Re-Approaching a Taxonomy of the Opera Fantasia: A Clarified Genre, A Clarified Context

To discuss opera fantasias as a corpus situated in a historical and social context - not to mention the ways in which opera fantasias interact with and comment on that context - we must first ask not only "what is an opera fantasia?" but also "how can such a piece be described and categorized?" Many scholars of the opera fantasia have emphasized the blurred boundaries between variation sets and fantasias. However, woodwind fantasias rarely occupy ambiguous positions between variation and fantasia by using a single theme but stepping beyond the category of "theme and variations"; by avoiding virtuosic ornamentation on themes yet altering them; or by including multiple solo instruments. Often a desire to separate out and describe the "true opera fantasy" (as per Charles Suttoni) pairs with a desire to exceptionalize a single composer while, purposefully or incidentally, denigrating the genre as a whole. Yet carefully considering aspects including variation methods and characteristics, levels of virtuosity, specific titles, and number of operatic themes solidifies the idea of the fantasia as a distinct genre. At the same time, this allows for analysis of cultural reception and placement of these works as a genre beyond individual composer characteristics. For example, the wide range of titles assigned to opera fantasies does not necessarily reflect a wide range of differences in content. Nevertheless, the title "potpourri" can have strongly negative implications, while the title "concerto" can be seen as an attempt at elevating a fantasia into a more established genre. From implications of censorship to attitudes towards woodwind virtuosity to a prolonged Italian focus on vocality in instrumental music, woodwind opera fantasias in their specifics and as a clarified genre reflect their nineteenth-century Italian context and the often Germanic history of musicological reception between the times of their composition and now.