[Sable]

 


Some years back, the PBS showed the Ring Cycle complete with closed captions. I was both fascinated and appalled by the storyline and the wording, much of which a 5th grader would have been embarrassed to have written. More recently on PBS, caught part of a contemporary opera in English. Modern people in unrealistic poses singing banal words in wildly overblown vocal affectations. My conclusion - opera works much better in a foreign language where you don't know what they're saying. Whether in German, Italian or English, ignorance is bliss.

I enjoyed L'Orfeo more knowing what are they singing about. The exquisite justification for stealing a boat while the owner is asleep was especially entertaining. 


<>

 

[bosiemoncrieff]

 
Some years back, the PBS showed the Ring Cycle complete with closed captions. I was both fascinated and appalled by the storyline and the wording, much of which a 5th grader would have been embarrassed to have written. More recently on PBS, caught part of a contemporary opera in English. Modern people in unrealistic poses singing banal words in wildly overblown vocal affectations. My conclusion - opera works much better in a foreign language where you don't know what they're saying. Whether in German, Italian or English, ignorance is bliss.

Wagner is definitely not into realism, and is certainly not the poet that Goethe or Schiller is—and I'm aware of the old too clever by half saying that Wagner was a better librettist than Beethoven and a better composer than Goethe—but the Ring Cycle is one of the few genuinely successful epics written in the last 200 years. It is the story of Wotan's tragedy, how, despite attempting with all his ingenuity to get out from the "world of contracts" he has used to establish his power, he nevertheless fails. Carl Dahlhaus wrote a great book thirty years ago "Richard Wagner's Music Dramas" that I posted pics of earlier in the thread, but it's a couple bucks on amazon (in translation from the original German). If you care to have an opinion on Wagner, that text gives you the most "quality analysis per word" of any that I've read—and there's no shortage of people professing to explain Wagner. Most of them do it quite badly. Dahlhaus is genuinely brilliant.
 
I should say that the Ring is decorative but essentially meaningless if you do not understand the meaning of the words. The fact, at the end of Walküre, that Wotan sings ​Wer meines Speeres Spitze fürchtet durchschreite das Feuer nie! (whosoever fears the point of my spear shall never pass through this fire) to the tune of Siegfried's leitmotiv, is a brilliant stroke, as it is Siegfried who cuts his spear in two one opera later and marches through the fire to Brünnhilde. Indeed it is also an eerie premonition of Wotan's own downfall, as surely as is his kissing Brünnhilde's Gottheit von dir (her divinity away) ten minutes earlier. If you don't know what's going on, what does it matter that Wotan's spear motif is a minor scale, but that the motif of his love for Brünnhilde is the same scale, rendered in major, with two octave jumps up added to illustrate the breaking of his power—that the breaking of his power is the source of his love? Yes, there is a certain silliness ("campiness") to Wagner, but as Sontag argues in Notes on Camp, if you look deeper, there is a seriousness that saves the man from ridicule. I give her the last word:
 
There is a sense in which it is correct to say: "It's too good to be Camp." Or "too important," not marginal enough. (More on this later.) Thus, the personality and many of the works of Jean Cocteau are Camp, but not those of André Gide; the operas of Richard Strauss, but not those of Wagner; concoctions of Tin Pan Alley and Liverpool, but not jazz. Many examples of Camp are things which, from a "serious" point of view, are either bad art or kitsch. Not all, though. Not only is Camp not necessarily bad art, but some art which can be approached as Camp (example: the major films of Louis Feuillade) merits the most serious admiration and study.
 
<<Quote edited to remove political evaluation>>

 

[jacal01]

  There is a sense in which it is correct to say: "It's too good to be Camp." Or "too important," not marginal enough. (More on this later.) Thus, the personality and many of the works of Jean Cocteau are Camp, but not those of André Gide; the operas of Richard Strauss, but not those of Wagner; concoctions of Tin Pan Alley and Liverpool, but not jazz. Many examples of Camp are things which, from a "serious" point of view, are either bad art or kitsch. Not all, though. Not only is Camp not necessarily bad art, but some art which can be approached as Camp (example: the major films of Louis Feuillade) merits the most serious admiration and study.
 

 
 
Ooh.  Are we talking Band Camp?  Because if we are, there's a couple that I do recommend: 

 
And the War Came - Shakey Graves
Nothing We Say EP - Courtney Hartman

 

[Pietro Cozzi Tinin]

Somebody coin a definition of camp?

 

[bosiemoncrieff]

  Analysis of opera singers is a challenging judgement for me to make. There are of course, the quality of the voice and the quality of the acting. Interestingly enough, these judgements certainly overlap with pop musicals and to much less extent popular bands' and musicians' concerts as well.
 
If one is to judge an singing/acting performance, that judgement is best based on the entire show as opposed to selections. Live recordings of entire operas did not really become common until the late 1930s early 1940's. Also, a recording inherently makes It difficult for me to form acting ability opinions of those who I cannot see, although a certain percentage of that ability is clearly conveyed in vocal inflections.
 
As one who has spent much time backstage in straight plays and musicals as a performer, stage manager, and director, there is a a certain feeling of excitement and adrenaline when the curtain comes up, you are bathed in lights, and can hear, indeed feel the audience which is positively inspiring. No matter what the level of the rehearsal, the audience generally has a stunning positive effect on the performers/actors. This is in contrast with film work, which like studio recordings, are based upon flaked and formed, out of sequence parts, designed to make someone or something better than it is.
 
As an aside, valid or not, straight play (non musical) actors generally feel that musicals require little acting ability, and musical (Broadway sorta stuff) performers have little regard for opera singers abilities to do little other than sing. In fact many musical comedies will parody opera singers by posing them stiffly, singing with clasped hands.
 

When I speak of 'acting ability,' it is indeed these vocal inflections that I am citing. In the Silver Age of Wagner, just to be very crude for a moment, I chart Wagner sopranos from Nilsson, the cold olympian who can sing anything, to Varnay, whose voice has a limitless upper register and who sings with great nobility but more emotion than Nilsson, to Martha Mödl, whose upper register was always insecure, especially after 1953, but who was so vulnerably human—never more so than in her radiant Isolde under Karajan from 1952. When we describe certain headphones, like the original Orpheus, the HD650, the MDR-R10, we often cite 'colorations' as conveying euphony. In describing singers like Martha Mödl and Maria Callas (two name merely the two on which I discourse at the greatest length in my last novel), I find language comes upon similar 'technical imperfections' that nevertheless reveal something 'truer' than Nilssonian flawlessness. Mödl's tone is not the glassy, shiny steel of Nilsson; as Isolde, there's a craziness, a sense that she is barely in control  of her instrument. This makes the experience of listening to her much more exciting—it is of course helped by the fact that it is a live recording (though the '66 Böhm is as well). 
 
The question of whether these vocal inflections qualify as acting is ultimately a question of semantics. They constitute the emotional domain of my listening, and because 99% of opera recordings do not have visual aid, they are the extent of that domain for all intents and purposes. 
 
I think the "straight play chauvinism" you describe above is valid to the degree that operas often have tremendously limited character development—Eugene Onegin made an impression on me, I think, largely because so few operas have the psychological complexity of Pushkin. It is unfortunate, though understandable. I hope operas going forward hew to the greatest dramatic texts that they can. I still hope to see the German opera based on Lear one of these years.

 

[muziq]

  In the Silver Age of Wagner, just to be very crude for a moment...

 
Anyone else ready for a power-switch-on-the-front-panel debate? Oh, wait, wrong forum... 

 

[wout31]

I thought this was a SCHIIT thread?

 

[jacal01]

This is Mikey's thread.  And Mikey likes opera.
 
How do you define 'schiit'? 

 

[Pietro Cozzi Tinin]

I think opera's where highly amusing for the people then just as musicals are for lot's of people today.
For some of us (including me) opera is still amusing.
What I never understood however is the need for some people to make more of it than it is.
And then..... battering others with a (for me) highly suspect "tailored to be one of the in crowd who understands so to be considered more than a mere listener" knowledge to let themselves shine.
Be real. It's the performers that shine.
I saw Herbert Von Karajan many times live and more important, during rehearsals.
For him the human voice was a very delicate instrument, not to be over stressed and to be careful with.
He saw performers not only as technicians but first and foremost as interpreters.
Does somebody think we will have this very discussions about Mama Mia in 100 years?

 

[Baldr]

   
Anyone else ready for a power-switch-on-the-front-panel debate? Oh, wait, wrong forum... 

 
 

  I thought this was a SCHIIT thread?

There are two rules on this thread - no politics and no religion.  It is kinda like the weather in Chicago.  If you don't like it - "Wait a minute.".  The topics are broad.  Take what you like.  Leave what you don't.
 
I have been an amateur musician, an amateur performer, and a professional builder of audio reproduction gear.  Were it not for the music, there would be no need for the audio gear. 
 
There are few forms of music I do not like - generally not restricted to a genre, but a subset.  For example, I love classical music, but have problems with much of the Second Viennese School (atonal).  I really like Jazz, but do not appreciate Ornette Coleman.  And so on through more popular genres.
 
I detest censorship.  Occasionally posts are held for moderation by the Head Fi controllers, only to be released within hours.  The only posts I ever deleted were for incoherence.  I have edited only a very few posts for political reasons, but left the main message intact.
 
Mostly what I do is share my musical and audio experience/opinion with you, and listen to yours. 
 
I just returned from Can Jam LA and am in catch-up mode.  More yakking later.

 

[Byronb]

   
 

There are two rules on this thread - no politics and no religion.  It is kinda like the weather in Chicago.  If you don't like it - "Wait a minute.".  The topics are broad.  Take what you like.  Leave what you don't.
 
I have been an amateur musician, an amateur performer, and a professional builder of audio reproduction gear.  Were it not for the music, there would be no need for the audio gear. 
 
There are few forms of music I do not like - generally not restricted to a genre, but a subset.  For example, I love classical music, but have problems with much of the Second Viennese School (atonal).  I really like Jazz, but do not appreciate Ornette Coleman.  And so on through more popular genres.
 
I detest censorship.  Occasionally posts are held for moderation by the Head Fi controllers, only to be released within hours.  The only posts I ever deleted were for incoherence.  I have edited only a very few posts for political reasons, but left the main message intact.
 
Mostly what I do is share my musical and audio experience/opinion with you, and listen to yours. 
 
I just returned from Can Jam LA and am in catch-up mode.  More yakking later.

A man after my own heart. Though classical is not my main genre, I can definitely find goodness there. I appreciate the free flow of ideas and occasional stream of consciousness that occurs here. 

 

[earnmyturns]

  I love classical music, but have problems with much of the Second Viennese School (atonal).  I really like Jazz, but do not appreciate Ornette Coleman.  And so on through more popular genres.

Not even Alban Berg? When he freed himself from Schoenberg's thrall, he relaxed the strict 12-tone discipline and did for example the beautiful Violin Concerto (I love this version https://www.amazon.ca/Berg-Violin-Concerto-Martinon-No/dp/B0145R3LUO). As for Ornette, I respect him most for bringing up alumni like Don Cherry, Charlie Haden, Dewey Redman, Ed Blackwell, all of whom went on to temper his dissonance with older traditions and new influences, as in their Old and New Dreams recordings. I miss them all, gone too young, but especially Charlie Haden, who teamed up with Gonzalo Rubalcaba to make me appreciate Latin jazz (their "Nocturne" goes perfectly with your Yggy).

 

[muziq]

 
Mostly what I do is share my musical and audio experience/opinion with you, and listen to yours. 

 
Oh I had no intention of actually criticizing anyone; mine was just a silly quip written in jest. Carry on.
 
But I do likes me some Schoenberg...

 

[Baldr]

   
Oh I had no intention of actually criticizing anyone; mine was just a silly quip written in jest. Carry on.
 
But I do likes me some Schoenberg...

Verklärte Nacht

 

[wink]

Wot, not even a mention of Fred Frith....? shameful......