# Do you care about the libretto?



## James clerk (Jan 28, 2010)

Do you think that the quality of an opera its affected by its libretto.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

I think it's of equal importance. I need to know what the story is before I can understand & enjoy the music. I also like to know about the librettist.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

No, I never cared about the libretto or story: I guess the plot by opera title, Elektra is about electro-mechanics (the music describes electro-shock of one of them), Tannhauser is about dancing house (some party is going on there) and La Nozze de Figaro is about nose of Figaro who is gouging in it - this affect his speech, so he says "my nozze" instead of "my nose" HO HO HO HO HO

Maybe you mean quality of libretto? In case of poetic craft it has no meaning, most people read translations which are not first grade poetic translations so they don't know if lyrics are good or bad - they just get brief abstract. Unless they libretto makes no sense and is so silly that not only form is bad, but the content. But I never met such opera. Except maybe some early Wagner when characters repeat the same thing milion times (like in Lohengrin, scene with bad guy and bad witch by the sea). 

Uch, and I had some bad time listening to King Roger by Szymanowski, as I understand the original libretto entirely. It gets quite pretentious in many moments.


----------



## Il Seraglio (Sep 14, 2009)

Yeah, the depth of the language is lost in the translation so it goes without saying that the libretto isn't everything but the story and characters are still very important in being able to enjoy an opera almost as much as the music is. If the libretto of Beethoven's Fidelio was anywhere near as good as the score, it might have been held in as high a regard as Don Giovanni, Les Troyens, Tristan, etc


----------



## Niebolaz (Jul 9, 2009)

Well, I need at least a basic grasp of the story to be able to enjoy the non-aria parts; the libretto generally helps me to focus. But beside that I rarely enjoy it just for the content - usually the story is watered down by repetitive dialogues and the psychological insight is scarce. The only enjoyment comes from the poetry, but - as it was already mentioned - that is usually lost in translation.


----------



## classidaho (May 5, 2009)

Not at all.........I do want to know the basic plot (enough to know why the heroine dies), And I absolutely detest recitetetive (can't even spell it). But, that all said, I do like to watch it as well as hear it.


----------



## rgz (Mar 6, 2010)

Aramis said:


> No, I never cared about the libretto or story: I guess the plot by opera title, Elektra is about electro-mechanics (the music describes electro-shock of one of them), Tannhauser is about dancing house (some party is going on there) and La Nozze de Figaro is about nose of Figaro who is gouging in it - this affect his speech, so he says "my nozze" instead of "my nose" HO HO HO HO HO


Personal favorite is Die Zauberflote, in which the unfortunate Mr. Zauberflote has a hit taken out on him. The sequel, Die Fledermaus, isn't as good imo.


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Yes, yes I do.


----------



## Almaviva (Aug 13, 2010)

Sure, it makes a difference, but comparatively, the music is more important.


----------



## Tehzim (May 19, 2013)

I really didn't get into opera until I got to read translations of librettos. Blasphemy, I know. But before I didn't like the music as much. After knowing what's going on, I liked it much better. It's sort of the key to opera for me.


----------



## Air (Jul 19, 2008)

It depends on the opera. In a comic opera like _Le Nozze di Figaro_ or _Il Barbiere di Siviglia_, it's hard to follow the humor of the work unless you read or know the libretto. All the little intonations, inflections of voice, and musical components are all reflections of a specific moment in the libretto. It's in understanding these quirks that you can really have a good time.

On the other hand, if you're listening to an opera like Wagner's _Tristan und Isolde_, the story is much slower so knowing the plot usually suffices. Plus, from the moment you hear that glorious beginning to the prelude, you just kind of melt away into your own mystic, romantic fantasy. The musical and dramatic elements still follow the plot, but you can usually "feel" your way around the story without reading specific moments in the libretto, as long as you're aware of which voice corresponds to which character.


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

Absolutely, libretto is equal to the music. Otherwise it would be a symphony and not an opera. A smart, intelligent libretto is a delight to both read and sing.

For me, the Mozart/DaPonte librettos are among the best: Marriage of Figaro is humane and smart, Giovanni is clever. And of course there are many others.

When I was singing opera, most of our librettos were the Schirmer editions with English translations by the Martins. The English was meant to rhyme and fit the tempo but wasn't accurate. So, whatever I sang, I'd get my Italian/English dictionary and puzzle out the libretto myself. I'd also refer to translations in the CD booklets that came with the complete operas I bought to study from.

But yes, libretto is critical. How else can the singer know what emotions to convey to the audience? And of course, how else can the technical people make unintentionally hilarious translations for the supertitle projector?


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Niebolaz said:


> Well, I need at least a basic grasp of the story to be able to enjoy the non-aria parts; the libretto generally helps me to focus. But beside that I rarely enjoy it just for the content - usually the story is watered down by repetitive dialogues and the psychological insight is scarce. The only enjoyment comes from the poetry, but - as it was already mentioned - that is usually lost in translation.





classidaho said:


> Not at all.........I do want to know the basic plot (enough to know why the heroine dies), And I absolutely detest recitetetive (can't even spell it). But, that all said, I do like to watch it as well as hear it.


Let me introduce you guys to my friend Richard Wagner.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Of course the libretto is important as a skilled composer will fit the music to the words. Mozart was the greatest master of this.

With some operas (eg Parsifal) I listen to the music and try not to think about what is being sung.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

I do, I do, I do, I do! I must admit, the only opera I have heard so far is Wagner, and in his operas the libretto and the storyline is just as important as the music, an essential part of the _Gesamtkunstwerk_. Plus, Wagner's librettos are often beautiful poetry on their own.


----------



## moody (Nov 5, 2011)

Tehzim said:


> I really didn't get into opera until I got to read translations of librettos. Blasphemy, I know. But before I didn't like the music as much. After knowing what's going on, I liked it much better. It's sort of the key to opera for me.


Of course you need a translation ,nothing blasphemous about that.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

moody said:


> Of course you need a translation ,nothing blasphemous about that.


Doesn't everybody just become fluent in the language of every opera they want to see?


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

ahammel said:


> Doesn't everybody just become fluent in the language of every opera they want to see?


Well, I have learned to say in Russian _three cards_, _who is your second_, _queen of spades_, _I love you_ and _you beautiful thing, you_, from watching Tchaikovsky's operas!


----------



## Volve (Apr 14, 2013)

For me, from one side, I enjoy very much reading the libretto and knowing the settings and story, it increases the experience, specially if it's well written. But, i also like diving into the unknown, listen to the music and let it make it's own story. Music is so oppenly interpretable that knowing what it's ment to be actually limits what it could be.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I must admit, the only opera I have heard so far is Wagner


Well time to move along, then


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

To a degree. Some story lines are basic, cliche, sort of universal love triangle, various themes, where not a lot is expected.

But, a bad "book" can kill the success of any musical drama, Opera, Operetta, West End or Broadway Musical. (Those failed operas of Schubert.)

A great book won't save a bad musical score.

What many put up with, without complaint, are things like a long aria after the heroine has been mortally wounded, having been stabbed with a knife / Longish aria from a heroine moments away from shuffling off her mortal coil via succumbing to TB. (Longish Lunger Aria?) and many other beyond plausible events.

Spoiler alert! "He / She dies in the end." LOL.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I always try to follow the libretto in time to the music especially if the work is long and the plot is of the more multi-layered variety (i.e. Berg's Lulu, where it's easy to get lost as there seem to be many subtle mind games going on and with a large cast). However, sometimes I can 'wing it' by reading the libretto in advance if the story is relatively self-explanatory, like I did with Eugene Onegin yesterday, and/or if the work is on the shorter side, i.e Rachmaninov's Aleko. I can't honestly say that I know any opera so well that I don't have to refer to the text somewhere along the line.


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

To watch an opera without understanding the libretto is like going to se a film in other language without subtitles. Sure there's plenty of people that like Transformers or Ironman for their special effects or like to see movies where Angelina Jolie or Brad Pitt are. But if you don't understand the plot, it's rubbish.

In opera if one does not understand the libretto, it's just a fat lady screaming!


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

PetrB said:


> Well time to move along, then


When I find other operas that will be as perfect in every aspect, as those of Wagner, I will. Until then I am happy enjoying the whole variety of other music.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

dionisio said:


> In opera if one does not understand the libretto, it's just a fat lady screaming!


You mean there's more to it than that?


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

Taggart said:


> You mean there's more to it than that?


Oh yes! That's exactly the first thought i had long time ago, when i understood there was more than just screaming. Then i had to learn what opera was until i started to understand that to sing like that it's a rare gift and the proper singing it is not screaming. Unfortunately not everybody can sing properly and that leads to some people screaming.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

dionisio said:


> Unfortunately not everybody can sing properly and that leads to some people screaming.


to be fair, some composers wrote screamier music than others.

on the subject of the libretto, I do care. Some libretti are very clever, some funny, some rather informative (all that mythological malarkey), some silly, some really stupid; either way, I want to know what the fuss on stage is all about.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

SiegendesLicht said:


> When I find other operas that will be as perfect in every aspect, as those of Wagner, I will. Until then I am happy enjoying the whole variety of other music.


but how will you find them if you're not listening?  btw, you could start with Mozart, unless you really dislike non-mythological themes.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

SiegendesLicht said:


> When I find other operas that will be as perfect in every aspect, as those of Wagner, I will.


<cough> Mozart! <cough> ............................


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

I remember falling asleep during Madame Butterfly in Roma once. I nodded off at a crucial bit. Blink and you miss it, really, because when my chin drooped towards my chest, she was alive, and in the instant I sat bolt upright (with a snort), she'd dropped a calf. I don't know if that was the libretto's fault. 

But the libretto is the story, and the music is how they tell the story. Figaro and Don Giovanni and any other opera stands alone as great music, but not in a theatre. Opera is musical theatre, which suggests a narrative. The libretto is crucial...


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Kieran said:


> I remember falling asleep during Madame Butterfly in Roma once. I nodded off at a crucial bit. Blink and you miss it, really, because when my chin drooped towards my chest, she was alive, and in the instant I sat bolt upright (with a snort), she'd dropped a calf. I don't know if that was the libretto's fault.


:lol: see, that would never happen with Baroque opera, you're sure to wake up sometime during the da capo.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

deggial said:


> :lol: see, that would never happen with Baroque opera, you're sure to wake up sometime during the da capo.


I think with a Baroque opera I might fall asleep in the queue outside. 

But actually, that's on my to-do list, some Handel operas. That's the only baroque operas I know of. Baroque music is quite opaque to me. I can't seem to penetrate it. I actually find modern music easier to listen to...


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

that's interesting. Somehow, I find it easier to digest it when there are very clear arias, then a break of recitative, then another aria or perhaps a duet than when the music just goes on and on (Strauss excepted). You could try Rameau as well, he's very creative. I particularly enjoyed Platee.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

I don't know any modern opera, in fact, 'modern music' for me is Mahler! :lol: 

I really should broaden my horizons. I read about Nixon in China, that it's five hours and the audience are encouraged to shift in their seats, walk about, leave for a meeting and come back later. Doesn't recommend that opera to me. But yes, I should look back further than Wolfie. Thanks for the recommendations!


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

Kieran said:


> I read about Nixon in China, that it's five hours and the audience are encouraged to shift in their seats, walk about, leave for a meeting and come back later. Doesn't recommend that opera to me.


_Nixon in China_ is only about three hours long. Are you thinking of _Einstein on the Beach_?


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

ahammel said:


> _Nixon in China_ is only about three hours long. Are you thinking of _Einstein on the Beach_?


That's it! Thanks...


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Oh, Kieran, how could you - how could you go to sleep in the middle of Madame Butterfly, you heartless brute? 

Re Baroque operas, Purcell's Dido & Aeneas is lovely. 

As basically a converted play-goer, I couldn't get along with opera until they introduced the electronic lyric board over the stage or whatever you call it. I have to understand the characters to get involved; the music on its own wouldn't do it for me.


----------



## Cavaradossi (Aug 2, 2012)

ahammel said:


> Doesn't everybody just become fluent in the language of every opera they want to see?


Nothing near fluent, but between some serious libretto cramming in advance and my high school German and abysmal traveller's survival-grade French and Italian, I can manage to follow along fairly well. It's still a big effort but I'd say it's doubled my already considerable enjoyment of opera since I started doing it. Also keeps the languages rumbling around my brain when they'd probably otherwise be dormant.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> Oh, Kieran, how could you - how could you go to sleep in the middle of Madame Butterfly, you heartless brute?
> 
> Re Baroque operas, Purcell's Dido & Aeneas is lovely.
> 
> As basically a converted play-goer, I couldn't get along with opera until they introduced the* electronic lyric board over the stage or whatever you call it*. I have to understand the characters to get involved; the music on its own wouldn't do it for me.


Are you referring to surtitles?


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

I expect so. Thanks!


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> I expect so. Thanks!


Whoever had the bright idea of putting them up above the opera deserves a medal. Even when you know the story it still helps to know what they're singing. Well more or less.

In _Tosca_ Tosca insists that Cavaradossi paints the eyes of the woman in portrait, dark. _"Ma falle gli occhi neri!.."_ "But make her eyes dark" Not sure if this is an urban myth but I read that at one performance the surtitle said "give her a black eye".


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

deggial said:


> to be fair, some composers wrote screamier music than others.
> 
> on the subject of the libretto, I do care. Some libretti are very clever, some funny, some rather informative (all that mythological malarkey), some silly, some really stupid; either way, I want to know what the fuss on stage is all about.


True. When I think about a superb libretto, I think about the opening scenes of Marriage of Figaro. Figaro is doing "guy stuff" (measuring things) and Susanna "gal stuff" (preening a bit, pleased with her new bonnet) and the humorous juxtaposition of the two is magical. Of course the music is perfect, Figaro singing semi-staccato notes to Susanna's more lyric line, but the text is essential as the two tease each other in a very realistic way, just like real-life lovers will do.

Inside three minutes, Mozart/DaPonte create two human beings, genuinely in love, smart and possessed with humor. Pure brilliance. And from that perfect beginning, you've got two characters in whom you invest care and interest.

Consider the genius a bit later, when Figaro sings "Se vuol ballare" (if you would dance), usually while polishing the Count's boots. In Beaumarchais' play, Figaro is vicious and hateful in his diatribe against the monarcy. But Mozart/DaPonte turn this into a "modern" reflection on privilege. Instead of death and destruction, Figaro only wants to embarrass the Count at court.

The brilliance of these two sequences would be lost without a libretto, despite the perfection of the music.


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

SiegendesLicht said:


> When I find other operas that will be as perfect in every aspect, as those of Wagner, I will. Until then I am happy enjoying the whole variety of other music.


As was said before, er, Mozart? And I'll add: Verdi's "Rigoletto", maybe the most intense of all Italian opera, probably the darkest, with a poetic and thrilling libretto.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Ingenue said:


> Oh, Kieran, how could you - how could you go to sleep in the middle of Madame Butterfly, you heartless brute?


I was certainly considered heartless by the grumpy Romans sat on either side of me. Heartless, but not - alas - noiseless in that sleep...


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

ahammel said:


> Doesn't everybody just become fluent in the language of every opera they want to see?


Ha ha, we wish! I admit that via my collegiate German, I was able to pick my way through most of the libretto of "Magic Flute" first time I read the score. Like most any singing, regardless of the language, it's not always easy to glean the words from just hearing them sung, even if in your native language or one in which you're fluent, because singing often stretches or chops up the phrases and makes them a bit less understandable if you're in the audience.

I'd watched Magic Flute but if there hadn't been supertitles (or surtitles as you please), I'd have been lost. Reading the score was easier, of course.

Not knowing French or Italian other than a few choice curses or touristy phrases, I was stuck without a translation when I first started singing opera. Despite a printed English translation beneath the original language libretto, I would still perform my own translation of whatever I'd be singing. Investing the time to do that helped set the lyrics more firmly into my rattled brain. Latin the same, when singing choral music -- and yes, Italian and Latin are very similar, but there's enough difference that you need to consider them two separate languages if translating.

And there are actually three "Latins", "common" as spoken in Roman Empire times, "liturgical" via the Roman Catholic church, and "classical" as per written poems and other literature. Each has slightly different pronunciation and phrasing. When learning a "new scholarship" version of Mozart's Requiem (a newly restored and longer version per the Mozart library in Salzburg), we often discussed several possible ways to pronounce words, such as "deus" --- "day-us" vs "dee-us" vs "day-uzz" and so on.

Anyway, I digress... but yes, libretto is critical and I'd say about 35% of an opera, 50% being the music, 15% acting and stagecraft and sets and costumes and so on.


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

Kieran said:


> I think with a Baroque opera I might fall asleep in the queue outside.
> 
> But actually, that's on my to-do list, some Handel operas. That's the only baroque operas I know of. Baroque music is quite opaque to me. I can't seem to penetrate it. I actually find modern music easier to listen to...


Baroque operas are definitely an acquired taste, like single malt Scotch. There's very little "acting" as we might consider it in modern aspects, nor was that expected. The singers simply stood there and sang or moved around like wooden soldiers between arias or duets or whatever. No real stagecraft or genuine acting. Myself, although I fully understand the concept and appreciate the way it was performed in that era, it falls cold on me (like most, ahem, Wagner, he said quietly, heh heh).

I freely admit to being much more at ease with realistic ("verismo" in Italian) stagecraft in opera, even if it's a period performance. This trend was promulgated by Mozart mostly, then later, of course, by French opera and then the Italian schools of Verdi or Puccini (naming only the most famous).

But stagecraft can overwhelm an opera, too, especially if it's "modernized" and there's more action on stage than a Michael Bay movie. It should be balanced, as Hamlet recommends, "suit the action to the word, the word to the action".


----------



## WAWilson (Nov 8, 2011)

Absolutely - I am only interested in music that serves the drama. As someone who loved what is commonly called 'musical theater' far before I loved opera, it is paramount. This is why I believe Mozart's operas are the pinnacle of the form.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

Cavaradossi said:


> Nothing near fluent, but between some serious libretto cramming in advance and my high school German and abysmal traveller's survival-grade French and Italian, I can manage to follow along fairly well. It's still a big effort but I'd say it's doubled my already considerable enjoyment of opera since I started doing it. Also keeps the languages rumbling around my brain when they'd probably otherwise be dormant.


In the almost three years of my acquiaintance with Sir Richard I have gone from barely managing a few simple German phrases to holding a job where passable German is a prerequisite (and I apologize if that sounds like boasting, for I did not intend it that way). Of course I do not mean to say this was exclusively his credit, but he was definitely there along the way.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

SiegendesLicht said:


> In the almost three years of my acquiaintance with Sir Richard I have gone from barely managing a few simple German phrases to holding a job where passable German is a prerequisite (and I apologize if that sounds like boasting, for I did not intend it that way). Of course I do not mean to say this was exclusively his credit, but he was definitely there along the way.


It must sound awfully funny doing your job while talking in _Stabreim_, though.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

ahammel said:


> It must sound awfully funny doing your job while talking in _Stabreim_, though.


I should have foreseen that line coming...

There has been no complaints so far though


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

SiegendesLicht said:


> In the almost three years of my acquiaintance with Sir Richard I have gone from barely managing a few simple German phrases to holding a job where passable German is a prerequisite (and I apologize if that sounds like boasting, for I did not intend it that way). Of course I do not mean to say this was exclusively his credit, but he was definitely there along the way.


Wagner is definitely refined German, very top drawer, albeit a bit overly formal these days, but it still works.

Well, as per my memory of language class in college, you might be expected to learn Italian, Spanish, or French, but you were expected to BE German! (How's your German? He's fine, how's yours?) And yes, I learned the old-style Fraktur alphabet as well as modern German.

We were taught "high" German (Hochdeutsch) instead of "low" German (disdainfully referred to as "coal miner German") and it showed. Our language labs (where you put on earphones and repeat phrases, you know the drill) had tapes spoken by graduate students in the language arts from the University of Berlin. And Berlin is the centerpoint for Hochdeutsch, the final authority.

I've not spoken German (aside from singing in opera) for ages but phrases in our language drills still drift into my mind at 3am.

Incidentally, if anyone is learning a modern foreign language, I highly recommend finding current newspapers and reading them. It's a superb way to refresh yourself on the common aspects of a language. For German, I suggest the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Frankfurt Everyone's Daily) or Die Zeit (the Times). Weekly magazines, try Der Spiegel (the Mirror).


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

katdad said:


> Baroque operas are definitely an acquired taste, like single malt Scotch. There's very little "acting" as we might consider it in modern aspects, nor was that expected. The singers simply stood there and sang or moved around like wooden soldiers between arias or duets or whatever. No real stagecraft or genuine acting.


Maybe at the time they were written there was very little acting. But in modern productions there is often as much emphasis put on acting and stagecraft as any other style of opera. Cue Joyce DiDonato going spectacularly mad in Handel's Hercules. Verismo eat your heart out:


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

katdad said:


> And there are actually three "Latins", "common" as spoken in Roman Empire times, "liturgical" via the Roman Catholic church, and "classical" as per written poems and other literature. Each has slightly different pronunciation and phrasing. When learning a "new scholarship" version of Mozart's Requiem (a newly restored and longer version per the Mozart library in Salzburg), we often discussed several possible ways to pronounce words, such as "deus" --- "day-us" vs "dee-us" vs "day-uzz" and so on.


Not only are there three styles of Latin, within each there are major differences in style - e.g. in classical Latin is it Veni, Vidi, Vici or Weni, Widi, Wici? In church Latin, there are major differences although the main style is Solesmes the German versions have a subtly different accent possibly reflecting a different classical pronunciation. All great fun!


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

I try very hard to get a copy of the libretto to any opera before I give it precious listening time and I usually will listen to an opera four times before moving on to something else. So an opera to me is a major investment of time, concentration and energy; time that is augmented immeasurably by an understanding of the words being sung (or screamed). I will read through a libretto before listening, listen, then read again until I am familiar with the story - at this point the opera begins to come alive for me (or not).

In my experience, some musically seductive operas can be ruined by mediocre librettos - the Magic Flute being a case in point.


----------



## dionisio (Jul 30, 2012)

KRoad said:


> I try very hard to get a copy of the libretto to any opera before I give it precious listening time and I usually will listen to an opera four times before moving on to something else. So an opera to me is a major investment of time, concentration and energy; time that is augmented immeasurably by an understanding of the words being sung (or screamed). I will read through a libretto before listening, listen, then read again until I am familiar with the story - at this point the opera begins to come alive for me (or not).
> 
> In my experience, some musically seductive operas can be ruined by mediocre librettos - the Magic Flute being a case in point.


Au contraire mon ami! The flute is saved by the music! But since it was written to be a magic opera, it is fun though.


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

Yeah, "ruined" is a bit strong. It's not a bad libretto, but da Ponte it ain't. However, Mozart music is never part of anything we'd consider "ruined..."


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

Kieran said:


> Yeah, "ruined" is a bit strong. It's not a bad libretto, but da Ponte it ain't. However, Mozart music is never part of anything we'd consider "ruined..."


Agreed. But I also think that the Flute libretto is a bit saggy and childish in places, whereas, for example, Marriage of Figaro holds up as intelligent and closely realistic.

We must, of course, understand that the Flute was written specifically for a family audience and that a somewhat simplistic libretto may be just right for the subject matter: a fairy tale.

I also think that Mozart and his pal Schink... intentionally made the Princess and especially the Prince as very naive. And although naive as well, Papageno is the driving force for good in the opera, his simplicity and gentle soul transcending the high-falutin priestly morals. I don't think that for an instant Mozart thought he was writing an opera meant to be taken literally or with authentic or believable characters, except maybe Papageno.

I do know this: Papageno is probably the most beloved character in all of opera.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Kieran said:


> ..."ruined" is a bit strong.


Well, okay, "ruined" _is_ a little strong; it is a very good opera indeed. But, try as I may, I cannot make sense of the plot and I can't help but feel that something more accessible in terms of story line would have made it an excellent opera - which musically, it most certainly is.


----------



## ahammel (Oct 10, 2012)

KRoad said:


> Well, okay, "ruined" _is_ a little strong; it is a very good opera indeed. But, try as I may, I cannot make sense of the plot[...]


It helps if you realize that half way through Tamino changes his goal from 'rescue the princess' to 'become a member of the Freemasons'.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

katdad said:


> Incidentally, if anyone is learning a modern foreign language, I highly recommend finding current newspapers and reading them. It's a superb way to refresh yourself on the common aspects of a language. For German, I suggest the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Frankfurt Everyone's Daily) or Die Zeit (the Times). Weekly magazines, try Der Spiegel (the Mirror).


... or Die Welt, if you like a more conservative spin on things.


----------



## Ebab (Mar 9, 2013)

katdad said:


> Wagner is definitely refined German, very top drawer, albeit a bit overly formal these days, but it still works.


"Stylized" is the word I'd use. Wagner had a rich vocabulary and great sensitivity for language, but nobody ever really talked or wrote like that. Wagner used language to create mythic ages, or emulate an actual epoch (Meistersinger) in a way that his contemporary audience would still be able understand.



> And Berlin is the centerpoint for Hochdeutsch, the final authority.


Absolutely not!  Berlin has a _very_ strong dialect with interesting grammatical deviations. The city with the traditional language that's regarded as closest to standard German is Hanover.


----------



## apricissimus (May 15, 2013)

If I'm just listening to a CD, I honestly don't care much about the libretto. But on DVD or in person, it's much more important since following the story is a vital part of the experience. And if it's not in English, I'm going to need sub-titles.

My opera experience is pretty limited though.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Kieran said:


> It's not a bad libretto, but da Ponte it ain't.


I severely dislike this libretto, as well. I can normally deal with fairytale settings but this one makes me go wtf?! it doesn't help that I can't stand _clubs_ like the freemasons or the illuminati. Yes, it very closely ruins the whole thing; there's a good number of Mozart operas that I like better even though they aren't half as popular.


----------



## badRomance (Nov 22, 2011)

Kieran said:


> I think with a Baroque opera I might fall asleep in the queue outside.
> 
> But actually, that's on my to-do list, some Handel operas. That's the only baroque operas I know of. Baroque music is quite opaque to me. I can't seem to penetrate it. I actually find modern music easier to listen to...


Similar here. I can't listen to any baroque opera without falling asleep except for Monteverdi's Orfeo.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

^ out of curiousity, which ones have put you to sleep so far?


----------



## Kieran (Aug 24, 2010)

deggial said:


> I severely dislike this libretto, as well. I can normally deal with fairytale settings but this one makes me go wtf?! it doesn't help that I can't stand _clubs_ like the freemasons or the illuminati. Yes, it very closely ruins the whole thing; there's a good number of Mozart operas that I like better even though they aren't half as popular.


Well, I read all about the Freemason stuff and it's in there, but to be truthful, I still couldn't tell you where. I sit back and let it wash over me. I think the da Ponte operas have a clear story but this one is fantasy, mysticism, fairy tale. It's not so bad, to my eyes, since it has a cohesive tale. But the main thing is the glorious music. I can close my eyes and ignore sur titles and be lost in this immaculate score...


----------



## badRomance (Nov 22, 2011)

deggial said:


> ^ out of curiousity, which ones have put you to sleep so far?


Handel Giulio Cesare, Handel Rinaldo, and Purcell Dido & Aeneus. I just find the recitatives repetitive especially the harpsichord accompaniment, the tempos frequently hectic, and the constant barrage of runs tiring and perfunctory. I'm sure I can find some performance of some aria that I would listen to again but overall I'm just not into it.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

oh, I see - recitatives a nono and runs tiring. Sounds like Baroque isn't your thing. Now that I think of it, I could live with an opera made up of *just* recitatives and runs, haha.

character I: oh, I've been betrayed. I have to hurry.

(enter character II): wait, where are you going? I'm confused.

character I (sings): lalalalalalalalalalalalalalala (b section) la...la...la...la (da capo) lalalalalalalaLALALAlala

character II: right. But worry not, I will help you.

character I: oh, I knew you were a true friend. I must go now, I will see you in the next scene. (exit)

character II: (rubs hands) hahaha, what an idiot! Finally I can take my revenge (sings) hohohohohohohohoho (b section) ho ho ho ho ho (da capo) hohohohohohHOHOhoHO (exit)


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

deggial said:


> I severely dislike this libretto, as well. I can normally deal with fairytale settings but this one makes me go wtf?! it doesn't help that I can't stand _clubs_ like the freemasons or the illuminati. Yes, it very closely ruins the whole thing; there's a good number of Mozart operas that I like better even though they aren't half as popular.


Magic Flute clearly isn't a libretto comparing with, say, Nozze or Verdi's Rigoletto, but it's okay if you just accept the fairy tale stuff at face value and don't look too deeply into the freemasons or whatever. btw, illuminati is pretty much fictional but freemasons have been around for centuries and were the first glimmer of freedom in a world that was essentially feudal before. But anyway...


----------



## katdad (Jan 1, 2009)

deggial said:


> oh, I see - recitatives a nono and runs tiring. Sounds like Baroque isn't your thing. Now that I think of it, I could live with an opera made up of *just* recitatives and runs, haha.
> 
> character I: oh, I've been betrayed. I have to hurry.
> 
> ...


Wonderful synopsis of the plot of Masked Ball, by the way, ha ha


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

katdad said:


> freemasons have been around for centuries and were the first glimmer of freedom in a world that was essentially feudal before. But anyway...


dunno, sounds to me like scientology.

anyway, one of these days I'll give the Flute another try. I've changed my mind about things before.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Kieran said:


> Well, I read all about the Freemason stuff and it's in there, but to be truthful, I still couldn't tell you where. I sit back and let it wash over me. I think the da Ponte operas have a clear story but this one is fantasy, mysticism, fairy tale. It's not so bad, to my eyes, since it has a cohesive tale. But the main thing is the glorious music. I can close my eyes and ignore sur titles and be lost in this immaculate score...


The plot may be rubbish, but oh that music!!!


----------



## Yardrax (Apr 29, 2013)

In answer to the thread topic, yes I care about the libretto in Opera's, it is a form of program music and as such most of the formal elements of the music need to be understood with reference to what is being said. Even when composers resort to using more obvious musical forms this usually has a dramatic import, think of how Papageno's aria's in strophic form with their simple folk like melodies affect his characterisation. Having said which, I haven't listened to too much Baroque Opera, so I can't say much in that regard, but I think this is the case for at least some of what I have listened to from Mozart, Rossini, Verdi, Wagner and Strauss.

The question of whether or not the libretto is a make or break element is a bit more difficult, since a libretto is designed to be sung and not read there is always going to be the music to add another dimension and depth to something which might be bland or cliche when treated solely as text or drama. And what makes great theater or poetry doesn't necessarily make great Opera as such - Despite the fact that a number of Opera libretto's are based on already existing plays or poems, none that I can think of are verbatim copies of the originals with music added, they have to be rewritten and restructured so they can work as Opera. So I would say that for me at least, I think the libretto is important, but it should be held to the standards of an Opera libretto, not other forms of literature. 

Also I think the libretto to Die Zauberflote is pretty neat, personally. It's a nice allegorical representation of the transition of man from nature-dependance to enlightenment and the role that love plays in the animation of that journey. The way it's presented is obviously highly whimsical but that's part of it's charm, to me anyway.


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

deggial said:


> oh, I see - recitatives a nono and runs tiring. Sounds like Baroque isn't your thing. Now that I think of it, I could live with an opera made up of *just* recitatives and runs, haha.
> 
> character I: oh, I've been betrayed. I have to hurry.
> 
> ...


Ah, thank you. Best laugh I've had all week.


----------



## Roland (Mar 13, 2013)

SiegendesLicht said:


> I do, I do, I do, I do! I must admit, the only opera I have heard so far is Wagner, and in his operas the libretto and the storyline is just as important as the music, an essential part of the _Gesamtkunstwerk_. Plus, Wagner's librettos are often beautiful poetry on their own.


I do believe SiegendesLicht is one of the biggest Wagner fans on this site. I wish I could enjoy Wagner's operas as much as she does. I love what George Bernard Shaw calls the "Bleeding chunks," orchestral highlights cut out of the operas, but I have to admit that sitting through an entire Wagner opera is still quite an effort for me. Her comment above gives me a clear picture what I need to do if I really want to get a full appreciation for Wagner's genius.


----------



## Cavaradossi (Aug 2, 2012)

deggial said:


> oh, I see - recitatives a nono and runs tiring. Sounds like Baroque isn't your thing. Now that I think of it, I could live with an opera made up of *just* recitatives and runs, haha.
> 
> character I: oh, I've been betrayed. I have to hurry.
> 
> ...


I have to say the da capo form became a little more
became a little more
became a little more
bacame a little more
I have to say the da capo form became at little more
palatable when I picked up a bit of rudimentary Italian.

I finally have a clue 
finally have a clue 
finally have a clue 
what they're going ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon 
ooooooooooooooooooon
ooooooooooooooooooon
ooooooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooon
about.

I have to say the da capo form became at little more
became a little more
became a little more
bacame a little moooooooo00000000000ooooOOOOOOOOOOoooo000OOOOOooorrrrrrrrrrrrre
I have to say the da capo form became at little m0O0O0O0O0O0O0O0O0Ore
palatable when I picked up a bit of rudimentary Italian.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

^ :lol: oh dear! but it must be great for singers to have to remember only two lines per aria


----------

