Armand German Opera: Le nozze di Figaro

Event Information

Venue(s):
Thalia Theater

Proprietor / Lessee:
Eduard Härting

Manager / Director:
Johann Armand [tenor, director]

Conductor(s):
Adolph Neuendorff

Price: $1.50 balcony; $1 orchestra reserved; $.75 first tier; $.60 balcony reserved; $.50 parquet; $.30 second tier; $10 private booth (for 6 people)

Record Information

Status:
Published

Last Updated:
27 October 2015

Performance Date(s) and Time(s)

14 Jan 1867, 8:00 PM

Performers and/or Works Performed

1)
aka Marriage of Figaro; Figaros Hochzeit
Composer(s): Mozart
Text Author: da Ponte
Participants:  Armand German Opera;  F. C. Urchs (role: Bartolo);  Heinrich Kronfeldt (role: Curzio);  Marie Frederici (role: Countess);  Otto Lehman [bass - Grover German Opera] (role: Antonio);  Sophie Dziuba (role: Cherubino);  Wilhelm Formes (role: Count);  Johanna Hübsch (role: Barbarina);  Natalie Seelig (role: Susanna);  Wilhelm Groschel [tenor and conductor] (role: Basilio);  Josef Chandon (role: Figaro);  Mathilde Berger (role: Marcelina)

Citations

1)
Advertisement: New York Herald, 13 January 1867.
2)
Announcement: New-York Times, 14 January 1867.

In review of earlier Armand performance, incorrectly states that the “‘Magic Flute’ will be repeated to-night.”

3)
Advertisement: New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung und Herold, 14 January 1867.
4)
Announcement: New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung und Herold, 14 January 1867.
5)
Review: New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung und Herold, 15 January 1867, 8.

“Seelig does not fit the part of Suzanna at all. She is much more appropriate for lyrical drama opera. We do recognize the effort, though; Seelig gave her interpretation of the part. Mrs. Himmer-Friderici [sic] sang the countess with accuracy and confidence. She can certainly consider this part one of her best. Dziuba and Formes satisfied only partly. The performance in general equaled rather a failed dress rehearsal. We will save our review for the repeat of the opera for next time.”

6)
Review: New-York Daily Tribune, 16 January 1867.

“Remarkable as a musical event was the production of Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro on Monday evening at the Thalia Theater. This joyful opera is welcome to lovers of music for many other reasons besides its novelty and rarity. Mozart never set himself a more complicated task than that of putting Figaro’s talkative, intriguing libretto to music; said libretto must be allowed its merits, but it runs into ingenious prolixity. Yet who would have one note of the magical score unwritten! The Marriage of Figaro is anything but an obsolete work. It has plenty of characteristic melodies, which a popular audience would recognize; but back of those fountains of song are sources of of studious pleasure. The large jollity of Figaro’s songs; the great march and its accompanying instrumentation in the scene of the procession before the Count and the Countess; the delicious duet of the Zephyr song in the third act—most ethereal and buoyant music; these are but a few of the mentionable beauties of this extraordinary work. Of the performances, much is to be said in its praise as a venture. We can only particularize the genial singing of Madame Frederici, and especially the fine delivery of the well-known solo of the Count in the second act – a model of musical soliloquy – by William Formes. Perhaps we should add a word of Mr. Joseph Chandon’s even but unemotional performance of Figaro. For the rest, the singing was fair, bad, and indifferent. The repetition of the opera last evening was needed to enable the German company to render it with greater credit to themselves and the composer. It was then much better performed in certain essentials, and we are only sorry that its audience was so poor in point of numbers.”

7)
Review: New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung und Herold, 20 January 1867, 4.

“Chandon as ‘Figaro’ did not always sang correctly, also was wooden in his body language and lacked a sense of humor; further Seelig was not convincing as ‘Suzanna’.”