# King Marke's Act 2 Tristan monologue.......



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

At the end of Act 2 of Tristan und Isolde King Marke gives
a heartfelt pouring out of his feelings regarding.Tristan's
betrayal.
It seems many people find it boring, and I find it beautiful
and very moving and an important part of the opera.
What are your opinions, feelings of this section?
Thanks


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I don't find it intrinsically or necessarily dull, but it can turn out that way. Wagner took a risk placing a longish, somber monologue for bass after the extraordinary love scene, and the singer of Marke and the conductor have to bring out the expressive potential of the music and text. Wotan's monologue in Act 2 of _Die Walkure_ and Gurnemanz's in Act 1 of _Parsifal_ present similar challenges to the performer. In all three cases, a rich, beautiful voice and an expressive projection of the words, along with a conductor who knows how to sustain the tension in slow music, can do the trick. I find Martti Talvela and Karl Bohm In their Bayreuth 1966 performance just about ideal.


----------



## Parsifal98 (Apr 29, 2020)

I also find Marke's monologue beautiful, but I agree with Woodduck that it needs a bass and a conductor of great caliber to make it worthwhile. One of my favorite performances has both, with Alexander Kipnis as King Marke and Erich Leinsdorf as conductor (this performance also has Flagstad as Isolde, Melchior as Tristan and Thorborg as Brangäne. Ouf... what a cast).


----------



## LeoPiano (Nov 1, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> I don't find it intrinsically or necessarily dull, but it can turn out that way. Wagner took a risk placing a longish, somber monologue for bass after the extraordinary love scene, and the singer of Marke and the conductor have to bring out the expressive potential of the music and text. Wotan's monologue in Act 2 of _Die Walkure_ and Gurnemanz's in Act 1 of _Parsifal_ present similar challenges to the performer. In all three cases, a rich, beautiful voice and an expressive projection of the words, along with a conductor who knows how to sustain the tension in slow music, can do the trick. I find Martti Talvela and Karl Bohm In their Bayreuth 1966 performance just about ideal.


Recently I've found Bohm's speeds in that part to be perfect for me. He somehow takes the ecstatic building from the Love Duet and extends it to that scene. Just the sound of Talvela's voice is incredible, even if I didn't know what he was singing. With the libretto that scene in that recording is overwhelming for me.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

LeoPiano said:


> Recently I've found Bohm's speeds in that part to be perfect for me. He somehow takes the ecstatic building from the Love Duet and extends it to that scene. Just the sound of Talvela's voice is incredible, even if I didn't know what he was singing. With the libretto that scene in that recording is overwhelming for me.


I'm with you. When I was first listening to recordings of _Tristan_ in the 1960s, I couldn't enjoy Greindl for Furtwangler or Van Mill for Solti, and Marke's monologue dragged. Talvela's magnificent voice and poignant interpretation, aided by Bohm's energetic conducting, really made me believe in Wagner's dramatic instincts. That _Tristan_ has its shortcomings - they all do - but it's ultimately a cogent and gripping performance with a very strong cast, also including Nilsson, Windgassen, Ludwig and Wachter. It was made in 1966, when Wieland Wagner was in charge and the operas were still recognizable as themselves on the Bayreuth stage.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

I think this is what separates the true Wagnerites from the rest of us. I'm afraid that, even if I don't skip to the end, I do rather wish he'd get on with it. I'm not much of a bass afficionado, but they can sometimes sustain my interest, as in the long scene at the beginning of Act IV of Verdi's *Don Carlo*, which starts with Philip's long monologue and then segues into the duet between him and the Grand Inquisitor. That scene never bores me and it must be just as long.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

It's a big solo part and it should be sung properly. King Marke could be imagined as not necessarily old but mature and experienced, slightly tired from life, faced by an unexpected trouble. If a singer can show all these feelings, the result can be excellent. But he shouldn't be blamed if he hasn't genuine acting skills. 
The bass who sings Marke in my theater has good days, sometimes he has bad days, I could say it either about singing or about acting, but in german repertoire he is mostly better than in others. He maybe loses to the old masters mentioned above, but Marke is one of his successes.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I think this is what separates the true Wagnerites from the rest of us. I'm afraid that, even if I don't skip to the end, I do rather wish he'd get on with it. I'm not much of a bass afficionado, but they can sometimes sustain my interest, as in the long scene at the beginning of Act IV of Verdi's *Don Carlo*, which starts with Philip's long monologue and then segues into the duet between him and the Grand Inquisitor. That scene never bores me and it must be just as long.


I often watch Don Carlo for Philips and Ebolis too.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Tsaraslondon said:


> I think this is what separates the true Wagnerites from the rest of us. I'm afraid that, even if I don't skip to the end, I do rather wish he'd get on with it. I'm not much of a bass afficionado, but they can sometimes sustain my interest, as in the long scene at the beginning of Act IV of Verdi's *Don Carlo*, which starts with Philip's long monologue and then segues into the duet between him and the Grand Inquisitor. That scene never bores me and it must be just as long.


Shouldn't the Verdi be considered two short scenes rather than one long one? The conversation has no musical or dramatic connection to Philip's aria. There isn't even a musical transition between them. For me, despite the poignant beauty of the aria, my enjoyment depends substantially on the bass. That's pretty much true for me in all music for bass. So many bass voices are dull and tubby, when they aren't something worse.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

Itullian said:


> It seems many people find it boring, and I find it beautiful
> and very moving and an important part of the opera.
> What are your opinions, feelings of this section?


It depends on who's singing the role, of course. When I saw T&I at the Met in 1998, Rene Pape's singing of the monologue was the highlight of the opera.

Gurnemanz is another role that can seem interminable in the wrong hands.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> Shouldn't the Verdi be considered two short scenes rather than one long one? The conversation has no musical or dramatic connection to Philip's aria. There isn't even a musical transition between them. For me, despite the poignant beauty of the aria, my enjoyment depends substantially on the bass. That's pretty much true for me in all music for bass. So many bass voices are dull and tubby, when they aren't something worse.


Well, yes it is. However I was referring to the fact that it's a long time to listen to a bass (for me) and what we get in the Verdi is a scene for one bass followed by a scene for two basses. The two scenes together take almost twenty minutes. They're not that short.


----------



## The Conte (May 31, 2015)

Ok, controversial opinion here. I love this monologue and it's one of my favourite parts of T&I. I love it despite who happens to be singing it (unless they are truly dreadful).

N.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

wkasimer said:


> Gurnemanz is another role that can seem interminable in the wrong hands.


Undoubtedly true for some, although_ a_ dull Gurnemanz is largely saved, for me, by the wonderful tales Wagner spins in the orchestra, in which I can listen to the interplay and morphing of motifs telling me the stories of Titurel, Klingsor, Amfortas and the prophecy. I find the score of _Parsifal_ endlessly fascinating, and so I've never found the narration boring. But if the singer is less than engaging we can look forward to Parsifal's imminent appearance, the great transformation interlude, and the temple scene.


----------



## ColdGenius (9 mo ago)

Gurnemanz is pivotal for first and third acts of "Parsifal". I can't imagine if he might be dull. It means I was lucky with my live "Parsifals".


----------



## damianjb1 (Jan 1, 2016)

Woodduck said:


> Undoubtedly true for some, although_ a_ dull Gurnemanz is largely saved, for me, by the wonderful tales Wagner spins in the orchestra, in which I can listen to the interplay and morphing of motifs telling me the stories of Titurel, Klingsor, Amfortas and the prophecy. I find the score of _Parsifal_ endlessly fascinating, and so I've never found the narration boring. But if the singer is less than engaging we can look forward to Parsifal's imminent appearance, the great transformation interlude, and the temple scene.


Any suggestions you have of material that would help me understand the score of Parsifal the way you've described?? Like a guide of some kind? Maybe I should buy a score so I can highlight certain parts?? I'd love to understand Parsifal in so much depth. In fact I'd love it with Tristan, Meistersinger and The Ring as well. I'd be grateful for any suggestions you might have.


----------



## damianjb1 (Jan 1, 2016)

Itullian said:


> At the end of Act 2 of Tristan und Isolde King Marke gives
> a heartfelt pouring out of his feelings regarding.Tristan's
> betrayal.
> It seems many people find it boring, and I find it beautiful
> ...


I've always found the passage extremely effective when performed well. It takes the audience out of the bliss of the love duet and into the beginnings of the tragic horrors. It also sets up Act 3 really well. I find the Prelude to Act 3 the most agonised music ever written. For me it's tragedy on a scale that can barely be comprehended.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

damianjb1 said:


> Any suggestions you have of material that would help me understand the score of Parsifal the way you've described?? Like a guide of some kind? Maybe I should buy a score so I can highlight certain parts?? I'd love to understand Parsifal in so much depth. In fact I'd love it with Tristan, Meistersinger and The Ring as well. I'd be grateful for any suggestions you might have.


Wagner's art of interrelating and transforming motifs for musical and dramatic purposes is pursued in _Parsifal_ with great subtlety. Sometimes a single chord will be extracted from a motif - for example, the first chord of the "prophecy" motif - and used in very different musical contexts to make dramatic points. Obviously the first and last way to appreciate this is to listen, but having a score handy is helpful. When I was discovering Wagner about fifty million years ago I took copies of the scores - piano/vocal scores - out of the library and worked through them at the piano. I found that picking my way slowly through the harmonic and motivic complexities was a tremendous experience in itself. A piano score of _Parsifal_ sits on my piano to this day, ready to be dipped into whenever I want to marvel again at Wagner's compositional craft. It pleases me to know that Puccini too kept the scores of _Tristan_ and _Parsifal_ on his piano for inspiration.

I'm sure there have been numerous studies of _Parsifal_'s musical-dramatic consruction. It's easier to find studies of the _Ring_, but there's a fantastic web site devoted entirely to _Parsifal _which everyone interested in Wagner should know.






Index (redirect) -- this is a temporary stub


This is a temporary stub with the old filename. xyz



www.monsalvat.no





Here is the section discussing the score's thematic material:






A Guide to the Thematic Material of 'Parsifal' | monsalvat







www.monsalvat.no


----------



## damianjb1 (Jan 1, 2016)

Woodduck said:


> Wagner's art of interrelating and transforming motifs for musical and dramatic purposes is pursued in _Parsifal_ with great subtlety. Sometimes a single chord will be extracted from a motif - for example, the first chord of the "prophecy" motif - and used in very different musical contexts to make dramatic points. Obviously the first and last way to appreciate this is to listen, but having a score handy is helpful. When I was discovering Wagner about fifty million years ago I took copies of the scores - piano/vocal scores - out of the library and worked through them at the piano. I found that picking my way slowly through the harmonic and motivic complexities was a tremendous experience in itself. A piano score of _Parsifal_ sits on my piano to this day, ready to be dipped into whenever I want to marvel again at Wagner's compositional craft. It pleases me to know that Puccini too kept the scores of _Tristan_ and _Parsifal_ on his piano for inspiration.
> 
> I'm sure there have been numerous studies of _Parsifal_'s musical-dramatic consruction. It's easier to find studies of the _Ring_, but there's a fantastic web site devoted entirely to _Parsifal _which everyone interested in Wagner should know.
> 
> ...


Thank you. Very much appreciated.


----------



## wkasimer (Jun 5, 2017)

ColdGenius said:


> Gurnemanz is pivotal for first and third acts of "Parsifal". I can't imagine if he might be dull. It means I was lucky with my live "Parsifals".


I don't think that there are too many second- or third-rate basses who take on the role. The only time I've been disappointed was listening to the Barenboim recording, which has a pretty dull Gurnemanz in Matthias Hölle. A pity, because the recording is otherwise superb.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> Wagner took a risk placing a longish, somber monologue for bass after the extraordinary love scene


The sense of contrast between them is striking, -do you think it's something he intended?


Woodduck said:


> fifty million years ago


Now you seem like a wooddinosaur


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> The sense of contrast between them is striking, -do you think it's something he intended?


Of course he did. And he surely knew he was taking a chance on his ability to sustain dramatic interest and make the audience care about the old king's pain and sorrow after an hour of passion and rapture. It would be especially challenging to be relying on a bass voice to do it. I suspect that any other composer would have rejected the whole concept of a monologue at that point. Verdi or Puccini might have had Melot rush in and immediately challenge Tristan to a duel, and Marke would have had only a few lines as Tristan was hauled away to Kareol by his vassal Kurwenal. But Wagner was always trying to do difficult things. The listener must decide how well he succeeded.


----------

