Alright so here it goes: review of Doctor Atomic.
A little context: I haven't had the opportunity to see many live operas. I've seen Nozze, Lucia, and Zauberflote. I've participated in Carmen, Zauberflote, and Countes d'Hoffman. I've listened to many operas and a variety of vocal works. I'm sympathetic to the difficulty involved with putting on a show, getting the courage to go on stage and sing. I expect a lot out of anyone singing at the Met. I know very little about composition and respect those that write the notes that magically become beautiful music. I am by no means as qualified as many other bloggers to give a critical opinion.
On the other hand, this gives me the advantage of listening and judging from the view-point of a new generation of opera-goers and hearing through ears less influenced by the traditions of the past. These were my thoughts, take them as they are.
The Movie Theater vs Opera House: Undecided, though I was glad to get close-ups of Finley and the bomb; the editing was thoughtful, unobtrusive and added to the dramatic arch of the piece. I liked it...would have preferred to hear live singing though.
The concept: 5/5. I researched the opera extensively before going and was predisposed to like it. I like John Adams and love stories that center around a tormented and tragic soul. This is the perfect subject for a modern opera. Libretto pieced from actual sources: great way of adding the weight of history to your story.
The production: 3/5. It worked but could have been more coherent and more effective. Have a feeling I would prefer the Peter Sellers version but have only seen clips on youtube. The box thingies, meh. I thought they distracted from the action instead of aiding it. Also confined chorus to limited movement; with so much frenzy in the pit, it would have been nice to see a reflection on stage.
The plot line: Act 1: 5/5. Act 2: 3/5. First act, incredible. Perfect setup for an awe-inspiring second act. Which was not to exactly come...it some how fell short. Maybe it was, as Adams admitted, that a stage production simply cannot compete with George Lucas special effects. But I feel like we needed to see more of the character Robert Wilson, played by the dynamic and intriguing Thomas Glenn. Wilson is Oppenheimer's foil, and in order to have as dramatic a second act as the first, would need to explore his character too. Regardless, the dramatic intensity is somehow preserved up to the end. I wish there was a better ending still. In opera, both the drama AND the music must find a resolution. Here, the drama resolves but not the music.
The Singing: 10/5. That's right. 10 out of 5. That's all Finley's AMAZING ability to sing English intelligibly and sing a line. Plus his creamy, brilliant baritone, *sigh* I'm officially a Finley-fan/worshiper. Kudos to the chorus too, difficult music + choreography = challenge.
The Acting: 5/5. Once again, Finley leads the cast. He is a god-send for those who understand the essence of acting and are also opera-lovers. The essence of acting is this: every gesture or movement that an actor makes must have a motivation, a reason for that movement. So many singers have been taught to sing but have not been taught or explored the world of theatre and this bad acting is everywhere in opera, from the smallest to the largest houses. Poi il teatro. Meredith Arwady(Pasqualita) has an incredible voice but it's lost when she gestured awkwardly on stage. It didn't help that she had to stand in one spot while repeating her warnings, but her gestures did not reflect her character or her words. It's like the talking stain commercial, you can't focus on the power of the words and music and singing when the singer is making mindless gestures.
The Music: Wonderful. Shimmering, fluid, powerful, penetrating...there's so much I could say about it but I will simply say that I felt I could here the composer speaking through the orchestra. The same feeling when I listen to Mozart. This is not only music that illustrates and frames the drama and characters, but also, through it's own sheer beauty, becomes a statement about the horrors of war and mankind. We are hearing such music describe such a terrible day and the contrast of the beauty and the tragedy is so stark that we are caught, breathless, in a state of disbelief. How could men threaten to use a weapon that could so utterly destroy a world filled with such beautiful things as this music? Or these singers or this composer?
The Overall: 5/5. Even with the short comings, this opera moved me. The singers/actors were incredible, the story relevant and thought-provoking, the drama gripping. I think Adams is perhaps very close to writing the first 21st century opera masterpiece, one that will be as enduring as the Mozart-DaPonte's. He just needs to tweak his sense of plot; find a well-balanced, smart libretto; and the rest will follow.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Friday, November 7, 2008
Yay Met HD
Going to the Doctor Atomic HD broadcast tomorrow with newbie opera listener Vinay. Hope he likes his 3 hour and 21 minute intro to opera!
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
IUPUI Chamber Ensemble
The IUPUI Chamber Ensemble will be performing at the IT building auditorium on November 10th, 7:30 pm. Concert will feature a variety of modern and classical music. Admission is $5 at the door!
A response to blog "Doctor Atomic and Modern Opera" by John Schaefer of WNYC Soundcheck online
So I read this blog entry the other day by a John Schaefer about modern opera, the ‘lack of tunefulness’ in arias today, and Doctor Atomic’s role in all of this. Read it here.
Here is Schaefer's question: "What’s your impression of modern American opera? Do you like being able to follow the story? Or do you want to be able to walk out with a tune stuck in your head?"
Here is my response:
Tunefulness and advancement of the plot are not what is at odds here. Doctor Atomic contains arias which slow the action down just as an aria in a pre-1930's opera would. An aria is a character taking time to express their thoughts. It therefore does not advance a plot no matter how tune-ful or un-tune-ful it is. Oppenheimer’s arias “Batter my heart” and “Long let me inhale” are not tuneful and do not advance the plot. What you are talking about is the difference in formats of songs: tunefulness vs. lack-of-tunefulness.
You should instead ask your audience if they would prefer that modern composers be constrained to the ABA format I mentioned in my previous comment or if they should be encouraged to find a new voice. I think it's obvious which I advocate.
We would not expect modern painters to mimick the Dutch school, nor to imitate the impressionists. We would not expect modern writers to fall into a Shakespearean voice nor modern poets to follow the prose of Byron. In fact, they would be condemned by art critics for not seeking a unique and new voice/style.
Why, then, do you seek to trap composers into the glorious past? The past masters were innovators themselves, breaking from their traditions. History forgets imitators and favors the experimental.
Instead, please change the way you think about what music should be. Open your mind to different sounds and don't condemn modern composers for not holding on to the past.
In response to Schaefer’s blog's question as to why modern opera composers don't write "tuneful memories," claiming that composers are too afraid to do so, I offer this respose:
The reason opera composers aren't writing "tuneful melodies," by which I believe you mean songs that repeat the same phrase over again, is not that they are afraid to do so, but because that is not their goal. Modern opera composers should be searching for a new sound and not be in the business of mimicking the past.
Tunefulness is when a composer takes one phrase or a series of phrases (melody A) and repeats them, usually with a contrasting section (melody B), and then repeat the first melody again [whole scheme is known as ABA scheme]. with different words. It is the same format that pop-songs, rock songs, blues, folk, lots of jazz, and a million other styles of music use and have been using since the dawn of music. Opera-listeners have 400 years of operas filled with arias, duets, choruses, etc. that conform to this definition of "tune-ful-ness."
Opera-goers and opera composers are already familiar with this format, we hear operas written in this format and enjoy them, every season. Look at the season list for any opera company, it will be at very least 75 percent pre-1930 operas, a majority of which contain "tuneful melodies" in the songs.
BUT, when we commission new operas from modern composers, we are not looking for a repeat of the past. We want that composer to give us something new; something that speaks more of our own times and reflects a modern sensibility. We are looking for a sound and an opera that astounds us by identifying our own feelings, concerns, thoughts, fears, hopes, conflicts, in the context of our own time. Not the time of Bach, of Mozart, of Verdi, of Wagner, or Puccini, (though we appreciate how these works remind us that we are not so different from our forefathers), but of OUR time.
That is what Doctor Atomic does.
Here is Schaefer's question: "What’s your impression of modern American opera? Do you like being able to follow the story? Or do you want to be able to walk out with a tune stuck in your head?"
Here is my response:
Tunefulness and advancement of the plot are not what is at odds here. Doctor Atomic contains arias which slow the action down just as an aria in a pre-1930's opera would. An aria is a character taking time to express their thoughts. It therefore does not advance a plot no matter how tune-ful or un-tune-ful it is. Oppenheimer’s arias “Batter my heart” and “Long let me inhale” are not tuneful and do not advance the plot. What you are talking about is the difference in formats of songs: tunefulness vs. lack-of-tunefulness.
You should instead ask your audience if they would prefer that modern composers be constrained to the ABA format I mentioned in my previous comment or if they should be encouraged to find a new voice. I think it's obvious which I advocate.
We would not expect modern painters to mimick the Dutch school, nor to imitate the impressionists. We would not expect modern writers to fall into a Shakespearean voice nor modern poets to follow the prose of Byron. In fact, they would be condemned by art critics for not seeking a unique and new voice/style.
Why, then, do you seek to trap composers into the glorious past? The past masters were innovators themselves, breaking from their traditions. History forgets imitators and favors the experimental.
Instead, please change the way you think about what music should be. Open your mind to different sounds and don't condemn modern composers for not holding on to the past.
In response to Schaefer’s blog's question as to why modern opera composers don't write "tuneful memories," claiming that composers are too afraid to do so, I offer this respose:
The reason opera composers aren't writing "tuneful melodies," by which I believe you mean songs that repeat the same phrase over again, is not that they are afraid to do so, but because that is not their goal. Modern opera composers should be searching for a new sound and not be in the business of mimicking the past.
Tunefulness is when a composer takes one phrase or a series of phrases (melody A) and repeats them, usually with a contrasting section (melody B), and then repeat the first melody again [whole scheme is known as ABA scheme]. with different words. It is the same format that pop-songs, rock songs, blues, folk, lots of jazz, and a million other styles of music use and have been using since the dawn of music. Opera-listeners have 400 years of operas filled with arias, duets, choruses, etc. that conform to this definition of "tune-ful-ness."
Opera-goers and opera composers are already familiar with this format, we hear operas written in this format and enjoy them, every season. Look at the season list for any opera company, it will be at very least 75 percent pre-1930 operas, a majority of which contain "tuneful melodies" in the songs.
BUT, when we commission new operas from modern composers, we are not looking for a repeat of the past. We want that composer to give us something new; something that speaks more of our own times and reflects a modern sensibility. We are looking for a sound and an opera that astounds us by identifying our own feelings, concerns, thoughts, fears, hopes, conflicts, in the context of our own time. Not the time of Bach, of Mozart, of Verdi, of Wagner, or Puccini, (though we appreciate how these works remind us that we are not so different from our forefathers), but of OUR time.
That is what Doctor Atomic does.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
WGA strike
It's not [classial] music related but I wanted to mention it anyway. The Writer's Strike ended last night and what a wonderful example of compromise. Although it took a three and a half month strike, the WGA didn't get violent or stubborn and the Motion Pictures didn't either (finally House and The Office will be back on).
For celebration, here's fast rising tenor Stephen Costello (2007 graduate of Academy of Vocal Arts Philadelphia) as Rodolfo.
For celebration, here's fast rising tenor Stephen Costello (2007 graduate of Academy of Vocal Arts Philadelphia) as Rodolfo.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Events this week 02-11-08
From University of Indianapolis: "Faculty flutist Anne Reynolds teams with faculty and guest performers in music of Andre Jolivet (the virtuoso tour-de-force “Chant de Linos”) and Erwin Schulhoff (his 1925 Concertino for flute, viola, and double bass). The program concludes with Johann Nepomuk Hummel’s exhilarating Septet, Op. 74."
From IUPUI: Faculty Recital featuring Steven Kent Murphy on the piano. "Steven Kent Murphy is an adjunct music professor at Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis School of Music. Steve is also a composer and performer living in Indianapolis. He works for the Indianapolis Public Schools as a performer and composer and is a vocal coach locally for many singers."
ISO: This weekend the ISO is performing Mendelssohn's violin concerto. I incorrectly posted this as happening last weekend. From the ISO site "British sensation Jack Liebeck visits Indy for the first time to perform Mendelssohn’s alluring Violin Concerto. Douglas Boyd will bring the romantic story of Berlioz’s Symphonie fantastique to life in a compelling performance of this orchestral tour de force."
More later, if I find anything.
From IUPUI: Faculty Recital featuring Steven Kent Murphy on the piano. "Steven Kent Murphy is an adjunct music professor at Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis School of Music. Steve is also a composer and performer living in Indianapolis. He works for the Indianapolis Public Schools as a performer and composer and is a vocal coach locally for many singers."
ISO: This weekend the ISO is performing Mendelssohn's violin concerto. I incorrectly posted this as happening last weekend. From the ISO site "British sensation Jack Liebeck visits Indy for the first time to perform Mendelssohn’s alluring Violin Concerto. Douglas Boyd will bring the romantic story of Berlioz’s Symphonie fantastique to life in a compelling performance of this orchestral tour de force."
More later, if I find anything.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
