Cairo Opera archives was published for the first time. Also a performance his-
tory, 1871–1881, and fine illustrations of scenery and costumes. Indexes of
documents, cities, and names.- Kitson, John Richard. “Verdi and the Evolution of the AidaLibretto.” Ph.D.
diss., U. of British Columbia, 1985. 2v. - Petrobelli, Pierluigi. “Music in the Theater (à propos of Aida,Act III).” In
Music in the Theater(#1807), 113–126.
Describes and discusses the opening scene of act 3, seeking the dramatic lan-
guage of the opera. The methodology is largely semiotic, following the ideas of
Frits Noske (#1285). - Lawton, David. “Tonal Systems in Aida,Act III.” In Analyzing Opera(#416),
262–275.
Describes the tonal structure of the act, showing how it combines with motivic
relationships to produce a unified whole. The key progression is a double
cycle, moving from G major through F major to D-flat major/minor, the final
key of the opera. - Parker, Roger. “Motives and Recurring Themes in Aida.” In Analyzing Opera
(#416), 222–238.
It is the “most nearly Wagnerian of Verdi’s operas” but has fewer, more easily
identifiable motives. They are employed with subtlety; for example, the Aida
theme refers only to her uncertain love for Radames; it is not in the act 4 tomb
scene, where her love is final. The interweaving and variations of this theme
are remarkable (and so is this analysis).
See also Gossett (#246).
Un ballo in maschera (A Masked Ball)
ASO32 (1981–1982), ENOG 40 (1989). Verdi1 (1960) offers various approaches
(one is at #1869). An exchange of ideas on the opera’s tonal macrostructure appeared
in 19thCM: Siegmund Levarie, “Key Relations in Verdi’s Un ballo in maschera,” 2
(1978–1979): 143–147; Joseph Kerman, “Viewpoint,” ibid., 186–191; Guy A.
Marco, “On Key Relations in Opera” (#418); and a last word by Levarie, 19thCM 3
(1979): 88–89. In synopsis: Levarie offers an explication of Ballo’s macrostructure
based on the interplay of dramatic situations and key patterns; Kerman takes issue
with the basic notion and with details of execution; Marco looks at a basis for a gen-
eral theory of operatic structure that stems from key relations; Levarie sums up with a
statement distinguishing his own “ontic” (being) orientation from Kerman’s “gig-
netic” (becoming) position. The debate was pursued by Roger Parker and Matthew
Brown in “Motivic and Tonal Interaction in Verdi’s Un ballo in maschera,” JAMS36-
2 (Summer 1983): 243–265. They present some useful schematics that elucidate many
structural features but find themselves unable to discover any tonal or motivic pat-
terns that unify the entire work. They conclude with murky grumbles about the dan-
ger of “organicism.” See also Siegmund Levarie, “A Pitch Cell in Verdi’sUn ballo in
maschera,” Journal of Musicological Research3 (1981): 388–409.
Giuseppe Verdi 349