COT's Clemenza

Prima la musica-- the music's the first thing, the most important. Always been true of opera or else we'd see the play!

Chicago Opera Theater's La Clemenza di Tito sounds first-rate and looks stylish too. The general director, Brian Dickie, has once again assembled a talented team, who offer wonderful music to hear in a visually appealing setting.

I've begun to believe that conductor Jane Glover has descended from the gods and can do no earthly wrong. Her conducting of this Mozart work supported every singer while transporting the audience with phrasing and timing that imbued almost every minute with glory and grandeur. Remember my recent complaint of Mozart having too many notes (see below, re: the Lyric's Abduction)? If Ms. Glover rehearsed and conducted that work, I'm sure my opinion would be different!

The young singers had splendid voices all; many also had shapely legs, which they had several opportunities to display as they were directed to roll and lie about rather a lot. No one role was more outstanding or important than another, really, each having her or his solo arias and recitatives and a handful of ensembles. The standard modern convention of casting mezzo-sopranos in roles originated by castrati confuses contemporary audiences, who are now quite accustomed to counter-tenors taking up these roles. No mention of these kinds of things in the program. COT audiences must be sophisticated enough to sort it all out.

The set piece and its furnishings reminded me ever so much of the LaSalle Bank lobby-- gleaming garbage canisters, marble benches, and all. Strong, solid visuals with little symbolic bearing do provide a tasteful backdrop. Alas, I think the singers could have done with a bit more Method than choreography. There being much regret in the libretto, the story can seem a bit sad sack. A singing actor who must sustain long lines of melancholy needs more to do than stoop forward from the thoracic vertebrae. Much of the cast sported dowager's humps. All that anguish inclined them to lean against the walls or lie on the floor quite often. I began to wonder if this is a theatrical convention missing in my education? Maybe the director meant something by it, but it was too subtle for me. How about you?

Having just watched the excellently researched HBO series "Rome," I had an easier time understanding some of the aristocratic machinations and intentions of the times. I wonder if any of the cast or the director could benefit from that same series?

Nonetheless, the music, the conducting, and the singing will transport even the least interested party. I saw several children sitting still and enjoying the sounds. When the leaning and stooping were too exasperating, I closed my eyes and heard Mozart-- how much better can it get?

Light Opera? Musical Theater?

What is the difference? Something or other to do with the difficulty and construction of the music. A famous Chicago chef's daughter is off to study musical theater, but he thinks I gave him the impression that she would be slumming it by opera standards. Not so, not so-- two different beasts.

And vive la difference! I saw Mary Poppins and was quite bowled over by the spectacle. As was the entire audience. Lots of showstopping dance numbers with an intensely energetic chorus. Brave singers 'flying' all over the theater. Fantastic light show. Talented children, too. (Always love that!) But the amplification was sub-par, alas. Which seems odd when everything else was so late-breaking technology. Of course, the dialogue didn't much matter, which is good because the acquired English accents were hard to understand anyhow.

Overheard comments ranged from "It's not totally like the movie" to "This is the best show ever!" Plenty of children in the crowd. Lots of fun, really. Good enough but nowhere near great.

Music of the Baroque rocks again

NO, it's not really opera, but it's related by more than half: Jane Glover, the conductor of Music of the Baroque, usually conducts one opera for the Chicago Opera Theater. Last year she conducted Don Giovanni and this year it will be another Mozart gem, La Clemenza di Tito. Also, tonight the MOB performed a section of Purcell's Fairy Queen, a semi-opera, and they started their season with a concert version of a Handel opera, so I'm not too far off-topic.

Among the many wonderful things about Chicago, the arts and humanities reign supreme for me. Art Institute? Love it! The Chicago Symphony Orchestra? World class. The Lyric Opera? Great singing. But the Music of the Baroque is almost a secret treasure; guess it's not such a secret because few seats remained empty.

Check it out:

http://www.baroque.org/about/


Great hits this evening to commemorate the births and deaths of four great and standard composers: Purcell, Handel, Haydn, and Mendelssohn. For the neophyte these are recognizable names. Many tunes and styles also resonate with non-classical music people, which isn't to say it was cliched, trite, or dull to the regular WFMT listener. Not at all. In fact, a chamber orchestra setting brings nuances to light for everyone.

Simply splendid evening made more educational by excellent program notes, neither too pedantic nor superficial. And if one can find the time, pre-concert lectures brush one up ever so refreshingly.

Bravo, Chicago. Your arts more than make up for the strange weather and politics!

Boring Abduction

Quite a lot of Chicago Lyric Opera's Abduction from the Seraglio is boring. Mozart can be. There, someone said it. Yes, the music is really sublime, but not for hours on end. "Too many notes," they said in Amadeus, and everyone remembers that because it seems true to modern ears.

When there's a lot of coughing during an aria, the director has failed. True, the singer could commit a bit more. Yet if the director has done a good job, then the singer will have an easier time of it! Standing and declaring is too much onus on the singer and sleepy-making for the audience.

As has been written of this production everywhere, the entropic approach to set design baffles. What was a charming set in the first act was reduced to a revolving astro-turf platform, which then gave way to a door. I am a big fan of minimalism (such as was seen here in the AMAZING Eugene Onegin last year), but there must be strong style or meaningful symbols.

Five of six performers were mediocre on the night I went. I wonder if because they were all young, they were obliged to the conductor?

Anyhow, it is another opera NOT for the beginner. Approaching Mozart operas daunts many, rightfully so in this case. For the neophyte, The Magic Flute is the way to go.

Tristan at Lyric Opera

The archetypal opera could be any one of many because of the different genres, but Tristan und Isolde always seemed like THE BIGGIE to me when I was but an unwashed Conservatory student: lengthy exposition in German, knightly legend, love, death, you know-- the usual fare. I dreaded it, knowing that it would be outside my ken.

My aversion was unfounded. Some 12 years ago we went to LA Opera's presentation of the masterwork. Our ill-advised tardiness had an upside: we were not left in the lobby to watch on a screen. Instead we were seated in the rear of the main floor, under the balcony. We couldn't read the supertitles, but they were wholly unnecessary because the music expresses the feeling so clearly. Even the overture foreshadowed the emotional content ahead. So detailed the exposition, so detailed the music. I almost felt that I had bathed in chocolate mousse because of the richness!

The Lyric production (featuring the same cartoonish sets and costumes from LA!) starred Deborah Voigt, America's preeminent Wagnerian soprano. She is a phenomenon! Her voice and directness in bearing are perfect! Everyone else comported themselves exquisitely, still her star shone the brightest.

Tarnishing the evening was a dull, dry overture. I was robbed of my luxuriating. Perhaps the acoustics in the cheap seats up high aren't so good? Also, a strange scrim lay before our eyes at the opening of each act: "Tristan and Isolde by Richard Wagner," in what must have been 20-inch letters. Rather overbearing and wholly unnecessary, I think.

A friend says that during the intermissions in Germany, one may dine on china and linen in ample time. How funny it was for her to see so many people in their elegant garb, sitting on the steps and floors, eating from boxes. Things are indeed different in America. At least it wasn't McDonalds!

Opera as Top 40

Pertaining to the title of this little episode, I could rattle off the top 40 YouTube opera videos to catch if anyone wants. Perhaps I will do that soon!

Just today I'd have to put Anna Netrebko way on up there. She is gorgeous and sings as nicely (in certain repertoire). I heard her caress some Bellini piece on the radio the other day and just about drove off the road due to my exalted state-- whooey, babe!

The other point to this title: I have been asked why anyone should care about opera nowadays if it is more or less the Top 40 from 200 years ago. Even people who think they hate all the wobbly singing suspect that this highly cultured art form holds some mystique or cachet. Well, it does! You're right. And I have been really slaying myself to get the wording just right. And not be too long-winded, which, as an operaphile, I easily tend to do. Musn't hold forth ad nauseum, right?!

Opera was its Top 40's. Catchy tunes, emotional stories, good entertainment. Take a peek at a few things on You Tube-- not Paul Potts or Andrew Lloyd Webber-- those are Opera Lite and LOTS of fun, but glance at the real thing here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vazQuEh47mo&feature=related

or

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvNU_1Z9ZU8

Neither of these is the One Perfect Offering of that particular number. Such a thing probably doesn't exist on film! But it's a little something for you!

New Year's Resolutions

I was greatly heartened this morning to hear some resolutions of WFMT listeners being read on air: two out of three of them wanted to learn more about opera (and how to 'tolerate' it!). Well, well! Your old auntie here has LOTS of info and ideas for them! I'm so impressed that there are such stout-hearted souls still out there! Those of us in the proverbial know have a cosmically important duty to help our seekers.

First off: don't play your umpteenth recording by various artists as a ploy to enrapture them. Netrebko, Callas, and Tebaldi will come AFTER other introductions are made. Those fine ladies will be the vehicles, thank you, not the stars-- at first.

There are many user-friendly operas. Start with the [weak] plot, give an aria and highlight, then move on. Give some time to digest in between, as it were. Carmen goes very well, exotic, erotic, tuneful. The Barber of Seville charms everyone in the first act. Puccini carries one away. Hummable is accesible; accessibility is key.

Again, it's all about the emotionalism. The passion of that well-trained BIG voice. Sumptous orchestrations. If you're over-the-top, this is for you. If you prefer quiet, this is for your inner feelings.

Not every opera is for every person all of the time. Me, I cannot tolerate Madame Butterfly. The music is so gorgeous that I weep just to hear it, but I don't need to cry these days (got enough of it elsewhere, you know?). I also despise that American imperialism and a deep chauvinism are chief themes. And that a nice, naive young woman with a baby suffers so mightily. TOO MUCH LONGING wears me out! Yet I very much recommend this opera to a neophyte in that it is so operatic and beautiful and sexy and and and.

I can see that my prose is suffering here, so I shall quit for now. More useful thoughts put eloquently will follow soon, I promise!