# The ambiguity of Norma finale - does she have a "Liebestod" or not ?



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

The finale of Norma is ambiguous on the topic, if she actually still loves Pollione at the moment of her death and whether she gets some satisfaction from the fact, that they will be united in death. (I'll use the word "Liebestod" here, although Wagnerians might argue, it is not the proper meaning of the word). 

Apparently, the librettist Felice Romani wrote the libretto as ending with the Liebestod. The musical score, however, gives a different impression. "Qual cor tradisti" may be interpreted as loving and gentle for a while. However, after Pollione appologises, it sounds as if Norma finally has had enough of him. She coldly brushes off his appologies, and her last words are adressed to her father, because the kids will be in his care.

It seems, that for some time, they played the opera with Norma sending Pollione to go get stuffed, kept distributing the libretto with the Liebestod, and nobody thought it was weird ?!!

Is there any more background known on this ? Any letter-discussions between Bellini and Romani ? Or how did Giudita Pasta play it ?

How do _you_ like it played ?


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

I suppose it is open to interpretation. I've always believed that in that final duet, she realises and accepts her own culpability as the High Priestess of the Druids and moves on from Pollione, all jelaousy spent and with it all her love for him. That is why her final words are to her father and her final thoughts for her children. I doubt she gives Pollione a second thought as she mounts the pyre.

The turning point for her is that moment when she sings _Son io, _thus accepting her guilt. You can hear it in any one of Callas's recordings, but particularly in the 1955 La Scala performance and in the 1960 studio recording. In those two words she manages to convey a wealth of conflicting emotions, all passion spent as she finally accepts the consequences of her actions.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

The first version of Norma I ever saw was on youtube, the one with Joan Sutherland from Sydney. They made it very much like Liebestod there. The Norma's cold remarks are even omitted from the subtitles. In fact, I was very surprised after I learned what is in the score ! The first impression left a strong influence. I prefer very loving and forgiving Normas ever since.


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

Pollione ascends the pyre with her but it is atonement not a love-death.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I suppose it is open to interpretation. I've always believed that in that final duet, she realises and accepts her own culpability as the High Priestess of the Druids and moves on from Pollione, all jelaousy spent and with it all her love for him. That is why her final words are to her father and her final thoughts for her children. I doubt she gives Pollione a second thought as she mounts the pyre.


No _Norma_ expert I - when did I last read the libretto? - but this seems right to me. I'd like to think that the high priestess is noble, mature and penitent enough to put her indiscretion and its philandering object behind her. This opera is not a celebration of romantic love. _Tristan_, of course, is, and Isolde's vision of joining Tristan among the stars, culminating in her happy expiration on his body, is a galaxy away from Norma and Pollione.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

On the other hand, if Norma still loves Pollione, her love finally got rid of the baggage of lies and betraying her people. And she can be sure, Pollione will not ruin their relationship again. There's no time, LOL !

The librettist originally made them both say the last words, that in the flames begins new love, more sancted and eternal.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Norma is not very interested in what Pollione is doing, or not doing, by the end of the opera. In "Qual cor tradisti, qual cor perdesti" she is practically damning him: "Sul rogo istesso che mi divora, sotterra ancora sarò con te". When Pollione asks her: "Ma tu morendo, non m'abborrire, pria di morire, perdona a me!" she is not even answering.

The, she is singing the exquisite and wonderful "Deh! Non volerli vittime" to his father. She wants her forgiveness and atonement for her actions. At the same time, she cares for her children. Once his father agrees to take care of them, she can die a happy death. Pollione... he was just there, he was going to die anyway, and just went along. But he is not important anymore.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

schigolch said:


> In "Qual cor tradisti, qual cor perdesti" she is practically damning him: "Sul rogo istesso che mi divora, sotterra ancora sarò con te".


So do you understand it as damning ? Like, "I will haunt you forever, will remind you of your guilt even when we are are both dead ?". Interesting. I hear it rather like "We belong together, even if you fail to understand it".

If we go by Soumet, it is both of these things. "We've been together for seven years. Didn't I rightfully earn the place in hell next to you ?" But Soumet's Norma is a terrible person 

And the third interpretation of "Sul rogo istesso che mi divora, sotterra ancora sarò con te" is just commenting on the irony of the situation.


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

BBSVK said:


> So do you understand it as damning ? Like, "I will haunt you forever, will remind you of your guilt even when we are are both dead ?". Interesting. I hear it rather like "We belong together, even if you fail to understand it".
> 
> If we go by Soumet, it is both of these things. "We've been together for seven years. Didn't I rightfully earn the place in hell next to you ?" But Soumet's Norma is a terrible person
> 
> And the third interpretation of "Sul rogo istesso che mi divora, sotterra ancora sarò con te" is just commenting on the irony of the situation.


In the Norma of Soumet, she performs a Medea act to her children. In the opera, she nobly sacrifices herself and realizes she had made her children victims. Perhaps Pollione aware that she is concerned for her children and wishes to save them realizes the immensity of his transgression.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Francasacchi said:


> In the Norma of Soumet, she performs a Medea act to her children. In the opera, she nobly sacrifices herself and realizes she had made her children victims. Perhaps Pollione aware that she is concerned for her children and wishes to save them realizes the immensity of his transgression.


Did you read the play ? 
People around me normally don't do such things and tell me to "just listen to the music".

The plot is similar to the opera for a long time. She contemplates killing her children, but changes her mind and asks Adalgisa to take the kids to Pollione and marry him, which she refuses. It goes on, there are equivalents of "In mia man alfin to sei" and "Son io". Pollione tries to save her, by saying it is not true. At this point, she makes me angry by telling the crowd a lot of details, including "and I have been hiding the fruits of our love in the temple". But people do not seem to understand this euphemism for the children, or just don't pay attention. Pollione doesn't appologize - do you think this is the reason ? I don't. Neither of them seems to focus on the childrens' fate. It does not look like she wants something downright bad happen to the kids at this point, she is just beeing an idiot. She certainly does not ask her father to protect them, because this Daddy is quite horrible and unforgiving. She and Pollione are led to the stake together, but, almost as in Hollywood, Roman troops arrive. They are both set free, and Pollione - this is bad - leaves her there and goes home to his Roman camp ! At this point, she loses her senses. We don't see it happening, it is just a second-hand report. After Pollione gets some rest at his military base, the impact of what just happened hits him. He wants to correct everything, wants to marry her immediately, and still loves her after all. He goes on a rescue mission, begs her to go with him, but she is very confused, alternately does and doesn't understand the situation. We find out she has killed her younger son already. After some talk, she jumps into the abyss, with her other son in her arms. At this moment, Norma's Dad arrives. His plan was to repeat her execution by fire (!), but it is passe already. It is unclear, if he is now going to capture and kill Pollione, or if he wants him to stay alive and haunted by the memory of Norma and the children. The thriller of the 19-th century...


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

BBSVK said:


> Did you read the play ?
> People around me normally don't do such things and tell me to "just listen to the music".
> 
> The plot is similar to the opera for a long time. She contemplates killing her children, but changes her mind and asks Adalgisa to take the kids to Pollione and marry him, which she refuses. It goes on, there are equivalents of "In mia man alfin to sei" and "Son io". Pollione tries to save her, by saying it is not true. At this point, she makes me angry by telling the crowd a lot of details, including "and I have been hiding the fruits of our love in the temple". But people do not seem to understand this euphemism for the children, or just don't pay attention. Pollione doesn't appologize - do you think this is the reason ? I don't. Neither of them seems to focus on the childrens' fate. It does not look like she wants something downright bad happen to the kids at this point, she is just beeing an idiot. She certainly does not ask her father to protect them, because this Daddy is quite horrible and unforgiving. She and Pollione are led to the stake together, but, almost as in Hollywood, Roman troops arrive. They are both set free, and Pollione - this is bad - leaves her there and goes home to his Roman camp ! At this point, she loses her senses. We don't see it happening, it is just a second-hand report. After Pollione gets some rest at his military base, the impact of what just happened hits him. He wants to correct everything, wants to marry her immediately, and still loves her after all. He goes on a rescue mission, begs her to go with him, but she is very confused, alternately does and doesn't understand the situation. We find out she has killed her younger son already. After some talk, she jumps into the abyss, with her other son in her arms. At this moment, Norma's Dad arrives. His plan was to repeat her execution by fire (!), but it is passe already. It is unclear, if he is now going to capture and kill Pollione, or if he wants him to stay alive and haunted by the memory of Norma and the children. The thriller of the 19-th century...


Sounds like a 1950s or 1960s historical epic movie costume drama. I read parts of the play a while ago.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

BBSVK said:


> Did you read the play ?
> People around me normally don't do such things and tell me to "just listen to the music".
> 
> The plot is similar to the opera for a long time. She contemplates killing her children, but changes her mind and asks Adalgisa to take the kids to Pollione and marry him, which she refuses. It goes on, there are equivalents of "In mia man alfin to sei" and "Son io". Pollione tries to save her, by saying it is not true. At this point, she makes me angry by telling the crowd a lot of details, including "and I have been hiding the fruits of our love in the temple". But people do not seem to understand this euphemism for the children, or just don't pay attention. Pollione doesn't appologize - do you think this is the reason ? I don't. Neither of them seems to focus on the childrens' fate. It does not look like she wants something downright bad happen to the kids at this point, she is just beeing an idiot. She certainly does not ask her father to protect them, because this Daddy is quite horrible and unforgiving. She and Pollione are led to the stake together, but, almost as in Hollywood, Roman troops arrive. They are both set free, and Pollione - this is bad - leaves her there and goes home to his Roman camp ! At this point, she loses her senses. We don't see it happening, it is just a second-hand report. After Pollione gets some rest at his military base, the impact of what just happened hits him. He wants to correct everything, wants to marry her immediately, and still loves her after all. He goes on a rescue mission, begs her to go with him, but she is very confused, alternately does and doesn't understand the situation. We find out she has killed her younger son already. After some talk, she jumps into the abyss, with her other son in her arms. At this moment, Norma's Dad arrives. His plan was to repeat her execution by fire (!), but it is passe already. It is unclear, if he is now going to capture and kill Pollione, or if he wants him to stay alive and haunted by the memory of Norma and the children. The thriller of the 19-th century...


I remember being quite interested in literary sources once and would occasionally seek them out. It can be interesting, as long as one remembers that ultimately ideas of performance and interpretation have to come from the music and the libretto. I remember Callas saying that, when she knew she was going to play Anne Boleyn in Donizetti's opera, she sought out historical texts on Anne, but quickly realised that she had to set them aside. In the end, she stated, your idea of a character and how to play her, can only come from the music and how the composer and librettist have characterised her.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I remember being quite interested in literary sources once and would occasionally seek them out. It can be interesting, as long as one remembers that ultimately ideas of performance and interpretation have to come from the music and the libretto. I remember Callas saying that, when she knew she was going to play Anne Boleyn in Donizetti's opera, she sought out historical texts on Anne, but quickly realised that she had to set them aside. In the end, she stated, *your idea of a character and how to play her, can only come from the music and how the composer and librettist have characterised her.*


Exactly. We don't need to read Shakespeare to interpret Verdi's _Macbeth, Otello or Falstaff_, or Dumas to understand _La Traviata. _We don't need to study the Eddas and the Nibelungenlied to interpret the _Ring. _Wolfram von Eschenbach's_ Parzival _is not a reliable guide to the meaning or performance of _Parsifal,_ and in fact Wagner himself criticized Wolfram for getting the story wrong! Operas are self-sufficient works of art. I contend - as did Wagner and Callas - that the music is the primary key to understanding them.

In the case of _Norma_ and the question of this thread, I hear nothing in the music that suggests that Norma is concerned with Pollione at the end of the opera. It's interesting, in fact - now that I'm thinking about it - that there is nothing anywhere in the score that suggests a romantic relationship between Pollione and either Norma or Adalgisa. Given that the affection between the two women is given such lovely musical expression, we should surely expect otherwise. But the opera isn't about sexual love. It's about moral conflict and consequences, and that's what we hear in the opera's final scene.


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> Exactly. We don't need to read Shakespeare to interpret Verdi's _Macbeth, Otello or Falsaff_, or Dumas to understand _La Traviata. _We don't need to study the Eddas and the Nibelungenlied to interpret the _Ring. _Wolfram von Eschenbach's_ Parzival _is not a reliable guide to the meaning or performance of _Parsifal,_ and in fact Wagner himself criticized Wolfram for getting the story wrong! Operas are self-sufficient works of art. I contend - as did Wagner and Callas - that the music is the primary key to understanding them.
> 
> In the case of _Norma_ and the question of this thread, I hear nothing in the music that suggests that Norma is concerned with Pollione at the end of the opera. It's interesting, in fact - now that I'm thinking about it - that there is nothing anywhere in the score that suggests a romantic relationship between Pollione and either Norma or Adalgisa. Given that the affection between the two women is given such lovely musical expression, we should surely expect otherwise. But the opera isn't about sexual love. It's about moral conflict and consequences, and that's what we hear in the opera's final scene.


Though there is a romantic part when Adalgisa tells Norma how Pollione wanted to prostate himself at her feet and kiss her hair. But note she describes this to Norma who may have heard the same words from Pollione.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Francasacchi said:


> Though there is a romantic part when Adalgisa tells Norma how Pollione wanted to prostate himself at her feet and kiss her hair. But note she describes this to Norma who may have heard the same words from Pollione.


Girl talk. And who knows how many women he's said that to?


----------



## Francasacchi (7 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> Girl talk. And who knows how many women he's said that to?


Exactly. That is what I noted in the last sentence of my post.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Exactly. We don't need to read Shakespeare to interpret Verdi's _Macbeth, Otello or Falstaff_, or Dumas to understand _La Traviata. _We don't need to study the Eddas and the Nibelungenlied to interpret the _Ring. _Wolfram von Eschenbach's_ Parzival _is not a reliable guide to the meaning or performance of _Parsifal,_ and in fact Wagner himself criticized Wolfram for getting the story wrong! Operas are self-sufficient works of art. I contend - as did Wagner and Callas - that the music is the primary key to understanding them.
> 
> In the case of _Norma_ and the question of this thread, I hear nothing in the music that suggests that Norma is concerned with Pollione at the end of the opera. It's interesting, in fact - now that I'm thinking about it - that there is nothing anywhere in the score that suggests a romantic relationship between Pollione and either Norma or Adalgisa. Given that the affection between the two women is given such lovely musical expression, we should surely expect otherwise. But the opera isn't about sexual love. It's about moral conflict and consequences, and that's what we hear in the opera's final scene.


When Corelli played it the women and gays thought about romance LOL


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> But the opera isn't about sexual love. It's about moral conflict and consequences, and that's what we hear in the opera's final scene.


Time to quote a musicologist !  
"But essentially, as Lippmann's oft-made analogy between Bellini and Wagner insists, this is a movement to ravish the hearers by
sheer sonorous intoxication. Its swaying rhythms, rising chromatic modulations and ecstatic climactic unison of soprano and tenor voices are erotic in an almost graphic way. In fact it is a supreme demonstration of a fact of Italian opera that is not easily accounted for in rational terms that not infrequently, in its musical numbers, we are dealing not so much with music drama as with a ritual of communal ecstasy." (Vincenzo Bellini: Norma, David R. B. Kimbell, Cambridge University Press 1998) 
Sorry, I had to 🙃


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BBSVK said:


> Time to quote a musicologist !
> "But essentially, as Lippmann's oft-made analogy between Bellini and Wagner insists, this is a movement to ravish the hearers by
> sheer sonorous intoxication. Its swaying rhythms, rising chromatic modulations and ecstatic climactic unison of soprano and tenor voices are erotic in an almost graphic way. In fact it is a supreme demonstration of a fact of Italian opera that is not easily accounted for in rational terms that not infrequently, in its musical numbers, we are dealing not so much with music drama as with a ritual of communal ecstasy." (Vincenzo Bellini: Norma, David R. B. Kimbell, Cambridge University Press 1998)
> Sorry, I had to 🙃


Sounds like Mr. Kimbell needed to fill some pages to earn his doctorate.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Woodduck said:


> Sounds like Mr. Kimbell needed to fill some pages to earn his doctorate.


Noooo, he already had his credentials. He went on sabatical and wrote this for the pure love of art only


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BBSVK said:


> Noooo, he already had his credentials. He went on sabatical and wrote this for the pure love of art only


He might have tried a less pure form of love. There's generally a "ritual of communal ecstasy" happening somewhere in town.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

As for the affection and the romantic feelings, Norma has them for Pollione in the opera, but they are not anchored in the present reality. First the above mentioned duet "O rimembranza". And later the few seconds after "Ei tornera".

Next one is a matter of debate, but I hear a sort of sad affection in the short orchestral part before "In mia man alfin to sei". I know Callas makes this part threatening and uses all her chest voice she can, and I like that. But in that orchestral interlude I hear "We used to love each other, what happened to us ?"


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

BBSVK said:


> So do you understand it as damning ? Like, "I will haunt you forever, will remind you of your guilt even when we are are both dead ?". Interesting. I hear it rather like "We belong together, even if you fail to understand it".


That's how I've always read it. The drama's narrative demands a double redemption through death. That's somewhat larger than whether the two lovers will spend eternity "together".

N.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> Exactly. We don't need to read Shakespeare to interpret Verdi's _Macbeth, Otello or Falstaff_, or Dumas to understand _La Traviata. _We don't need to study the Eddas and the Nibelungenlied to interpret the _Ring. _Wolfram von Eschenbach's_ Parzival _is not a reliable guide to the meaning or performance of _Parsifal,_ and in fact Wagner himself criticized Wolfram for getting the story wrong! Operas are self-sufficient works of art. I contend - as did Wagner and Callas - that the music is the primary key to understanding them.
> 
> In the case of _Norma_ and the question of this thread, I hear nothing in the music that suggests that Norma is concerned with Pollione at the end of the opera. It's interesting, in fact - now that I'm thinking about it - that there is nothing anywhere in the score that suggests a romantic relationship between Pollione and either Norma or Adalgisa. Given that the affection between the two women is given such lovely musical expression, we should surely expect otherwise. But the opera isn't about sexual love. It's about moral conflict and consequences, and that's what we hear in the opera's final scene.


 I agree with your summation and of course you don't _need _to read Shakespeare's Macbeth to interpret Verdi's. However, reading the original texts can expand our understanding of a role or character, especially if the motivation seems odd until you find out extra details of a character's back story that are only in the original source.

When it comes to Anna Bolena, the opera was based on two literary sources (has anyone read Ippolito Pindemonte's _Enrico VIII ossia Anna Bolena_?), which in turn are based on history (at least in part) and so the historical Anne Boleyn is two steps removed from the opera. I think Donizetti has given us everything we need to understand _his _Bolena, whereas I think it helps knowing the complete story of Manon to understand Puccini's Manon Lescaut.

N.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

The Conte said:


> I think Donizetti has given us everything we need to understand _his _Bolena, whereas I think it helps knowing the complete story of Manon to understand Puccini's Manon Lescaut.
> 
> N.


Well I think there's a good deal more Prévost in Massenet's Manon than in Puccini's and I also think the two Manons are quite different, so perhaps in that sense the original novel doesn't really help at all.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Well I think there's a good deal more Prévost in Massenet's Manon than in Puccini's and I also think the two Manons are quite different, so perhaps in that sense the original novel doesn't really help at all.


Puccini's version is more compact and concise and his Manon can seem so shallow as to be downright silly at times. Knowing the Prevost can temper that. Characters in operas based on books, tend to have more depth in the books than in the operas as they are more fleshed out. That extra knowledge can help singers flesh out the roles.

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

The Conte said:


> I agree with your summation and of course you don't _need _to read Shakespeare's Macbeth to interpret Verdi's. However, reading the original texts can expand our understanding of a role or character, especially if the motivation seems odd until you find out extra details of a character's back story that are only in the original source.
> 
> When it comes to Anna Bolena, the opera was based on two literary sources (has anyone read Ippolito Pindemonte's _Enrico VIII ossia Anna Bolena_?), which in turn are based on history (at least in part) and so the historical Anne Boleyn is two steps removed from the opera. I think Donizetti has given us everything we need to understand _his _Bolena, whereas I think it helps knowing the complete story of Manon to understand Puccini's Manon Lescaut.
> 
> N.


I'm not saying it can't be interesting or worthwhile to delve into an opera's historical or literary sources. Doing so can be quite fascinating, and for a stage director such sources can supply information about periods and milieus which composers and librettists either took for granted or simply chose to leave unspecified. There may also be instances in which something about an operatic story or character seems inconsistent or mysterious, or there may be an assumption that audiences are familiar with the opera's sources or cultural background. I'm saying only that what is actually in the work's story and music should be the controlling factor in how it's interpreted, regardless of whatever ideas we may bring to it from elsewhere. This is obviously an unfashionable view in the age of regietheater.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Woodduck said:


> I'm not saying it can't be interesting or worthwhile to delve into an opera's historical or literary sources. Doing so can be quite fascinating, and for a stage director such sources can supply information about periods and milieus which composers and librettists either took for granted or simply chose to leave unspecified. There may also be instances in which something about an operatic story or character seems inconsistent or mysterious, or there may be an assumption that audiences are familiar with the opera's sources or cultural background. I'm saying only that what is actually in the work's story and music should be the controlling factor in how it's interpreted, regardless of whatever ideas we may bring to it from elsewhere. This is obviously an unfashionable view in the age of regietheater.


Absolutely. I totally got that and wasn't disagreeing with you. Very much adding to your point.

N.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

I believe that there is a relatively small number of operas almost or at all unrelated to sex. Of course, Norma isn't in this special group. Sex may take place before the beginning or behind the scenes (Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk is a rare exclusion) or only be desired, but they all sing about it, though in other terms. Norma is a story of a finished relationship and impossibility to change anything. I mean consequences, not a marriage reparation. So for me the final is not a Liebestod. 
If we think of a plot as a story dwelled in a traditional society, we can imagine the heaviness of taboo breaking and try to understand why she doesn't see any exit except a pyre. But I don't think that authors were that sunk in sociology and history, and these sciences digged in this direction in romantic period. There was no more historical accuracy in romantic operas than in an average period movie. 
And one more side thought: if we remember, say, Satyricon, then Adalgisa could be a trousers role. I wait with a little trembling when Warlikowsky and Tchernyakov guess it.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

ColdGenius said:


> And one more side thought: if we remember, say, Satyricon, then Adalgisa could be a trousers role. I wait with a little trembling when Warlikowsky and Tchernyakov guess it.


I do not know what Satyricon is, but there was a production in Dresden, where the opera is ending with the "Si fine al'ora" and Norma is leaving Gauls together with her true love Adalgisa, walking together into the sunset. (Of course, they also had to play the rest of the opera, so they started a different story for the second act). Another one was in Wales (?), where Adalgisa ascends the pyre with Norma. I wouldn't go that far, but I keep thinking, Adalgisa should have come to give Norma a hug after her unsuccessful mission in the Roman camp. The disaster could possibly be averted.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

BBSVK said:


> I do not know what Satyricon is, but there was a production in Dresden, where the opera is ending with the "Si fine al'ora" and Norma is leaving Gauls together with her true love Adalgisa, walking together into the sunset. (Of course, they also had to play the rest of the opera, so they started a different story for the second act). Another one was in Wales (?), where Adalgisa ascends the pyre with Norma. I wouldn't go that far, but I keep thinking, Adalgisa should have come to give Norma a hug after her unsuccessful mission in the Roman camp. The disaster could possibly be averted.


Then the production from ROH with Yoncheva and Ganassi, with a Christian sect wasn't that radical.

Satyricon is a novel by Petronius, written during Nero's time. There is an adaptation by Fellini. I meant that real life Norma could compete both with women and men, so Adalgisa might be a boy. Opera directors didn't explore Roman history so far. And we have male singers now who say they could sing Lucía for example.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

ColdGenius said:


> And we have male singers now who say they could sing Lucía for example.


Just because they could doesn't mean that they should.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Just because they could doesn't mean that they should.


Aren't we all waiting impatiently to hear from Luke of Lammermoor, his evil twin Harry, and his very special friend Eddie?


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Just because they could doesn't mean that they should.


There are many today who think they 'should' even though they fail at the 'could'!

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

The Conte said:


> There are many today who think they 'should' even though they fail at the 'could'!
> 
> N.


Quite.


----------



## BBSVK (10 mo ago)

Edit: This post originally contained a link to the site, which is stealing the content of Talk classical, including my text about Norma. Now I am removing the link, because it was improving thei thief's position in the google ranking system.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

BBSVK said:


> WTF is this ?!!
> I see my synopsis of Soumet's Norma from this thread reproduced at this other website, but my words are replaced with synonyms and the result is... well...
> 
> 
> ...


Someone is plagiarizing TC. It seems to be a site called libri24. Fascinating!

I don't think anyone should be surprised that this sort of thing goes on. We're all public property now. It's offensive at the very least.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Someone is plagiarizing TC. It seems to be a site called libri24. Fascinating!
> 
> I don't think anyone should be surprised that this sort of thing goes on. We're all public property now. It's offensive at the very least.


 Yes, one of my posts is on there too. It looks as if it might have been translated and then translated back into English. Spherical Two: Ah, Perfido! Baker And Horne - Libri24


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> Yes, one of my posts is on there too. It looks as if it might have been translated and then translated back into English. Spherical Two: Ah, Perfido! Baker And Horne - Libri24


Is plagiarism the sincerest form of flattery?


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

It looks like a Spanish site. 
It should flatter you. Bette Davis said, "I don't care what they speak about me until they speak about me at all".


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

ColdGenius said:


> It looks like a Spanish site.
> It should flatter you. Bette Davis said, "I don't care what they speak about me until they speak about me at all".


She also said, "Old age isn't for sissies." So many wise words. Haha!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> She also said, "Old age isn't for sissies." So many wise words. Haha!


Actually, I'm not sure who it's for.


----------

