22.II.1915

Dear Illica,

           Castellarquato

   I was about to respond to your first letter when the second one arrived, hand delivered and dated the 15th.

   But why all this anger against poor Montemezzi? I have no idea what your well-meaning sources could have reported regarding something Montemezzi said about you (when? after Hellera?), but things were certainly exaggerated as they passed from one mouth to another, who knows how and how much. And then, dear Illica, this is not the first time that we see storm clouds gathering between you and your musicians. Mascagni and Franchetti, whom you advocate today, are telling examples — yet such disagreements were resolved when both sides became convinced that something good would come of the collaboration.

   And since the objective is to have "Italia" turn into something quite good, I believe the designated maestro should be Montemezzi, whose foray into the heroic genre has proven victorious.

   I have never considered Zandonai, nor do I now; he is a first-rate talent but possibly not one who could relate to such a subject — maybe yes, maybe no.

   As for Franchetti, I think he's finished, totally finished, and I want nothing more to do with him — "Notte di leggenda" is such a poor and miserable thing that anymore there's little hope his muse is still capable of inspiring any decent — not to mention truly good — work.

   As for Mascagni...... it's Mascagni — life is already difficult enough without poking about for opportunities to make it insufferable — and then after Isabeau came Parisina — and so?

   For me, I'll stick with the name of Montemezzi, and I hope that this faith I have can overcome all residual discord and reunite his name once again with that of Luigi Illica — otherwise, since I am unable to accept either Franchetti or Mascagni, I must say to Illica and Simoni with the utmost regret: take your "Italia" back and do with it what you think best.

   Puccini's response to Wolff was not dictated by me but I saw it before he sent it, and I hardly found that "I am pleased" to be so terrible and compromising.

   The French had been lying in wait for Puccini for more than five years to be rid of him — parliamentary interpellations, chauvinistic edicts for subsidized Theatres, newspaper propaganda, an attempt (failed!) to suppress performances of Puccini at the Théâtre des Champs Elysées, etc. etc. — the meagre opportunity for attack provided by the Wolff letter was too attractive and easy for those dear brethren from beyond the Alps not to take advantage of it — and so they've shown Puccini the door..... at least for now.

   As for Giacomo Puccini's stance of neutrality, I agree with him completely, even if reasons of political necessity should drag us into war — it's not by shouting "Long live France" or "Down with Austria" that one prepares for an ordeal unlike any other in history — for me, the Garibaldians, the Nationalists, the Irredentists, the Interventionists, the Conferences, the Demonstrations leave me cold, indeed they provoke my disgust — not words but rather work, serious, diligent work is necessary. I know that the Ricordi and Origoni families are all ready to be useful if the war should come — but we are not shouting it from the rooftops and we are all neutralists!! Notwithstanding my fifty years, I too hope to be useful to my country if it should be dragged, to its misfortune, into war — because above all else my heart yearns to cry out: "Long live Italy!!"

   And have no doubt that this sentiment smolders deep within Puccini's heart as well, notwithstanding his letter to Wolff and notwithstanding other expressions of neutrality that he has preferred not to share with the general public.

   Do forgive me for this patriotic effusion, and believe me always

yours fondly,

Tito Ricordi