"La Fanciulla del West" has never enjoyed the success 
        of at least four of the operas that preceded it ("Manon Lescaut", 
        "La Bohème", Madama Butterfly" and "Tosca"). 
        This is at the same time both understandable and unfair. All the Puccini 
        fingerprints are present, but the listener who goes to the opera house 
        to hum along with the big tunes may find this piece reluctant to open 
        out into real melody. It often sounds as if it is about to but actually 
        does so only rarely. If this explains its early failure, it can also be 
        argued that its apparent weaknesses are its strengths; it opens out when 
        it needs to but does not do so gratuitously. 
         
        
Take the scene between Minnie and Johnson which closes 
          the first act. The two are strongly attracted but are not quite ready 
          to admit it. They hedge around, trying to make conversation, and Johnson 
          leaves with no more achieved than a vague invitation to call on Minnie 
          at her cabin and say goodbye to her there. The music is melodious (how 
          could Puccini be otherwise?) but the phrases never expand into a full 
          grown melody; it is as if Debussy’s "Pelléas et Mélisande" 
          is being seen through Italian eyes. Thus the inability of the two characters 
          to admit and express their love is exactly expressed in the music. In 
          the following Act, when the two are united by the snow which prevents 
          Johnson from leaving, they express their love in a glorious lyrical 
          outpouring equal to anything else Puccini wrote and all the stronger 
          for the earlier restraint. In other words, once the listener has accustomed 
          himself to what he is not going to hear, he should easily recognise 
          that Puccini in fact refined and deepened his art in this opera. Those 
          for whom he emotes too easily in his earlier works must prefer "La 
          Fanciulla del West". 
        
 
        
All this will be nought, of course, if the performers 
          are unperceptive. In the award-winning Neblett/Domingo/Milnes/Mehta 
          set (1978), based on a Covent Garden production which saw the reinstatement 
          of the opera in the UK repertoire, I have to say that Mehta has got 
          this crucial part all wrong, and the singers seem quite happy to go 
          along with him. He has the First Act encounter move along strongly, 
          not faster than Basile but passionate and surging, Tristan-style. With 
          this backdrop Neblett and Domingo sing their lines strongly and ardently 
          with a sort of generalised emotion which makes nonsense of what they 
          are actually saying. Thus it seems that their love has already been 
          declared, and when they come together in the Second Act one’s likely 
          reaction will be to say, in the words of the Anglo-Saxon Messenger, 
          "they’re at it again!" 
        
 
        
Gavazzi, Campagnano and Basile, on the other hand, 
          express perfectly in the First Act the uneasy embarrassment of two people 
          who feel an immediate attraction and find themselves alone together 
          earlier than they had bargained for, while they are not yet ready to 
          face the situation. Basile’s halting handling of the orchestral part 
          and the much more detailed response of the singers to the words add 
          several new dimensions to the music. While in the Second Act there is 
          no holding them back and their passionate exchanges are all the more 
          thrilling for not having been anticipated earlier. 
        
 
        
There is one school of thought which claims that the 
          various Serafins, Vottos, Basiles and so on who conducted Puccini recordings 
          until Karajan recorded Madama Butterfly in 1955, setting the 
          stage for a host of "original" and "personal" interpretations 
          by the likes of Mehta, Maazel and Sinopoli, were a bunch of talentless 
          hacks and "routiniers" who owed their position to their humble 
          acquiescence towards the star singers. This line is particularly prevalent 
          in Italy and is repeated, albeit not in its most virulent form, in the 
          booklet to this CD. 
        
 
        
Another school of thought has it that the Italian maestri 
          of the old school really knew how Puccini goes and that modern reinterpretations 
          have replaced the old naturalness and flexibility of pulse with heinous 
          exaggerations; the loud passages as hard-hitting as possible, the soft 
          passages inaudible, allegros become prestos, andantes become adagios 
          and so on. 
        
 
        
In spite of my comments on the love music I cannot 
          really say that the comparison between Basile and Mehta supports either 
          view. Mehta has in any case never been one of the most extreme of "modern" 
          interpreters and in most of the faster music there is very little difference 
          between the two conductors. Mehta’s textures are warm and he gives the 
          singers space, no less than Basile, but it is in slow sections that 
          he has a tendency to dawdle where Basile keeps the pulse going (Mehta’s 
          ten extra minutes are not just a question of opening up some traditional 
          cuts made by Basile), as in Minnie’s Bible lesson scene which becomes 
          sentimental at the end under Mehta, or in Minnie’s crucial exchange 
          with Sonora and the miners in Act 3 (CD 2 end of track 19) culminating 
          in the phrase "Si può ciò che si vuole" ("You 
          can do anything if you have the will"), where Gavazzi and Basile 
          show that the full significance of the moment can be expressed without 
          grinding to a halt. 
        
 
        
A preference on the whole for Basile, then, even if 
          much of what Mehta does is fine. Some of his slower tempi may spring 
          from a realisation that Carol Neblett needs careful nurturing if she 
          is to negotiate the higher passages with a rounded tone, something which 
          is no trouble for the sure-fire Gavazzi. While Neblett’s first entry 
          suggests that her high notes may be a problem (not entirely fairly since 
          she manages an opulent tone when she has time to reach them calmly), 
          Gavazzi immediately establishes a character, flinging forth ringing 
          high notes and powerful chest tones in equal measure. Her Act Two solo, 
          "Oh, se sapeste", goes like a bomb while Neblett sounds simply 
          cautious. I have had occasion already to speak of Carla Gavazzi (see 
          reviews of her in "Adriana Lecouvreur", "Don Giovanni" 
          and "Pagliacci") and once again she throws herself wholeheartedly 
          into a vivid portrayal. Though much of what Neblett does is good hers 
          is an embryonic interpretation in comparison. 
        
 
        
Placido Domingo is, of course, one of the Great Tenors, 
          and he has adorned a surely unprecedented number of opera sets with 
          his unfailingly glorious tone and naturally musical phrasing. Whether 
          he is always an imaginative interpreter is another question and once 
          our admiration for his impeccable technique and good taste are over 
          it is difficult to think that this is a part he really feels. Vasco 
          Campagnano, now forgotten, was only a middling name even in his day 
          (he also recorded "Manon Lescaut" and "Aroldo" for 
          Cetra). Against Domingo’s "baritonal" tenor, he is the typical 
          Italian tenor after the manner of Gigli, sweet but strong and not given 
          to bawling. He may not have the complete technique of Domingo (there 
          are some uneasy high notes) but he is thoroughly inside the part of 
          Johnson. 
        
 
        
Ugo Savarese has been much maligned as the Germont 
          in the Callas Cetra set of "La Traviata", a recording which 
          certainly reflected little credit on anyone except Callas herself. He 
          has a softer-grained, mellower baritone than the more sharply focused 
          Sherrill Milnes. Again the ready communion which Italians of the day 
          had with their national repertoire is obvious. 
        
 
        
A major test for the smaller parts comes in the first 
          piece of sustained lyrical writing in the opera, the ensemble piece 
          which develops from Jake Wallace’s song "Che faranno i vecchi miei". 
          With Dario Caselli a touchingly warm-voiced Jake for Basile, and with 
          Francis Egerton unduly caricatural for Mehta, the older set achieves 
          a heartfelt warmth which the newer one does not quite match. 
        
 
        
There is, however, the little matter of the 1950 recording, 
          which is narrow and constricted, though reasonably clear and with the 
          voices well caught. I have the Mehta on LP; it is a finely spacious 
          product of the late 1970s and will presumably sound better still on 
          CD. Other performances to be considered are the Tebaldi/Del Monaco/MacNeil/Capuana 
          (Decca 1958), the Nilsson/Gibin/Mongelli/Matacic (EMI 1958) and the 
          Marton/O’Neill/Fondary/Slatkin (RCA 1992). Opera buffs will want this 
          in particular for a further Gavazzi performance (I am afraid this completes 
          her discography to the best of my knowledge) and will surely enjoy Campagnano, 
          Savarese and Basile. 
        
 
        
Christopher Howell