|
n
Tuesday night I went to the opera to see Norma. What follows
here is not exactly a review. I know my place, and I leave serious
musical commentary to my colleague Jay Nordlinger, who does it superbly
well (see almost any issue of The
New Criterion). This is more in the nature of what I think
is called a "personal appreciation."
I came to opera
fairly late in life. I had no childhood training in music and did
not spend much time listening to serious music until my late twenties.
By that time, it was too late to develop the really serious powers
of discrimination that enable one to tell the difference between
a superb performance and a merely good one, though I can tell a
good one from a thoroughly lousy one well enough. There is no use
fretting about this: Those are the breaks, and I take what pleasure
I can in music, and am grateful for it.
The only music
that gives me much pleasure is vocal music. Oh, I can sit down and
enjoy a piece of instrumental music, but I rarely bother to do so.
For me, music is almost nothing without voices. I don't know why
this is, and I am not going to bother trying to figure it out or
apologize for it. I just give the little time I can spare to music
I have found appealing. What I find particularly appealing is bel
canto opera, and most especially the operas of Vincenzo Bellini.
My attitude to opera is roughly as follows: Opera? Yes. Italian
opera? Oh yes. Bel canto Oh yes indeed! Bellini?
Aaaaaaaah!
I had better
explain about bel canto and Bellini. Bel canto
literally "beautiful singing" is the style of opera
that flourished in Italy during the first part of the 19th century,
and is associated most particularly with the composers Rossini,
Bellini, and Donizetti. This period, especially the early part of
it, was one of terrific vitality and creativity in Italian opera.
Every Italian town had its opera house, and going to the opera was
the great social occasion for Italians. There is a funny scene in
Berlioz's Memoirs when he attends a performance of Donizetti's
L'Elisir d'amore at Milan in 1832: "I found the theater
full of people talking at the top of their voices, with their backs
to the stage; the singers all the time gesticulating and shouting
in eager rivalry. So at least I judged by seeing their huge open
mouths, for the people made so much noise it was impossible to hear
a sound beyond the big drum. In the boxes some were gambling, and
some were having supper..."
Berlioz added,
however, that the Italians did occasionally listen, when a song
caught their attention. To get that attention, the singers of the
bel canto era developed dazzling powers of vocal agility
and ornamentation, and it is that agility more than anything that
characterizes the style. This was, above all, the age of the singer.
Composers, conductors, and musicians were considered very secondary
to the enterprise. (Which is one reason why, to this day, a lot
of conductors regard bel canto with disdain, and at least
one maestro actually refuses to conduct it.) Many bel canto
operas have a cheerfully thrown-together quality. Librettos were
often rudimentary a good many of them would be failed if
presented as exercises in junior-high-school short-story composition.
In Bellini's La straniera, for example, the following happens:
The jealous Arturo, misunderstanding a meeting between the heroine
and her brother, accuses the brother of being his rival. He stabs
the brother, who falls into a lake. Apprised of his error by the
girl, he throws himself into the lake to save the brother. Both
men disappear beneath the waters. The heroine picks up Arturo's
sword and calls for help. People come running and, seeing her with
the bloody sword, charge her with murder. At her trial, Arturo suddenly
rushes in ("oppressed and gasping"). He confesses to her
brother's murder. While everyone is stunned by this, the brother
walks in. "A God came to my aid," he explains.
As with the
words, so with the music. Rossini used the same overture for three
different works. Operas were frequently written for a particular
singer, then rewritten for other singers in later productions, usually
in different cities. The relationship of composer to singer in bel
canto opera is captured very precisely by a usage of Bellini's.
In a letter to a friend, he describes the writing of an aria for
the tenor Rubini. The verb he uses is provare, which is also
the Italian word used by tailors to describe the fitting of a suit.
(Speaking of which, the fee Rossini received for The Barber of
Seville was four hundred scudis equivalent to about $8,000
in today's money and "a nut-brown suit with gilt buttons.")
L'Elisir d'amore was written, words and music both, in two
weeks from a standing start. Bel canto opera was all about
the singers, the singers.
Bellini stands
a little apart from this. His prominence was not helped, as Rossini's
was, by coming into the field early; nor was it helped, as Donizetti's
was, by overwhelming productivity. (Scholars are still arguing about
how many operas Donizetti wrote. Grove lists 66, not counting
rewrites and revisions. He seems to have written two operas just
for the fun of it, without having any commission for them. Neither
was performed until modern times.) Bellini came to fame by sheer
quality. He died young, a few weeks short of his 34th birthday,
having written only ten operas, each of which he created slowly
and painstakingly, with great effort. Two were immature pieces;
two were duds; three were good, workmanlike bel canto operas,
with passages of great beauty; two were superb, though with some
flaws; one was a work of towering and unblemished genius.
That one was
Norma, the opera I saw on Tuesday. As you can tell from the
above, I was predisposed to enjoy it under pretty much any circumstances.
Apart from worshipping Bellini (my novel Fire
from the Sun ends with a performance of Norma), I
don't get to the opera much, living as I do out in the 'burbs, so
I treasure any time I can spend in an opera house. I am, in short,
rather easy to please, a state of mind that is much assisted by
the price of opera tickets nowadays. Tuesday's cost me $155, though
admittedly that was a very good seat. When I spend that much money,
I am very reluctant to admit to myself that it was wasted. Opera
houses don't give refunds for crappy performances.
Notwithstanding
all of which, I turned up at Lincoln Center with low expectations.
Norma is a ferociously difficult role to sing, and very few
sopranos can rise to it. According to the reviewers (the ones in
the New
York Times and New York magazine, anyway), English
soprano Jane Eaglen had not risen to it. Eaglen is a heroic soprano,
a hochdramatischer sopran in the German fach system
of voice classification, with enough power in her voice to sing
over the massed orchestration required by Wagner. The Norma
role is for a dramatic coloratura soprano, a somewhat different
species of fauna, accustomed to pay more attention to vocal agility,
ornamentation, and sweetness of timbre than to sheer power. The
Times man grumbled about Eaglen's incompetence in the pianissimo
passages. He further declared the costumes "dreary and nondescript"
and the stage set a complete failure at the première,
he reported (this is a new production), the audience booed the production
team when they tried to take a bow.
A lot of people
who go to the opera are over-influenced by reviews. They read in
the Times that Ms. Eaglen was not up to the role, and thereupon
make up their minds to come out of the performance saying to each
other: "Oh, she wasn't up to it." Being of the I-don't-know-much-about-music-but-I-know-what-I-like
school (and, see above, being blessedly free of those powers of
fine discrimination that qualify one to be a paid critic
how did that princess in the "Princess and the Pea" story
ever get a good night's sleep?), I cheerfully ignore this stuff.
I read the critics out of curiosity, but I make up my own mind.
Well, I thought Tuesday's performance was wonderful. Eaglen started
off slowly, not making Casta diva the show-stopper it should
be (it's the song being sung in the background, by Maria Callas,
in the kitchen scene of that awful Bridges of Madison County
movie my wife made me watch the sole redeeming feature of
the wretched thing), but rallying in the cabaletta* and turning
in superb performances in the duets and trios. True, she had trouble
keeping up with the other female principal, the American mezzo-soprano
Dolora Zajick, who has been getting rave reviews, and in this case
very rightly so; but after Casta diva, Eaglen did not disappoint
me once, not in a single note. The other principals were excellent,
too. Richard Margison, the lead tenor, actually showed some signs
of being able to act, a rare thing in opera singers, especially
male ones. Pavarotti couldn't act his way out of a paper bag.
Of the orchestra
I am not the person to ask, and in bel canto especially
in Bellini it doesn't matter much anyway. If you mentally
subtract out the voices from a Bellini aria, there's not much there
except a lot of legato strings and woodwinds humming away discreetly.
Bellini's art was to use the music as a setting for the voices,
in the way a jeweler creates a setting for a precious stone. Like
an English gentleman's suit (sartorial metaphors seem to be unavoidable
here), the ideal to which Bellini's music strives is not to be
noticed. You can see why conductors think bel canto a
waste of their time. As far as I can tell, Carlo Rizzi did just
fine. The costumes? The stage sets? None of them distracted me from
the singing, which is all I ask of a production team. Hey, I said
I was easy to please.
Vincenzo Bellini
was an unlikely person to create a work as spellbinding and magnificent
as Norma. His hometown of Catania was provincial even by
Sicilian standards, and Sicily was provincial by Italian standards.
As well as being a bit of a bumpkin, forever making odd hand signs
to ward off the Evil Eye, he seems to have been one of those people
whose narcissism keeps them at arm's-length from the world. "Self-absorbed,"
we would say nowadays; "a sigh in dancing pumps," said
Heinrich Heine. Bellini's biographer, Herbert Weinstock, admits
that although he intensely admires Bellini as a composer, he finds
him unattractive "in his relationships with other people."
Born on either November 2nd or 3rd of 1801 (it was the middle of
the night, so we are not sure), Bellini died alone and in agony
from amoebic dysentery in a borrowed country house outside Paris,
on September 23, 1835. You will notice that next Friday, or possibly
Saturday, is his 200th birthday. If you love music, light a candle
for the man Wagner called "that sweet Sicilian."
What is the
appeal of opera? Why do I lay out money I cannot afford, spend two
hours on the Long Island Rail Road, and sit for three hours in a
not-very-comfortable seat to see a not-very-plausible story whose
outcome I already know, acted out by people that no sane movie-casting
director would have chosen for the roles they are playing? Why does
a certain shift of melody, a certain trick of the singer's voice,
make the bristles stand up on the back of my neck? Why is it that
I tremble and melt at the introductory chords to Qual cor tradisti,
and float off to some place I am not sure I even want to go to?
("Opera, through singing, must make one weep, shudder, die..."
Bellini, in a letter to one of his librettists.) I have no
idea.
Yes, opera
is ludicrous. Young women dying from diseases of the lung rise from
their deathbeds to sing lusty, chandelier-rattling, 120-measure
arias. Two lovers are discovered meeting secretly in a convent,
but the situation is saved when the ghost of the man's grandfather
emerges out of a wall and drags the lad off to safety in
a tomb! The parts of dainty young lovers are played by a 300-lb.
man and a 250-lb. woman who can't get their arms round each other,
and who make the scenery shake every time they move. (Talk about
"it ain't over till the fat lady sings": The three female
principals of Norma last Tuesday night must have added up
to a cumulative half-a-ton of diva, or very nearly.) I have always
thought that performances of The Marriage of Figaro should
come with a modest cash prize to anyone who can explain what is
happening in the last act. Opera can't help but be ludicrous.
With the best score and the best libretto in the world, those onstage
who aren't singing have to stand around looking indignant, angry,
baffled, grief-stricken or enraptured for ten minutes while an aria
is sung. You try standing deadstill looking indignant for
ten minutes.
So how is it
that such a performance, always hovering on the edge of the absurd
and sometimes, as in The Magic Flute, taking a swan-dive
over it how on earth can such a thing come to be a vehicle
for the divine revelation of art? There you have me. I can offer
no clue, and no explanation. I can only testify that it is so; that
it was so last Tuesday night, that it will be so next Wednesday
and Saturday, the final performances of Norma; and that it
will still be so two hundred years from now, when you and I are
the dust on someone's bookshelves and National Review Online is
utterly forgotten, but somebody, somewhere, will still be singing
Bellini. Sure, the plot of La straniera is sillier than a
Three Stooges movie. Now go listen to Montserrat Caballé's
pianissimo entrance into the trio "No, non ti son rivale"
in Act 1 of the 1969 New York recording (track 10 on the
Gala CD). Then tell me, if you can, that there is no God!
* The "grand aria" of bel canto
times was usually in two parts, the first slow and thoughtful, to
show a singer's powers of expression, the second faster and more
"technical," to show her agility. The second part is called
the "cabaletta." The first part has no fixed name.
Some singers call it the "andante" or "adagio,"
some the "largo" or the "cavatina."
Verdi called it the "cantabile," which is good
enough for me. Because a change of pace is required between the
cantabile and the "cabaletta, there is often
a spell of spoken or sung dialogue in between, to allow for the
necessary plot development. A messenger appears with dramatic news,
a confidante reveals a secret, or something of that sort. Also,
the entire grand aria is usually "set up" for the listener
by some sung dialogue or slow melodic instrumental music in front.
This setting-up is called "scena." Now look at
what is happening here: the slow introductory caress of the scena;
the deep, strong rhythms of the cantabile; a lull, a temporary
withdrawal for change of mood; then the energetic athleticism of
the cabaletta, generally ending on a terrific, sustained
high note... These boys knew their business.
|