Francesco Izzo. Laughter between Two Revolutions: Opera Buffa in Italy, 1831-1848. Eastman Studies in Music Series. Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 2013. xiii + 304 pp. $90.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-1-58046-293-8.

Reviewed by Maria Christina Marchi (University of St. Andrews)
Published on H-Italy (October, 2014)
Commissioned by Niamh Cullen (University of Southampton)

Francesco Izzo’s monograph grapples with some of the most complex and intricate issues that defined preunification Italy. Even though the multifaceted political nature of the various Italian states and the understanding of opera from a historical perspective are delicate themes, Izzo introduces his work with simplicity, laying out the central aim of his book very clearly: to reestablish the role of opera buffa in mid-nineteenth-century Italy. His reinterpretation of the post-Rossinian period does not necessarily amount to a rewriting of the history of opera, nor does it attempt to topple the predominant genres from their pedestals. It mainly strives to reintegrate opera buffa into the contemporary cultural narrative. Although Izzo admits that the Romantic culture of the time pushed writers, composers, and artists to seek a more “elevated” purpose for art, comedy, he believes, still had a purpose on the Italian stage.

In his attempt to define the opera buffa of the inter-revolutionary period, the author explores a variety of topics and sources, from the composers, to the librettisti, from the performers to the impresarios who funded this art form. However, what is key in Izzo’s work is that he considers opera buffa not merely a musical practice. It is a “literary object” (p. 10), a cultural artifact that brought some lightness to a serious era. His careful analysis and deconstruction of the genre’s librettos, translation of lyrics, and reproduction of entire sheets of music give substance to this vision and help the reader grasp the musical and cultural dimensions of the opera.

The first three chapters of Izzo’s study focus on the evolution of opera buffa from the Rossinian period. He takes into account some lesser-known operas and librettisti, examining works like Luigi Ricci’s Il nuovo Figaro (1832) and Gaetano Donizetti’s L’elisir d’amore (1832). Chapters 4 and 5 discuss more closely the issue of genre in the developing comedy of mid-nineteenth-century Italy. The analysis of humor, characterization, and language of the librettos yields a better understanding of Izzo’s definition of opera buffa.

It is chapter 6, however, that brings the political issues that shaped opera buffa to the forefront; it highlights the problem of the perception of “Italianness” in the preunification period. In this chapter, Izzo finally illustrates the substantial differences that existed between the various Italian states, although he overstates the belief that local populations regarded the Austrian and French rulers as foreign invaders. To explain the difference between each Italian state, kingdom, and duchy, Izzo compares the different versions of Donizetti’s La figlia del reggimento (1840) that existed throughout Italy. The opera was modified and censored in different ways in each part of the Italian peninsula, allowing for an interpretation of how the national question was perceived by each ruling faction.

In contrast to religious or moral censorship, as was more common in the pre-revolutionary period, the focus on political censorship is an efficient tool to help us understand how Italian patriotism was perceived and to determine if it was considered a genuine threat. The rondo “pensa alla Patria” from Donizetti’s opera, for instance, was frequently censored during the Risorgimento. The connotations of Patria (the fatherland), especially in places like Milan where uprisings against the Austrian rulers had actually occurred, made this text appear incendiary. The same occurred with Luigi Ricci’s Il birrajo di Preston (1847): both in Venice and Milan the notion of Patria was censored.

Not only does the author consider the way in which librettisti and composers attempted to mention the Italian national cause but his analysis of the foreign military characters shows the antagonism that existed between states as well. For example, Francophile operas were not censored in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, for France was not perceived as a threat, whereas in Austrian Lombardy and Venice the celebration of French militarism was much more problematic. Such lines as “cor Francese” (French heart) were replaced by “cor cortese” (gentle heart) (p. 210), and in La figlia del reggimento, instead of having France invade the Austrian region of Tyrol, the censors changed the opera’s location to neutral Switzerland, making the supposedly harmless Savoy of Piedmont-Sardinia the invading military force.

Interestingly Izzo draws up a table showing how each part of the Italian peninsula adapted the play, each alternating between France and the Savoy as invaders, and Tyrol, Switzerland, and “at the foot of the Alps” as the location of the invasion (p. 216). The table effectively highlights the very different sensitivities that predominated in the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, the Duchy of Parma, and other parts. Only here does the political fragmentation of Italy really become apparent, showing that the Italian national cause was not the only thing that the governments felt threatened by.

The issue of reception is somewhat more problematic because of the relatively small size of the reading and opera-going public. Whether or not the public perceived the notion of Patria and whether they understood the meaning of nationalistic overtones apparently present in some of the works mentioned cannot be deciphered. There is a risk that one perceives them through the sophisticated lens of the twenty-first-century historian—leading to a misinterpretation of the original meaning. Considering the case of Verdi’s “Và Pensiero,” which was for a long time believed to have been deliberately nationalistic in order to promote national unification and was later shown to have been interpreted as nationalistic only in retrospect, opera buffa must be handled with caution in regard to its power to influence the public.

Izzo acknowledges the difficulties arising from this and instead uses the censors as “readers,” which adds a dimension of reception, although not an all-encompassing one, to the contemporary understanding of opera buffa. Since these figures acted on behalf of a higher authority, it helps to highlight some of the preoccupations that they faced. Therefore, the conclusion that Izzo unwittingly draws is that the issues of censorship focused much more on the antagonisms between France, Austria, and the Bourbons than on restricting the expression of “Italianness.”

Izzo’s work should be praised for moving away from a Verdi-centric interest in Italian opera and broadening the understanding of how the tradition of opera buffa evolved in nineteenth-century Italy. However, he handles the nationalistic tones of operatic tradition too cautiously, obscuring the distinction between Italian nationalism and regional sub-nationalisms, which is a key issue of the era. Nonetheless, Izzo’s analysis of the evolution of opera buffa in a period when it is widely believed to have disappeared from the Italian stage successfully returns the genre to the operatic world of nineteenth-century Italy.

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at: https://networks.h-net.org/h-italy.

Citation: Maria Christina Marchi. Review of Izzo, Francesco, Laughter between Two Revolutions: Opera Buffa in Italy, 1831-1848. H-Italy, H-Net Reviews. October, 2014.
URL: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=42410

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.