# Two guys from New York talk about Wagner's Ring cycle (latest podcast episode)!



## marceliotstein (Feb 23, 2019)

The new episode of "Lost Music: Exploring Literary Opera" features two guys who are not opera experts (but try their best) talking about their experience of watching Wagner's entire "Ring des Nibelung" at the Met. Here's the episode:

iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000438719999
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4bzJ8EbK3tp5llukxL74CX
Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/los...era/e/60792193

And here's the show page:

https://litkicks.com/LostMusic

This opera forum has been REALLY helpful to me as I prepared for this episode, which was by far the most intellectually challenging of the four episodes I've produced so far. I learned a lot (and enjoyed the conversation greatly) in various threads here, including one that's still highly active involving the question of Wagner's attitudes towards Mozart, and the question of whether or not there are elements of comic opera and ambiguous sexual innuendo in the Ring cycle. (I think there are many such elements, though this doesn't appear to be a popular opinion.)

In fact I had hoped to air this question out thoroughly during this podcast interview, especially on the hot question of whether or not Siegfried-as-Gunther is telling the truth in Gotterdammerung when he pledges to be chaste with Brunnhilde, which has been the subject of a lively thread. But I try to keep each episode to about an hour, and Bud Parr and I got so excited talking about Das Rheingold that we burned 30 minutes of our hour of our interview up before we even got to opera #2, and barely had 5 minutes to talk about opera #4. The podcast episode, appropriately for Wagner, is our longest yet, and I hope it's enjoyable and informative to anyone who listens to it. Feedback very welcome! I am really glad to have found this forum, and I'm sure it will continue to help inspire future podcast episodes.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

I'm enjoying this immensely, but I can only get 31:27 of it on Spotify. How do I hear the rest?


----------



## GeorgeMcW (Jun 4, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> I'm enjoying this immensely, but I can only get 31:27 of it on Spotify. How do I hear the rest?


If you have iTunes podcast, search "Lost Music Opera"


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

The podcast "Opera After Dark" recently concluded its four-part series on the Ring Cycle. A warning though, their commentary is pretty irreverent, and one of the co-hosts makes it very clear, over and over, that she hates Wagner and thinks the Ring Cycle is ridiculous. So maybe avoid it if you're sensitive to something like that.

https://operaafterdark.com/


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

apricissimus said:


> The podcast "Opera After Dark" recently concluded its four-part series on the Ring Cycle. A warning though, their commentary is pretty irreverent, and one of the co-hosts makes it very clear, over and over, that she hates Wagner and thinks the Ring Cycle is ridiculous. So maybe avoid it if you're sensitive to something like that.
> 
> https://operaafterdark.com/


Sensitive schmensitive. Why does she even have the job? Reminds me of a certain member here, but he at least isn't pretending to represent the forum.


----------



## MaxKellerman (Jun 4, 2017)

apricissimus said:


> So maybe avoid it if you're sensitive to something like that.
> 
> https://operaafterdark.com/


...or if you're sensitive to ignorance of a subject matter being displayed and falsehoods being put forth left and right, probably not something you'll be able to tolerate for long. About 10 minutes into listening to the operning episode on "Richard Wagner" that was to set the stage for their discussion on the Ring, the co-host who hates Wagner and stated that she refuses to give Wagner's music any sort of chance because of his antisemitism had to jump into a discussion about Wagner being the only notable opera composer who wrote his own libretti to inform us that he wrote all of his own libretti except for his early operas that he went on to disown later in life. And the other two co-hosts merely conceded the point to her.

Umm. Well actually. He wrote the libretti for those as well. I really didn't see the point of listening to this prattling, superficial discussion anymore after that.


----------



## marceliotstein (Feb 23, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> I'm enjoying this immensely, but I can only get 31:27 of it on Spotify. How do I hear the rest?


Woodduck, I'm honored to have you listen to it. Yes, there was an early version that broke at 31:27. It's been fixed, but Spotify may not have gotten the update yet. Please do try again. It's also available directly here, and I think this link will always work correctly:

http://litkicks.libsyn.com/brunnhilde


----------



## marceliotstein (Feb 23, 2019)

apricissimus said:


> The podcast "Opera After Dark" recently concluded its four-part series on the Ring Cycle. A warning though, their commentary is pretty irreverent, and one of the co-hosts makes it very clear, over and over, that she hates Wagner and thinks the Ring Cycle is ridiculous. So maybe avoid it if you're sensitive to something like that.
> 
> https://operaafterdark.com/


I listened to a few minutes of this podcast as well. I do understand why some people might not want to enjoy Wagner, but I don't understand why somebody thinks it's valuable to join a podcast about Wagner and simply repeat over and over how much they don't like Wagner. We heard it the first time.

I humbly believe the "Lost Music: Exploring Literary Opera" podcast handles this subject matter better! We acknowledge the issues with Wagner's anti-semitism but we try to understand the whole context surrounding this issue.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

I agree that she belabored the point to excess, but they've done something like 90 episodes on many different operas, and some non-opera music. So it's not like she came specifically to trash Wagner. I believe they made the point that they really had to discuss Wagner at some point, being an opera podcast and all, even if one of the hosts doesn't care for Wagner.

Anyway, I think it's generally a fun podcast.


----------



## marceliotstein (Feb 23, 2019)

apricissimus said:


> I agree that she belabored the point to excess, but they've done something like 90 episodes on many different operas, and some non-opera music. So it's not like she came specifically to trash Wagner. I believe they made the point that they really had to discuss Wagner at some point, being an opera podcast and all, even if one of the hosts doesn't care for Wagner.
> 
> Anyway, I think it's generally a fun podcast.


Yes, I do like it too. There are many great opera podcasts! I particularly like Opera Explained (out of Wyoming!), the Metropolitan Opera Guild podcast, Sex Drugs and Opera, and the Chicago Lyric Opera podcast.


----------



## annaw (May 4, 2019)

marceliotstein said:


> Yes, I do like it too. There are many great opera podcasts! I particularly like Opera Explained (out of Wyoming!), the Metropolitan Opera Guild podcast, Sex Drugs and Opera, and the Chicago Lyric Opera podcast.


Just found that there's a podcast about the leitmotifs and the Ring in general - "An Introduction To Der Ring Des Nibelungen" by Deryck Cooke. I didn't have time to listen it to the end right now but considering that it's made by Cooke, it should be rather good.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

marceliotstein said:


> Woodduck, I'm honored to have you listen to it. Yes, there was an early version that broke at 31:27. It's been fixed, but Spotify may not have gotten the update yet. Please do try again. It's also available directly here, and I think this link will always work correctly:
> 
> http://litkicks.libsyn.com/brunnhilde


Ahh, that explains it. I thought it was a bold move, ending in the middle of a sentence, and having a podcast called Wotan and Brunnhilde where she is only just mentioned at the end.  But I'm glad to hear that there's more.

I am curious to know what myths with Zeus y'all know where he comes off as morally upright and faithful. It's been a while since I've read much Greek mythology, but my understanding was that the pantheon of gods had very human qualities: they squabbled, manipulated and deceived humans for fun and profit, and were generally a mess.

I don't generally listen to podcasts, but it can be very interesting to listen to people talk about opera! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## marceliotstein (Feb 23, 2019)

mountmccabe said:


> Ahh, that explains it. I thought it was a bold move, ending in the middle of a sentence, and having a podcast called Wotan and Brunnhilde where she is only just mentioned at the end.  But I'm glad to hear that there's more.
> 
> I am curious to know what myths with Zeus y'all know where he comes off as morally upright and faithful. It's been a while since I've read much Greek mythology, but my understanding was that the pantheon of gods had very human qualities: they squabbled, manipulated and deceived humans for fun and profit, and were generally a mess.
> 
> I don't generally listen to podcasts, but it can be very interesting to listen to people talk about opera! Thanks for sharing.


Hi mountmccabe - I am very upset that a broken file went out for this episode. Many people are reporting the same problem that it ends after a half hour. It should be more than 80 minutes long. The problem was fixed, but all the services aren't updating correctly. I believe it will correct itself over time. If you access this episode directly at this link, it will work:

http://litkicks.libsyn.com/brunnhilde

You make a good point about Zeus - but let me clarify. I am not only remarking on Wotan's moral choices, which like Zeus's are often questionable. What I find most remarkable (and, actually, psychologically insightful) about Wagner's Wotan is how feckless he is. He changes his mind constantly. He is likely to be persuaded by the last person he spoke to. I do remember Zeus being occasionally cruel, but I can't remember him being chronically indecisive!

I do believe this is a choice Wagner made - that is, Wotan's fecklessness is key to whatever exactly it is that Wagner has in mind as the deeper meaning of this drama.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Thanks, Marc, for the link that allows me to hear the whole conversation. Although I'm only at the end of your talk about _Die Walkure,_ I need take a moment to respond to your comments there (and here) about Wotan.

You've described Wotan as a Lear-like figure and as "feckless." But I'd say he's a bit more interesting than Lear, and is a true tragic hero such as Lear is not. For one thing, he is not blind to the virtues of his daughter, despite the fact that he feels he must renounce her. The fundamental thing I think you may be missing is something that Wotan is reminded of several times by different characters: the fact that his godly power depends on his upholding a moral/legal code embodied in treaties and contracts, which are inscribed as runes on the shaft of his spear. It's his agonized recognition of the fact that his desires are in conflict with his role as law-keeper, and ultimately that his very existence as a god is at stake, that makes him different from Shakespeare's vain king, who must lose his reason to discover what love is. Wotan already knows what it is, but is constrained by his position to destroy it if it transgresses the boundaries of convention and law.

The philosophical drama of the _Ring_ traces a growth in consciousness, and a basic component of this is an evolution of moral sentiment and ethical thinking from the primitive stage represented by raw obligation enforced by law to the more advanced stage of free choice informed by love, embodied by Brunnhilde. Brunnhilde, remember, is the offspring of Wotan (godly power) and Erda (omniscient wisdom); the god journeyed to the center of the earth in order to mate with the Earth Mother in order to find wisdom, and she gave him Brunnhilde who, thereafter, would embody the wisest part of her father and would carry out his fondest wish in spite of the edicts to which his position as upholder of law and order bound him.

If Wotan acts foolishly, it's because he is divided against himself; his impulses chafe against his godhood - it might not be too much to say that he feels within himself humanity struggling to be born - and thus he harbors within himself the seeds of his own demise. He is, like the primitive morality he represents, ultimately untenable and destined to fail - which, Wagner tells us, is the nature of gods and their rule over humanity's mind and heart, and why man must learn to be free of them and claim the moral prerogatives inherent in his own nature.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

marceliotstein said:


> Hi mountmccabe - I am very upset that a broken file went out for this episode. Many people are reporting the same problem that it ends after a half hour. It should be more than 80 minutes long. The problem was fixed, but all the services aren't updating correctly. I believe it will correct itself over time. If you access this episode directly at this link, it will work:
> 
> http://litkicks.libsyn.com/brunnhilde
> 
> ...


I have downloaded the full episode, as well as the one on Orpheus and Eurydice since I'm seeing the Gluck in August. I have a long flight ahead of me (and then a week later, a long flight back home) and it's nice to have options!

I am not sure what you mean by Wotan being feckless; he changes his mind a few times, but I think they reflect the gravity of the situation, rather than his inconstancy.

And I think Wotan as irresponsible is the point. This is how he became king of the gods (and how, in the modern age, other powerful people get to their positions): by gambling irresponsibly. Sometimes it pays off (he won Fricka but did not have to give up his remaining eye); we see the (very compelling!) consequences of the time he bites off more than he can chew. Wotan never intended to give up Freia to the giants, she was the bait to get them to build Valhalla in the first place. Once the fortress has been built, he's in a better negotiating position. When you're the god of contracts you can set yourself up to benefit (think of in the current era, where powerful people and corporations lobby to get laws written for their benefit).

I suppose I'm filling in a pantheon around Wotan, other challengers wishing to be king. I don't see Valhalla as a vanity project (gold palace), but rather a way to stay ahead of the competition (a functional fortress). If Wotan doesn't push the envelope, he will be overtaken by someone else who did (such as Alberich who cursed love to get the ring, but of course Valhalla wasn't built in response to Alberich).


----------



## marceliotstein (Feb 23, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> Thanks, Marc, for the link that allows me to hear the whole conversation. Although I'm only at the end of your talk about _Die Walkure,_ I need take a moment to respond to your comments there (and here) about Wotan.
> 
> You've described Wotan as a Lear-like figure and as "feckless." But I'd say he's a bit more interesting than Lear, and is a true tragic hero such as Lear is not. For one thing, he is not blind to the virtues of his daughter, despite the fact that he feels he must renounce her. The fundamental thing I think you may be missing is something that Wotan is reminded of several times by different characters: the fact that his godly power depends on his upholding a moral/legal code embodied in treaties and contracts, which are inscribed as runes on the shaft of his spear. It's his agonized recognition of the fact that his desires are in conflict with his role as law-keeper, and ultimately that his very existence as a god is at stake, that makes him different from Shakespeare's vain king, who must lose his reason to discover what love is. Wotan already knows what it is, but is constrained by his position to destroy it if it transgresses the boundaries of convention and law.
> 
> ...


Woodduck, once again, I do understand your meaning here and I like it very much. In fact, as a person who mixes music appreciation with political activism, I also like the underlying political and philosophical message I believe you are presenting here, which is that authentic existence as a human being cannot be circumscribed by any legalistic or rational framework. We live in an anarchic universe, in which the "crisis" of existence can only be dealt with as an act of willfulness, or courage. This calls to mind the existentialist writings of Kierkegaard, not to mention Schopenhauer, who inspired Wagner, and Nietzsche, Wagner's close associate and sometime-friend. (When I mention both Wagner and Nietzsche, of course, I am concerned about how to deal with the fact that both of these figures were later championed by the Nazis, but that sad truth need not pollute our appreciation of the great work both Wagner and Nietzsche actually were responsible for.)

I'm not sure if what I'm saying here is exactly the same thing you are saying above, but I do think we are both of the same mind when it comes to describing the philosophical message embedded in Wagner's work. I see it also in Tristan und Isolde, which strikes me as a celebration of the holy madness of romantic love - a madness that is never resolved rationally, and doesn't need to be. Again - the philosophical corollary to this seems to be the philosophy of existentialism.

I do differ with you, though, in seeing Shakespeare's King Lear as a lesser characterization. In fact, I think both Wotan and Lear are brilliantly drawn theatrical characters who can be filled out by (hopefully) capable directors and actors in any number of dimensions. The essence of great literature is the possibility of multiple interpretations, even conflicting possible interpretations. I think King Lear goes through a series of changes during the course of his long play, and each of these changes hold a variety of possible meanings. Both Wotan and Lear can be interpreted in many different ways. It is the genius of Wagner or Shakespeare to make this possible. Would you agree with this?


----------



## marceliotstein (Feb 23, 2019)

mountmccabe said:


> I have downloaded the full episode, as well as the one on Orpheus and Eurydice since I'm seeing the Gluck in August. I have a long flight ahead of me (and then a week later, a long flight back home) and it's nice to have options!
> 
> I am not sure what you mean by Wotan being feckless; he changes his mind a few times, but I think they reflect the gravity of the situation, rather than his inconstancy.
> 
> ...


Fascinating, Mountmccabe - thank you for explaining this side of the story. It did not occur to me, and I didn't see it onstage, that Wotan ever had a strategy for how to get out of his highly problematic contract to "give" Freia to the giants. It seemed feckless to me, and yet as I watched Greer Grimsley as Wotan catching flak from every other character onstage for his terrible decisions I could tell that there must be a deeper meaning to this situation, and I think maybe it's necessary to have more background in the story and the underlying mythology to fully understand it. I almost can't believe I'm saying this, because I had a tough time spending all those hours at the Met watching these four operas, but I wish I could watch the whole cycle again starting today. That's how fascinating it was. I bet I'd understand a lot more of the dimensions if I could. Oh well, the Met will be doing Fliegende Hollander next season and I will be there!

Hope you liked what you heard of the podcast, too - I feel truly humbled at the thought of several people here who clearly know more than I do about opera listening to my fumbling words. So thanks.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

marceliotstein said:


> Woodduck, once again, I do understand your meaning here and I like it very much. In fact, as a person who mixes music appreciation with political activism, I also like the underlying political and philosophical message I believe you are presenting here, which is that authentic existence as a human being cannot be circumscribed by any legalistic or rational framework. We live in an anarchic universe, in which the "crisis" of existence can only be dealt with as an act of willfulness, or courage. This calls to mind the existentialist writings of Kierkegaard, not to mention Schopenhauer, who inspired Wagner, and Nietzsche, Wagner's close associate and sometime-friend. (When I mention both Wagner and Nietzsche, of course, I am concerned about how to deal with the fact that both of these figures were later championed by the Nazis, but that sad truth need not pollute our appreciation of the great work both Wagner and Nietzsche actually were responsible for.)
> 
> I'm not sure if what I'm saying here is exactly the same thing you are saying above, but I do think we are both of the same mind when it comes to describing the philosophical message embedded in Wagner's work. I see it also in Tristan und Isolde, which strikes me as a celebration of the holy madness of romantic love - a madness that is never resolved rationally, and doesn't need to be. Again - the philosophical corollary to this seems to be the philosophy of existentialism.
> 
> I do differ with you, though, in seeing Shakespeare's King Lear as a lesser characterization. In fact, I think both Wotan and Lear are brilliantly drawn theatrical characters who can be filled out by (hopefully) capable directors and actors in any number of dimensions. The essence of great literature is the possibility of multiple interpretations, even conflicting possible interpretations. I think King Lear goes through a series of changes during the course of his long play, and each of these changes hold a variety of possible meanings. Both Wotan and Lear can be interpreted in many different ways. It is the genius of Wagner or Shakespeare to make this possible. Would you agree with this?


I had never thought about existentialism in connection with Wagner (I guess I haven't thought much about existentialism since college, which is about three lifetimes ago), but I should know by now never to dismiss any perspective on Wagner too easily. As I think about this, I'm even more impressed by the way he utilizes the most archaic materials to deliver the most modern messages. The _Ring,_ with its gods, elementals and assorted fantastic creatures, is only superficially a celebration of a pre-Christian, Teutonic, heroic world of myth, before which a racist, nationalist megalomaniac like Hitler could sit entranced and imagine himself the protagonist. What it really is, is an apocalyptic tale of the end of heroic illusions, in which gods and heroes alike destroy themselves in their own fantasies and contradictions and the human race is left, _tabula rasa,_ to find its own way to a rational, compassionate existence on this little planet. What a pity that we're doing such a crappy job of it.

As for King Lear, I suspect that you've spoken with him more recently than I have, so I happily bow to your superior knowledge.


----------

