii and Great Britain had a large number of ties which significantly predate the Sullivan period. In fact, the Hawaiian flag contains the Union Jack. King Kamehameha the second and his wife, the Queen, died while visited King George IV in 1825. Many members of the Hawaiian Monarchy continued to visit Great Britain in particular for many years. Was Authentic Hawaiian music directly supplied to Sullivan? I have no idea, and I suspect that had it been supplied, it would have been of little use as the "chant" which was the authentic music of Hawaii would have been, at best, difficult to incorporate, and the music being written in Hawaii at the time (for example the Queen's prayer was written by the last Queen of Hawaii who died in 1917. Except for the fact that the words are in Hawaiian, it would fit right in with traditional "churchy" sound for the period. Eagle High, in my opinion, would fit right in with Hawaiian music of the period (which I am familiar with having sung a good deal of it in High School, assuming that you are defining Hawaiian music as that being written in Hawaii at the time.) Hawaii was, until the US finally rested control, a very Anglo-focused area (tempered by Missionary New England fervor.) Tom Shepard: We may be overstressing the importance of "ethnicity" or lack of it, in Utopia. For sure, Sullivan was not operating at full speed, but the lack of "native type" music doesn't mean much one way or the other. Although Rodgers and Hammerstein get a little "Far West" in South Pacific and The King and I----at least for a few particular numbers, the bulk of these scores is pure Richard Rodgers, just like the bulk of The Mikado is pure Arthur Sullivan. The bulk of Utopia, musically, is just not so pure A.S.S. So I don't deny that it might have been a bit more interesting had Sullivan tried a little harder to be a bit more exotic, but the fundamental problem with Utopia is not its lack of musical exoticism; it is its lack of musical invention. Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION The Libretto 4.1 - General feelings about the libretto 4.2 - The real meaning of "Ulahlica!"? 4.1 - General feelings about the libretto David Craven: What is it about the Libretto which brings out such strong feelings? Robert Jones: It contains too many words! And, as I said, the plot meanders. If WSG had looked at it as someone else's work that needed editing, he would have made a fine job of it. Tom Shepard: Its absence of heart. Paul McShane: Unlike other respondents, I do not accept that the libretto is poor. Andrew Crowther: I think most of us are agreed that Gilbert's later style is much too wordy. Even so, I pity the man who plays Calynx in a production of Utopia. He has the first spoken words in the opera, and what are they? The following horrifying rigmarole: "Good news! Great news! His Majesty's eldest daughter, Princess Zara, who left our shores five years since to go to England - the greatest, the most powerful, the wisest country in the world - has taken a high degree at Girton, and is on her way home again, having achieved a complete mastery over all the elements that have tended to raise that glorious country to her present pre-eminent position among civilized nations!" Hardly, I think, the terms in which an urgent message is usually expressed. I mean, look at those subordinate clauses! It's the third line before he even gets to the main verb of the sentence, and most of the audience has probably given up trying to understand him by that point. Gilbert has obviously overloaded the sentence with far too much information. He once said that the craft of writing plays was mainly to do with a sense of balance in the construction of plots and sentences - a lesson he seems to have forgotten completely here. I suppose it's possible to make the meaning of this first speech clear, if the actor gives a lot of forethought to inflexions and making the sentence structure clear to the audience - but what a lot of work Gilbert makes him do, and within a couple of minutes of the curtain going up! Marc Shepherd: Besides the structural problems in the work, the dialogue is too wordy. As Andrew Crowther has pointed out, taking the very first speech in the opera as an example, Gilbert simply takes too long to make his points. There are plenty of good jokes in the libretto, but the dry spells between them make the book seem tedious. Andrew Crowther: After Utopia Limited D'Oyly Carte said that "There is no doubt in my mind that what the public want now is simply 'fun' and little else." It seems clear to me that Gilbert made a deliberate effort to provide exactly that in GD - the full Gilbertian bag of tricks. But he was tiring of the old style now, and it all sounds a little jaded and second-hand. 4.2 "The true meaning of "Ulahlica"? The following irreverent exposition was supplied by Phillip Sternberg: The Utopian populace eagerly assembled. Lady Sophy watched with pride as her compatriots were about to be introduced. Princess Zara presented Captain Fitzbattleaxe and promised how he would bring the benefits of the English military to Utopia. The crowd shouted, "Ulahlica! Ulahlica! Ulahlica!" Sophy beamed. Next Zara presented Sir Bailey Barre, who promised great legal reforms. Once again the crowd shouted, "Ulahlica! Ulahlica! Ulahlica!" Sophy was aglow. One by one, Zara presented the remaining Flowers of Progress, all of whom promised reforms beyond belief. Each time the crowd shouted, "Ulahlica! Ulahlica! Ulahlica!", and each time Sophy's pride grew accordingly. Sometime later, Sophy took a walk with her pupils, the Princesses Nekaya and Kalyba. The girls pointed out the birds in ivied towers and the rippling play of waterway to Sophy. As they entered a lush, green field, Nekaya said, "And now we're walking amongst the lowing herds." Kalyba added, "But be careful! Don't step in the ulahlica!" Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 5 - The Characters 5.1 - General feelings about the characters 5.2 - Who's the baddest baddy? 5.3 - You gotta have a patter man 5.1 - General feelings about the characters Tom Shepard: The characters are not charmingly quirky; they are mostly very driven and very humorless. Fitzbattleaxe is apparently flawless, which makes him ineffably boring David Craven: ... In Utopia one of the problems may be that the villains are some of the least credible. The two wisemen are clearly outmatched against Fitzbattleaxe from the start and the Public Exploder is more of a clown than a real threat to the king... 5.2 - Who's the baddest baddy? Bruce Walton: I'm not so sure that there is a single out-and-out baddie in the entire Savoy Canon who is nearly as bad as Scaphio and Phantis. They're spiteful, vindictive and selfish, and all the others have redeeming features: Derrick McClure: Scaphio and Phantis, now, are in a different category: their prolonged and calculated humiliation of the King is like nothing else in Gilbert, whether he's meaning to be serious or humorous: it is mental cruelty in a very nasty form, and, however you look at it, not in the least appropriate to a comic opera. Robert Jones: On the contrary, I consider Scaphio & Phantis to be very credible villains, in that villainy is all we see in them. We are given no insight into any other facet of their personalities (cf. Fairfax), nor do they receive any opprobrium (cf. Deadeye) except very weakly at the very end. Even Rudolph is almost likeable because he shows his weaknesses genuinely. No, Scaphio & Phantis are unlikeable villains, therefore credible, but not effective as characters. Paul McShane: In the first printing of Utopia's libretto, about 3 months before opening night, Fitzbattleaxe shows himself as a prig after having outwitted the two wisemen: 'There! Have I not managed it cleverly?' but Zara is sorry for the Wise Men, and sings an aria about youth and old age. This left Scaphio and Phantis seeming not quite as nasty as they actually turned out. David Craven: I wanted to come to the defense of the public exploder and the two wise guys. I don't think that they are intended to be the true "villains" of the piece. Rather, I submit that it is the Flowers of Progress generally and Goldbury in particular, which are the true villains of the piece. First lets deal with the Public Exploder. I think that the public exploder is intended to merely represent a system of government which is totally foreign to the British, but which, at least for its own people works. Is a despotism by dynamite any more unusual (aside from the fact that it has never happened to my knowledge) than proclaiming a very young child a major religious leader because he is the reincarnation of an earlier leader? The selection of a leader merely because he is the son or daughter of a prior leader? The selection of a leader because he was able to advertise better than the other prospective leaders? In fact, the "democracy by dynamite", in many ways, makes more sense than most of those systems because the public exploder must temper his or her actions by the fact that they then become a target. Much like the situation in America today in which both parties have attacked the certain actions of other parties to such a degree that they, themselves, soon thereafter, become targets. Acting in accord with the proper dictates of the governmental system clearly does not make one evil. The Two Wise Guys are a little bit harder to defend. They have both admirable traits and unadmirable traits, but on the balance, they weigh out on the positive side. Certainly their mutual desire for the Princess Zara is out of line, particularly when they could just as easily demanded the twin princess, thereby keeping each other at the same relative position. But they did eventually back down. Their conduct against the King and the Flowers of Progress, at least to some, was admirable. Victors write the history. What would one call individuals who stand up against a leader? You call them Freedom Fighters and Patriots if they are on the winning side (at least from a PR standpoint). In such cases, invariably, the deposed leader is characterised as someone who abused their power and ignored the laws. If they lose (again from a PR standpoint), they are invariably called traitors and terrorists. In this case, the two wiseguys stood up to the Flowers of Progress whose ill-conceived ideas were ruining the local economy, the local arts climate, and the overall health and well being of the people of Utopia. How do we view someone who has personal flaws but great public vision. Well Winston Churchill had a number of significant personal character flaws, but a great public vision. He is viewed as a great leader and his personal flaws are overlooked. Jimmy Carter, in contrast, has a very strong character, but at least as President, he was not very successful. His great personal character did not overcome his perceived deficiencies as a leader. Similar examples exist throughout history. Using these tests on the wise guys, I submit that their personal flaws are overcome by their successful efforts to prevent the State of Utopia from slipping into anarchy through their stick-to-it-ness in resisting the flowers of progress. The Flowers of Progress. The Flowers of Progress, while not personally evil, were certainly misguided. They imposed radical changes on a country without understanding the consequences of their actions. History is replete with such actions. (For example, the Hill Country of Texas, when settlers first arrived looked like an Eden with abundent rain and fertile soil. The settlers moved in and discovered that the rain had been a freak occurrence and that the fertile soil was very thin. Once the native vegetation was removed, what little good soil that was there was washed away by what little rain that fell, resulting in great sorrow and pain for all of the settlers.) But, particularly Goldbury, being men of Education they should have seen what was going wrong with Utopia as a result of their actions and they should have acted at this point, instead of carrying on as if the whole plan was working. The initial actions were misguided, not evil, but the subsequent actions were evil. And the greatest of these villains is, of course, Goldbury as it was his actions which brought the greatest ruin in the most obvious manner, but rather than solving the problem, he is running around seducing young girls. (And the least evil are probably Fitzbattleaxe and Corcoran whose "innovations" merely created extra work for the people of Utopia, but probably did not result in any major harm...) Bruce Walton: So Down with them! Down with them, with Scaphio and Phantis Down with them, down with them, they're worse than the rest of Gilbert's! 5.3 - "You gotta have a patter man" Mike Nash: From Sorcerer onwards (although Trial goes some way towards it - I don't know enough about Thespis) G&S set up certain conventions which helped the operas' success - a "formula", if you like. That doesn't mean that all the operas were the same, of course, but there were elements which would guarantee at least partial success, and one of these was the role of the patter baritone. People look forward to hearing a chap rattle off a rapid, funny and often topical song. It's especially odd that in Utopia Ltd., a show about politics where one would expect some sort of topical patter song, there isn't one. Nor, strictly speaking, is there a patter baritone role; instead we have the "comedy duo" of Scaphio and Phantis, with Tarara as a sidekick. (BTW, I think these characters are the only true "baddies" in the whole of G&S, unless you count Colonel Fairfax as a baddie.) IMO, this dilutes the effectiveness of each of them, rather than enhances it. Might it have been better to have had just one Wise Man who was Public Exploder as well (shades of Pooh-Bah, Lord High Everything Else here), who was King Paramount's nemesis, and who could deliver a pretty nifty piece of patter? Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 6 - Stagecraft 6.1 - General feelings about staging 6.2 - Costuming expense 6.3 - To bare or not to bare? 6.4 - Drawing-room names 6.5 - Ethnic casting - a good idea? 6.6 - Alternative productions 6.1 - General feelings about staging Utopia Paul McShane: Utopia lends itself best of all the G&S operas to lavish spectacle. This no great advantage for a bunch of amateurs, but throughout Act II we come across a whole range of scenes which modern professional stage designers and choreographers would drool over - the Court of St. James's Hall, the Royal Household March, the Drawing Room presentations, the 'capital plot' trio and dance, the graceful dance/tarantella interlude. 6.2 - Costuming expense David Craven: One major problem with Utopia is the need for two (well sort of two) costumes for much of the cast. Could this problem be solved by raiding the costume racks and using costumes from other shows for the second act of Utopia? For example, if a company has presented Patience, could many of the men in the second act be dressed as Dragoons? Would the dresses from Pirates be of use for the ladies? What about a few people dressed as British Bobbies? What about a few people in Kimonos? hmmm... Bill Snyder: In our productions, both times we showed the progress of the islanders to enlightened Englishness throughout the second act. By the Drawing Room apparently not all of the islanders had been able to acquire each a full set of formal wear, so, selfless people as the Utopians are, they shared what they had among themselves, each Utopian getting a piece of a costume, the rest filled out with traditional Utopian garb. Cheap and effective! Marc Shepherd: Indeed, I am fairly certain that there HAVE been Utopia productions that took this approach. There are other G&S operas that require two costumes for much of the cast, but none as expensively as Utopia. 6.3 - To bare or not to bare? David Duffey: I saw a Cambridge University (student) production of the 1969-72ish era. In its time the CU G&S has turned out some of the very best amateur shows I have ever seen, apart from the occasional poor make-up - not looking old enough - job. In this production of Utopia it seemed reasonable that the South Sea Maidens would dress thus - or not dress thus (compiler's note: i.e. topless!), prior to their enlightenment by the F or P. A good running gag was having the twins clearly uncomfortable in their clothes and being restrained from throwing them off whenever they saw their more liberated sisters. It was not an illogical interpretation, and the students in the audience thought it wonderful, but I did not enjoy it. We were sitting next to the parents of one of the choristers and fell to talking to them before the curtain went up. Throughout the show I did not know where to LOOK. Dan Kravetz: You didn't know where to look? Hel-LO! You're supposed to be looking directly at the performers. That's why they're up there performing, and giving their all for the audience's amusement. Any less than your full, undivided attention would no doubt be taken by them as a slight. Tom Shepard: Of course we know where to look, and I must say that the idea of topless Utopian maidens is initially very attractive. But when I think seriously about the opening chorus of Utopia, I realize that there is a great deal more sensuousness to the lyrics and music than we generally have had a chance to hear. The DOC recording, for example, has absolutely no sultriness or suppleness here. So what I am saying is that G&S have NOT really been given their due, AND, if we add twenty topless maidens, I sincerely doubt that any of us are going to be doing much more than thinly-disguised gawking. Perhaps because we do NOT live in a topless culture, we still find the sight (especially if it is by surprise) of bare breasts at least titillating (no pun intended) and therefore quite liable to take our concentration off of the works of Messrs G&S, and onto the works of God. So, until onstage nudity is relatively commonplace, I think I would object to its introduction in Utopia because, as I have said, the nudity becomes the event instead of the work being performed. David Craven: I understand your degree of uncomfortableness, but I must make a few points. One: Topless, if not naked, Utopians is a very reasonable set of costume choices for pre-FoP'd Utopia. As someone who has lived in the tropics, and someone who has worn both British Style attire and also worn far less encompassing tropical attire, the choice to avoid the British Style of Dress is very logical. The Twin's running gag of throwing off clothing is pretty close to true behavior. My school had a very strict dress code, long pants for the men, skirts for the women, and shoes (except on Friday) for both. As soon as the school day ended, the campus looked liked auditions for a production of gypsy as shoes came off and long pants and skirts were exchanged for shirts. To someone whose regular form of dress was negligible, this is totally normal. If anything, the behavior was natural. Two: As for the cast members who chose to do this... it was a free and voluntary decision. I, personally, have never appeared on stage in such Costume, but I know a large number of people who have in a whole variety of productions. In such cases, the actors had accepted their body and had no problem with it. One such actor told me that it was the most freeing experience of her life and since then she has had no hesitation in accepted Nude Scenes. The only problem that they had was when the audiences did not fully accept it, for it was this that caused them a degree of lack of comfort. I would have asked the couple next to me who their daughter was (particularly in the far freer days of the late 60's - early 70's) and later comment to them on the great job that they had done in instilling into her such confidence. Would I do it, probably not (and I think that the audience would appreciate it), but if it was appropriate to the part and I felt sufficiently committed to the role, I would at least consider it. It certainly takes some work on the part of the audience to get over the initial reaction to nudity on stage, but once you get beyond the shock value (which it has, at least in Western Society) and if it is presented in a forthright, almost matter fact way, it is a very valid approach.. Frankly, I admire a company with the guts to do this....and I wish I could find a company in the US with the self-assurance and resources to do such production in the United States. Ron Orenstein: I seem to recall a certain WS Gilbert being very proud of the fact that no woman appearing in his operas was required to wear a costume that would not have been wearable with complete propriety at a fancy dress ball. Ralph MacPhail: Yeah, but check out one of those "Bab" drawings - for "King Borria Bungalee Boo"? Clive Woods: Call me naive and ignorant if you wish, but please can someone explain to me in words of one syllable why the common law of decency does not extend to the theatre? I don't mean the legal argument, I am well aware that people pay to go in so it is legally not public; this seems to me to be a technicality, because (presumably) this performance was advertised publicly and was open to any members of the public. I am more interested in the philosophical reason why this distinction should be made. Rica Mendes: Legally (let's cover this quickly) women can show their bare breasts in public even in the wonderful country of the USA (granted, not in every state and city, but several). Philosophically, I think it depends on which realm you place theatre - "Real Life" or "Art"? By "real life", I mean are you offended by the fact that the performers are live people in front of you performing in real time? Whereas a nude painting or sculpture is not a living breathing thing? Personally, I place (and will always place) theater as "Art" - a living, breathing piece of expression. Therefore, if the artist(s) (in this aspect, the director) feels that nudity expresses something to the audience, he is merely using his paintbrush (costumes, or lack thereof), to communicate. I mean, in reality, how outrageous is it to have topless women in a show that is, I think we can agree on this, inspired by a tropical island where women likely went around topless? Ron Orenstein: The point I was trying to make, obliquely, is that the real problem with topless (female) Utopians is that it imposes something on the opera utterly false to its conception - besides making us shift our own attention (as we have been doing here) from the show to the "gimmick". After all, Gilbert (besides his views on stage decorum) made not the slightest effort to introduce "real" South Seas local colour into Utopia (as many stagings in other locales have shown) - it is, for example, far less Pacific than Mikado is Japanese. This whole thing sounds like an attention-getting device that attracts attention AWAY from what the show is, or ought to be, about, and therefore strikes me (sight unseen) as bad staging. 6.4 - Drawing-room Names Stan DeOrsey: In the original Drawing Room scene as staged by Gilbert -- is it recorded anywhere what names were used for the ladies? I assumed they were announced loud enough for the audience to hear. How about the 1975 revival, what names did D'Oyly Carte use? Anyone care to relate their experience and cleverness with this "opportunity" to invent? Arthur Robinson: I can't answer your question; but I remember that in the Utopia production done in Toronto in May 1987 for the festival there, many of the names were those of characters who appeared (or didn't appear) in other G&S operas (e.g. Margaret Murgatroyd and Lalage, Mistress of "The Pigeons" or whatever). I can't remember many of them, but it was hilarious. (You had to be there.) Bill Snyder: Two different groups: Cornell Savoyards and Summer Savoyards. Asked to pick their own names. One group of ladies researches authentic Polynesian names; the other group comes up with .... well, the only repeatable names from their first tries were "Kamanawanna" and "Kahlua" Ralph MacPhail: Several years ago the Ohio Light Opera at Wooster, Ohio, made quite a production of this, with names such as Lady B. Good, etc. I can't remember the names, but each of the ladies had on hoopskirts that must have been six feet in diameter! I have never seen anywhere that the ladies were named in Gilbert's original production. 6.5 - "Ethnic casting: Good idea?" David Craven: The peoples of Oceania are divided into three different "ethnic" groups... the Polynesians (Hawaii, Tahiti etc), the Micronesians (Marianas, the Marshalls and the Carolines) and the Melanesians (Island groups NE of Australia). The "typical" member of each of these groups would have skin colour of varying shades. The Melanesians, by and large, have a darker skin tone than that of the Polynesians. Henry Stephens: I have a question here....Why hair color? Is this to show the Utopians as Irish? (This is an Emerald Isle theme.) Or is it just easier to change hair color than to cast it ethnically? David Craven: On the other hand, if we are trying to show the evils of colonialism, which I believe is a major part of the message, than anything which emphasizes this is good. Personally, if I had complete control of the cast, I would bring out the bleach and the hair dye and give all of the Utopians VERY red hair.... and would make sure that all of my flowers of progress and the other Europeans had their hair dyed black, except for Fitzbattleaxe who would hopefully have blonde hair. Henry Stephens: I also think it would be cool to do Utopia Ltd. with a fine black cast as the Utopians to play off the white English. Tom Shepard: Playing Utopia in Black and White is an interesting idea, and seems to have been at least suggested in the D'OC revival which made Utopia a South Pacific Isle. The picture of Sandford as Paramount (on the LP package) certainly shows him with darkened skin. 6.6 - Alternative productions Neil Madras: Last year, St. Pat's Players in Toronto set Utopia on a moon of Saturn. The Flowers of Progress (including Ron Orenstein as Mr. Blushington) were Earthlings who arrived with Zara by transporter, a la Star Trek. The whole concept was quite effective and consistent. Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 7 - To cut or not to cut? 7.1 - Ought we to rearrange? Cut? If so, what? 7.2 - Ought we to add something? 7.3 - Durham Savoyards Utopia (Un)limited 7.4 - A solution? 7.1 - Ought we to rearrange? Cut? Add? If so, what? David Craven, whilst looking for pointers for Utopia's lack of success and popularity, pondered: Is it because of a first act which, in the words of the Sunday Times, could do with a degree of compression? Robert Jones: Amongst other problems. It is certainly long, and takes forever to present the basic, necessary characters and plotlines. It tends to wander off now and then without good reason. David Craven: One of Utopia Ltd's more interesting features is a very long first act. This first act, at least to many of our modern audiences, is too long. This leads to another series of questions. In Philadelphia the Oberlin production of Princess Ida divided the show into five acts (although as they presented the show with NO intermissions this dividing was purely academic). Could the pacing or timing of Utopia be improved by changing the location of the Act break or by dividing it into three acts instead of two? Paul McShane: Granted, there are dead spots in Act I (in Act II, too), and I would recommend cutting a couple of numbers in each act. As we have seen, Act I is more than twice as long as Pinafore's first act. But I think there are dead spots in all the operas that leave me cold (more on this when we come to other OOTW's), and cutting Utopia back by - say - two songs in each act would leave it of acceptable length, and of (IMHO) excellent quality. David Craven: In a similar vein, could the scenes be reordered with one or more scenes moved to Act II in order to better balance the acts? Tom Shepard: I don't think it would help things appreciably. Marc Shepherd: I suppose this might be possible, but at that point you're rewriting the opera (exactly what Gilbert should have done, but didn't). I'm not about to attempt it, but I wish the best of luck to anyone who wants to try. Paul McShane: The only changes I would make would be to cut a couple of numbers from each Act - see above. My cuts would be 'A King of autocratic power', 'Subjected to your heavenly gaze', 'A wonderful joy our eyes to bless' and from 'When but a maid of fifteen year' to 'The author on the spot (ugh!)'. This would bring Utopia back to about the length of the Mikado - just right, and just as good (said he, ducking for cover). I think that trying to tinker with the love story would cause more problems than it solved, and that in nearly all the other operas, Act I is significantly longer than Act II - so why make any more changes? Nick Sales: David Craven is quite correct in that it is most important to consider your audience. Yes, I agree that Utopia must be cut in some measure, at least when being presented to the hoi polloi. However, as noted, when you are playing to a guaranteed audience (more or less), such as at the G&S festival, a cut or cuts is not vital. Witness the winning show from the first (1994) festival at Buxton - Hancock County's Utopia. From memory this show went ahead not only without cuts, but with an additional number - and was a great success, both in terms of audience reaction, and of course adjudication. Don Smith: Not true: Hancock County cut "First You're Born." Ron Orenstein: "First You're Born" - I think this is the most underrated number in the show, a regrettable cut and a favourite of mine. I have never understood cutting it and leaving in "A king of autocratic power", which although closer to the plot line is a dreadful song. Marc Shepherd: I find "First You're Born" an excellent lyric, with a capable (if not outstanding) setting. Unfortunately, it is an extremely difficult song to enunciate clearly in a large theater. As I recall, most Utopias that I've seen have cut the number. But, when it has been left in, my experience was that the audience didn't "get it." Obviously, Kenneth Sandford in 1975 proved that it can be done successfully, but it's still difficult. Tom Shepard: Perhaps "First You're Born" is being overly maligned. It is something of a bio of the King, something of a WSG life-statement, and it is more "humanity oriented" than "commercial." I freely admit that the music is no prize, but Sullivan often subjugated his music when the meaning of the text was (excuse the pun) paramount. I can easily defend cutting down "A King of Autocratic Power We" but I think the King deserves his moment of philosophical irony in "First You're Born". Robert Jones: Certainly, but no two people are likely to agree on what to cut. For example, Ronald Orenstein thinks "First you're born" is underrated and "A king of autocratic power" never would be missed. I think the reverse. You can't please everybody, even if You're WSG! There are so many things to take into account if you're brave enough to rewrite UL. Ralph MacPhail: I like the song because it is a more cynically stated version of a metaphor used eleven years earlier: "Life is a joke that has just begun" (at age eighteen and under) becomes a joke that increases day by day until (at three-score and ten) "the joke is over!" Ouch! David Craven: Are there things which can be cut from Act I (and for that matter Act II) which will improve the timing and the pacing. (Some people argue that Utopia's largest problem is an imperfect editing job). Tom Shepard: Editing will help, but Utopia needs more good numbers than it has. Bill Snyder: Having directed it rather successfully twice, the music director and I had to prune and/or inflate the show to fit the cast and audience. David Craven: I agree that it is important to consider the audience. For example, a full fledged production of Utopia Ltd. is far more likely to be well received at a Gilbert and Sullivan festival than at, for example, the Illinois State Fair. As you are in Boston, a town noted for its political acumen and activism, you are more likely to find an audience which is able to understand sophisticated political humor than in other parts of the country. Thus the (theoretical) cuts would be different than a production, for example, in Los Angeles. Tom Shepard: I still maintain that, except for Grand Duke and Utopia, which are dramatically very floppy, and - in the case of Utopia - musically vapid too much of the time - I still maintain that an historic revival should present as much of the original material as possible, that the neatness of the book is subsumed by the nostalgic value of presenting the complete score Ron Orenstein: At St Pats we cut ALL of the Scaphio-Phantis-Zara plot, a considerable improvement - this was also done at U of Michigan - and no one missed it! 7.2 - Ought we to add something? David Craven: Are there additions which could be made to Utopia which would improve the show. For example, the dispute between the two wise men over Zara, in the mind of many, is not well resolved. Could the addition of another dialogue scene or even another song help resolve this better... or should the love story basically be cut? Tom Shepard: It's not worth fussing with. Robert Jones: You'd have to be very brave to compete with WSG, even at his (arguably) worst. And I think you'd be better served to lop off the dead branches than to cover them up with new foliage. 7.3 - Durham Savoyards Utopia (Un)limited Gene Leonardi posted a lengthy statement from Randolph Umberger, the artistic director of the Durham Savoyards who were at the time of the original discussion preparing to produce an extensively revised version of the opera, titled "Utopia (UN)LIMITED". This caused some feedback, notably from dedicated Gilbertian, Andrew Crowther. Quote: "It is serendipitous that our production of Utopia coincides with the current discussion of the same. Having directed full scale productions of all the operas at least once, we find great fun in such banter; but we take great care to avoid producing museum pieces for the sake of museum pieces. We've enjoyed the recent discussion of Hawaiian music, but find it a case in point. Though these islands may very well have been Gilbert's intended site, choosing them as the location for a production could become a visual commonplace. We have placed our action much further south and west, and one should not be surprised to find the natives looking more like Maoris than the subjects of King Kamehameha V. Whether the environment is Samoan or Tahitian, it's intentionally ambiguous. Gauguin's "La Orana Maria" provided a clue for costumes and sets. Indeed, someone like Gauguin may appear during the staged overture. As far as Polynesian music is concerned, someone last year dropped off in our local thrift store a considerable pile of old recordings of Hawaiian music, much of it composed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by Hawaiian composers. It's all terribly academic, Eurocentric, and it all sounds like early Elgar, only more so. There was one fascinating precolonial chant, but it's not the kind of thing great Western operettas are based on. So, instead of complaining about Sullivan's score, we are thankful that so much of it is good in comparison to what was being produced. There are plenty of tunes you can't get out of your head and once the offending words embedded in them have been polished, abridged, or abolished, there's much that delights us and our cast. Actually, as we have now completed large-scale productions of the entire canon as a directing team, we can think of several scores we would actually rate as inferior overall to Utopia. Our maestro, Ben Keaton, has set the "lost" lyric "From ship that lay in yonder bay." We have also added a national anthem for the island, given Paramount a recitative, trimmed Lady Sophy down to manageable lengths; added a second verse to "Eagle high", cut the Act Two trio "With wily brain" to almost nothing, and reworked the Act Two finale. [Andrew Crowther: It seems odd to me to be so careful to trim away the dull stuff and then put back the second verse to "Eagle High", which has nothing to add to the first. Many people think this number a rather dull bit of stodge, and, while I don't agree, I think two verses of it would be a bit much.] Quote: In addition , we've used the archetypes from THE HAPPY VALLEY to replace Blushington, Dramaleigh, and Goldbury with characters more accessible to our audiences. Again, characters and lyrics were changed, but not music or rhyme scheme. True, the opportunity for complicated choreography is missing, but the orchestration is particularly full and rich in places and provides an adequate amount of ritual spectacle. As for the talky and obscure book, it too has been trimmed, transposed, truncated and totally replaced- in most instances to something resembling a pre-Nancy-McIntoshian state of recognizable chaos. There is certainly no need here to recount the opera's troubles, when John Wolfson has done such an admirable job for us. We've given more to Calynx, softened Sophy, and added a new comic slapstick scene for Scaphio and Phantis. [Andrew Crowther: At which point I am seized with an attack of Pedant's Apoplexy.... I'd be the first to admit Utopia isn't perfect, but this seems excessive. For instance, why soften Lady Sophy? Gilbert has already softened her a good deal from his original conception, and the generally accepted version makes her much less of the Gilbertian dragon than many of her predecessors in the Savoy series. Soften her any more and she will disintegrate into a pile of mush. Personally, I like the "Katisha" characters, because of the sharpness of their tongues. But I'm complaining too much. Utopia (Un)limited is, after all, frankly advertised as a reinvention of the opera, so it isn't deceiving anyone. Such experiments shouldn't be discouraged.... Only be very careful not to forget that it is an experiment and a reinvention, not the original opera. When you try to second-guess people who knew their business as well as Gilbert and Sullivan did, don't assume that what you're doing is necessarily an improvement. But away with these doomy prophecies - I wish the production the best of luck.] Quote: Needless to say, the entire work will be available for perusal following its world premiere as Utopia (UN)LIMITED. It is our hope to develop a version which will take its place in the repertoire of other G&S societies around the country. 7.4 - A solution? Robert Jones: how about... [Curtain rises on happy Utopians] CHORUS: In lazy langour - CALYNX: Good news! Great news! His Majesty's daughter's ship has been wrecked five miles off the coast, and the Flowers of Progress are all drowned! MELENE: We are very well as we are. [CURTAIN] Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 8 - The Finales 8.1 - The Act 1 Finale 8.2 - The Act 2 Finale 8.1 - The Act 1 Finale Marc Shepherd: In most of the G&S operas, the final movement of the Act I finale sets a human conflict in high relief. The final movement of Utopia's Act I finale is merely an ode to the joys of Joint Stock Companies. Satirically pointed, perhaps, but oh so boring. (Yes, I know Scaphio, Phantis and Tarara are muttering under all of this, but it's terribly ineffective compared to most of the other Act I finales.) Paul McShane: I have always thought that the Utopia Act I finale has the much-desired qualities of a catchy tune and high dramatic content. Marc Shepherd: This is debatable in some instances. It may well have those qualities, but I have always found the dramatic content extremely weak in this instance. A country incorporating itself may be satirically humorous, but I find it dramatically weak. Bruce Miller: Now, we could go on about the vast melodic wasteland which is the Act I Finale of Utopia. Yes, there are a few small oases in this threadbare tapestry, but it's really sad when you realize the very best one is the reprise of the Captain's song from Pinafore... Nick Sales: Of course, here I simply do not buy this. That I may have a blind spot where Utopia is concerned is debatable, but I LOVE the Act I finale. [Note: were this some shallow, unthinking forum and not the highest example of internet acadaemia, I would be content to leave it at that, but I suppose some corroboration is required, so here goes;] I love Princess Zara's march tune, and the spectacle of the Flowers' entrances I find dramatically to be very pleasing. I particularly love the "pilgrims/wanderers from a mighty state" passage, and Zara & Fitz's soaring "who love with all sincerity" painted over the choral hubbub of "henceforward, of a verity", and also the jolly, foursquare "act of sixty-two!" ending. Tom Shepard: For what it's worth, so do I. Nick Sales: Oddly, the Pinafore reprise provides me with my only criticism of Sullivan in the finale - and I'm not even sure it's a criticism. I fancy I can feel Sullivan labouring over the "Oh my gosh, how am I going to get round to including that tune?" from quite a way back, and occasionally it irritates me as I think I can feel it from the musical segue that precedes Zara's "and lastly I present" through the hornpipe (at this point I envisage ASS thinking "well, I've got this far, I might as well carry on") right up to the moment that the old tune breaks forth, giving Bruce his one ray of sunshine. At this point, I imagine ASS being much relieved and silently cursing Gilbert for having had to include the damn thing in the first place, and joyfully getting on with finishing the finale. This passage does seem to go down well with audiences, though, particularly those unfamiliar with it. Paul McShane: Bruce and I hold different opinions in the opposite direction about the Utopia Act I finale - yet we both passionately will defend the brilliance of the operas to all comers. The ability of G&S to overwhelm people at various ends of the musical and dramatic spectrum is an enduring monument to their genius. 8.2 - The Act 2 Finale Andrew Crowther: Some people have said the Act 2 Finale needs fixing, is a low point, etc. I don't see this at all. It summarises the point Gilbert has been making throughout: that Britain pretends to be superior to all other nations, but really isn't. "Let us hope for her sake/that she makes no mistake - /That she's all she professes to be!" This is why Gilbert was so insistent on Sullivan setting these verses, despite Sullivan's difficulties in doing so. Arthur Robinson: I agree. In fact it's the point made, more clumsily, in the first (dialogue) lines of the play (see section 2). Andrew Crowther: Utopia is the only G&S opera which doesn't end with a reprise: there must be a very strong reason for this. Arthur Robinson: Good point. I'd noticed this (in fact I used it in a G&S quiz once) but I hadn't pondered on the significance. Andrew Crowther: Oh, and I like Sullivan's setting, personally - the right note of pompous patriotism. Robert Jones: Yes, it's excellent, but I agree with Sullivan that it's too pedestrian a tempo to finish the opera. Bruce Miller: I had thought it was Gilbert who suggested this, not Sullivan, but it's possible I got it wrong...in any event, Sullivan didn't seem to have the same concern with the close of Princess Ida. Robert Jones: Good point. Quite likely, if I'd never heard about the Utopia finale disagreements, I'd be none the wiser and not think twice about it. The reference (according to my sieve-like memory) was in a letter from one to the other, the one understanding the other's concerns. But which was which, I can't remember. Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 9 - The 1975 D'Oyly Carte Centenary Performances 9.1 - Reminiscences and thoughts on the 1975 D'Oyly Carte performances David Cookson: I was actually in the 1975 D'OC production of Utopia, both at the Savoy and also later on that summer at the Festival Hall. At the time I was repetiteur with the D'OC. One of the ways I had of boosting my income was to take on the roles of "supernumerary" - I was a Marine in Pinafore, and I was given a walk-on part on Utopia - I was the punkah-wallah who followed Lyndsey Holland around, catching her date- stones on a plate. I also played the piano - offstage - for the opening of Trial by Jury on the centenary night. The main memory I have of the centenary fortnight was my debut as conductor - less than auspicious. Our percussionist, Gerry, had been ill for a long time, and made his comeback on centenary night. Royston Nash and Glyn Hale (MD and chorus master) were to go on stage to take their bows, along with Bridget D'OC and Harold Wilson (the then PM, and a G & S fan), amongst others. It fell to me to conduct at the end, firstly Auld Lang Syne and then the National Anthem. I had rehearsed and rehearsed, in my mind, the upbeat for Auld Land Syne, and all the band and company had been told what would happen. All except Gerry. When I gave the upbeat for Auld Lang Syne, Gerry thought to rescue me by giving the drum-roll for the National Anthem. My world fell slowly apart. Half the audience started to stand up, and half the band, taking their cue from Gerry, started to play the National Anthem. The other half started into Auld Lang Syne, and what followed sounded like a Charles Ives seminar. Harold Wilson looked alternately nostalgic and patriotic, the company looked confused, and I wanted the floor to open up and swallow me, a la John Wellington Wells. I was 20 at the time, and I had just made an almighty cock-up of my big chance. Does anyone else remember this ? David Duffey: I do. Thanks for the memory. At the time I thought it a very gentle dig at the Tyrone Guthrie Pinafore just after the copyright lapsed. That production was in the theatre in Haymarket which Phantom of the Opera is at now. The timp started a national anthem roll, waited until all the audience was up, then began the Pinafore overture. Someone earlier has said that the occasion (DOC centenary) was a gathering of the G&S clans - about right; the nearest analogy I have is to an International at Twickers, where one bumps into people one half knows all the time and everyone has a common interest. Harriet Meyer: Evidently, it caught on! In 1982 (?) we saw a revue in London about a musical comedy team a la Gallagher & Sheehan, starring Christopher Timothy. Before curtain, the orchestra launched into God Save the Queen. As up we rose, they switched abruptly out of God Save the Queen and into a rousing oompah passage--laughs, blushes, and down we all went again. Ed Glazier: I was fortunate enough to attend the D'Oyly Carte Centenary Festival in London in 1975 on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the opening of Trial By Jury. DOC did all the extent G & S shows in chronological sequence at the Savoy Theatre, including a fully staged Utopia and a concert Grand Duke. Trial appeared as a curtain raiser both to Sorcerer and to Pinafore and also as an after-piece to the closing night Grand Duke, with an expanded public and jury, consisting of many former DOC members. I would imagine it was the first time that most in attendance had ever seen Utopia. The cast was more or less identical to the DOC recording that was issued shortly thereafter (my recording and theatre program are at home, so I can't compare the casts). I believe that any musical cuts taken on the recording were used in performance. I can't speak to cuts in the dialogue, since I was not familiar with the libretto when I saw the show and I certainly don't remember now. Standouts were Kenneth Sandford as Paramount, Pamela Field as Zara, and the late Meston Reid as Fitzbattleaxe. If you have seen the cover of the American pressing of the LP issue or photographs in various books, you may recall that the impression given by the sets and costumes was more "middle-Eastern/sub-Saharan Africa" instead of "South Sea Island", or such is my recollection 20 plus years later. As I recall, at least Sandford as Paramount wore a very dark-toned face and body makeup. Perhaps I assumed this was meant to be Africa mostly because of the solar toupee worn by Lyndsie Holland as Lady Sophy. The setting for Act I included a striped awning extending over an upstage entrance and a stuffed camel(?) that was used as a seat. Recent discussions of the score have included suggestions that "First you're born" be cut. While the number in itself is perhaps not brilliant, the staging in this production was brilliant and included the camel, and led to a much-deserved encore of, I believe, the third verse. (I only wish I could have remembered this staging when I played Paramount for the Stanford Savoyards a few years ago!) The only other specific number that I can recall off the top of my head was the minstrel number. I suspect this generated the same sensation in 1975 as it had in its Savoy Theatre debut in the 1890s. Since most of the audience was probably unfamiliar with the show, they did not expect the banjos and tambourines that are part of the traditional staging of this number. The number brought the house down and the third verse was given two well-warranted encores. (Certain numbers in the rest of the canon were given "traditional" encores, whether warranted by the audience response or not, such as the 5 or so for the 3rd verse of the Pinafore "Bell Trio"). In performance by D'oyly Carte, then, for a group of G & S aficionados, Utopia Limited was an unqualified success. The flaws in the show were subordinated to a particular clever staging and perhaps the sense of "an event" helped, too, since this was the first D'OC London staging of Utopia since the original production. Marc Shepherd: Ed Glazier mentioned that, whatever the opera's warts may be, the D'Oyly Carte centenary production caused a sensation and was rapturously received by its audiences. I wasn't there, but Ed's recollections certainly are consistent with others I've heard. A few things need to be pointed out. This production was only given, in London, about five or six times. Naturally, all the tickets were snapped up by the G&S inner brotherhood, who made up virtually all of the audience. We'll never know the production would have fared as an ongoing repertory offering. It is indicative of the incompetence in D'Oyly Carte management of the time that only ONE performance of this production was originally scheduled. When they realized they had a hit on their hands, several more were scheduled. But, it was never taken on tour, which I have always believed was a mistake. Gilbert and Sullivan Archive UTOPIA LIMITED DISCUSSION 10 - Appendices 10.1 - Acronyms, etc. explained 10.2 - "Who and Where? - The protagonists named 10.1 - Acronyms, etc. explained The Savoy Operas: TBJ: Trial By Jury Sorcerer: The Sorcerer Pinafore: HMS Pinafore Pirates: The Pirates of Penzance Ida: Princess Ida UL, UTO, Utopia: Utopia Limited GD: The Grand Duke Miscellaneous: AS, A.S.S. and ASS: Arthur Seymour Sullivan BTW: By the way CD: Compact Disc CU G&S: Cambridge University Gilbert & Sullivan Society DOC and D'OC: D'Oyly Carte Opera Company F of P: Flowers of Progress G&S: Gilbert and Sullivan! IMO: In my opinion IMHO: In my humble opinion LP: Long Playing Record (A vinyl predecessor of the Compact Disc) MD: Musical Director OOTW: Opera Of The Week - the discussions of the Savoy Operas on Savoynet in 1997 PM: Prime Minister (of Great Britain) PR: Public Relations WSG: William Schwenck Gilbert Carte: Richard D'Oyly Carte - the impresario who brought Gilbert & Sullivan together. 10.2 - Who and where? A list of all the Savoynetters whose comments have been included in this discussion, together with an indication in which portion(s) of the discussion they can be found: Sheldon Brown: Section 1.5 Sam L. Clapp: 1.4 David Cookson: 9.1 Andrew Crowther: 2.1, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 4.1, 7.3, 8.2 David Craven: 1.1, 1.5, 1.6, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 3.1, 3.8., 4.1, 5.1, 5.2, 6.2, 6.3, 6.5, 7.1, 7.2 Stan De Orsey: 6.4 David Duffey: 1.3, 2.1, 3.1, 3.7, 6.3, 9.1 Neil Ellenhof: 2.1, 3.1, 3.4, 3.5 Ed Glazier: 1.2, 9.1 Robert Jones: 1.1, 1.6, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 3.1, 3.2, 3.7, 3.8, 4.1, 5.2, 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, 8.2 Dan Kravetz: 6.3 Gene Leonardi: 7.3 Derrick McClure: 1.5, 2.4, 2.5, 3.8, 5.2 Ralph MacPhail: 6.3, 6.4, 7.1 Paul McShane: 1.4, 1.6, 2.1, 2.3, 2.6, 3.6, 5.2, 6.1, 7.1, 8.1 Neil Madras: 6.6 Rica Mendes: 6.3 Harriet Meyer: 9.1 Bruce Miller: 1.1, 1.3, 2.6, 3.3, 3.4, 3.8, 8.1, 8.2 Mike Nash: 2.3, 3.6, 5.3 Ron Orenstein: 1.1, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 2.6, 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.8, 6.3, 7.1 Arthur Robinson: 1.1, 2.1, 2.3, 3.2, 3.6, 6.4, 8.2 Nick Sales: 2.1, 3.1, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 7.1, 8.1 Tom Shepard: 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 4.1, 5.1, 6.3, 6.5, 7.1, 7.2, 8.1 Marc Shepherd: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 2.2, 2.3, 2.6, 3.1, 3.2, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 4.1, 6.2, 7.1, 8.1, 9.1 Don Smith: 7.1 Bill Snyder: 1.5, 2.4, 3.4, 3.6, 6.2, 6.4, 7.1 Phillip Sternberg: 4.2 Chris Wain: 2.5 Bruce Walton: 2.5, 5.2 Clive Woods: 1.4, 6.3 Total Number of Contributors: 31