The Complete Operas Of Puccini

I found Charles Osborne's book interesting and full of important insights into Puccini's life and works. It is a book worth reading on many levels so that it appeals to a wide spectrum of opera lovers the world over.

Great book! It works as a reference to Puccini's work as well as a biography. Lots of information packed into one book.

Mr. Osborne's books are indispensable for opera lovers as well as opera professionals. They are full of pertinent academic information presented in a format and with a style that makes them really pleasant reading. I use them in my vocal coaching studio as well as for preparing talks about operas. I have never not enjoyed reading or re-reading a word he writes. he gives you a little about what was happening in the composer's life when he was writing the opera. You get a sense of the context from which the pieces were created. I would love to met this man. His passion for the art-form, and his commitment to sharing it with everyone regardless of their prior familiarity are extraordinary.

Terrific book, came packaged very well.

Most insightful comments on the character of Puccini in comparison of Verdi

I can see why people would appreciate and be impressed by the source material Osborne has dug up regarding Puccini's libretti. This, however, is the only worthwhile part of the book. Osborne's musical-dramatic of Puccini's works is incompetent. For example, on page 195, Osborne says that the love melody from Act II of La fanciulla del west that reoccurs when Johnson is being chased by the miners in Act III does so "for no very good reason." That's it. Off the top of my head, I can think of a few "very good" reasons. Perhaps it's as simple as Puccini reminding us of what is at stake, namely the love between Johnson and Minnie. A more nuanced interpretation might require us to look at the text to which that melody was earlier set: in the Act II love duet, Johnson sings to Minnie, to the melody in question, "Io non ti lascio piu" ("I won't leave you again," or "I won't leave you anymore"). Now we can compare this text with the text and dramatic situation in act III when the melody recurs: Johnson is attempting to escape the area, and is under pursuit by the miners. He is, in a word, "lasciando," ("leaving"). He is presumably caught or about to be caught when the miners shout "Urrah!" ("Hooray!"). This is when the love melody recurs. So we have his attempted flight, and his flight being prevented by the miners through their capture of him. They, of course, intend to kill him, which would be another way he might leave Minnie. To underscore this moment, when he is attempting to leave but prevented, and facing the possibility of leaving in another way (in fact, in his aria later he will tell the miners to tell Minnie not that they killed him, but that he escaped to live a life of redemption), is ironic in several possible ways. Puccini could be pointing to the discrepancy between Johnson's earlier vow to stay, and his attempt to leave; he could be further remarking on the irony that it is the miners trying to chase him down and kill him that keeps him with Minnie; he could telling us what is going through Johnson's head; he could be generally contrasting the eternality of love described in the previous duet with Rance's declarations of "Minnie, Minnie e' finita" ("Minnie, Minnie, it's over"). These are all interesting, "Very good" reasons why Puccini might have brought this melody back at this moment. If I can discover them so easily, then someone who clearly considers himself able to judge works of music drama and appreciate them enough to write a book about them -- moreover, a book that confidently considers the work in question to be second-rate -- should be to see them. Osborne does not, which suggests to me that he has not even done the minimal necessary work for interpreting these dramas, because of his biases and dismissive attitude towards the composer.The page before, he describes Johnson's solo "Una parola sola... Or son sei mesi" as his "attempt to justify his lawless way of life." Except that it is no such thing; he does not offer a defense (he explicitly says, "Non mi difendero'/Sono un dannato/lo so, lo so," "I will not defend myself/I'm condemned/I know it, I know it"); of course, he might do so anyway, but it's important to note how he actually describes his own narrative.) Instead of justifying himself, Johnson explains his situation, essentially saying "I did what I thought was necessary, but I know it was wrong and I'm ashamed." In fact the climax of the entire aria, which Osborne says is "stirring" (about as enthusiastic as he gets) comes on the words "mia vergogna", "my shame." Who justifies themselves by saying, "E labbro mio mormoro' un ardente preghiera/oh Dio ch'ella non sappia mai la mia vergogna" ("And my lips murmured an ardent prayer/Oh God/that she never know my shame")? Johnson is saying specifically that he understands that he was *not* justified, and that his life history does not justify his actions. That's an important difference, and Osborne gets it exactly wrong. In fact, the comment is made in passing, and as throughout the book, it seems as though he has not given much thought to his observations. Why has his "musical dramatic analysis" been praised, and described as insightful? It it is not.Osborne often simply repeats the commonly quoted criticism of others, such as Kerman's ubiquitous description of Tosca. (Less often quoted is Ravel's opinion of Tosca: when his student Maurice Rosenthal tried to criticize it, Ravel became angry and played him nearly the whole opera from memory on the piano, pointing out the original and advanced harmonies and praising the orchestration.) The only useful parts of the book are the comparisons of the source material with Puccini's libretti, but this use is only factual. Any actual analysis is either missing the point or just missing.