# What Is Killing Opera?



## Xavier (Jun 7, 2012)

_"Ladies and gentlemen, movies have taken the place of the opera and there you have it"_

[......]

_"All of us who love opera want the same thing, I suppose, new and great ones that contain the essential ingredients for the sacred brew of telling important, politically active stories in a medium that entertains and dazzles its audience. Right now, Hollywood is simply better at it, while Broadway seems to have forgotten that, too"_

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-mauceri/hollywood-the-opera_b_1822703.html


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

Movies have taken de opera? Why? Because of the number of the audience? Money? Reviews?

Opera, cinema and theater, althought performance arts, very different. By that same line of thought, cinema killed theater, video killed the radio star, hip-hop and rap killed rock music, broadway music killed opera, movies killed musicals, internet killed letters, facebook killed hi5 and nowadays the internet is killing music and cinema.

I even think that the movie era is about to faint someday. What does cinema do to dazzle its audience? The supercomplex plots? The special effects? The sexy lady in high heels but kicks everybody without breaking one single nail? Werewolfs with no body hair? Honestly to me, hollywood is losing territory when compared to movies from other countries.

i never liked competitions like this one. I accept all three kinds of performance art (oh! and ballet too) instead of taking sides. There are something one could learn in movies to use in opera and vice-versa. Enjoy them!

Also with all the technology we have in this century, i think opera has never been so great. Like othe world we live there are pros and cons (lots of bad opera productions/stage directors who are very good in destroying opera) but millions of people have the possibility to see/hear opera as never before.


----------



## Dongiovanni (Jul 30, 2012)

Xavier said:


> _"the essential ingredients for the sacred brew of * telling important, politically active stories* "_


Uhm, and what recent Hollywood blockbusters have done this recently ? Only a few at the most....

What point is the author trying to make here ? That people stop attending opera performances because the subjects of these operas are irrelevant ? Or not of this time ? Or not "important" ? And to get their fix they turn to Hollywood ?

Really ? I don't think so.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

There are plenty of terrible movies, just as there are plenty of terrible operas that have not survived (and that continue to be written, some might say), but that shouldn't be representative of the genre.

To an extent, I agree that the film industry has supplanted opera for the most part, but I disagree that this is bad thing. With movies, as with opera, the potential often exceeds the realisation. Opera was concieved as a merging of the art forms - literature, music, visual conception. Movies have all these elements too and though the musical element is significantly less important, much movie music has been very successful in popular culture in much the same way as some of Verdi's music was. Movies have become the dominant art form because they are so accessible and they have so much more potential than previous art forms. In that, they are superior to opera as a medium. Some of the best operas I have seen are opera movies because the original opera has been improved by that medium. 

I don't dispute that opera aspires to be a more intellectual art form, but there are many films that fulfill that role too and it is often the case that both are inspired by pre-existing written works or plays. There will always be a place for opera, however, because its focus on music makes it unique enough to bet set apart from Broadway or Hollywood. Opera will always be around in much the same way as we will always have Shakespeare, Picasso or Mozart. It is worth preserving and there will always be enough people with a passion for it to continue the legacy. It can never be killed because it has become immortal.


----------



## Yashin (Jul 22, 2011)

What's killing opera for me?

Poor adverts -sometimes even I am confused. 

Poor or silly booking systems, where you have to wait for specific periods before you can book unless a paid member. How about 'first come, first served'. I can understand that there is a privilege system but it puts people off booking. If airlines did it like this they would be bankrupt! 

Dress codes that are too strict. What is wrong with smart casual? if you can afford to pay for the ticket why do you need to have a suit on.

Poor viewing angles in some theaters. I can appreciate that some theaters are very old and it came with the style but what about the others?

Bad dates....once I went to see 4 operas in one week with one opera company. I was shattered!! 

I personally don't like the hype some singers get. The Netrebko's, the Kauffman's and the Villazons. Yes and before that were the Alagna's. A bit too much for my liking. They seem to get too many roles that could be filled by much better singers in that rep (in my opinion).


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

To a degree it is true that movies are a cheap (per capita) and easily accessible art form while opera is an expensive (per capita) and not easily accessible art form and that this makes a difference to the sheer numbers of people who watch movies as opposed to opera. 

I would be interested in learning about the statistics relating to opera movies world wide.


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

Yashin said:


> Poor or silly booking systems, where you have to wait for specific periods before you can book unless a paid member. How about 'first come, first served'. I can understand that there is a privilege system but it puts people off booking. If airlines did it like this they would be bankrupt!


I have never been able to understand the privilege system in the electronic age. Why not simply send out a mail shot to one's 
"privileged" people on the data base and let them reserve their tickets before it is advertised?

One company in South Africa (musicals, not opera) goes through their data base each season, picking the big block bookings (for companies etc) and adds them to the privileged list and then invites them to a launch ahead of the media launch. Dinner and schmoozing and all the frills and excitement before the press releases go out. So they just get reminded when the publicity starts - although a lot of them have done their bookings already. A data base like that is worth a thousand journalists.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I don't think anything is "killing" opera . Of course, it has its problems, but so does every field of human endeavor . But it's a great and magnificent art form which has survived for 400 years, and I'm sure it will last as long as humanity does, or until some catastrophe or series of them destroys human culture .
I agree with the point that countless mediocre or lousy operas have been deservedly forgotten. And only time will tell which of the many which have been premiered since the year 2000 will survive .
But the operatic repertoire is anything but stagnant . Every year, new ones are premiered, and most do not achive instant popularity . And long neglected operas from the past are revived . There is no way to predict which ones will be revived in upcoming years . 
Lack of new operas ? Not exactly. Recently, there have been new operas all over Europe and America by such composers as Glass, Adams, Bolcom, Rorem, Harrison Birtwistle, Henze, Andre Previn, Unsuk Chin, Kaaia Saariaho, Louis Andriessen, Mark Adamo,Lorin Maazel, Jake Heggie, and many other ocmposers. Some have actually been enthusiastically received by audiences . Some of these have been released on CD and DVD .
As far as I am concerned, opera is very much alive and kicking, whatever its problems .


----------



## Toddlertoddy (Sep 17, 2011)

Answering the question directly:

1. money (self-explanatory)
2. duration: operas are long and tedious to some, and may be boring to most people
3. money
4. the idea that opera is elitist because it's full of rich, white, and old people and they will reject you because of your class, race, or what you're wearing
5. etiquette: you need to somehow know what to wear without receiving weird looks
6. money
7. elitism
8. money
9. people like modern popular music more
10. money
11. elitism
12. money
13. elitism
and so on

Movies aren't killing opera, opera is killing opera. However, movies are killing opera because it is the cheaper and "better" alternative to elitist opera but this has been going on since films were created. What opera needs to do is to completely abandon the annoying formalities and treat it as what it really is: opera, not etiquette.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

The guy in the article mentions two dates, the birth of opera in 1598, and then mentions the emergence of Broadway musicals in the mid 1920's.

Well, quite frankly, 300+ years for an artform is not bad, actually. So, RIP Opera (1598-1925)?

In any case, opera is not killed or dead, its just less important than it was in say the 19th century.

But funny how with things like Lloyd Webber's 'Phantom of the Opera' (the title is a dead giveaway), musicals themselves have been becoming more and more 'operatic' (eg. using techniques taken from opera, and quite challenging to sing, etc.). I mean we've even had combinations of various things, eg. 'rock opera' in the 1970's ('Jesus Christ Superstar' and 'Hair'). So its kind of developing.

But I think that there's a challenge for the whole thing to be relevant to a wider audience. But maybe that won't happen anymore. I read a quote by the American 'veteran' composer Ned Rorem who said when he was young, the issue for many composers was to fight some cause or other, but he said now, people don't care about those things, a composer's biggest challenge is to actually have an audience in the first place, forget fighting causes. So what he's saying brings to my mind issues like relevance, sustainability (putting bums on seats?) and music as a living art, not some museum piece or relic of the past. Its similar with other issue in classical music, not only opera, but the whole thing basically.


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

The 2013 Melbourne Ring is apparently almost sold out, over a year before it is due to be performed. Not bad for a dying artform.


----------



## Dongiovanni (Jul 30, 2012)

Toddlertoddy said:


> What opera needs to do is to completely abandon the annoying formalities and treat it as what it really is: opera, not etiquette.


What would you suggest to "abandon annoying farmalities" ? I think this is an intersting topic for discussion here.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

mamascarlatti said:


> The 2013 Melbourne Ring is apparently almost sold out, over a year before it is due to be performed. Not bad for a dying artform.


Well I don't believe opera is as close to death as is often said, but the fact that it is a 140 year old opera that draws the crowds suggests not entirely healthy to me.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Glenn Beck.


----------



## quack (Oct 13, 2011)

That's hardly fair, he's killing everything, opera is just a minor casualty of his.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

140 year-old operas indeed. We have enough going on in our world, that an exciting, thought-provoking, entertaining work, could be staged every week most places. We have the minds. We have the talent. Unfortunately, we do not have the production costs. Nor have we, as some have said, bridged the culture gap with too many.

The Saturday morning Met operas in movie theaters have been beneficial to some degree. Getting the product out there to those who would never otherwise experience them.

DVDs are also a boon. But again, it's largely the rehashing of 140 year-old works, complete with lean storyline.

As with other entertainment product, more creativity with sensible marketing is needing. Easier said than done, apparently.


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

This just in. The Met announces their rush seats program will continue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/a...ted-tickets.html?_r=2&ref=arts&pagewanted=all


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Nothing is killing opera. If you are looking for more Puccini, that musical era is over, but opera certainly is not 'over.'


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

mamascarlatti said:


> The 2013 Melbourne Ring is apparently almost sold out, over a year before it is due to be performed. Not bad for a dying artform.


I got egg on my face then. I said about a month or more ago on this forum that it would not sell. But its a funny 'dichotomy' between Sydney and Melbourne that there are differences, but its hard to pin down. Dunno if it would sell in Sydney, Melbournites kind of see us as more 'lowbrow' than them (well, that's the stereotype, not necessarily reality). But we got the Mahler cycle in 2010-11, so we ain't doing bad.



quack said:


> Well I don't believe opera is as close to death as is often said, but the fact that it is a 140 year old opera that draws the crowds suggests not entirely healthy to me.


Yeah and for some reason the writer of the article says something like he's not including Gershwin's 'Porgy and Bess' in his argument. Well, why not? Its just a different kind of opera, jazz opera. & why not Bernstein's 'West Side Story,' which has also been done as opera? I mean aren't they good enough?


----------



## Aksel (Dec 3, 2010)

quack said:


> Well I don't believe opera is as close to death as is often said, but the fact that it is a 140 year old opera that draws the crowds suggests not entirely healthy to me.


As opposed to the rest of classical music? Ferneyhough doesn't really draw many crowds, now does he?


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

Vaneyes said:


> 140 year-old operas indeed. We have enough going on in our world, that an exciting, thought-provoking, entertaining work, could be staged every week most places. We have the minds. We have the talent. Unfortunately, we do not have the production costs. Nor have we, as some have said, bridged the culture gap with too many.
> 
> The Saturday morning Met operas in movie theaters have been beneficial to some degree. Getting the product out there to those who would never otherwise experience them.
> 
> ...


The issue isn't the age of the operas, its the fact that modern composers don't write in a musical style that people identify with. They are fond of atonalism and abstract ideas. Popular culture hasn't progressed beyond early 20th century classical styles. Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk is still frighteningly modern to most people. Contrast this with the music of the late 19th century. This is the style in which 'classical' movie scores are written and the style that people who are taking music from opera use for whatever reason ie those well-known arias that anyone in the street would recognise the tune of, though it is unlikely they know the name of it. The boat has sailed for that type of music, however. No modern day contemporary composer who considers himself/herself worth their salt will try to create a rehash of late romantic musical styles. Sometimes there are exceptions, like The Enchanted Island, which uses music from the Baroque.

As an aside, two things that have occurred in the last year or two that show that opera is not dying. Firstly, news that two friends of mine had decided to go to see an opera written by Blur's Damon Albarn based on the life of Dr. John Dee (staged by the ENO). They are most definitely not 'opera people', but were very enthusiastic about attending. Now, whether this is accepted as being any good in opera circles is beside the point. Clearly the medium is adaptable to a popular style.

Secondly, what appears to me to be a very interesting staging of Berlioz' Damnation of Faust directed by Terry Gilliam. Another well-known name who is popularising opera and making it more interesting for modern audiences.

In addition, there are some really good alternative stagings of operas in the last couple of decades. Correct me if I am wrong, but I can't think of any non-traditional stagings of operas before, say, the mid-eighties. As one of the younger generation who sees the value of opera, I often find these stagings more interesting because it highlights the universal nature of the plot.* This is another way that opera is having life breathed into it, but this is not just something that happens with opera. It happens with Shakespeare, Chaucer and Dickens. Theatre, and opera, evolves.

*This doesn't work with everything, usually when the libretto doesn't lend well to it.


----------



## peeknocker (Feb 14, 2012)

For me, two very serious problems with opera (though, by no means the most serioius) as it is staged today are:

- repetition (that is, the same canonical works are re-staged ad nauseam whilst many deserving works of the past are completely neglected) 

and

- the prevalence and excesses of Regietheater, many of which productions underestimate both the intelligence of the audience and the timelessness of many of the operas that are subjected to this treatment. I am not at all adverse to inventive stagings and re-imaginings, but many of these productions take such an adventurous approach to extremes, denying contemporary audiences the opportunity to experience these works in a form resembling that in which the work initially appeared.


----------



## TrazomGangflow (Sep 9, 2011)

I think opera has declined since its invention because people have lost patience to sit for the length of the opera. Especially if it is in a foreign language. People today need constant action to fill their craving for instant gratification. Take a look at the progression of broadway plays, for example. First they were only simple musicals. Then came more attention grabbing plays, with complex sets, such as Lion King. Now there is Spiderman! People used to go to Broadway for the plot. Now people go to see Spiderman flying over the stage! The average person simply doesn't have the attention span for an opera. I am guilty of this as well. I found myself day dreaming at the first opera I attended. (although the malfunction of the subtitles could have contributed)


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

TrazomGangflow said:


> Now there is Spiderman! People used to go to Broadway for the plot. Now people go to see Spiderman flying over the stage! The average person simply doesn't have the attention span for an opera.


I don't think that is true. People _like_ the story of spiderman or whatever, so it is still driven by the plot. Its the same thing as basing operas on famous stories such as Othello, Romeo and Juliet or Faust. Some people would ask how one can compare Spiderman or Back to the Future with Shakespeare, but the truth is that the plot of Spiderman is a lot better than most operas (even those in the standard repertoire). Operas violate all kinds of writing rules that authors have to master in order to maintain the interest of their readers/watchers. This is one improvement of Broadway over opera - the reacceptance of spoken dialogue in place of recitativo. It improves communication of the plot to the audience and accepts the idea that it is human to have an attention span. Ignoring this point leads to bad writing.


----------



## TrazomGangflow (Sep 9, 2011)

crmoorhead said:


> I don't think that is true. People _like_ the story of spiderman or whatever, so it is still driven by the plot. Its the same thing as basing operas on famous stories such as Othello, Romeo and Juliet or Faust. Some people would ask how one can compare Spiderman or Back to the Future with Shakespeare, but the truth is that the plot of Spiderman is a lot better than most operas (even those in the standard repertoire). Operas violate all kinds of writing rules that authors have to master in order to maintain the interest of their readers/watchers. This is one improvement of Broadway over opera - the reacceptance of spoken dialogue in place of recitativo. It improves communication of the plot to the audience and accepts the idea that it is human to have an attention span. Ignoring this point leads to bad writing.


That is very true. Many go to Spiderman for the plot. But I'm sure that it's creators and writers chose to produce a Spiderman play because they believed it would appeal more to the younger generation who spend much of their time watching action movies and playing high intensity video games. You'd have a better chance of getting a kid to go see Spiderman than another more traditional play. Obviously the familiar plot would entice the younger audience but I'm sure lights, smoke, and flying characters would play a part as well.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

TrazomGangflow said:


> That is very true. Many go to Spiderman for the plot. But I'm sure that it's creators and writers chose to produce a Spiderman play because they believed it would appeal more to the younger generation who spend much of their time watching action movies and playing high intensity video games. You'd have a better chance of getting a kid to go see Spiderman than another more traditional play. Obviously the familiar plot would entice the younger audience but I'm sure lights, smoke, and flying characters would play a part as well.


And there aren't lights, smoke and flying characters in Wagner?  Spiderman and the Lion King are recognisable 'brands', if you will, that will sell tickets on the name alone. That gets people in the door - putting on a good show in terms of plot, musical numbers, costume and special effects ensures that the production runs for years rather than nights. This isn't any different from any opera or broadway production in the history of theatre. They take something already known to the public and adapt it to a new medium. You say that, in modern times, this is to entice a younger audience, but this isn't any different than most eras. We just have new source material.

Concerning the 'younger generation' and 'kids', there is a distinction between those that grew up in the eighties and actual children. The Lion King, for example, was released 18 years ago. The greatest appeal (in my view) is to the age group that saw it as young children and who now have children of their own (and indeed many who do not). It is more to do with nostalgia than bright lights and costumes. It would be interesting to know how the sales demographic stacks up - is this meant to be for kids, or adults? Spiderman is also much older than the Lion King and has appeal to many generations of those familiar with it. There is a long list of musicals based on children's/family movies. With regard to opera, there are several operas based on children's fairy stories - Hansel and Gretel most notable among them. As an aside, there is a rather curious free kindle book from the late 19th century entitled 'Operas Every Child Should Know'.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

peeknocker said:


> For me, two very serious problems with opera (though, by no means the most serioius) as it is staged today are:
> 
> - repetition (that is, the same canonical works are re-staged ad nauseam whilst many deserving works of the past are completely neglected)
> 
> ...


There are still many productions of operas that are not part of the usual repertoire. Check out the following:

http://operabase.com/index.cgi?lang=en

Although there are probably more new plays than new operas, I think that a comparison can still be made with the repertoire of stage plays and operas. Romeo and Juliet, A Streetcar Named Desire and Death of a Salesman, for example, still sell lots of tickets and have more appeal than a new play by an unknown author. Stage actors are still gauged by the roles they have played within this standard repertoire.

Some reimaginations of opera miss the mark, I will freely admit. Those that stick out in my mind are some of the modern Ring adaptations, Netrebko's Salzburg Traviata (I love the idea of updating the dress to modern times, but I don't like the business with the clock and masks) and Davis' Pelleas and Melisande (mainly for the opening scene where the lyrics state that he is in a forest and other things that don't quite sit with what is actually happening on stage). Nonetheless, some of the greatest adaptations of the classics have been alternative productions (I actually love the wierd puppet adaptation of Pelleas and Melisande) and this is a relatively modern development in opera. Of course, it is also my opinion that many of the _traditional_ stagings of operas have also vastly improved. Sutherland and Pavarotti appear in what seems like pantomime costumes compared with many modern day productions. I am very excited to see what the next ten years of productions come up with.


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

One think one should consider when composing opera: Its only reason to exist is for people. One should compose for people, not for himself or a few. And we should understand and embrace what was done in the past without alienating it or the people

Die Meistersinger has all the answers  heheheh

Why Pucinni works?  Didn't someone said "Pucinni made great operas but terrible music"? Until the mid-19th century, opera composers were experts in their ground (exception for Mozart, but there's no need to point it out why hehehe). They knew theater as no one else. The drama and the theater came first and music and intelect later. In the end both should be quite balanced (normally the great operas that are still performed today have, and maybe it's why they survived, a good balanced). And that Pucinni was an expert. And Verdi and Monteverdi and Glück and Meyerbeer and so on...

Like i said, i think Die Meistersinger tells us all about it.

Oh! And there should be a law (that's right, an international law) against all the threats against all arts forms, including lots of Regietheaters assassinations. For the love of God, how can Wotan wear a baseball NY Yankees cap or Walther be in an Americal Idol-like trial?


----------



## peeknocker (Feb 14, 2012)

Thanks very much for the link! I was not aware of this site and I can see that it will be very useful.

"...still sell lots of tickets and have more appeal than a new play by an unknown author."

I haven't the faintest idea what I am talking about, but it seems that there is a willingness on the part of modern audiences to attend newly composed operas. Even here in Calgary, Canada (where I live) our own local opera company has in recent years produced new operas by Canadian and other composers. But when it comes to staging older works, most opera companies seem to stick to the established repertoire, primarily out of financial considerations, I should think. It's a pity that staging an opera is such a financial gamble, that many would rather stick with a sure thing. I'd rather see a bare bones production of some long neglected but worthy opera than the umpteenth staging of a canonical work. Then again, perhaps most audiences are not as adventurous and stick to the familiar.


----------



## arts (Jun 17, 2011)

In Atlanta the opera season used to have 4 shows. Now it only offers 3 shows per season and the house is not full. It's sad.


----------



## crmoorhead (Apr 6, 2011)

peeknocker said:


> Thanks very much for the link! I was not aware of this site and I can see that it will be very useful.


Your welcome! Being an obsessive list maker, I love sites with stats and I have found it useful in the past to find out more about operas and composers that I know little about. Which operas are being performed for the first time or revived is always interesting to me.

It is a pity that opera is, to a degree, financially unstable. I agree with you that it would be nice to see a bare bones production if it means more shows. I will admit, however, that I haven't yet seen a live opera (mainly because I have only started listening to opera within the last 2 years and I work on Thurs through to Sat nights). I am lucky, however, that there is a cinema within the city that has showings of MET, Glyndebourne and Sydney OH operas. I will endevour to get my schedule changed and attend in the new season.  I have also been invited by a friend who studies music at the local university to attend the next production by the university opera society.  The bottom line for me, however, is that where there is a will there is a way. There may be a surplus of opera houses in the states compared to the UK and the current economic climate always hits the arts hard, but I think that there will always be interest in opera as an art form and it does seem that there are still many new ones being written. From a quick survey of the website I sent you, I'd suggest that about 15% of operas being performed are not in the repertoire at all and another 20-30% being well-known but rarely performed.

EDIT: I might also add that there is much that this site does not show. I used to live in Belfast, Northern Ireland (a fairly small city by world standard) and it was possible to see operas both there and in Dublin (not too far away) that are not listed at that website. These were touring companies in Belfast, though I am not sure about Dublin. Belfast is also the home of the Ulster Orchestra - I _have_, at least, seen it perform live.


----------

