Talk:New Opera Company

Earlier New York City Company with Glyndebourne has same name

It appears there was another opera company active in New York City during the 1940s with this name that had ties to the Glyndebourne Festival Opera. See this article in the New York Times: [1].4meter4 (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to Leon Botstein in The Musical Quarterly, vol 78, no. 4 (1994) JSTOR 742504, it was founded by Helen Huntington Hull and became the New York City Opera in 1943. Apparently, it was a short-lived entity. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know that's not true. The NYCO was the brain child of Laszlo Halasz, whose leftist politics influenced the radical nature of its progressive rep and casting (i.e. non-white singers and musicians; new repertoire by Americans; operas by non-white composers; communist leaning repertoire at times) in addition to its tickets on the cheap side and all productions in English philosophy. It was Halasz who enlisted Fiorello La Guardia in getting it started in 1943. There is a lengthy article about the early history of the company by Donal Henahan in the New York Times detailing Halsz's vision. However, some of the financial backers of the NYCO were identical to the New Opera Company backers like Elizabeth Kray and presumably Ms. Hull. More than likely the NYCO project killed the earlier New Opera Company, and my guess is Hull spun the narrative to make herself look good. There's really nothing to indicate that they were connected in any way. None of the musical forces or artistic leaders were the same, and the NYCO never performed at the Broadway Theatre where the New Opera Company was residing. Most telling is the New Opera Company sang in foreign languages (for half their productions); one thing not in step with the NYCO's philosophy as the "people's opera". 4meter4 (talk) 03:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In reading more, I am beginning to question my original take. Botstein may be right. It's hard to square the narrative with the Henan article though.4meter4 (talk) 14:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was correct to begin with. [https://www.nytimes.com/1984/07/01/arts/city-opera-at-40-young-as-ever.html This article by Bernard Holland clearly states the New Opera Company was not part of the NYCO, and continued doing its own thing with operettas after the formation of the company with Halasz.07:26, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Brilliant find; thank you. Why is Holland's (!) article not mentioned in the NYCO's article? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Well it probably should be. I wasn’t really considering the NYCO article lol. I am thinking about writing a short article on the New Opera Company (New York City) just to prevent confusion with the British company.4meter4 (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]