"Modern Opera Is Rubbish"
“Modern opera studiously avoids anything so old-fashioned as melody or emotion, which seems to me a contradiction of what music is all about.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/m...ern-opera.html
Well, another crusty, close-minded blowhard citing the tired, old canard that modern music has “no melody.”
Last edited by Xavier; Aug-02-2012 at 20:45.
Yes. obviously from a position of intimate knowledge.Originally Posted by Xavier
There was so little to say about Attenborough that the reporter had to pad the article out with fulsome praise of a completely unrelated but much better director.
Natalie
Nonsense. Utter nonsense coming from a very silly man.
Has this dude ever listened Britten? If that's not melodic, I don't know what is.
During Wagner's lifetime, one of the most persistant criticisms of his music was that "it had no melody".
This is like saying that chocolate cake has no calories ! In fact, Wagner's music is chock full of great melodies .
It's true that operas like Wozzeck,Lulu, Moses &Aron etc are not the kind of operas where people walk out of the theater humming the melodies, but so what ? And these operas "lack emotion"? Wozzeck's torment and madness "shows no emotion"? Moses' despair whne he cries out "Oh word, thou word,that I lack !" does not show emotion?
"Doctor Atomic" by John Adams portays the anguish and fear of Oppenheimer as he realizes what he has created in a truly compelling manner .
Well in Australia, there are and have been some composers working in a more melodic, 'modern tonal' style.
Of the past, the late Richard Meale is an example. In his operas 'Voss' and 'Mere de Glace' he consciously returned to more melody and direct emotion. But for whatever reason, even like 20-25 years after they were produced, they are not known by many people here anymore. They are not played on radio for example (a musician involved in recording these told me that he has tried to get the radio stations to play them ever since but has had no such luck).
Of the present, Richard Mills has produced a number of more melodic but modern operas in recent years. 'The Love of the Nightingale' was done a few years back. He is a trenchant critic of the extreme 'fringe' avant-garde, he would probably agree on at least some points made in that article. In an interview on youtube, he says his aim with his operas is to give audiences a special experience, not just for example show people 'doing the washing.' Here is that interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0ENkh5Ahjg
My point is that I do like 'atonal' opera, I actually connect with that more readily than say wig opera. I also like Romantic opera (excluding Wagner, or most of his stuff at least). I like neo-romantic operas like those of Meale, they are great. The issue however has little to do with the music but with various ideological 'turf wars' between composers and others in the classical music industry. I am all for discussing this openly and with respect with the other side. Indeed, I see myself as a listener being on no side, only that of common sense. But people with ideologies to uphold won't admit that, or mostly don't.
So we get these types of polarising debates and frankly I'm sick of them, I've had a gutful of them. The 'rot' started post-1945 with Boulez and his ilk espousing 'total serialism' and other such rigidities. But composers like Messiaen, Xenakis, Carter did not get involved in these turf wars, they just kept composing rather than talking *****. So too Britten, I think part of the reason why he established the festival in his hometown, in Aldeburgh, is to get away from the cliques and turf wars in London. It makes sense, but I think now here at least we're moving towards some sort of pluralism and respect for diversity. People have had enough of this in-fighting, its counter productive and its got to stop. & in many cases it has sweet fa to do with the music, honestly. Its pseudo intellectual jargon and gobbledigook.
Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress - Mohandas K. Gandhi.
I am sorry but the only real music is from the ROMANTIC ERA after that the good music declined.
Well nothing like making your entry with a sweeping statement!
Great breakthrough opera had after Classicism. In the 19th and 20th century great revolutions took place in opera.
Although as much as i love opera from the Romantic period and forward, each time i hear a Mozart opera i always question myself "Why didn't we stop here and let music stay forever like this?".
But as life, evolution in opera exists. Whether it is a good one or not, only time will tell. However i agree there's lack of catchy melodies. What makes me sad, above all, is the loss of bel-canto. The italian opera had its true greatness in singing, but nowadays it is unthinkable writting in bel-canto style. Maybe Wagner is accepted. Verdi (and all behind him) not.
Korngold, Strauss, even Britten. The list goes on.
And you know, Wagner is rather old-fashioned these days. He was born 199 years ago, after all.
Well there's nothing stopping anyone from writing a Mozart opera. Seriously. Victor Borge did it, 'A Mozart opera by Borge' is on one of his live performances, I have it on vinyl, very funny, he gets all those cliches down pat (and before I am attacked by some Mozartian (or Mozartean, for the pendantic spellers?) I realise all operas have cliches, not just wig opera...*covers his ar*e and getting very cynical now...very)...
Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress - Mohandas K. Gandhi.
If that is true and a good composer now can write a "mozart" opera up to standard of the daponte trio - let them go ahead - seriously - I will be the first in the queue for tickets at covent garden to hear a new Mozart opera. Mind - I will be sitting behind the composer with a bucket of rotten tomatoes hoping to leave with bucket full.
Last edited by stomanek; Aug-03-2012 at 17:44.
The article says "Grandage’s production of Le nozze di Figaro at Glyndebourne in June — his second production at the venue after Billy Budd in 2010 — won rave reviews from the opera critics of every publication from The Daily Telegraph to The Lady",
which reminds me of Dorothy Parker's observation that "Katharine Hepburn delivered a striking performance that ran the gamut of emotions, from A to B."
Well the issue is composers today don't have to go back and do that as its already been done. Seriously, the issue here as always is ideology and dogma. If this director wants to do nothing but direct wig operas, then fine. But there's no use him or anyone else poo-pooing operas younger than 1791. I mean seriously. Are we back there? Do we travel around in horses and carts? That's what I mean.
People can do whatever they want. But I'm sick of this ideological rubbish, which seems to be practised by some in the classical music industry (and listenership?) of needing to elevate one thing and correspondingly degrade another. Just ******* do what you do, simple as that. Is that hard?
Last edited by mamascarlatti; Aug-04-2012 at 03:00.
Honest differences are often a healthy sign of progress - Mohandas K. Gandhi.
Who the hell is this guy? I prefer the opinion of his uncle, Sir David.
All composers are equal but some are more equal than others.
Posting Permissions
35Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
