successful was Adolphe Adam (1803-1856), whose ‘Chalet’ and ‘Postillon de Longjumeau’ are still occasionally performed.  They reproduce the style of Auber with tolerable fidelity, but have no value as original work.  The only other composer of this period who deserves to be mentioned is Felicien David (1810-1876).  His ‘Lalla Rookh,’ a setting of Moore’s story, though vastly inferior to his symphonic poem ‘Le Desert,’ is a work of distinction and charm.  To David belongs the credit of opening the eyes of musicians to the possibilities of Oriental colour.  Operas upon Eastern subjects have never been very popular in England, but in France many of them have been successful.  ‘Le Desert’ founded the school, of which ’Les Pecheurs de Perles,’ ‘Djamileh,’ ‘Le Roi de Lahore,’ and ‘Lakme’ are well-known representatives.  The career of the other musicians—­many in number—­of this facile and thoughtless epoch may be summed up in a few words.  They were one and all imitators; Clapisson (1808-1866), Grisar (1808-1869), and Maillart (1817-1871), clung to the skirts of Auber; Niedermeyer (1802-1861), threw in his lot with Halevy.  So far as they succeeded in reproducing the external and superficial features of the music of their prototypes, they enjoyed a brief day of popularity.  But with the first change of public taste they lapsed into oblivion, and their works nowadays sound far more old-fashioned than those of the generation which preceded them.

CHAPTER IX

WAGNER’S EARLY WORKS

Richard Wagner (1813-1883) is by far the most important figure in the history of modern opera.  With regard to the intrinsic beauty of his works, and the artistic value of the theories upon which they are constructed, there have been, and still are, two opinions; but his most bigoted opponents can scarcely refuse to acknowledge the extent of the influence which he has had upon contemporary and subsequent music—­an influence, in fact, which places him by the side of Monteverde and Gluck among the great revolutionists of musical history.  As in their case, the importance of his work rests upon the fact that, although to a certain extent an assimilation and development of the methods of his predecessors, it embodied a deliberate revolt against existing musical conditions.

From one point of view Wagner’s revolt is even more important than that of either of his forerunners, for they were men who, having failed to win success under the existing conditions of music, revolted—­so to speak—­in self-preservation, while he was an accomplished musician, and the author of a successful work written in strict accordance with the canons of art which then obtained.  Had Wagner pleased, there was nothing to hinder his writing a succession of ‘Rienzis,’ and ending his days, like Spontini, rich and ennobled.  To his eternal honour he rejected the prospect, and chose the strait and narrow way which led, through poverty