# The ENO is in trouble.



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...ational-Opera-placed-in-special-measures.html

I realise many companies limp along sucking up subsidies, but each year the news about the ENO just gets worse.

I owe them so much for introducing all the Joy that live Opera has given me. My first visit was to see Tosca with Linda Ester Gray. Intrigued I booked a subscription offering something like 6 for the price of 4 and the second of these turned out to be Johnathon Miller's new production of Rigoletto. The cost for the season was about £22, I've never looked back. Other highlights since then include Sour Angelica, Jenufa and one of my best ever visits to the theatre, an expressionist (One of the Alden's?) Masked Ball.

About a decade ago I started to go to less live Operas' and although I'm picking up again, I can't remember when I was last in the Coliseum.

I already have tickets for Sweeney Todd and I intend to get tickets for one or both of these.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...s-of-Nurember-ENO-London-coliseum-review.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...igh-pirates-penzance-rupert-christiansen.html

Save the ENO.

PS What does anyone know of John Berry?


----------



## Don Fatale (Aug 31, 2009)

The dogmatic ethos that ENO must sing in English* is surely past its sell by date in the age of surtitles. Personally I don't mind, and indeed it was my first opera experience too so I feel supportive towards them. However there is no doubt that singing in English has a negative effect on attendances. We all know people who simple won't go for that reason.

In Budapest recently I saw two operas in two different houses by the same company. The cost benefits are blindingly obvious. Given that there is also the matter of the Royal Ballet to consider in this matter perhaps it's time for a rethink. To have only one opera house in London would be disastrous in terms of nurturing the next generation of opera-goers as well as being detrimental to London's reputation as the world's theatrical centre.

*Apart from that time when they commissioned an opera sung in Ancient Greek (which nobody today speaks!). Needless to say it disappeared without trace.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

Alexander said:


> The dogmatic ethos that ENO must sing in English* is surely past its sell by date in the age of surtitles. Personally I don't mind, and indeed it was my first opera experience too so I feel supportive towards them. However there is no doubt that singing in English has a negative effect on attendances. We all know people who simple won't go for that reason.


I don´t know if that is true.
The Magic Flute is mostly performed in translated versions and that is still one of the most popular operas in the World.
I can´t see any reasons for operas to not be performed in the language of the country it is performed except for the possibility to use singers from other countries. Musicals and plays are performed in translated versions I can´t see why opera would be different and the thing is you do feel a higher connection if they are singing in your own language.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Sloe said:


> I don´t know if that is true.
> The Magic Flute is mostly performed in translated versions and that is still one of the most popular operas in the World.
> I can´t see any reasons for operas to not be performed in the language of the country it is performed except for the possibility to use singers from other countries. Musicals and plays are performed in translated versions I can´t see why opera would be different and the thing is you do feel a higher connection if they are singing in your own language.


That might be true if you could understand what the singers were singing, but I'm afraid that these days that mostly isn't true, which is presumably why they have started using surtitles at ENO, even for Britten and other operas that were written in English. It does rather make a mockery of the premise of performing operas in the language of the home audience.


----------



## Don Fatale (Aug 31, 2009)

Sloe said:


> I don´t know if that is true.
> The Magic Flute is mostly performed in translated versions and that is still one of the most popular operas in the World.
> I can´t see any reasons for operas to not be performed in the language of the country it is performed except for the possibility to use singers from other countries. Musicals and plays are performed in translated versions I can´t see why opera would be different and the thing is you do feel a higher connection if they are singing in your own language.


The key word in my post is _must_. It's officially their raison d'etre (Oops, I mean reason for existing!) I agree with you that there's nothing wrong with singing in translation per se, and actually I often find it interesting. But being obliged to always have to sing Boheme or Butterfly in English in order to justify your existence seems to me perverse. I saw Butterfly a few month back (Scottish Opera) in Italian with surtitles and the woman next to me was in tears at the end. No problem communicating with the audience there!


----------



## Speranza (Nov 22, 2014)

I am quite ignorant on this subject and I was hoping someone could enlighten me, does singing a translated opera make the opera sound different? Not just in terms of English sounds different to Italian but what happens if say a translated sentence had more/less syllables in it then the original and it doesn't fit with the music as well as the Italian? Does it affect how people sing it? Or does this just not affect anything or not even happen at all?

Thanks


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

Speranza, it all depends.

On the skills of the translator, on the performers, on what you most enjoy when watching.

Before the introduction of surtitles I used to enjoy live Opera on mostly gut feeling, the music swept me into the emotions that were the real story. Sometimes seeing one in English made the drama more relevant and sometimes it pointed up the absurdities often present in librettos. E.G. the Kidnapping chorus in Rigoletto singing "Softly, softly" over and over were surely the inspiration for the Cops in G&S. I am not good with languages so I'm lucky if I understand 5-10% of the Italian or French, almost zero in German. IN English this might rise to 30% but that makes a huge difference. Surtitles has been a game changer and as said above challenges the reasons for presenting translations.

As I grew to know the cannon more I found I transferred my attendances to Opera's sung in the original language. There is usually a better flow to them as per the Composer's intentions and oddly I enjoy the pure musicality of NOT understanding so many words. I.e. I don't' try and relate the surtitle to the words being sung, as I do when watching a French film with subtitles.

So to answer your question more succinctly. Yes it changes the sound of lines, not always markedly and sometimes dramatically its better to hear the action rather than read it or just feel it from the music. That said, I doubt there are many who prefer a strict diet of translated Opera.

ps apologies for the ramblings, I think I was sorting my thoughts out on this!


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> That might be true if you could understand what the singers were singing, but I'm afraid that these days that mostly isn't true, which is presumably why they have started using surtitles at ENO, even for Britten and other operas that were written in English. It does rather make a mockery of the premise of performing operas in the language of the home audience.


You might understand most or some of it but not all of it and want to be sure that you don´t miss something. I watch everything with subtitles on tv because I don´t want to miss anything. There are also those that can´t hear so good.


----------



## DonAlfonso (Oct 4, 2014)

Surtitles in the opera houses, or subtitles on DVD, may keep you up to speed on the story but they are necessarily brief. No fault of the translators of course but if you ever compare these with the libretto you realise how much you miss depending only on that source. Certainly you miss all the poetry and much of the nuance.


----------



## Sloe (May 9, 2014)

DonAlfonso said:


> Surtitles in the opera houses, or subtitles on DVD, may keep you up to speed on the story but they are necessarily brief. No fault of the translators of course but if you ever compare these with the libretto you realise how much you miss depending only on that source. Certainly you miss all the poetry and much of the nuance.


Considering how slow singing is comparing to speaking is I doubt that one miss much.


----------



## Speranza (Nov 22, 2014)

Thanks Belowpar that was helpful and not rambling. 

I want to know what's going on in a story so I always use subtitles even with English language operas as I can only seem to pick out a few words when it's being sung. I had always preferred the original language to translations because I thought something must be, if not lost, at least altered in the music/intended sound by a translation. With a whole company dedicated to singing in the English language in this age of surtitles I thought maybe I was wrong.


----------



## Belowpar (Jan 14, 2015)

Thankfully you also miss endless repetitions which can be farcical when you do understand the language, and very annoying. 
Thankfully you also miss endless repetitions which can be farcical when you do understand the language, and very annoying.
Thankfully you also miss endless repetitions which can be farcical when you do understand the language, and very annoying.
Thankfully you also miss endless repetitions which can be farcical when you do understand the language, and very annoying.
Thankfully you also miss endless repetitions which can be farcical when you do understand the language, and very annoying.


----------



## DonAlfonso (Oct 4, 2014)

Sloe said:


> Considering how slow singing is comparing to speaking is I doubt that one miss much.


In this context some people are singing, others reading - don't see where speaking comes into it.


----------



## Claudia Oddo soprano (Feb 13, 2015)

Once I have seen Mme Butterfly in German language at the Gärtnerplatz Theater in Munich, and it was shocking me, because Puccini ' s music did not sound like Puccini anymore...


----------



## Claudia Oddo soprano (Feb 13, 2015)

...this is because words have their own music accent, rhythm...colour. so I prefer listening and singing opera in the original language.


----------



## Claudia Oddo soprano (Feb 13, 2015)

Subtitles in the opera performance are a good compromise for audiences.


----------



## Claudia Oddo soprano (Feb 13, 2015)

If I talk to you in English with Italian accent and melody you might sometimes not recognize that it is English that I am talking, but English with Italian Intonation. It can be funny but strange anyway...


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Sloe said:


> You might understand most or some of it but not all of it and want to be sure that you don´t miss something. I watch everything with subtitles on tv because I don´t want to miss anything. There are also those that can´t hear so good.


But I actually think diction is getting worse, or at least sloppier. Two recordings I listened to recently brought this home to me. Yesterday I listened to the 1935 recording of Charpentier's *Louise* with Ninon Vallin and Georges Thill. Their words are so clear that one can easily make out the French. My French is not perfect by any means, but I was able to make out quite a lot of the words. Ditto when I listened to Britten's own recording of his *The Turn of the Screw*, recorded in the early 1950s. I did not have to strain to make out what they were singing about. Furthermore, on both recordings, the singers sing very natural French and English. They seem to have very little problem enunciating the text, though they make no conspicuous effort to do so. The words flow naturally and easily.

This is rarely the case with singers nowadays I'm afraid.


----------



## Marschallin Blair (Jan 23, 2014)

GregMitchell said:


> But I actually think diction is getting worse, or at least sloppier. Two recordings I listened to recently brought this home to me. Yesterday I listened to the 1935 recording of Charpentier's *Louise* with Ninon Vallin and Georges Thill. Their words are so clear that one can easily make out the French. My French is not perfect by any means, but I was able to make out quite a lot of the words. Ditto when I listened to Britten's own recording of his *The Turn of the Screw*, recorded in the early 1950s. I did not have to strain to make out what they were singing about. Furthermore, on both recordings, the singers sing very natural French and English. They seem to have very little problem enunciating the text, though they make no conspicuous effort to do so. The words flow naturally and easily.
> 
> This is rarely the case with singers nowadays I'm afraid.


Another singer who has sterling diction and elocution is Elisabeth Grummer. She's not my favorite singer by any dramatic means, but I appreciate the diamond-like clarity of her expression.


----------



## Loge (Oct 30, 2014)

Surtitles are a great idea. After all audiences used librettoes to follow Gilbert and Sullivan in Victorian London.

I recently bought the ENO English Ring from the 1970s. Whilst the tenors, baritones and basses are perfectly clear, I had to use the libretto to understand the sopranos.

Having the operas in the original language would bed beneficial though. It would allow the ENO to import in young talent from abroad who could not be bothered to learn a translation.

The main problem with the ENO is the Coliseum is just too big for the voices they book. Sound does not travel that well. Compared to Convent garden , where the best sound is heard up in the amphitheater, the balcony at the ENO slightly disappoints. Maybe they could install a mushroom in the dome to push the sound down. Even the cavernous Royal Albert Hall has more favorable acoustics.


----------

