Page 184 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2021. Opereta med obema svetovnima vojnama ▪︎ Operetta between the Two World Wars. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 5
P. 184
opereta med obema svetovnima vojnama
carded, giving more space to the beauty of music, dance and design.
If we cannot revive the old traditional operetta, let us make the new
operetta, the revue without hypocrisy. However, the revue has a big
flaw. It holds the sprouts of deterioration in itself as its possibilities
are limited and despite the detailed variations, it will fall into the
anaemic trap of constant repetition.11
Although we cannot agree with the statement that revue and operetta
are opposed to each other, Kállay understood the main difference between
them: a shift towards having mostly spectacular effects and their possible
danger. But his wish to introduce the genre without hypocrisy if based on
changes in the preferences of audience was not to be granted.
The production in the trap of political narratives
Already the decision to stage the show generated a resistance in the con-
servative Hungarian press, as they claimed that Blumenthal was attempt-
ing to Americanise Hungarian culture, with the extreme right-wing press
seeing it as “spreading Jewish culture”, which had to be stopped. Previous-
ly a Hungarian-themed show ran in the Operetta Theatre that was writ-
ten by Imre Farkas, A nótás kapitány [The singing captain], which finished
its run after 116 performances in order to stage the revue. This was already
very easy to interpret as discarding “national” values and favouring “for-
eign” ones. The conservative narrative argued that the show could have ran
longer and was terminated too early.12 For those making this political ar-
gument it did not seem to matter that one week before Halló Amerika! pre-
miered, A nótás kapitány was being performed again on Sunday afternoons
so the cast of the former could rest. Conservative press also questioned the
presence of Jack Haskell, claiming there were plenty of Hungarian direc-
tors who could stage such a revue. On the other side, theatre-sponsored ar-
ticles and liberal journalists argued that while the modern genre of the re-
vue was indeed not Hungarian, it could be,13 and the show raised Budapest
to the level of other European metropolises. In this regard, the show was in
the front line of a Hungarian political and cultural debate, which set in op-
11 Miklós Kállay, “Revü,” Nemzeti Ujság, January 30, 1925.
12 Pesti Hírlap, February 16, 1926. The press also claimed that the theatre did not or-
ganise a jubilee banquet after the 100th performance of A nótás kapitány, so that ac-
tors properly could rehearse the American revue (as it was called) next day, although
the actors organised one anyway. 8 Órai Ujság [8 o’ clock News], January 18, 1925.
13 Magyarország, April 8, 1925.
182
carded, giving more space to the beauty of music, dance and design.
If we cannot revive the old traditional operetta, let us make the new
operetta, the revue without hypocrisy. However, the revue has a big
flaw. It holds the sprouts of deterioration in itself as its possibilities
are limited and despite the detailed variations, it will fall into the
anaemic trap of constant repetition.11
Although we cannot agree with the statement that revue and operetta
are opposed to each other, Kállay understood the main difference between
them: a shift towards having mostly spectacular effects and their possible
danger. But his wish to introduce the genre without hypocrisy if based on
changes in the preferences of audience was not to be granted.
The production in the trap of political narratives
Already the decision to stage the show generated a resistance in the con-
servative Hungarian press, as they claimed that Blumenthal was attempt-
ing to Americanise Hungarian culture, with the extreme right-wing press
seeing it as “spreading Jewish culture”, which had to be stopped. Previous-
ly a Hungarian-themed show ran in the Operetta Theatre that was writ-
ten by Imre Farkas, A nótás kapitány [The singing captain], which finished
its run after 116 performances in order to stage the revue. This was already
very easy to interpret as discarding “national” values and favouring “for-
eign” ones. The conservative narrative argued that the show could have ran
longer and was terminated too early.12 For those making this political ar-
gument it did not seem to matter that one week before Halló Amerika! pre-
miered, A nótás kapitány was being performed again on Sunday afternoons
so the cast of the former could rest. Conservative press also questioned the
presence of Jack Haskell, claiming there were plenty of Hungarian direc-
tors who could stage such a revue. On the other side, theatre-sponsored ar-
ticles and liberal journalists argued that while the modern genre of the re-
vue was indeed not Hungarian, it could be,13 and the show raised Budapest
to the level of other European metropolises. In this regard, the show was in
the front line of a Hungarian political and cultural debate, which set in op-
11 Miklós Kállay, “Revü,” Nemzeti Ujság, January 30, 1925.
12 Pesti Hírlap, February 16, 1926. The press also claimed that the theatre did not or-
ganise a jubilee banquet after the 100th performance of A nótás kapitány, so that ac-
tors properly could rehearse the American revue (as it was called) next day, although
the actors organised one anyway. 8 Órai Ujság [8 o’ clock News], January 18, 1925.
13 Magyarország, April 8, 1925.
182
