# Gesamtkunstwerk



## Agamemnon (May 1, 2017)

Yesterday I've watched my first Wagner opera 'live' (albeit in a cinema) - Die Walküre - but I was disappointed: I found it quite a bore. I wonder if it has to do with Wagner's concept of Gesamtkunstwerk: could it be that because it is a Gesamtkunstwerk the music is somewhat subservient to the drama or to the whole (in which drama I also could find way less philosophical ideas than I'd hoped for)?

It makes me wonder: what is 'Gesamtkunstwerk' exactly? I read that it is an unison or synthesis of all the arts, in particular of music, drama and theater (and a little dancing). But isn't opera already that unison? What is a Gesamtkunstwerk different than a normal opera? Is it only about a more equal importance given to drama, theater and music? And succeeds Wagner better in this synthesis than others? 

Another aspect of it is that I understand that Wagner actually referred to the ancient Greek tragedy as Gesamtkunstwerk (and that he sought to revive that classical tradition) and that this classical Greek tragedy not only unites music, drama and theater but even religion and art. Is Wagner's Gesamtkunstwerk therefore an expression of religion (based on the mythical-Germanic pantheon as the counterpart of the classical Greek's)? In any case, Wagner would have used his work to express philosophical ideas - and I know Wagner read Schopenhauer every night - but as I've already said I couldn't find much philosophy in Die Walküre: I would like to hear what philosophical ideas there are to be found in it. Also, I know that Wagner was a revolutionary both as composer and political and that he wanted to change society by his Gesamtkunstwerke. Are there political ideas involved in Die Walküre (which ones?)? Does the concept of Gesamtkunstwerk involve religious, philosophical and political ideas?

I would like to hear what you think a Gesamtkunstwerk is, what it involves of incorporates and in what way it is different than an 'opera'!


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

You are asking a great many questions all at once, my friend! Briefly...

Wagner thought that opera had become a shallow entertainment that sacrificed depth of meaning and aesthetic integrity to theatrical and vocal display. He wasn't alone in this; Gluck had sought to reform opera from a similar conviction. Wagner saw ancient Greek drama as a ritual enacting the fundamental values of its society, utilizing a combination of the arts. Again, this was not entirely a novel view; the originators of opera, the Florentine camerata, had looked to Greece for models.

Wagner's operas are not philosophical tracts and are certainly not religious in any specific sense, but they do dramatize philosophical, moral, social and psychological ideas symbolically, much more than most operas. The key word is "dramatize"; there is little explicit philosophical dialogue. This is too big a topic for a brief response. You need to experience the operas at some length first hand and determine whether you like them, and then if you're drawn into their emotional worlds do some reading. Trying to approach them by asking what they're supposed to mean is to some extent putting the cart before the horse.

_Die Walkure_, by the way, is just one part of a much larger work. Figuring out what the _Ring_ is all about can keep you busy for years!


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Digging into say the Ring production by Boulez/Chereau might broaden one´s sense of the perspectives inherent in the work a bit more, including society aspects
https://mostlyopera.blogspot.com/2008/11/chreau-and-boulez-nibelungen-ring-on.html

The Valencia Ring by Padrissa/Mehta has been criticized a good deal, but the sci-fi-like visuals are certainly quite stunning
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2009/Dec09/Wagner_Rheingold_blu-ray_706004.htm


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

It may seem counterintuitive in light of the "Gesamtkunstwerk" concept, but there is great value in getting to know Wagner's works on sound recordings without the visual element. Staging is supposed to complete the experience, but many, perhaps the majority, of Wagner stagings today are "regietheater" productions that seek to impose some director's ideas on the works, to the extent that we are no longer experiencing Wagner's own conceptions of what his dramas are about. Wagner's music very graphically creates its own mise en scene and superbly illuminates the words.


----------



## amfortas (Jun 15, 2011)

Agamemnon said:


> Yesterday I've watched my first Wagner opera 'live' (albeit in a cinema) - Die Walküre - but I was disappointed: I found it quite a bore.


I wonder what production you watched, since I for one find _Die Walküre_ the most moving and exciting of Wagner's operas.


----------



## JoeSaunders (Jan 29, 2015)

For what it's worth, I absolutely adore Die Walkure but found yesterday's stream to drag more than it normally might (asuming it was the Royal Opera House stream? Gonna assume it was). Sieglinde and Siegmund's duetting in particular bored the **** out of me - both singers were repulsive to look at, Sieglinde's acting was especially bad, and her singing was DISGUSTING. Never have I heard such **** from a Sieglinde in my life. Her voice was breaking by act 3 and I simply couldn't look at the screen. What a ******* travesty - I mentally disengaged every time she turned up on stage. 

So, uh, sorry if that derails things a bit, but I just wanted to highlight that casting choices heavily impact our attention to proceedings! When a stream of music is beautifully performed it flies by, but when it's executed poorly it lingers on that little bit longer. I'd sooner defer to these sorts of explanations than immediately point to Wagner's grand artistic agenda, interesting though it is. 

But anywho, I know that isn't the real discussion point being prodded at here  Keep Gesamtkunstwerking peeps


----------



## Agamemnon (May 1, 2017)

amfortas said:


> I wonder what production you watched, since I for one find _Die Walküre_ the most moving and exciting of Wagner's operas.


http://www.roh.org.uk/news/catch-the-royal-operas-die-walkure-live-in-cinemas-on-28-october-2018

To be honest, I didn't like the production and - I 'm sorry - I found all of the singers too old, overweight and ugly to be credible as heroes and gods... So perhaps I should've followed Woodduck's advice to omit the visual element at first...


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Agamemnon said:


> http://www.roh.org.uk/news/catch-the-royal-operas-die-walkure-live-in-cinemas-on-28-october-2018
> .... I found all of the singers too old, overweight and ugly to be credible as heroes and gods...


It´s not meant to be some superficial Disney stuff, you know. Value the human acting and the singing, if it is good. They are roles that demand a certain age and singing experience.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

joen_cph said:


> It´s not meant to be some superficial Disney stuff, you know. Value the human acting and the singing, if it is good. They are roles that demand a certain age and singing experience.


No but Wagner wanted to create this 'total work of art'. How can you possibly do this in HD with (comparatively) elderly singers who don't look the part? I'm not surprised the OP found the work boring as there are some really dull and overlong passages. Far too much quasi-recitative in places. Like Act 1 starts with a tremendous orchestral prelude then goes to sleep. Wakes up a bit when Hunding comes in then goes to sleep again until it picks up for the Wintersturme and the end of the act, which is exciting, if you can take the premise that a brother and sister can fall in love! But OK, it is mythology. Wotan's long monologue in Act 2 slows the whole action down - for heavens sake, we know that - until the pronouncement of death which is real opera. The fight (such as it is) has great music. In Act 3 we get the famous Ride and then the long duet between Wotan and his daughter which always sticks in my craw as the guy has been such an idiot and is now blaming his daughter. Nothing like as moving as the Gilda Rigoletto duets imo. Then of course the farewell and the magic fire music which again ends the act well.
Now I know I awaken indignation from Wagnerians when I say this but I can well understand why the OP feels as he does. I have the Ring on DVD and have never been able to sit through a single opera uncut. There are parts which thrill me and parts that bore me. Added to which the singers are usually mature which takes some swallowing. To me Wagner failed in his efforts of Gesamtkunstwerk as he overplayed his hand too often and dreamed up visions the theatre could not deliver. Added to which the almighty length of the operas can be tedious to people who are not committed Wagnerians.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

DavidA said:


> .................. To me Wagner failed in his efforts of Gesamtkunstwerk as he overplayed his hand too often and dreamed up visions the theatre could not deliver. Added to which the almighty length of the operas can be tedious to people who are not committed Wagnerians.


I am in no way a Wagner expert, but considering the extreme hype and general, described ecstasy surrounding his works in his own days, I think it's very likely that he came closest to fulfilling his ideals back then, in the past, before the advance of the movie and the inflation of modern entertainment industries; this of course not forgetting that his public was mostly constituted by an elite.

EDIT: 
Oh yes: and experiencing Wagner in some sort of future 3D-way, moving around in the no-longer-just-a-theatre-stage-setting, together with the singers and protagonists, that would perhaps be interesting ...


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

Some things take more exposure to like than others.
Mahler, Shakespeare, 2001: A Space Odyssey, the Mathew Passion, etc, were/are considered boring by 
many people at first, but are masterpieces.

My suspicion is that you will listen to it again and like/ appreciate it more.

When I was first getting into opera I started with Rossini, Offenbach, Gounod and some Verdi.
When I finally bought The Ring, it was somewhat overwhelming, BUT, I also thought, WOW, this is something special.
So I listened to parts of it that immediately grabbed me, and little by little those parts got bigger and bigger.
Finally listening to whole acts and than operas.
Now, pretty much all those operas I started with I don't listen to anymore.
They seem like Coca Cola as compared to fine wine to me.
That's my experience.
All these years later, Wagner still fascinates and challenges me as well as pleases me musically and emotionally.
Yes, it is not easy to stage. But, SO WHAT! It challenges the imagination pushes creativity. Which keeps it fresh and young. (Even though I detest most Regietheater garbage)

*Also, I never can understand what "committed Wagnerian" means.* It implies people that love Wagner just because its Wagner? I think it's a pejarorite term.
I love Wagner's music because I love Wagner's music!!! Period.

I recommend giving Wagner more time. Listen to the operas with audio only.
Give yourself time to digest the grandeur, musical and psychological breadth and beauty,
And I would bet, in time, it will click and you will come to love like I do. :tiphat:


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Agamemnon said:


> http://www.roh.org.uk/news/catch-the-royal-operas-die-walkure-live-in-cinemas-on-28-october-2018
> 
> To be honest, I didn't like the production and - I 'm sorry - I found all of the singers too old, overweight and ugly to be credible as heroes and gods... So perhaps I should've followed Woodduck's advice to omit the visual element at first...


Strangely enough musical theatre seems to have no problem in casting credible attractive people unlike opera. In MT if you don't look the part you very rarely get the part! Shallow? Yes! Effective? Absolutely!


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

Itullian said:


> Some things take more exposure to like than others.
> Mahler, Shakespeare, 2001: A Space Odyssey, the Mathew Passion, etc, were/are considered boring by
> many people at first, but are now masterpieces.
> 
> ...


Well said!xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## WildThing (Feb 21, 2017)

Itullian said:


> *Also, I never can understand what "committed Wagnerian" means.*


Shh, no one blow the whistle on our secret initiation ritual.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

DavidA said:


> No but Wagner wanted to create this 'total work of art'. How can you possibly do this in HD with (comparatively) elderly singers who don't look the part? I'm not surprised the OP found the work boring as there are some really dull and overlong passages. Far too much quasi-recitative in places. Like Act 1 starts with a tremendous orchestral prelude then goes to sleep. Wakes up a bit when Hunding comes in then goes to sleep again until it picks up for the Wintersturme and the end of the act, which is exciting, if you can take the premise that a brother and sister can fall in love! But OK, it is mythology. Wotan's long monologue in Act 2 slows the whole action down - for heavens sake, we know that - until the pronouncement of death which is real opera. The fight (such as it is) has great music. In Act 3 we get the famous Ride and then the long duet between Wotan and his daughter which always sticks in my craw as the guy has been such an idiot and is now blaming his daughter. Nothing like as moving as the Gilda Rigoletto duets imo. Then of course the farewell and the magic fire music which again ends the act well.
> Now I know I awaken indignation from Wagnerians when I say this but I can well understand why the OP feels as he does. I have the Ring on DVD and have never been able to sit through a single opera uncut. There are parts which thrill me and parts that bore me. Added to which the singers are usually mature which takes some swallowing. To me Wagner failed in his efforts of Gesamtkunstwerk as he overplayed his hand too often and dreamed up visions the theatre could not deliver. Added to which the almighty length of the operas can be tedious to people who are not committed Wagnerians.


What's the problem, David? Can't you think of any _more_ ways to discourage other people from appreciating Wagner?

Everyone else here is making the expected and appropriate effort to frame a response helpful to the OP. You? The same uninformed, insulting @#$%^&*! you've been posting on every Wagner thread since you signed onto this forum six years ago.

You know very well that the _Ring of the Nibelung_ is regarded by many as one of the greatest artistic achievements in human history, and that _Die Walkure_ is probably the best-loved portion of it. It's an opera that moves people deeply; I consider it a masterpiece from start to finish, and Wotan's dark, anguished exposition of his dilemma to be the dramatic crux of the _Ring_ and an extraordinary, daring piece of dramatic writing. That you still can't help yielding to the compulsion to make a show of your inability to appreciate Wagner's achievement - that you must perform this sad act of exhibitionism in front of people who do appreciate what you can't - is an insult to the originator of this thread, and it ought to embarrass you.

My advice: forget Wagner. You don't need him, he certainly doesn't need you, and nobody needs to hear (again) how limited your artistic horizons are. Stick with the cynical silliness of _Cosi fan tutte_ and the faux-gypsy kitsch of _Carmen._ At least you'll be "entertained" and won't be troubled by all this weird mythology stuff.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

DavidA said:


> I have the Ring on DVD and have never been able to sit through a single opera uncut.


Considering your views on Wagner and his music, you made a poor acquisition. :lol:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

joen_cph said:


> I am in no way a Wagner expert, but considering the extreme hype and general, described ecstasy surrounding his works in his own days, I think it's very likely that he came closest to fulfilling his ideals back then, in the past, before the advance of the movie and the inflation of modern entertainment industries; this of course not forgetting that his public was mostly constituted by an elite.
> 
> EDIT:
> Oh yes: and experiencing Wagner in some sort of future 3D-way, moving around in the no-longer-just-a-theatre-stage-setting, together with the singers and protagonists, that would perhaps be interesting ...


I've been waiting all my life for "Wagner's Ring: The Movie" - a filmed production that actually seeks to realize totally the visions the composer must have imagined, free from the constraints of the theater of his day, and even those of our own much more advanced theater technology. We are now capable of making it happen - Tolkien, move over! - but I guess it will never be commercially viable and so will never be done. Where is mad King Ludwig when we need him?


----------



## WildThing (Feb 21, 2017)

For the OP, here's a thoughtful and compact discourse on the Ring worth watching:






And another talk that delves into some of the philosophical ideas that the opera expresses and that its characters respond to at the beginning of this:






Scruton's recent book, The Ring of Truth, is also one of the most comprehensive analyses on The Ring that I've come across.


----------



## Dimace (Oct 19, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> You are asking a great many questions all at once, my friend! Briefly...
> 
> Wagner thought that opera had become a shallow entertainment that sacrificed depth of meaning and aesthetic integrity to theatrical and vocal display. He wasn't alone in this; Gluck had sought to reform opera from a similar conviction. Wagner saw ancient Greek drama as a ritual enacting the fundamental values of its society, utilizing a combination of the arts. Again, this was not entirely a novel view; the originators of opera, the Florentine camerata, had looked to Greece for models.
> 
> ...


You speak like a German! Respect! :tiphat:

(The crossroad, where the Greek mythology - as it was expressed through the Greek Tragedies with Aeschylus, Euripides and Sophocles- meets the German one is the core and soul of Wagner's Gesamtkunstwerk. The target for the Greeks was the Olympus or the Parnassus. For Wagner ''die Walhalla''. *Salvation* is the magic word. Nothing more or less)


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Dimace said:


> You speak like a German! Respect! :tiphat:
> 
> (The crossroad, where the Greek mythology - as it was expressed through the Greek Tragedies with Aeschylus, Euripides and Sophocles- meets the German one is the core and soul of Wagner's Gesamtkunstwerk. The target for the Greeks was the Olympus or the Parnassus. For Wagner ''die Walhalla''. *Salvation* is the magic word. Nothing more or less)


Nicely put. Danke (like a German). :tiphat:


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Bulldog said:


> Considering your views on Wagner and his music, you made a poor acquisition. :lol:


I would have thought it was fair acquisition of an open mind as I actually wanted to see the operas and find out for myself.


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

I had the same reaction to my first opera on cinema: Wagner's _Tristan und Isolde_ by Skelton and Stemme in the Metropolitan opera. However, I didn't instantly question his whole concept of opera but was intrigued by his outstanding Act III overture.

The disadvantage of Wagner for me is that he is a composer difficult to put on stage yet alone follow his long scores. I was bored then about how slow were they talking about Isolde's past. I eventually came to love the music and especially his librettos. It took time. *Don't force yourself.*

Other opera composers have reached a similar or even superior amount of quality with other methods. I can think of Mozart as an example. Delighted with his music and vocal composition style, horrified by whoever wrote his libretto for _Idomeneo_.

The ROH CG production doesn't look bad by still images. Quite metallic, but I don't know the stage directions.








It can happen with modern productions. I have watched parts of the recent Covent Garden _Parsifal_ and I was quite stunned by the orchestra's playing and correct singing. But the Langridge production is even bloodier than the Girard one in Metropolitan! Ugh. I plan to watch it this weekend. I am currently reviewing Mono _Walküres_ from the 50s and 70s.

















By the way. Don't swear. Thank you <3


----------



## Byron (Mar 11, 2017)

DavidA said:


> I would have thought it was fair acquisition of an open mind as I actually wanted to see the operas and find out for myself.


Oh you're absolutely right -- most people would not make such an expensive purchase and extravagent commitment of time to music they found so uneven and frustrating, or to a dramatic experience they were completely unsympathetic to and felt made little sense. Your example should be a paradigm for us all. And the way your posts on the subject show a willingness to learn from others and to consider new points of view is admirable. At least you're not like some who stubbornly assert their point of view in the face of thoughtful and considered responses from those with an intimate knowledge and deep admiration for a subject, or make condescending remarks aimed at those who find something of real value in something they do not.


----------



## sharkeysnight (Oct 19, 2017)

Agamemnon said:


> It makes me wonder: what is 'Gesamtkunstwerk' exactly? I read that it is an unison or synthesis of all the arts, in particular of music, drama and theater (and a little dancing). But isn't opera already that unison? What is a Gesamtkunstwerk different than a normal opera? Is it only about a more equal importance given to drama, theater and music? And succeeds Wagner better in this synthesis than others?


I think of it in terms of Anything Goes compared to Sweeney Todd. Anything Goes is just an excuse to hear a bunch of random Cole Porter numbers and watch people tap dance, whereas everything that's in Sweeney Todd is there, and is placed where it is, to guide you through its themes and moods. The music of Sweeney Todd isn't just a "Sondheim" sound, it's a "Sweeney Todd" sound, and the libretto isn't just a bunch of funny one-liners or ways to beeline from one showstopper to the next, it's there specifically to assist in the highlighting of the message. Every element of Sweeney Todd guides you to a very specific experience and even provoke you towards (or remind you of) certain philosophical concepts, and it does all of this while being entertaining, moody, and thoroughly itself.

You could, with minor lyrical rewriting, stick a popular piece from Barber of Seville into La Cenerentola. I imagine you would be hard-pressed to do the same with Wagner - can you picture Ride of the Valkyries wedged somewhere into Meistersinger?


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

sharkeysnight said:


> I think of it in terms of Anything Goes compared to Sweeney Todd. Anything Goes is just an excuse to hear a bunch of random Cole Porter numbers and watch people tap dance, whereas everything that's in Sweeney Todd is there, and is placed where it is, to guide you through its themes and moods. The music of Sweeney Todd isn't just a "Sondheim" sound, it's a "Sweeney Todd" sound, and the libretto isn't just a bunch of funny one-liners or ways to beeline from one showstopper to the next, it's there specifically to assist in the highlighting of the message. Every element of Sweeney Todd guides you to a very specific experience and even provoke you towards (or remind you of) certain philosophical concepts, and it does all of this while being entertaining, moody, and thoroughly itself.
> 
> You could, with minor lyrical rewriting, stick a popular piece from Barber of Seville into La Cenerentola. I imagine you would be hard-pressed to do the same with Wagner - can you picture Ride of the Valkyries wedged somewhere into Meistersinger?


This is really well said. And _Anything Goes_ has been revived with significant changes such as reassigning songs to other characters, and inserting other Cole Porter songs. The idea of a book musical - starting with/around _Oklahoma!_ - is very much like Wagner's idea of Gesamtkunstwerk. Of course not every post-_Oklahoma!_ musical is a unified work where everything was supposed to be purposeful... but there was a real shift in what audiences expected and what writers created. There was, at least, a new target, a new (possible) goal.

This isn't a knock on _Anything Goes_! It's terrific to have a flexible show that you can switch around (a little) depending on the cast you are working with, and still come up with an entertaining performance. And, really, some of your audience isn't looking for more than a few good songs, some fun choreography, and some laughs.

But others are looking for something different. I grew up well after the book musical took hold and I find old musical comedies like that very strange.

Anyway, getting back to Wagner and Gesamtkunstwerk, one example I'll bring when he brought _Tannhäuser_ to Paris. The opera had be revised to add a ballet (because all operas there had to have a ballet). Wagner could not come up with a reason to have a ballet at the start of act 2 (where it traditionally should have been) so... he didn't put it there. He did, however, add a bacchanale after the overture that started act one, which he used as an introduction to the world of Venus.

That is his decision about how to incorporate a ballet was made not according to the traditions of the house (which would have made it easier to for everyone) but according to what made sense for the opera and the story being told.

(I have also heard it told that the sailor's chorus that opens act 3 of _Der fliegende Holländer_ was his half-hearted stab at a ballet for when that opera was to be performed at the Paris Opera).


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

Of course another option would have been to not do a ballet and let Paris not perform the work. That is, more or less, what Wagner did for his future operas.

But my point is that it isn't about writing worse music but about making sure that when you're writing that music, when you're structuring a scene, when you're deciding what stays and what gets cut... that the decisions are made together. Wagner wrote his libretti as well as his music, and had a lot to say about staging, and conducted some of his own works, so he was in a rare position to make sure everything was working together.

And of course, other operas have integrated ballets that serve a dramatic purpose. But many operas had ballets that were there because it was required. And it's not surprising that many of those ballets are cut in modern performance. We no longer require operas to have ballets, so if it doesn't make sense to have one, it's OK.

Another thing I'll note: the Ring by and large avoids many typical operatic devices through much of it's runtime. There aren't duets... until we have a pair of lovers that have a good reason to duet. There isn't a chorus... until the final opera of the cycle, _Götterdämmerung_, when the gods are all gone.

Might _Die Walküre_ be more enjoyable (on some level) if there was a chorus of kinsmen on Hunding's arrival? Maybe, but what would that serve other than being fun to hear? And would it make Hunding - who is present for only a few scenes - seem more important than he is? There could also be a chorus of fallen warriors to start act 3, perhaps integrated into the calls of the Valkyries. I can imagine some wonderful music... but I don't see how that would do anything other than interrupt the story.

Wagner didn't write many traditional arias because he literally didn't want show-stopping numbers.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Byron said:


> Oh you're absolutely right -- most people would not make such an expensive purchase and extravagent commitment of time to music they found so uneven and frustrating, or to a dramatic experience they were completely unsympathetic to and felt made little sense. Your example should be a paradigm for us all. And the way your posts on the subject show a willingness to learn from others and to consider new points of view is admirable. At least you're not like some who stubbornly assert their point of view in the face of thoughtful and considered responses from those with an intimate knowledge and deep admiration for a subject, or make condescending remarks aimed at those who find something of real value in something they do not.


Oh don''t worry, I got the discs very cheap. So no great expenditure. I didn't make an extravagant commitment to time either as I watched them over a time period. It did confirm my opinions though. I have, of course, as you rightly say, found in my many years of historical research and writing that a willingness to learn is essential. I have also learned, however, that it is important though to distinguish fact from opinion. Also to allow for the fact that people have different opinions and that on certain issues there is no black and white and one has to agree to differ.


----------

