The Meaning of It All

I was surprised to learn that the opera Rigoletto, reviewed here, was problematic for the censor. The original form of the opera was Victor Hugo’s play Le roi s’amuse (The King’s Fool). It only had one performance, following which the French authorities stepped in and did not allow any more performances of a play they called “immoral.” What did they find that was so wrong? The play, first of all, was believed to be offensive to the King, and in 1832, when it was preformed, the French had a king, again. I do not think that he would enjoy anything that looks like a challenge to his authority.

There is also an entirely deeper level of offensive about this opera that makes it distinctly modern. In the vast majority of operas before this one, and in general, evil characters are repulsive and good characters are attractive. Rigoletto (pictured above) is a hunchback with questionable virtues. He loves his daughter and wants to protect her but takes every stab he can at the nobles. the Duke is physically attractive but goes from woman to woman and finds that to be just fine. Guilda, the daughter that Rigoletto so loved, killed herself to save the life of the Duke, even after she saw that he was not loyal to her. In Verdi’s opera there is thusly none who is either completely good or evil. That sort of moral ambiguity is perhaps more realistic but was not ordinary in art of that time period. His opera is one of the first truly modern works for that reason.

Another meaning that I personally gathered is the shallowness of the nobility. They refused to help Rigoletto, who embodied the common man, when he begged for their help. This could be viewed as at least a wink to the revolutionaries, because the nobility is seen as useless and scheming for nothing other than their benefit in this opera.