# Pet peeve: what's wrong with a good aria?



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

OK, this thread will drive Aramis, World_Violist, and other fans/defenders of modernist and contemporary opera berserk. So, sorry, guys, I like you both a lot, it's not meant to upset you, please forgive old dinosaur Almaviva.

But tell me - you or anybody else - what's wrong with a good aria?
Why are almost all modernist and contemporary operas written-through, with declamatory or arioso style?

Couldn't it be because under the guise of musical evolution and not going back to the past, these guys are just hiding the fact that they aren't as good melodists as the great composers of the baroque, classical, and romantic periods, therefore even if they tried, they wouldn't be able to deliver in the melodic aria department?

Are we, lovers of belcanto and related styles, condemned to being considered unsophisticated listeners who "don't get it?"

You know, I've been enjoying modernist and contemporary operas lately, and I think I do get it and I appreciate it. But I'd like to hear some good arias in recent operas from time to time, dammit!:scold:

I know I'm risking my skin here, and I'm bracing for a shower of stones.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I think it's basically a case of "been there, done that," & audiences want to hear something new...


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Andre said:


> I think it's basically a case of "been there, done that," & audiences want to hear something new...


Sure, but I mean, couldn't they insert a couple of good arias from time to time? I think a good aria is part of the operatic experience. Sometimes I listen to contemporary works and get the impression that something is missing.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

Ask dear old Richard Wagner about it. I dunno why there aren't any good arias in contemporary opera. I'm thinking maybe so that the story (and thus the whole musical structure) is more concise, streamlined, etc. Virtually all modern thought is basically about either simplifying or complicating things, and through-composing operas does both at the same time. Arias are an easy way to get an audience clapping, but they hold up (and ultimately threaten to collapse) said audience's grasp of what exactly is going on.

And there are arias in modern opera--they're just assimilated into the structure.

(Actually, the whole idea of aria in opera is rather foreign to me in some ways; my first encounter with arias was in the cantatas and passions of JS Bach.)


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Let me elaborate a little more.

Take, for instance, _Pélleas et Mélisande_. Do I like it? You bet! It's one of my favorites. It's pretty impressive with its symbolism (even though sometimes I think it is a bit too obvious), its dramatic impact, its outstanding finale (one of the most hair-raising death scenes in all of opera), and its hypnotic, dreamy and exquisite impressionist music.

But then, once one walks out of the opera house, can one really remember the music? I have the impression that I've been through an ocean of sound, a pretty rolling and overwhelming storm, and I do recognize its beauty... but can I remember any of it? Can I go home humming some tune?

Wouldn't _Pélleas et Mélisande _be even more impressive and satisfactory if we had a couple of outstanding arias to remember it by? Why *not* have them?

In their absence, when I think back about _Pélleas et Mélisande _it tends to strike me more as a play (Maeterlinck's play) than an opera, because the aspects I tend to remember are the dramatic ones, not the musical ones.

No, I'm not saying it's not musically beautiful. Of course it is! What I'm saying is that the addition of a couple of arias would individualize it even more, would make of the experience an even more rewarding and memorable one, instead of just a mesh of endless sound that is thrilling while you're experiencing it, but doesn't last.

Do you get my point?


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

World Violist said:


> Ask dear old Richard Wagner about it.


Well yeah, he's the one who started it all, although even though the structure of his operas is not one of a numbers opera, we do get individualized bits that are memorable (in the sense of recognizable by memory) unlike what we get in _Pélleas et Mélisande_ or _Lulu _(read my other post above)


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I''ve been feeling that as I listen to Dialogues des Carmelites. I didn't notice the lack of arias when I was watching it, as the story was so dramatic and I was enjoying the language, but I did when listening with no libretto. I'm hanging out for the end scene.


----------



## Poppin' Fresh (Oct 24, 2009)

I don't think composers who compose operas without arias are suggesting there's anything _wrong_ with them. They are simply taking a different approach to the genre, one that possibly comes more naturally to their modes of artistic expression. Would _Pélleas et Mélisande_ or _Lulu_ be better with "memorable" arias? I can't see how. Any kind of conventional aria would seem totally out of place. And I find the whole of those works to be very memorable.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Poppin' Fresh said:


> I don't think composers who compose operas without arias are suggesting there's anything _wrong_ with them.


Well, my "what's wrong with a good aria" was a figure of speech, just to convey my exasperation with this pet peeve. I didn't mean to say that the composers actually think that *there is* something wrong with arias.



> Would _Pélleas et Mélisande_ or _Lulu_ be better with "memorable" arias? I can't see how. Any kind of conventional aria would seem totally out of place. And I find the whole of those works to be very memorable.


Well, I don't know. Mélisande at one point *almost* sings an aria... it's the one and only point in the opera in which her arioso soars a little more... and I'll tell you, I got all excited about it but then it fizzled. Would it really be out of place? Maybe rather than being out of place, it would deliver a sort of emotional peak. Yes, these works are memorable in a larger sense and I like them both, but I just can't seem to keep the music in my memory. They are both very impactful *plays* and they are beautifully set to music... but then... the music slips away.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

mamascarlatti said:


> I''ve been feeling that as I listen to Dialogues des Carmelites. I didn't notice the lack of arias when I was watching it, as the story was so dramatic and I was enjoying the language, but I did when listening with no libretto.


Exactly! The absence of arias - or at least recognizable musical pieces like in Wagner - makes of these modern operas more plays than operas. And I don't mean it in the literal sense, of course. I know very well that they *are* operas, but I think you know what I mean.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I didn't realise we were talking about the c20th rather than say just the last 20 years. For one thing, I find many of the songs in Berg's _Wozzeck_ quite memorable. Listen to the numbers that Marie gets, and the harmonies there would truly not be out of place in say a Wagner opera. But I agree with others above, the more modern operas seem more to be about continuity, and so there are no "show stoppers." The drama and action have to be seamless, everything is part of an integrated whole (I agree that Wagner was the guy who probably started this?), and so there is an unending stream of musical thought, rather than some "show stoppers" with musical filler in between...


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Andre said:


> I didn't realise we were talking about the c20th rather than say just the last 20 years. For one thing, I find many of the songs in Berg's _Wozzeck_ quite memorable. Listen to the numbers that Marie gets, and the harmonies there would truly not be out of place in say a Wagner opera. But I agree with others above, the more modern operas seem more to be about continuity, and so there are no "show stoppers." The drama and action have to be seamless, everything is part of an integrated whole (I agree that Wagner was the guy who probably started this?), and so there is an unending stream of musical thought, rather than some "show stoppers" with musical filler in between...


That's why I didn't quote Wozzeck but rather Lulu.
I don't think we need "show stoppers" and I do appreciate the through-composed oceans of sound, I just think that at some point we need something to grab in our memories, some soaring melodious ecstasis that sort of burns a scar or inks a tatoo onto our internal musical skin and can't be erased.

Tell me, when you think of Lulu or P&M, can you actually remember any of the music? You can certainly remember the *experience* of the music - e.g. that dreamy hypnotic quality in P&M or that rough, raw, emotional rollercoaster of Lulu's music - but can you remember the actual notes and tunes? I can't.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

Almaviva said:


> Tell me, when you think of Lulu or P&M, can you actually remember any of the music? You can certainly remember the *experience* of the music - e.g. that dreamy hypnotic quality in P&M or that rough, raw, emotional rollercoaster of Lulu's music - but can you remember the actual notes and tunes? I can't.


I think part of the point is that you do remember the soundworld in which the composer operated. The notes don't matter as much as do the words/story. Also, maybe the composer felt that a soaring melody would in fact detract from their expression (kinda back to Andre's remarks). I mean, think about it. Arias are delirious things, delivered when a character kisses someone or gets shot to death. They're not supposed to make sense. Within many 20th-century operas, things get a bit more concrete. Take Lulu, for example: an aria would destroy its entire integrity because the entire opera, story and music, is horrifying, realistic, down-to-earth. To insert an aria would be to enter a character's mind and show what they're thinking, and in the twentieth century that doesn't matter anymore--the circumstance and its direct, raw impact are everything. Basically, arias go places that aren't necessary, so many 20th century operas just don't use them.


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Simple.

20th century music is not vocal in idiom. You simply cannot compose memorable tunes for the human voice for "you to remember to go home to whistle to" because it is essentially instrumental in idiom, not vocal in idiom. It's a style that is a constraining one for the human voice. Why is it that when we say even an early Handel opera is instrumental in idiom whereas his mature operas are truely vocal in idoim, or that J. S. Bach's vocal pieces are more instrumental in idiom?

You simply cannot compose memorable tunes in atonal style for example, by its very definition. That's of course not to say that you cannot compose a great 20th century opera.


----------



## Poppin' Fresh (Oct 24, 2009)

World Violist said:


> I think part of the point is that you do remember the soundworld in which the composer operated. The notes don't matter as much as do the words/story. Also, maybe the composer felt that a soaring melody would in fact detract from their expression (kinda back to Andre's remarks). I mean, think about it. Arias are delirious things, delivered when a character kisses someone or gets shot to death. They're not supposed to make sense. Within many 20th-century operas, things get a bit more concrete. Take Lulu, for example: an aria would destroy its entire integrity because the entire opera, story and music, is horrifying, realistic, down-to-earth. To insert an aria would be to enter a character's mind and show what they're thinking, and in the twentieth century that doesn't matter anymore--the circumstance and its direct, raw impact are everything. Basically, arias go places that aren't necessary, so many 20th century operas just don't use them.


That's the impression I get as well.

Honestly, the lack of arias is not even something I'm conscious of when I'm experiencing works like that. Yeah, sure, humming a memorable melody afterwards is nice but it doesn't even come close to replacing the experience of being engaged with the drama and immersed in the music. _Pélleas et Mélisande_ is overwhelmingly beautiful, and I appreciate it for what it is rather than wishing it were more like something else.


----------



## Falstaft (Mar 27, 2010)

Almaviva, I think this is an interesting question. Certainly World Violist is right in pointing to Wagner as the prime source for this trend, although ample precedent in French and German opera in the first half of the 19th century pointed in this direction as well. Opera composers seem cyclically prone to bemoaning the "subjugation" of drama to musical artifice, and Wagner's through-composed style was a means of reasserting dramatic priorities (for a least a while) that happened to really resonate with later composers. So the "play"-like quality you observe is intentional, an effort to magnify the impact of stage narrative. The best composers do so without compromising musical interest. But I begin to lose you with your specific example of Pelleas.



Almaviva said:


> Take, for instance, _Pélleas et Mélisande_. [...] But then, once one walks out of the opera house, can one really remember the music?
> Wouldn't _Pélleas et Mélisande _be even more impressive and satisfactory if we had a couple of outstanding arias to remember it by? Why *not* have them?


I don't know, I found Pelleas musically unforgettable, even to the extent that I felt haunted by its music for days after. I hope I'm not alone on this board in not equating memorability with tunefulness. Is leaving the theater with a catchy tune in one's head really a sign that that what you witnessed was an aesthetic success? Asking "why not" have arias there seems to me akin to asking "why not have a simple, danceable minuet movement in a Bruckner symphony?" The question seems unnecessary and indicates an effort to hear a piece within a frame inappropriate for it, rather than on its own terms, by which I think you and I would agree Pelleas succeeds magnificently!

I also think that if we were to make a concerted effort, we could furnish you with a "battery" of perfectly existent ravishing 20th century arias. Here is but one prominent and recent example


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Simple.
> 
> 20th century music is not vocal in idiom. You simply cannot compose memorable tunes for the human voice for "you to remember to go home to whistle to" because it is essentially instrumental in idiom, not vocal in idiom. It's a style that is a constraining one for the human voice. Why is it that when we say even an early Handel opera is instrumental in idiom whereas his mature operas are truely vocal in idoim, or that J. S. Bach's vocal pieces are more instrumental in idiom?
> 
> You simply cannot compose memorable tunes in atonal style for example, by its very definition. That's of course not to say that you cannot compose a great 20th century opera.


OK, now, this makes sense.:tiphat:


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Falstaft said:


> Almaviva, I think this is an interesting question. Certainly World Violist is right in pointing to Wagner as the prime source for this trend, although ample precedent in French and German opera in the first half of the 19th century pointed in this direction as well. Opera composers seem cyclically prone to bemoaning the "subjugation" of drama to musical artifice, and Wagner's through-composed style was a means of reasserting dramatic priorities (for a least a while) that happened to really resonate with later composers. So the "play"-like quality you observe is intentional, an effort to magnify the impact of stage narrative. The best composers do so without compromising musical interest. But I begin to lose you with your specific example of Pelleas.
> 
> I don't know, I found Pelleas musically unforgettable, even to the extent that I felt haunted by its music for days after. I hope I'm not alone on this board in not equating memorability with tunefulness. Is leaving the theater with a catchy tune in one's head really a sign that that what you witnessed was an aesthetic success? Asking "why not" have arias there seems to me akin to asking "why not have a simple, danceable minuet movement in a Bruckner symphony?" The question seems unnecessary and indicates an effort to hear a piece within a frame inappropriate for it, rather than on its own terms, by which I think you and I would agree Pelleas succeeds magnificently!
> 
> I also think that if we were to make a concerted effort, we could furnish you with a "battery" of perfectly existent ravishing 20th century arias. Here is but one prominent and recent example


Good points, and your example is extremely beautiful!!! But then, your example kinds of reinforces *my* point. One would say: "there you go. that's what is missing from some operas, and is not missing from Dr. Atomic." I don't mean that modern arias should necessarily be like _Una furtiva lagrima_. But they could still exist (as this one does) and be memorable (as this one is) even though the style is so different in terms of tonality.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Poppin' Fresh said:


> That's the impression I get as well.
> 
> Honestly, the lack of arias is not even something I'm conscious of when I'm experiencing works like that. Yeah, sure, humming a memorable melody afterwards is nice but it doesn't even come close to replacing the experience of being engaged with the drama and immersed in the music. _Pélleas et Mélisande_ is overwhelmingly beautiful, and I appreciate it for what it is rather than wishing it were more like something else.


Maybe it doesn't come close to *replacing* the experience, but couldn't it *add* to it? The example above of Dr. Atomic certainly must *add* to the experience - it is beautiful, haunting, and can be grabbed and registered.


----------



## karenpat (Jan 16, 2009)

I haven't heard much contemporary opera, but maybe it's because an aria isn't as narrative as the rest, more a kind of dwelling in a moment which is considered to romantic nowadays? I don't know. 

In art in general I find that desperately seeking to go new ways can go too far, too. I was just reading about 70's performance/body art where a man stalked people and got away with it because he was supposedly an artist and called it Following Piece. Because any relation to old mediums without renewing it (on a very high intellectual, conceptual level) is apparently artistic suicide.  (sorry - I feel strongly about this - I digress)

When I listen to opera (and don't get to see it) I concentrate on the beauty of the music so that the story (which I can't understand anyway) becomes irrelevant. Maybe modern operas want to focus on the story and the expressive qualities of it rather than communicate a sense of beauty?

I realise I don't really know what I'm talking about here but thought I'd try anyway.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

The contemporary music scene is so diverse that no set of characteristics applies to everything. There ARE operas from living composers WITH arias, duets and so on - Adams' "Doctor Atomic," Golijov's "Ainadamar", Previn's "A Streetcar Named Desire" and Corigliano's "The Ghosts of Versailles" are a few that I'm familiar with and since my knowledge of contemporary music is rather limited I'm sure that there must be many more.


----------



## World Violist (May 31, 2007)

karenpat said:


> When I listen to opera (and don't get to see it) I concentrate on the beauty of the music so that the story (which I can't understand anyway) becomes irrelevant. Maybe modern operas want to focus on the story and the expressive qualities of it rather than communicate a sense of beauty?


I think my previous post addresses this rather well. The music is every bit as beautiful, but the story is just more realistically presented, and since arias distend reality they're removed.

Of course there are contemporary operas with arias in them... this whole thread is just about the modern operas that don't, since it seems to me that practically every pre-20c opera has arias in it.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

karenpat said:


> I haven't heard much contemporary opera, but maybe it's because an aria isn't as narrative as the rest, more a kind of dwelling in a moment which is considered to romantic nowadays? I don't know.
> 
> In art in general I find that desperately seeking to go new ways can go too far, too. I was just reading about 70's performance/body art where a man stalked people and got away with it because he was supposedly an artist and called it Following Piece. Because any relation to old mediums without renewing it (on a very high intellectual, conceptual level) is apparently artistic suicide.  (sorry - I feel strongly about this - I digress)
> 
> ...


Au contraire, you're making a lot of sense.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

jhar26 said:


> The contemporary music scene is so diverse that no set of characteristics applies to everything. There ARE operas from living composers WITH arias, duets and so on - Adams' "Doctor Atomic," Golijov's "Ainadamar", Previn's "A Streetcar Named Desire" and Corigliano's "The Ghosts of Versailles" are a few that I'm familiar with and since my knowledge of contemporary music is rather limited I'm sure that there must be many more.


I know that there are exceptions (and I'm always glad to find them, thank you for posting these), I never said that *no* modern/contemporary operas have arias. But I think it is undeniable that arias became much less common in opera after the 1920's.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Almaviva said:


> I know that there are exceptions (and I'm always glad to find them, thank you for posting these), I never said that *no* modern/contemporary operas have arias. But I think it is undeniable that arias became much less common in opera after the 1920's.


Well, my reply was mostly an excuse to post some Renée youtubes. :lol: AND to promote "A Streetcar Named Desire" - an opera (and DVD) I've raved about in the past, but with little result although I think that most of you guys would enjoy it very much.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

jhar26 said:


> Well, my reply was mostly an excuse to post some Renée youtubes. :lol: AND to promote "A Streetcar Named Desire" - an opera (and DVD) I've raved about in the past, but with little result although I think that most of you guys would enjoy it very much.


It's on my UWP at the library.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

There's also the issue that operatic composers of the last 100 years or so have been more adventurous than merely sticking to the traditions. There are also a few operas I know that use instrumental sections (rather than those with voice) to highlight an aspect of the drama or story. Some I can think of is when the Israelites are worshipping the golden calf in Schoenberg's _Moses und Aron _(possibly the most colourful music he ever penned, it's my favourite part of the whole work), Berg's massive orchestral lament at the end of _Wozzeck_ (it combines all of the themes of the opera, a bit like a sung quartet or something of that manner would have perhaps done in the past), and the most famous part (& the only part known to me) of Adams' _Nixon in China_, "The Chairman Dances." Often, music in itself is sufficient without soloists or the choir & I feel that this has become more common in the last century (correct me if I'm wrong?)...


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

mamascarlatti said:


> It's on my UWP at the library.


Cool. I hope you'll like it.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I must agree with jhar26 in that modern opera is far too varied to suggest that it follows one or another set of characteristics. Here are a few of my favorite modern arias:











I can't seem to find a full orchestral version of this one on line































And can there be a single more important opera composer of the last 100 years than Richard Strauss?





















Of course Strauss followed firmly in the footsteps of Wagner and his "arias" are not so much built upon simple tunes with a repeating melodic line, but are far broader... and symphonic... but one might say the same of his _Four Last Songs_ as well. Whatever... these are simply just some memorable moments of modern operas that stand out... whether they count as "arias" in the sense you are after...?


----------



## karenpat (Jan 16, 2009)

Can I ask a stupid question? Is West side story (I noticed the video posted in the previous post^) generally considered a modern opera?? I have always thought it was a musical.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

Can I ask a stupid question? Is West side story (I noticed the video posted in the previous post^) generally considered a modern opera?? I have always thought it was a musical.

It would seem to me that the term "musical" is used as opposed to "opera" largely as a means of inferring something of lesser merit. Generally, it is presumed that opera involves dialog which is also sung (recitative) but this is not always true... the most obvious exception being Mozart's Magic Flute (which is sometimes termed as a "singspiel" as opposed to an opera. The question is perhaps apt.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

I think there is something about the style of singing too. West Side story did not sound "right" when sung operatically by Te Kanawa and Carreras - it sounded florid and artificial.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

karenpat said:


> Can I ask a stupid question? Is West side story (I noticed the video posted in the previous post^) generally considered a modern opera?? I have always thought it was a musical.


I believe that West Side Story sits sort of on the wall dividing opera and musicals. While it can be performed with lyric singing, it can also be performed with regular "pop" singing.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Can I ask a stupid question? Is West side story (I noticed the video posted in the previous post^) generally considered a modern opera?? I have always thought it was a musical.
> 
> It would seem to me that the term "musical" is used as opposed to "opera" largely as a means of inferring something of lesser merit. Generally, it is presumed that opera involves dialog which is also sung (recitative) but this is not always true... the most obvious exception being Mozart's Magic Flute (which is sometimes termed as a "singspiel" as opposed to an opera. The question is perhaps apt.


The Magic Flute *is* Singspiel. It's a subgenre of the operatic universe, like Carmen is opera comique. There are also several operettas that belong to another subgenre - like Die Fledermaus.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> Of course Strauss followed firmly in the footsteps of Wagner and his "arias" are not so much built upon simple tunes with a repeating melodic line, but are far broader... and symphonic... but one might say the same of his _Four Last Songs_ as well. Whatever... these are simply just some memorable moments of modern operas that stand out... whether they count as "arias" in the sense you are after...?


Thanks for the examples. I still think that even though we can find several exceptions, arias or equivalent are much less common now than before. And I wouldn't properly use Richard Strauss as an example, because after daring with Salome and Elektra, he went back in time and actually walked away from Modernism.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Andre said:


> There's also the issue that operatic composers of the last 100 years or so have been more adventurous than merely sticking to the traditions. There are also a few operas I know that use instrumental sections (rather than those with voice) to highlight an aspect of the drama or story. Some I can think of is when the Israelites are worshipping the golden calf in Schoenberg's _Moses und Aron _(possibly the most colourful music he ever penned, it's my favourite part of the whole work), Berg's massive orchestral lament at the end of _Wozzeck_ (it combines all of the themes of the opera, a bit like a sung quartet or something of that manner would have perhaps done in the past), and the most famous part (& the only part known to me) of Adams' _Nixon in China_, "The Chairman Dances." Often, music in itself is sufficient without soloists or the choir & I feel that this has become more common in the last century (correct me if I'm wrong?)...


Good points, but my only regret is that by adopting this trend, composers are in a way walking away from opera, and privileging stage plays with orchestral background. I wonder for how long we'll still be able to call these works, operas.


----------



## scytheavatar (Aug 27, 2009)

Almaviva said:


> Exactly! The absence of arias - or at least recognizable musical pieces like in Wagner - makes of these modern operas more plays than operas. And I don't mean it in the literal sense, of course. I know very well that they *are* operas, but I think you know what I mean.


Isn't that the whole point of what the modern composers are trying to achieve? The old aria/recitative style is something closer to boardway musicals, where the recitatives are essentially fillers and the drama has a stop-go-stop-go flow. Wagner killed the old aria/recitative style by creating a more complete package of opera, that integrates drama and theater more cohesively with the music. He was trying to move opera closer to being something Shakespeare would have approved, closer to being plays. And the fact that Wagner's reforms have become dominant over time shows that composers have embraced his style and his intentions.



karenpat said:


> Can I ask a stupid question? Is West side story (I noticed the video posted in the previous post^) generally considered a modern opera?? I have always thought it was a musical.


West Side Story is definitely a musical; Bernstein wanted it to be an opera but the rest of the team didn't and he had to make a lot of cuts in his music to make it less difficult to sing. It is not something like Porgy and Bess that was intended to be an opera and that would truly count as something that blurred the line between opera and musical.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

mamascarlatti said:


> I think there is something about the style of singing too. West Side story did not sound "right" when sung operatically by Te Kanawa and Carreras - it sounded florid and artificial.


I liked it. It was the first thing I ever bought with classical voices and I loved them (and it) immediately. One week later I bought a cd recording of Carmen, followed by Figaro and Elektra. So, that operatic West Side Story recording really changed my life - no kidding. The only problem are the accents of Kiri and Jose, but for the rest it still works very well for me. It's clearly a musical, but there are classical influences there as well. The rhythms of those orchestral dances for example are very Stravinskyian.


----------



## jhar26 (Jul 6, 2008)

Andre said:


> I think it's basically a case of "been there, done that," & audiences want to hear something new...


I don't think audiences necesssarily want to hear 'something new.' They are forced to, but I don't know if they actually want it. Without passing judgement on the artistic merits of modern opera, I'm sure that the vast majority of opera goers still prefer to hear Mozart, Verdi or Puccini operas as opposed to any of recent history. Not only because they love those composers, but because they want melodies - tunes that they will remember for the rest of their lifes. Again, I'm not saying this to criticize modern opera (or modern classical music in general) because I love some of them myself, but it's just not true in my opinion that audiences are tired of arias or tunes - the composers and critics may be, but not the audiences.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

jhar26 said:


> I liked it. It was the first thing I ever bought with classical voices and I loved them (and it) immediately. One week later I bought a cd recording of Carmen, followed by Figaro and Elektra. So, that operatic West Side Story recording really changed my life - no kidding. The only problem are the accents of Kiri and Jose, but for the rest it still works very well for me. It's clearly a musical, but there are classical influences there as well.


I can understand that Gaston - Carreras brought me to opera & I'll always love him for that. (Wish he'd retire now though) I've got the DVD 'the making of'










I love the bit where José flounces out


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

That is one stressful recording session. Funny though!


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

And what of _Porgy and Bess_? Another work that straddles the line. Personally, by favorite recording is that of Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald who embrace the popular music/jazz roots of the work.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> And what of _Porgy and Bess_? Another work that straddles the line. Personally, by favorite recording is that of Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald who embrace the popular music/jazz roots of the work.


I don't think Porgy and Bess straddles the line. It is undeniably an opera. Here what you have is popular singers singing this operatic work, which doesn't make of it a musical. It is still an opera. Just like, when Andrea Bocelli sings operatic arias, the works they came from don't stop being operas although he does his best to murder them. Not that I'm saying Louis Armstrong and Ella Fitzgerald murder Porgy and Bess, they don't - they are fabulous singers in what they try to do, while Bocelli is not.


----------

