FINAL BLOG EVER!!!

Despite the blood trickling down from my ears, as I listened to Sarah Brightman, I appreciated the “classical” voice being integrated into the Repo. The perennial topic of how to gain more opera lovers is always up for constant brainstorming and discussion. All I have to say is Sarah Brightman is one of those figures who has helped bridge the gap between popular and classical music whether you like it or not. As is it was said class, if it wasn’t for Brightman, Andrea Bocelli, and maybe Josh Groban, many of us wouldn’t be sitting in this class writing blogs about opera. Thanks to them, some of us were intrigued at an early age to start exploring the grand world of opera.

With that said let’s talk about Repo- the Genetic Opera. I think I could potentially be addicted to it. It wasn’t until last year that I was introduced into the world of graphic novels, The Watchman being the first one I read. Never, ever did I think I would find myself submerged into such a fantastical world of super heroes, but now I understand another reason why I’m drawn to opera. Repo was like watching a graphic novel, only it had singing! Sorry for the digression. Now, going back to the topic of Sarah Brightman. Although the clips we saw were the “dream cast” of the director, I would have casted differently. The fact that it is labeled a rock opera screams to me that it needs to have an eclectic mix of performers, which would tie the operatic and pop cultures together. First of all, I love the charged energy you get from rock music and the fueled rhythm that drives every song. Secondly, I love opera because like rock it can be so extreme and exciting. Juxtaposing the insane dynamics and resonance of opera with the driving force of a rock beat would be AMAZING! Just imagine a soprano singing a D6 executing a messa di voce over a head banging, ear shattering rock beat!!!!!! Again, sorry for the digression.

Casting… Instead of Sarah Brightman for Blind Mag, I would cast Dawn Upshaw (as a genre cross over) and for the role of Rotti Largo I would cast Anthony Hopkins because he’s just stellar as an evil creeper. For the role of Shilo Wallace I would cast either Hayley Williams from Paramore or Amy Lee from Evanescence because both have a big following in the rock genre, especially with the younger crowd. Repo Man, I’m not so sure who I would cast. As I was listening to Zydrate Anatomy I can’t help but wonder if Thomas Hampson couldn’t pull it off, with an opera chorus making George Crumb-like sounds. It would certainly be interesting or maybe I should just cast Rob Zombie?!? Last but not least, I have no clue who I would cast as Amber Sweet, but it definitely would NOT be Paris Hilton!

Food For Thought

In pervious classes we talked about the evolution of the microphone and it’s lasting effects on singing and the way people perceive natural projection. We also talked about how kids aren’t singing and using their imagination for entertainment, instead they are bombarded with entertainment. However, this has caused shows like Glee and American Idol to become popular and I think that’s because kids are starving for music and to be able to make music. Either way, modern views on singing are very different today because of the microphone. If one was to go to a rock concert then go to the opera the next night, obviously one would say the rock concert was louder, even if Deborah Viogt was the Diva of the night! Yes, the rock concert may be louder, but I don’t think average audience member takes into account the lack of amplification being used in an opera house. For instance, my boyfriend, who has never been to an opera, decided to take me to see Madame Butterfly last year. I know, so sweet of him! During intermission he made a comment about how well the microphones were camouflaged, which was when that I had to inform him that there were no microphones. I use this as an example because he is a jazz musician and he loves musical theater, so when he found that there were no microphones he developed an appreciation for the demands of operatic singing.

This leads me to another story that my teacher told me during my voice lesson a week ago. We were talking about Sarah Brightman and The Phantom of The Opera and she went on to tell me that her friend was in a production of Phantom. Keep in mind her friend is a classically trained, professional singer and she was cast in a production of Phantom as Carlotta. Carlotta’s character sings higher and louder than Christine’s role at certain points, because of this, the whole cast had to use microphones. Apparently, no one, except the Phantom, was allowed to sing louder than Christine because she was the heroine. So poor Carlotta’s high D was toned down, while Christine’s microphone was cranked up. Hmmmmmmm. Not so sure how I feel about that, but it is certainly some food for thought!

Get Out Of The Box!

I thoroughly enjoyed Kiya Heartwood’s presentation in class on Tuesday! I thought she presented a new way of looking at the operas we have been studying, especially coming from a compositional approach. She pinpointed what I haven’t been able to articulate as clearly regarding music versus culture; the idea of listening to the music for the sake of listening music as apposed to listening to music for the sake of culture. Our society tends to put a premium on aesthetics, so a rock star could very well take a country tune and make it a rock hit. Does that mean it’s still a country song? I say a good song is a good song, but our culture has a tendency to create barriers that box us into categories, which was one of her reasons for having different websites for her different works. This leads me to another topic, her versatility as a composer and writer.

I’ll be honest, writing a simple poem or story is not one of my strong points. If I ever got the gumption up to attempt at writing an opera or a musical, I don’t think I would get past the first two lines of text. The ability to write lyrics that flow with the language and then set them to music seems impossible. Although I haven’t listened to all of Lying to the Sea Gypsy, the songs I did hear seemed cleverly written both musically and lyrically, especially since they catered to younger performers and incorporated adult humor. Additionally, her music was catchy and I can definitely see younger performers having fun doing this show and learning simutaneously. I then decided to You Tube her old band, Stealin’ Horses, and listen to those lyrics and style of writing. Here is the link to her band: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4zoiuZH2TI After listening to this, it’s apparent that she has a knack for writing creative lyrics that flow with the music. I can’t even begin to express how fascinated I am by this. Yes, there have been many brilliant composers in the past, but many of them had a librettist. I realize that Kiya’s style versus Mozart’s is very different, but the fact that she can write lyrics and music is very impressive, especially since she said that she has “a lot of catching up to do.” So what! I realize I’m being rather emphatic about this, but it hits home for me. My boyfriend is part of a band, which has a rather eclectic make-up of five guys. The leader of the band/lead singer/drummer, writes all of the lyrics and music for them; more importantly he doesn’t read music, and he is a self taught drummer and guitarist. Two of the other guys don’t read music, even though one understands chord progressions by ear. Finally, the bass player and my boyfriend did their undergraduate degree together in jazz and classical performance. I guess what I find most intriguing is that the drummer/lead singer, the one who is untrained, heads it all up and it’s great! I’m not just saying the band is great because my boyfriend plays piano, I’m saying they are genuinely good and very musical. The music is catchy, but inventive and the lyrics are memorable but not overly simplified. Check it out: http://vimeo.com/7868453

I guess where I’m going with this is anyone has the ability to create music. It doesn’t matter what his or her background maybe. Personally, I think it is so cool that Green Day’s songs have been turned into a rock opera. I used to obsess over Green Day when I was in high school, so I was a bit skeptical about hearing their music in a different way. However, I was pleasantly surprised, which brings me back to Kiya’s comment about music versus culture. What I’m trying to get at is the idea that there are do many styles of music out there, all of which present their own challenges. Like Aaron said today in class, if Renée Fleming had sang her jazz songs well we would have loved it, however that is not the case. It doesn’t matter what style you may choose to identify with, just as long as you do it well!

Preserving The Tradition

I have to admit, I am not one of those people who rushed into classical music with verve and excitement. Music wasn’t my declared major when I started my undergraduate degree. In fact, I had never listened to an opera nor had the desire to and I was a huge musical theater, pop music, teeny bopping eighteen year old. With that said, the idea of putting oneself into an elite classical box seems ridiculous to me and very limiting. In almost every class I’ve been in, since I started studying music, the decline of classical music audiences is a topic for conversation along with ways of trying to save it. (Please forgive if I happen to vomit, for lack of a better word, on this blog. I tend to stand on a soap-box regarding this topic.) Anyways, it got me thinking that we need to start approaching things differently. Instead of resisting contemporary music or new ways of doing things for the sake of our classical egos we need a new out look. It boils down to preserving tradition, reinventing the old and progressing with the new. Tradition keeps the past connected to the changing times and it reminds us of our origins. Without the past we wouldn’t have the future.

Often times during these discussions, people will say that marketing and catering to a younger audience is the answer, which I agree with, but no one ever defines how young. In between my undergraduate and graduate degree I took a year off and taught pre-school in a public school, additionally I had just finished my student teaching at the primary and secondary level. With that said, I can honestly say that music is severely lacking in schools and kids are more inclined to listen to their Ipods rather than sing on their own accord. The lack of singing and music in schools can be linked to a growing decline of appreciation of the fine arts. For example, because of amplification and the microphone most people can’t grasp how amazing it is to hear a classical singer fill a hall with sound without the help of amplification. Projection is a foreign idea now because of the microphone, which can be linked to supported, resonant singing. I think a major way of preserving the classical tradition; as well as enabling society to go forward musically is to give our children a decent music education. Future generations aren’t exposed to this music like the past generations and so they haven’t a clue.

However, on a positive note, there are sources out there that promote the “classical” genre, which could help classical musicians bridge the gap between the classical and pop culture, starting from an early age. When I was home on break, I was watching Wonder Pets with my segregate niece and it is surprisingly very close to that of an operetta. It’s mostly singing and has a classical sounding accompaniment but the only blaring difference is the way the singing is executed. I defiantly think it would be a great way to introduce the idea of the orchestra to primary age children. Maybe, if someone was really creative the could make it into an opera and actually incorporate some classical elements of singing so children can get used to that sound. Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxlWvE2U0nw

Another element that we need to keep in mind is that society is in need of visual stimulation. Television, video games and other forms of technology provide children with visual stimulation that is vivid, animated and interesting. Although opera is a grand event, I don’t think it is as visually exciting to a child. We need to be aware of this and be able to “conform” or try to gain a child’s interest through this medium as well. The Bug Opera, by Geoffrey Hudson combines the classical music element with the need for an aesthetically pleasing visual for younger audiences in a live performance, here is a link: http://www.hybridvigormusic.org/TheBugOpera.html

Basically, what it boils down to is finding creative ways to keep an old art form alive as well as move forward keeping the integrity of music and promoting it as a fine art. I guess what I’m getting at, in a long-winded, round about way, is that art is art. We talked about preserving opera and classical singing, but as artists we need to embrace different forms of art and realize that different genres of music present their own challenges. It’s through composers like Kiya Heartwood and G.Hudson who branch out and use an amalgamation of styles that could pique a child’s interest into learning to love the classical style.

Project Process

I must admit, over spring break I geeked out and wrote ninety percent of my paper and finished ninety percent of my project. In my defense though, to geeking out that is, I had access to the main tool that I needed to complete my project; a sewing machine. Since the creative portion of my project is a quilt, I kind of needed to utilize the short amount of time I had with my sewing machine. I will be going home this Thursday for Easter and I plan on finishing my quilt between Friday and Saturday. The only thing I have left to complete is cutting out and pasting/sewing on silhouettes of the Puritans and Mohawks. The only problem is that I haven’t found an outline of these cultural stereotypes that would translate well onto fabric.

Through this whole process I’ve discovered that hardest part in making my project was the actual designing of the quilt. As I started delving into my opera more, there was so much that could be talked about or represented in a creative way. I think I spent the majority of my time with a box of colored pencils and computer paper figuring out what to do. Finally, after a trash can full of colorful attempts I knew what my game plan was! Trying to illustrate an opera through fabric art is a bit of a challenge, more that I expected. I’m not a seamstress, by any means, so I had to keep in mind what I could within my limits. Yet, the goal of my quilt is for someone to look at it and understand what is going on in the opera and also identify the differences but see how they are “sewn” together. Either way, this project has forced me, in a good way, to dig deeper and be more creative.

Paper Progress

Where to begin… Well, the initial goal of my paper was to look at Paula Kimper’s opera, The Captivation of Eunice Williams, and discuss how homosexuality has impacted her compositions as well as other musicians of the past. I was well aware that the topic of sexuality and music is an extensive topic to delve into; I just didn’t realize how extensive. I have finished my paper, and have handed it in for a review, but I feel like I have opened a can of worms and the worms are escaping from me!

One of my main problems is trying to limit what aspect of sexuality in music I want to discuss. Two of my resources, The Queen’s Throat, and Queering the Pitch, have presented me with some great, enlightening information, but now I don’t know what to talk about anymore. Initially I wanted to discuss how Kimper’s opera is about acceptance and being able to live in accordance with one another even though we are different. Because of this, I was going to compare the issues in the opera to issues of today regarding sexuality, which directly affect her. Additionally, I wanted to discuss how homosexual composers and musicians of the past have paved the way for Kimper to be able to compose so freely and that sexuality is represented in her music very different from that of Britten, Bernstein, and etc… Well, as I started reading I came across some differnt material that discussed the voice as an androgynous entity. What to do?! This is rather interesting because now opera could be viewed very differently, especially when you think about it form a compositional aspect.

Lastly, I began to stress about my paper because there was so much to talk about and not enough time! So now I’m wondering if I should completely revise my paper and discuss my project in great detail. I just don’t know!!!

A View From The Bridge

My feelings about William Bolcom’s, A View From The Bridge, are rather ambivalent. Part of me thought the story was twisted and enticing, but NOT as an opera. Would I go out and read the book? Maybe, but I wouldn’t go out and buy a CD of the opera. Class, this semester, has been interesting because a lot of the 20^th Century operas we have looked at don’t fit the “classical” operatic story that you get from Mozart, Puccini, Rossini etc… Twentieth century composers have had to become more creative regarding the story line; how they write the music and the staging, which could be partially attributed to the evolution of time and society.

The Aspern Papers, The Death of Klinghoffer, Satyagraha, Candide, and A View From A Bridge all share something in common; they don’t succumb to the traditional mold of opera. Besides A View From a Bridge, love and deception don’t really come into play. I realize Candide shows the relationship between Candide and Cunegonde, but their relationship isn’t (to me) the forefront of the show. These operas present the idea of the hero in a non-traditional sense; the stories really hone in on real-life, and tangible situations, which deal with social, political and domestic issues. Additionally, none of these operas are particularly humorous nor do they conclude happily-ever-after. Do 20^th Century composers purposely want to highlight the negative aspects of life to bring awareness to our current situations? Is the goal of these operas to evoke a strong reaction, thus provoking thought? I really have no idea, but I do know that some of these stories work, whereas others definitely do not (I say this subjectively). I attribute this challenge to the story line and finding the ideal spot for a climactic moment that induces a response from the audience.

As a general, extremely broad, statement, many people really enjoy Mozart, Rossini, Puccini, and etc operas. Yes, there maybe certain ones that people don’t like, but overall, people tend to be very receptive to the ‘old chestnuts.’ Really folks, who doesn’t love Marriage of Figaro or Tosca???? Contrastingly, I have found, throughout the course of this semester, the class has had differing views on all the operas we have covered. For instance, A View From A Bridge, was well received by some of my classmates, while I was not a fan. This all goes back to whether or not a plot is going to work. I think it’s the combination of choosing a laudable story, but more importantly being able to set it musically. The Death of Klinghoffer was by no means traditional and it was exceedingly controversial, however the music added to the momentum of the story, thus making it successful in my opinion. Conversely, A View From A Bridge, had a horrible story and the music was a confusing mish mash of sound. I thought Bolcom tried to create music specific to each character, plus illustrate his or her emotions, plus create a contrast between the two nationalities, which ended up being a hot mess. I appreciated his ability to write in such a manner that lends well to acting and word inflection, but overall I wasn’t really thrilled with the whole thing, which only validates my opinion that he should have picked a different story!

Eddie Is Totally The Diva

In Thursday’s class we discussed the role of women in opera and how they are perceived. The idea of the Diva, the extreme emotional range of women, and the labels that describe them with negative connotations ranging form submissive, hysterical, insane, shrewish, asexual, hypersexual, etc… Many of the operas we have studied in class thus far have promoted these stereotypes and/or labels to depict woman, as well as a woman’s submission to a male figure. However, William Bolcom’s, A View From A Bridge, seems to portray the characters Beatrice and Catherine as seemingly normal women who are trying to respond to a desperate situation in the only way they know how.

In class, the idea that Bea’s music was that of a slow simmer that burst into a hysterical explosion is accurate. However, I don’t think that we should jump the gun and coin her as crazy. I thought Bea’s reactions to her current situation were completely justified and rational. Seriously, ask yourself, how would you feel if your husband was pursuing your segregate daughter? Under the circumstances, I think Beatrice handled herself swimmingly! In fact, I thought Eddie’s character seemed to be synonymous to that of a “hysterical woman,” more than the actual female roles.

It would be interesting to further investigate the topic of how music, throughout history, illustrates male anger versus female anger. For instance, woman will sing extreme highs and lows deeming them insane, whereas men will shout and the range of the music will be more contained, which automatically means they are angry and not crazy. Despite these observations, I don’t think Bolcom’s use of these musical characteristics maintain old stereotypes. For instance, he gave Beatrice a “mad” aria, if you will, with an extreme range because she was reacting to an abnormal, horrible, perverse situation; not because she’s crazy. Honestly, I think most people can relate to Bea because she is dealing with a troubled relationship. Whether you view it as falling out of love, anger at a spouse or just miscommunication, we can all relate to her emotions on some level. On the other hand, Eddie is the one who is having impure thoughts and feeling, then acting upon them aggressively, which most people (hopefully) might not relate to. He fits the idea of the Diva because his character, I can only hope, is so far removed from reality that people want to get a glimpse of the dark side. So even though you, as an audience member, don’t want to be him, the shock factor of his story lures you in. It is through Eddie that we vicariously experience something foreign and extremely tumultuous, hence, the idea of the Diva.

My Circle of Unanswered Questions

John Adam’s, The Death of Klinghoffer, highlights very controversial topics such as culture, race and religion. In class, we specifically addressed whether the opera had anti-Semitic undertones and how that impacted audiences and critics. A few questions were raised during the discussion. How are some directors and/or composers able to get away with making fun of another culture, whereas others are chastised? What makes a Jewish person more Jewish than the next? How do you define which side has struggled the most? This is only part of a conglomeration of questions asked regarding this perennial struggle that has been going on for ages.

As Toni brought out in class, the idea of the American Jew versus the Israeli Jew is two very different entities. In America, there are more branches of Judaism from relaxed to practicing strictly, whereas the Israeli Jews don’t have as many options. It’s interesting to look at it from this perspective because this could be readily applied to Catholics, Protestants or to Christianity in general. What if Adam’s opera had been applied to a different story, using different religions? What if it were Catholics and Protestants? I know that the struggles Christianity has faced, in the recent past, have not been as catastrophic as other religions, but one must realize that there has been struggle. In fact, Adam’s could have applied his opera to any race, religion or culture. What I find most perplexing is how certain depictions of events are praised, while other events are abhorred. Like it was mentioned in class, a big sister can pick on her little brother, but if someone else chimes in, the older sister will defend her little brother; even if the sister and the friend are saying the same thing. Maybe we make a mockery of ourselves because we need to find the humor in a grim situation, and we know that within our circle of comfort it is okay to do that. For instance, Seinfeld was able to get away with many politically incorrect episodes, but it was deemed acceptable. I guess, I’m just mulling over the same issues we discussed in class in hopes of finding an answer. Yet, I don’t think there will ever be a definite answer regarding such a sensitive topic.

Desensitized

The nebulosity of John Adams political views, in The Death of Kinghoffer, has audiences and critics alike disputing the idea that his work is infused with anti Semitic undertones; among other controversial topics. Honestly, Adam’s work presents facts, events and raw emotions that people can’t handle; and personally I find these reactions to be refreshing. Our culture has been desensitized through media, which presents gruesome images that flood our TV’s and newspapers. Before Desert Storm happened, civilians were sheltered from the brutality of the battlefields, but this war was the first to be broadcast on national television. Since the birth broadcasting a war, I feel like our culture has taken a quantum leap in the wrong direction. I think back to a time when soldiers were praised more heavily than they are now for their sacrifice and bravery. In today’s society we are so inundated with violence that we don’t view it as a horrific event anymore. Instead, we thrive on movies that incorporate violence and kids play brutal video games that promote murder. Allow me to give a personal example. Around the holidays my family had a get together, or a pig-out if you will, to celebrate the season. As I walked into the living room my 16-year-old cousin was playing a shockingly murderous video game, where the objective was to kill people; it was a manhunt. I asked him what possessed him to play such a violent games and he simply replied, “It’s okay Shelley, I’m killing terrorists, so it’s okay.” First of all, the fact that he was able to quickly respond with a justified answer that was so appallingly ignorant, insensitive and shocking was quite unsettling to me. I think that our society has succumbed to insensitivity, thus producing a generation of people who either don’t care or don’t find murder and violence utterly intolerable. Our youth accepts violence as part of daily life, either indirectly or vicariously through other filters.

With that being said, Adam’s The Death of Klinghoffer evoked a strong visceral reaction in me. Sadly, in order to get through the opera I had to turn the music off for a second to compose myself. The juxtaposition of the music, story and the images was too much of a stimulus to handle. The opera was a vehicle for empathy to encourage the viewer to understand where people come from and what drives them to such drastic measures. At one point, in the article Klinghoffer in Brooklyn Heights, Fink says, “ No one was trying to justify murder, the composer argued, ‘but there was also violence perpetrated on the other side. Keeping someone bound up in a refugee camp his entire life is a different kind of violence than assassination, but nevertheless violence. I think that’s very hard for comfortable, middle-class Americans watching the world go by via their TV sets to get in touch with.’” I will openly admit, I am living a beautiful, comfortable, happy life. Thus far, I have never been a victim of suppression, oppression, sever discrimination, nor have I been subjected to violence, so I don’t know what desperate measures I would take to change my world if I lived in a violence filled milieu. I cannot even begin to fathom it. I watch the news and I see, only a fraction, how others live; poverty, lack of food and safe drinking water. I am aware of those who live their life in fear of being persecuted, but I can’t even begin to sympathize or relate to such turbulence. I think the most disturbing part in the opera was when one of the terrorists was describing his first gun, which he received at the age of five. All I felt was an intense outpouring of sorrow for this man. The fact that he played with guns was his reality because that is the world that he lives in. What is worse is that our society is “playing” with guns as well, but by his or her choice!

I guess what I’m trying to get at, is this opera not only showed actions and events, it was charged with raw human emotions and personal stories. In essence, Adam’s removed the rose colored glasses from either side, and that was a bitter medicine to swallow. In the end it didn’t matter to me who was at fault because everything came around full circle, everyone was hurting and everyone was to blame. Adam’s opera represents more than just the story he was telling; it’s a picture or snapshot of history repeating itself through misunderstandings, anger, religious differences and revenge. Truly, this opera only reminded my of the sadness that plagues humanity on a daily basis. If anything, empathy and amnesty is what this world needs; in the mean time I will count my blessings.

Diva Daydream

Part of today’s class topic was a riveting, open-ended discussion on the idea of The Diva. Insofar, we discussed reasons as to why the idea of the diva is so cherished and celebrated, some of which include the idea that the Diva experiences the emotional extremes, which most people never feel to that extent. The Diva possess an all-embracing range of emotions and characteristics; dominant yet submissive, stable yet unstable, seemingly normal but actually a little cracked, extreme ecstasy to suicidal tendencies. Who wouldn’t want the opportunity to relish in a euphoric world, even if it was for a single moment in time? In essence, that is what the Diva symbolizes; larger than life experiences which we all wish to attain at some point in life.

Reflecting on the past operas we have studied, I began to look comparatively at all of the female roles thus far. The outer shell of these woman share similar strengths that governs how they act. However, all are influenced or easily persuaded by a male figure thus exposing an inevitably weak side. Please excuse me while I ramble on (I mean vent) about them for a hot second. Cleopatra exudes power and sensuality, yet she insists upon killing herself with a snake because of a man. (I would call that a poor life decision.) Sadie, left Willie Stark’s office on account of him finding “true love.” She felt like she was being replaced, with a “real” woman, as opposed to all his other previous promiscuous encounters, which she tolerated. (Now really, ask yourself, would you tolerate even one indiscretion from a potential lover? Absolutely NOT!) Ann Stanton, where do I begin? She is a wishy-washy, narcissistic woman, born with a silver spoon in her mouth, yet somehow she finds herself in tumultuous situations. Torn by two men, lives a life in secrecy because she’s afraid the public will find out about her affair. Although she is rather flaccid, her situation is melodramatic because she is being coveted by two men, she has dark secrets, yet somehow she pulls through and sets her self “free” to be with Willie and then he bites the dust. Now folks, who really wants to experience that in real life??? Ummmmmm the audience! The audience craves drama and resolve. Who doesn’t want to see a reformed sinner? Personally, I think Bill Clinton would be a perfect candidate for an opera!

People feed off of gossip and fantasize about other peoples’ lives all the time. We see this in the grocery stores right before checking out. Take a moment and ask yourself (be honest): How much do I know about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitts relationship? Maybe you could even talk a little about Jen? I will openly admit I look at those magazines when I am in line, I can’t deny it. The fact of the matter is, people want to live a “glamorous” life vicariously through those apparently experiencing it. Movie stars, opera stars, politicians live in an esoteric world that we romanticize.

Finally, I’d like to make another point regarding fame and the idea of the Diva. There are those, who are timeless and there are those who dry up. Wayne Koestenbaum, who wrote The Queen’s Throat, makes a very interesting point as he adoringly describes Maria Callas; “She was Callas long before she died, but she would be a little less Callas if she were still living.” Melancholy but true. Many times there are super stars and then they disappear from our daily radar, which I think enhances the idea of the Diva effect. It adds to the mystery and wonder of what the future might have held had the superstar not died. Maria Callas definitely fits into this mold. However, what if she were still alive, would she be considered a “has been” today? Another example, from pop culture, is Nirvana’s lead singer Kurt Cobain who was in the height of his career when he committed suicide. Does this sort of thing add to the legendary, diva aspect of a superstar??? I think it’s the idea of the unimaginable, intangible, and unfathomable aspects of life that the average person desires. Now, personally I have no desire to lead a turbulent, bipolar life, but it is fun to dabble with these extremes time and again. Hence, the reason I love the stage; I want to wear the lavish, shimmering dresses, I want to sing a beautiful phrase and I want my knight and shining armor… even if it is only for two hours of my life… to come and rescue me. Hell, its opera, make it three hours!

The Aspern Papers

Initially, I passively listened to the You Tube clips of Argento’s The Aspern Papers, which I wasn’t overly thrilled about. Then I read the novella and the article, followed by listening to the clips again and somehow I still feel very ambivalent about the opera. Although the music was luscious and swelling, I felt disconnected for a two reasons; I wanted it to be sung in Italian and I was so captivated by the novel that I had a hard time translating the characters I had imagined onto the stage.

The bel canto quality infused in Argento’s score really lends itself well to the inherent rhythm of the Italian language. I appreciate Argento’s attempt at preserving the integrity of James ambiguous intentions regarding nationality, yet there was an apparent void. It was mentioned in class that James was an American writer who lived abroad, which is reflected in his style of music; the juxtaposition of the Italian style sung in English that doesn’t reflect a specific nationality. However, the harshness of the English language and the beauty of the line didn’t quite cut it for me. Instead, the text and melodic line reminded me of Albert Herring in a very odd way. Harmonically and textually, no, but the way Argento wrote the melodic line and set the text definitely, which is why I think the opera doesn’t flow as mellifluously as it could have, had it been sung in Italian. Yet, this since of displacement and ambiguity may have been Argento’s goal.

My second reason is more of a personal issue, rather than a defect in the opera. Allow me to give a personal example. I am an avid, overly obsessed fan of the Harry Potter books. I read all of the books… no wait; I read all of the books twice before I ever even considered watching any of the movies, which I wish I hadn’t done. With that said, watching the movies shattered all of the images I had created in my imagination. Henry James novel had the same exact effect on me as any other great piece of literature does. His eloquent, descriptive writing filled my head with striking images and vivid descriptions of each character. I don’t feel like his novel is easily translated onto a stage because of James’ flowery, vastly ambiguous style of writing. Furthermore, James’ writing paints such glorious images that it might be better left alone to its own devices as a novel.

Cliché That Ish Up!

To be cliché or not, that is the question. I say, regarding the production of Willie Stark that we watched, be cliché! I am specifically referring to the set design of the show. The immovable, bombastic stairs that engulfed the stage; I say keep them. I realize in the context of the performance they are the visual metaphor for “climbing the corporate ladder,” but I think they symbolize more than that.

Like I mentioned in my previous blog, Willie Stark is full of dichotomies and the stairs unite both sides. Donal Henahan’s review describes the stair’s effectiveness by saying, “The staging is unified, though also limited seriously, by a set that is designed around a stage-filled flight of steps, which must suggest at various times a football stadium with it’s torchlight rally, a Southern aristocrat’s salon, the homes of poverty-stricken voters and – most effectively – the assassination scene.” For the most part, I agree with Henahan except for when he describes the set as “limited.” He is not seeing the big picture if he thinks the set is limited. The stairs represent a solid, firm foundation existing in a tumultuous, ever changing world. The stairs are a grounding force that remind people, from all walks of life, that we all share similarities, meaning, we all know right from wrong. The stairs are bombastically simplistic, in the respect that you can decorate them and clean them up, but in the end stairs are stairs. Similar to Willie Stark who came from nothing, and with a little bit of guidance and self-motivation he became bigger than life; a grandiloquent exterior with a tormented interior, living in the fast lane but reminded of his simple roots.

Furthermore, I thought that the stairs provided a foundation for the three doors that set atop them. The three doors represented the choices that people make. Interestingly enough, the opera started out with three doors and by the end, only one door remained, which happened to be the door Willie Stark was assassinated next to. As the Mother Abbess, from the Sound of Music told Maria (talk about cliché), “When God closes one door, he opens another.” In Willie Stark, Mother Abbess would be wrong, wrong, WRONG! Apparently the door or path that Willie Stark chose didn’t open more doors in his life, it shut them. His poor life choices to get ahead left him with fewer and fewer options, hence closing doors. Cliché? Absolutely! Appropriate? I think so.

It Is Good As A Whole

The opera, Willie Stark incorporates an eclectic mix of styles, both musically and theatrically. A question was posed in class about listening to the music alone, and for me, that doesn’t seem like a viable option because the music needs to be in the context of the show. If one aspect of the opera were eliminated, the viewer would experience a void in the performance because the text, music, set and characters are woven together so tightly. These components that make up the opera are dependent upon one another, acting as a unit.

Now for the big question that we discussed in class: Is Willie Stark a musical or an opera? Aforementioned, the opera, which is what Floyd labeled it as, is composed of various elements that all require the utmost attention. I do not believe that one element carries the show more than another. For instance, I would not go out and purchase a recording of Willie Stark to jam to on a Sunday morning during breakfast. The music doesn’t do much for me on that level, however, used in the context of a performance, it enhance it. First and foremost, the acting needs to be extremely strong, and if it is, and the singer/actor is sensitive to the music, then the music is used to set the mood. The music augments the action on stage, just like the music you hear in movies, it adds to the suspense or emotion of a scene. (Like the music during the shower scene in Hitchcock’s movie, Pyscho… it adds to the action.) Yet, if the acting is subpar, than the music might be painful to listen to, even if the singers are superstars!

This brings up another issue: Phenomenal actor with a weaker singing voice or a diva with deadpan expressions? The correct answer is NIETHER! This production must be a challenge to cast because neither the acting nor singing should be compromised; otherwise I foresee a calamity in the future. Willie Stark, the character, is a complex individual; a charismatic and convincing façade that hides his inner torment and tumultuous personal life. The man is plagued with misfortune from his earlier years, and then lives a scandalous life in his later years. He represents the dichotomies of rich and poor, good and bad, genuine and fake. Thanks to his complexity, he is a main reason why neither the acting nor singing can be compromised. In conclusion I can see why someone might question calling Willie Stark and opera. The acting propelled the show, the music subtly described the mood, the set and full cast numbers made it seems like Broadway, and the style of singing coined it as an opera.

Director vs. Composer

During Monday’s class discussion, maintaining the musical intentions of the composer became the lively topic of conversation. Someone mentioned Gershwin’s Porgy and Bess, and how he intended the work to be performed by an African-American cast because of the historical background and his intentions should be observed. However, others ideas were tossed around about casting based on the voice versus looks and where do we draw the line? Are performances of Porgy and Bess, performed by an all white cast, true to the composer’s intentions? Suffice it to say, the discussion never came to a conclusion, but it got me thinking…

Art is subjective; it is up for interpretation by those creating it. Yes, there are guidelines that one must follow, like traditional performance practices and the wishes of the composer. However, when an artist enters into unchartered territory with a familiar work, he or she needs to be open to both criticism and/or praise. Recognizing the original intent of the composer is most important, but choosing to put your own twist on it is also okay as long as you have a reason. I think in today’s society we, as artists, need to make opera more emotionally accessible to the general public in order to create a stir or spark some interest, which is why I support new interpretations of traditional and nontraditional operatic works.

Although I’m not a fan of the all white version of Porgy and Bess, I realized I’m a bit of a hypocrite because, as I was watching Satyagraha, all I could think of was Martin Luther King Jr. What if the music and libretto stayed the same, but it was King’s life being portrayed instead of Gandhi’s? Essentially, my idea is comparable to the person who wanted the all white version of Porgy and Bess because it is an event I can relate to more easily, which helps me to connect with the music on a deeper level. If you think about it for a moment it would make since. Yes, the Sanskrit is not authentic to King, but the ideals and the struggles are. Or, what if the opera was a tribute to both Gandhi and King? The stage could be divided in half and the two stories acting out in tandem? Would this make Glass’s opera more accessible to the American people? Would Americans be more likely to go to an opera that is advertised as a tribute to Martin Luther King Jr.? I know that this idea is not the original intention of the composer, but if it could reach a completely different group of people, then isn’t that doing the composer a service? I guess I will save the answer to these questions for a later date because I’m a bit torn on how to properly answer them. I guess it boils down to director versus composer; which one do you think should win?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYaLLX_bF7c&feature=related

Here is a clip of Cirque du Soliel... maybe I'm crazy but Glass's Satyagraha could pull it off!

Open to Interpretation

It was so hard to sit and class on Thursday and not discuss the artistic aspects of Glass’s Satyagraha because the marriage between the visual and audio for this opera is paramount. In general, I really enjoyed Glass’s opera, so if I happen use words that have negative connotations, I mean the in the most positive way possible. Watching the Freyer’s version of Satyagraha reminded me of a trippy nightmare that you didn’t want to wake up from. The work moved so slowly and the music was extremely repetitive, but I found myself mesmerized by any subtle change. The opera was similar to watching a flower bloom; you don’t realize it is blossoming until it is fully open. The smallest changes fascinated me, whether it was a dynamic change in the music or a change of movement. This made me realize there is a plethora of ways that this opera could be performed because it relies so heavily on the visual aesthetic to propel the music forward.

Let me begin by saying that I have had very minimal exposure to Glass and his works. With that said, my first thought for his opera would be to use it for film. This is rather ironic considering his music has been used in films, which I discovered during my You Tube escapes, and thus started listening to some of his other works. I listened to clips form The Truman Show and The Illusionist and it is unequivocally Glass. Now that I have been exposed to his music I’m noticing that he has a very distinct sound. Hence, I it made me feel slightly justified in my film idea for Satyahraha. Potentially, the music could act as a soundtrack to a documentary about Gandhi or it could act as a silent film. Let me clarify. I feel like the actions that occur in Freyer’s version are so profound because of the subtlety in change. Yet, I thought the movement of the singers’ mouths disrupted the stillness in some of the scenes. I realize this is an odd statement since it is an opera. However, if you portrayed this opera on film, you could have motions and a story line without words with the music acting as a soundtrack, propelling the motion forward. I suppose Tim Burton and I need to work out some kinks before hitting the big screen!

Another thought that found it’s way into my brain was the idea of performing it like a Cirque du Soleil performance. Many of the Cirque du Soleil shows have a story line and some of the music incorporated into the performance is very repetitive. Moreover, approaching it in this way takes on a whole different element regarding the visual realm because Satyagraha would be propelled kinesthetically. Also, I think you could take this to another level, similar to Kurt Weil’s portrayal of Anna in The Seven Deadly Sins. Gandhi could be represented as two people; the motionless singer and the silent interpreter of motion. I think that Glass leaves the director a lot of room for stage interpretation because he leaves little room for change in the music.

Ms. Price Is In The House!

It was brought up in class that Barber wrote the role of Cleopatra for Leontyne Price, which made me wonder why? She possessed a powerful, penetrating, beautiful instrument and it was wasted, in my opinion, on a score written with barely any beauty. I realize that she had core and earthiness to her lower notes, sailing, mellifluous high notes, and she could sing the extremes with ease. Amazing? Absolutely, which is why he wanted her. It’s just disappointing that the opulent beauty of her voice wasn’t always captured by the music, through no fault of her own. Getting past technique and vocal prowess of Price, she was more than singer and Barber knew it.

The Heyman article made specific note of the assiduous studying that Price did to master the role of Cleopatra. “In preparation for her role as Cleopatra, Price put herself in almost complete isolation for a year, accepting as few singing engagements as possible. She read every book she could find, including Plutarch, on Cleopatra, ‘the strongest character I have played to date,’ Price said, ‘and the most provocative.” To facilitate proper pronunciation, she went through the whole play with the British actress Irene Worth and listened to a recording of it…”

Did Barber know she would go to such great lengths to perfect her role? Yes, I believe he did. He was probably aware that her deep understanding of the part could translate both on and off stage. In class we talked about how Cleopatra is the one who runs the story, and we get to know Anthony vicariously through her. Her words, her songs, her emotions are what construct our views of Anthony. Barber chose Price because he knew she would encapsulate everything that Cleopatra represented. Ranging from Price’s voice, radiant beauty, strong confidence, erudition, profundity and most of all her artistry. Cleopatra embodied strength, sensuousness and power, which Price could capture with her presence and voice. Although Barber’s vision, of the opera, was less grandiose than Zefferelli’s, Price had the facility to handle anything. Who else could compete against live animals, a sphinx, and pyramids? Who else could remain calm when lighting cues were misfired or the pyramid she was to emerge from wouldn’t open? Seriously, who has the lung capacity to sing through walls like her and still be heard? In essence, what makes a truly great singer? What motivates a composer to write for such talent? As a student, you keep putting pieces of the puzzle together and keep trying to make your own path, and this article was another revelation. It made me realize how deep a true artist needs to go, even if the opera ended up being a flop. However, I suppose it’s like trying to define music; it’s a life long study of subjectivity that people try to write about in a few sentences, but can never give a complete answer.

A "Sequence of Pleasing Sounds"???

It was a challenge trying to muster up any enthusiasm, after watching the clips of Barber’s Antony and Cleopatra, to actually listen to the whole opera. Don’t get me wrong if I were offered a role in it, I would JUMP at the opportunity. Maybe then I would start to appreciate it? Suffice it to say, based on listening alone, I thought Antony and Cleopatra was esoteric, forgettable and an absolute chore to get through. However painful my listening experience was, it got me thinking about the idea of music and what makes a musical work memorable or forgettable.

According to the fourth edition of Webster’s New World College Dictionary, the definition of music is:

MUSIC: 1. The art and science of combining vocal or instrumental sounds or tones in varying melody, harmony, rhythm, and timbre, esp. so as to form structurally complete and emotionally expressive compositions. 2. The sounds or tones so arranged, or the arrangement of these. 3. Any rhythmic sequence of pleasing sounds, as of birds, water, etc… 4. Particular form, style, etc… of musical compositions or a particular class of musical works of a particular style, place, period, or composer. 5. The written or printed score of a musical composition. 6. Ability to respond to or take pleasure in music. 7. [Rare] a group of musical performers – [Informal] to accept the consequences of ones actions, however unpleasant (Face the music).

Yes, at first glance, it is an extremely long definition, however, if you consider what music really is, then, it should take a lifetime to accurately explain. Moreover, many of us who are taking this class have spent an exorbitant amount of time trying to figure out the meaning of this noun. Therefore, to have it reduced to a few measly sentences is rather disheartening and/or slightly insulting. Yet, I found the definition rather interesting because it was primarily an objective definition naming the different facets of music, except for number three. The third part of the definition states, “ rhythmic sequence of pleasing sounds, as of birds water, etc…” Interesting. This is the only part of the definition I found to be accurate, mainly because it captures the essence of what music is; a subjective entity that is open to interpretation. This brings me back to my original question: what makes a musical work memorable or forgettable?

Personally, Antony and Cleopatra, was not a “sequence of pleasing sounds...” and I thought it was forgettable or I just wanted to forget about it. This got me wondering, what is it about a musical work that makes it memorable and loved? I thought back to the pervious week when talked about My Fair Lady, The Most Happy Fella, and Westside Story. We discussed certain aspects of each show that propelled then forward and gave them their own unique quality. The acting and the text drove My Fair Lady, The Most Happy Fella was driven by music, and Westside Story was driven by dance. Most of all, they possessed tangible story lines, memorable tunes and relatable characters, which are aspects that potentially move the human soul. I guess that is probably why Barber focused more on Antony and Cleopatra’s relationship in the revision. He was lacking all of the necessary attributes that make a show likeable; he needed to scale down and isolate the story’s focus on a real-life human situation.

Interestingly enough his revision worked, even though he didn’t get to enjoy the fruits of his labors. I realize I’m approaching this piece negatively, so forgive my litany of complaints, but it is apparent that someone liked it because it won a Grammy Award. This brings me to my final credo, which is; music is a subjective phenomena. A sound that is pleasing to my ears may be repulsive to someone else. Or, is that we, as humans, don’t like to accept something different at first? Are innovation and change things we can’t accept until a new generation grasps them and calls them classics? For instance, in 100 years, is Antony and Cleopatra going to be the new Tosca? NO. Thus, I’ll leave you with a quote from Louis Spohr, from Stark’s Bel Canto, who is referring to Rossini in his tirade on “new music.” “With his ‘flowery song,’ regardless of the pleasures it excites, he is well on the way to putting an end to real song, of which not much is left in Italy anyways.” So, if someone found Rossini distasteful, maybe I could be wrong in my criticisms of Barber’s Antony and Cleopatra?

Sexuality, Is It Relevant?

After reading Elizabeth Crist’s interesting article on Bernstein, I decided to read Nadine Hubbs’ article, Berstein, Homophobia, Historiography, from the journal Women and Music: A Journal of Gender and Culture. The article was very insightful and it heightened my awareness to the role that sexuality played in Bernstein’s life and in his musical works. The article conjured up many thoughts and questions about how sexuality might have played a role in Candide, if any at all.

As I said in my first blog entry, I believe Bernstein was a conflicted individual, caught between two contrasting worlds. Bernstein lived in an era where the autonomy of the individual caused trepidation to ripple throughout the government, liberals or conservatives alike. Bernstein posed two threats to this era: he celebrated social and civil values in his musical works and the ambiguity of his sexual preference was always being questioned. Around the 1940’s, homosexuals were being ostracized based solely on sexual preference. For example, homosexual men and women who served in the military were discharged and blacklisted.

Prior to marriage, Bernstein’s sexual ambiguity adversely affected him when he was denied the director’s position with the Rochester Philharmonic Orchestra, in 1947, because they suspected that he was gay. This catapulted him into a heterosexual marriage that sent his career in an upward trajectory. This façade he hid behind allowed him to win the orchestral post with the New York Philharmonic, but only because he told one of the panel members that, his dear friend and competitor, Dimitri Mitropolous was gay. Additionally, his heterosexual veil allowed him to have homosexual extra marital rendezvous’, which he kept very discreet until later years.

All of the aforementioned information is from the Hubb’s article, which propels me to think that Bernstein is pulling a double-edged sword. The fact that he was victim to discrimination and then the culprit of it only shows how divided he truly was with his sexuality. It also makes me wonder if this influenced any aspect of Candide, or am I over analyzing something that is not there? What about the character Maximilian? He was subjected to sexual encounters with men, he cross-dressed, AND he had stereotypical, gay characteristics. Is Bernstein making a mockery of himself as another way to mask his true identity? Having only seen the Kristin Chenoweth version, I’m curious to see how Maximilian was portrayed in other versions of Candide. Furthermore, is Cunegonde’s confusing love life of rampant sexual encounters and her indecisive desire to be with Candide symbolic of Bernstein’s own personal struggles with love? Again, reading both articles may have made my search for symbolism overly ambitious. However, Candide is full of political, social and moral layers, some of which seem very close to the composer's heart.

A Divided Candide

This past week, in class, we discussed the various facets that are pervasive throughout Leonard Bernstein’s Candide. The political, social and moral undertones of the show created different opinions on how people thought Candide should be artistically represented. One person preferred the Parisian version of Candide because it really brought out the sobering intensions of Voltaire’s writing, which were less than optimistic. The Parisian version was a juxtaposition of controversial events of the present and controversial events of the past, which only made the historical truths behind Candide even more biting and raw to modern day viewers. Conversely, another person related with the Kristen Chenoweth version because of the optimistic irony highlighted the deep-rooted issues with humor and sarcasm.

I think one reason for these contrasting views of Candide can be linked to Bernstein who, like Candide, was struggling, socially, politically, morally and domestically. The show ubiquitously makes references to Communist and Capitalist views and it scoffs at sexuality, race and religion. The show is always presenting a dichotomy: Jewish versus Christian, Communist versus Capitalist, straight versus gay, and just versus unjust. Interestingly enough, these are some of the exact issues that tormented Bernstein throughout his life. These struggles that Bernstein experienced are prevalent in Candide, who is continually searching for his “utopia,” yet when he is faced with pernicious obstacles, he remains positive. The ambivalence of the ending number, “Make Our Garden Grow,” symbolizes Bernstein’s and/or Candide’s conflicting world’s merging into “the best of all possible worlds.” I realize that quote is viewed as a satirical statement referring to McCarthyism, but I think that it can have another meaning as well. It’s not purely communist or capitalist views that prevail in the last song; it’s about finding balance and good in an unjust world. Bernstein realized that in an ideal world everyone helps one another, but individual expression and growth must not be compromised. He also toys with the idea of a perfect world as being unfulfilling. For instance, in the El Dorado scene, both Candide and Pauquette were living in peaceful harmony, yet both of them were experiencing an inner void. I think that void is the perfection of the imperfections that life already provides.

“Make Our Garden Grow,” symbolizes more than political views, it heightens our awareness that we, as humans, need to be responsible to social and moral change. Most of all, the song advocates working together and compromise. In order to find peace, we need to find a way to live together, whether it’s being a capitalist, communist, Jewish, Christian, black or white. Candide brings out human differences throughout the show until the end, when all that matters are the similarities that we share. As a concluding thought, I think Bernstein’s views are ambivalent thanks to the fact that he himself was unable to describe his ideal world, but he did know one thing: the world is not “sugar cake,” but sometimes you are able to get a taste of what it could be.