One of our American readers considers that the Journal is rather hard upon many trans-Atlantic productions, merely because they do not come up to the same standards of adherence to the traditional style as do the D'Oyly Carte performances. Linked up with this contention, our correspondent implies that the society, through its official organ, goes out of its way to champion that company at the expense of any other organization presenting the operas. In this letter, which was dealt with by direct reply, Mr. Henry Williams of Hanover, New Hampshire, writes: "One month the Journal comes out strongly for tradition; the next issue it defends some new departure concocted by the D'Oyly Carte management. In the United States, from 1925 to 1928, the Winthrop Ames company presented a series of revivals. These were ripped up by tradition lovers here and from abroad, yet no smoother or fonder productions have ever been presented. The deviations from the original texts in the Ames productions compared with some of the cuttings and re-arrangings of the D'Oyly Carte company were extremely slight."
Both these points may be answered together, and really the first raises a contention on which it is very necessary to avoid any misunderstanding. The D'Oyly Carte company is really nothing to us; but, as the articulate expression of Gilbert and Sullivan Opera, its existence cannot be ignored. It has often been written that the society is concerned with Gilbert and Sullivan Opera as a whole, and not with contemporary personalities engaged in its presentation. Yet, try as one may, the two things - the operas and the company - cannot be separated. The society, and by implication its official printed voice, is pledged to maintain intact the best traditions of the old Savoy. With the best intentions in the world, then, we cannot agree that it is at all possible to speak of the Winthrop Ames productions with those of the D'Oyly Carte company. After all, if we approve innovations by the latter organisationm we do at least know that they are made by the direct descendants of the original interpreters; by people to whom Gilbert's intentions - and Sullivan's - are fully known; by people whom we can trust not to depart from these intentions. Textual changes are no criterion; many a published play differs materially from the acted version. There are, we know, many interpolations and alterations (approved in most cases by Gilbert) which appear in the D'Oyly Carte productions but are absent from any edition of the libretto.
But where the truest tradition is to be found is in the spirit of the performance. We do not call, say, an amateur production "traditional" merely because it is a photographic reproduction of the professional company. But we should certainly be justified in calling a performance traditional, although positions and costumes differed from those to which we are accustomed, if the producer and actors, by their understanding of parts, situations, etc., achieved that elusive atmosphere and intellectual quality which really make up the Savoy tradition. Therefore, even allowing that the Ames' productions were the "smoothest and fondest" of interpretations, we cannot accept them as traditional for several reasons. In the place of the simple, rather unsophisticated, production, planned by Gilbert, which serves so well to sharpen his wit, satire, and irony, and Sullivan's melody, Mr. Ames gave New York showy spectacles. In place of the unforced humour, allowing the points to find their own home without extraneous aid, Mr. Ames found it necessary to force the points home by exaggerated comic business. He introduced new characters, to suit a little manikin of a player in his company. This little individual hopped about the stage in The Pirates of Penzance, presenting rhyming dictionaries to all and sundry. He was made the focus of attention in more than one place as the Lord Chancellor's train-bearer, a supernumerary character whose sole entrance is actually for "artistic verisimilitude" and correctness of local colour, as it were. Also in Iolanthe, I have recollections of an additional fairy who continually ogled the audience. And at the end of the opera, one did indeed have a glimpse of the realisation of the line "up in the air, sky high, sky high."
Now Gilbert would have had nothing of this; his humour is not too subtle, but even if it were, there would be no need to stress the fact by introducing it by way of the obvious. I can only refer these people who think that true Gilbert and Sullivan Opera can be achieved without recourse to the third necessary ingredient - the orthodox style of production as built up by the author to be as much a part of his book as the actual lines of the libretto - I can only, I repeat, refer such people to what I wrote in "Ourselves and the Operas" in March, 1933 (Vol. III, No. 9, p. 129). Here I asked readers to visualise a reversal of the position, instancing Mr. C. B. Cochran producing, in London, an American piece for which the original production accorded to a definite tradition. The use of Mr. Cochran's name in that connection must be evidence that one is not attacking Messrs. Ames, Aborn, and Co. as producers.
It all comes back to the D'Oyly Carte company for whom, as has been stressed, we are not official "boosters". Here is the one organisation that continues to present the operas in the manner in which they were conceived; a manner which, it has been proved, is on that brings out all that is best in the operas. That fact has long been realised in this country, and is speedily being recognised overseas.