Talk:Savoy opera

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gilbert and Sullivan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gilbert and SullivanWikipedia:WikiProject Gilbert and SullivanTemplate:WikiProject Gilbert and SullivanGilbert and Sullivan articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Opera

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera articles

Music/Music genres task force

Savoy opera is within the scope of the Music genres task force of the Music project, a user driven attempt to clean up and standardize music genre articles on Wikipedia. Please visit the task force guidelines page for ideas on how to structure a genre article and help us assess and improve genre articles to good article status.Music/Music genres task forceWikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forceTemplate:WikiProject Music/Music genres task forcemusic genre articles

Original comment

Patience opened at the Opera Comique, but it was transferred to the just-opened Savoy Theatre partway through its run; hence its being the first of the "real" Savoy Operas. Psmith 19:13, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Okay. In that case the definition should read "written for first performance at the Savoy Theatre" or "intended for first performance at the Savoy Theatre" rather than "performed at the Savoy Theatre", since all the shows were performed at the Savoy eventually. I had interpreted "performed at the Savoy Theatre" to mean "first performed at the Savoy Theatre" -- hence starting with Iolanthe -- but if you think that a different definition is more in line with common usage in order to make Patience first, then let's put that definition into the article. -- Derek Ross

It's certainly standard usage in my experience for Patience to be considered a

Savoy Opera even in the strictest sense; I've changed the definition to one that : reflects this more clearly. Psmith 20:05, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Revised definition

The prior edit defined "Savoy Opera" as:

The Savoy Operas are a series of comic operas or operettas written by Gilbert and Sullivan. Strictly speaking, the term refers only to those whose first run or part thereof occurred at the Savoy Theatre in London (those from Patience onwards); in practice, the term is used more generally to refer to all the operas written by librettist W. S. Gilbert and composer Arthur Sullivan, and produced by Richard D'Oyly Carte.

I don't think there's any historical basis for the rather pedantic idea that, "strictly speaking," Savoy Opera includes only those operas whose first run was entirely, or in part, at the Savoy. Moreover, at the time they were being written, "Savoy Opera" referred to a style, of which G&S were the pre-eminent, but not exclusive, practitioners. The contemporary press, of course, could not have guessed that all of those other works would pass into near-oblivion, leaving the G&S pieces to stand alone for a genre that originally included far more.

The revised definition, I hope, captures the idea more accurately. Marc Shepherd 16:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated list

I don't like the fact that the list of G&S Savoy operas is in the introduction and then repeated (and expanded) in the table lower down. Any objections to removing it? --Jmptdc 15:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. However, if you look at the G&S Project page, I think we say something about a plan to move it to a "see also" list. I think this article should have the FULL list of operas played at the Savoy (including curtain raisers), but that we should note that the term Savoy Opera is usually used as a synonym for just the 14 G&S operas. May I suggest that you wait until Marc Shepherd returns before dealing with this redundancy? Best regards, --Ssilvers 20:21, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the term "Savoy Opera" has meant different things at different times. In modern parlance, "Savoy Opera" is practically synonymous with the thirteen operas G&S wrote for Richard D'Oyly Carte. Indeed, before I joined Wikipedia, the leading sentence of the present article said, "The Savoy Operas are a series of comedy operas or operettas written by Gilbert and Sullivan," and the article did not mention the existence of any others.

Originally, of course, Richard D'Oyly Carte employed other composers and librettists, and "Savoy Opera" meant anything written for that theatre. Those other works didn't achieve a foothold in the standard repertory, leaving the G&S works as an apparently isolated phenomenon.

As this is an Encyclopedia for the general reader, I think it's appropriate to call out — right up front — the thirteen works that most people would expect to see. The article then goes on to explain the history in more detail, and provides the longer list, which includes a large number of works that are seldom or never revived.

The two lists, of course, are not strictly duplicates; they provide different information. Marc Shepherd 01:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Operetta

Carte intended his 'English' operas to banish French operetta from the London stage. In any case, there is no reason to remark on operetta here. It is true that the Savoy Operas influenced modern musicals, and we should not try to compare them to operettas in this article. This article has other issues to deal with. -- Ssilvers 05:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Operetta!!!

I think that this is actually an unfortunate decision. The Savoy operas are by any rational definition "English Operettas" in all but name - and were designed (as you rightly state) to directly compete with French (and German) examples of that genre. Unfortunately it WAS the Victorian era, and French operetta in particular had a reputation (a deserved one, in some cases at least) for "naughtiness". English operetta called itself "comic opera" largely to avoid the "unsuitable for children and servants" tag that operetta had acquired. This article (and the one on "comic opera") both fail to properly note that this (quite erronious) use of the term "comic opera" to describe an operetta in English is a Victorian/Edwardian whim than causes totally unnecessary confusion when applied from the standpoint of the early twenty-first century.

Is Pirates of Penzance (for instance) more "operatic" than Offenbach's Brigands??? - plainly the exact reverse is the case.

I almost think that it would be better to approach G&S on the basis that it (and other Victorian/Edwardian English operetta) IS OPERETTA - with side references to the fact that it was sometimes termed "comic opera" (wrongly, because it wasn't at all) or "Savoy opera" (a definition that means too much, or too little, and no one is sure what it really means at all anyway) - principally due to Victorian prudery.

Soundofmusicals 23:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A work is what its composer says it is. If Stephen Sondheim calls Sweeney Todd a musical (although opera houses have played it), then it is a musical. If George Gershwin calls Porgy and Bess an opera (although it has been on Broadway), then it is an opera.

Soundofmusicals is correct that Gilbert, Sullivan, and D'Oyly Carte had cultural reasons for wanting to avoid the term "operetta." Right or wrong, it's what they chose to do. Their terminology was widely adopted in the contemporary press, and in most (though not all) books written on their works for decades afterwards, and indeed up to the present day.

Obviously, it would be appropriate to introduce validly-sourced statements to the effect that, despite the authors' preferred terminology, their works could reasonably be called "English operettas," although, to the best of my knowledge, that term is ahistorical as applied to Victorian comic opera.

You can easily fall onto a slippery slope when asking questions like "Is X more 'operatic' than Y?" "Operatic" by what measure? Marc Shepherd 11:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The last Savoy productions

Through my recent research, the last opera to play at the Savoy was not Two Merry Monarchs, but a very brief production of Orpheus and Eurydice by Gluck. After that, the house was pretty empty until the December 1919 season. Should this be added to the list? It wasn't written for the Savoy, so maybe not. What do you think? Slfarrell (talk) 13:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty tough to argue that Orpheus and Eurydice is a Savoy opera. It was written 200 years earlier in a completely different style. I think what we're trying to list here is "Savoy operas," not "operas that played at the Savoy." Marc Shepherd (talk) 14:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Marc. I don't think it would be a useful addition to the list of Savoy Operas. On the other hand, it should be added to the Savoy Theatre article if you have a citation that verifies the date. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was thinking, and precisely why I didn't just put it in. From J.P. Wearing's "The London Stage, 1910-1919: A Calendar of Players and Plays", it opened April 12 1910 (while Two Merry Monarchs transferred to the Strand Theatre) and played for 23 performances until June 17. It was very intermittent, with none of the Savoy stars, just Marie Brema and Viola Tree in the title roles. Workman managed it, there was obviously a chorus but no male characters, and that was it. The Savoy shut down and no G&S in London during the 1910s. Is this significant enough? Slfarrell (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll put the info into the Savoy Theatre article. I need the volume and page number(s) for Wearing. Does Wearing say that the Savoy shut down? Was it completely dark for 9 years? If so, I need page numbers, etc. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's Volume 1, page 24. Wearing says nothing about anything. Baily says that no G&S was played in the West End during the decade, probably owing to the Great War and no one to run the company until Rupert was ready. Slfarrell (talk) 14:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I wonder what was happening in the Savoy Theatre during those 9 years. Presumably it was playing other pieces? -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It might have played other pieces. I'm not about to go through the book (which is quite long) to search for something that isn't there. On page 432 of Baily's book, he says the Rupert was renting the Prince's Theatre in the West End for the upcoming revivals of the 1920s. This probably isn't the Savoy - wouldn't it be called the Savoy if that were the case? - but it says nothing about what the Savoy house is doing during the war years. Slfarrell (talk) 14:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a different theatre. All this is already described in Rupert's article and the DOC article. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:35, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my research, I discovered that the Savoy *was* occupied between 1911-1919. Hayden Coffin was Feste in a production of ''Twelfth Night'' and it opened at the Savoy in November 1912. But that's the only one I found. I didn't look for others. Slfarrell (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a citation to that? It should go in Coffin's article as well as the Savoy. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have. It's in Coffin's biography, in the appendix, pg. 274. He gives facsimilies of programmes, so all his roles are credited. No G&S, I'm afraid, though he did audition for the Savoy. Slfarrell (talk) 19:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]