Wagner's Valhalla

[Scarpia]

Why outrageous, exactly?

I blame Wagner for not writing Operas that are less boring. 
[runs away]

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Actually, I can't find any Strauss operas either. How nice of them to almost totally dismiss german operas.

I blame fame of shapeless coloratura arias.

[DavidRoss]

I find kind of outrageous how top 20 most frequently performed operas in North America don't include single one from Wagner.

Full circle in just ten pages.

Does outrage preclude honest inquiry into the reasons these works are not as popular as you would like them to be?  If not, then the next logical step is asking why that is, and whether something about the nature of the works themselves inhibits such popularity.  Thus http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,113.msg490404.html#msg490404

I blame fame of shapeless coloratura arias.

Couldn't it be that there are just far more operas that offer more dramatically convincing story and more musically satisfying song of the sort that appeal to most audiences?  For instance, I love much of the music in Der Rosenkavalier, but the story's a bit of a mess.

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Couldn't it be that there are just far more operas that offer more dramatically convincing story and more musically satisfying song of the sort that appeal to most audiences?

Let's see... no.

[MishaK]

Couldn't it be that there are just far more operas that offer more dramatically convincing story and more musically satisfying song of the sort that appeal to most audiences?

That's a silly point. Many of the most popular operas have completely preposterous plots, two-dimensional characters, etc. etc. Popularity has never been a measure of artistic quality. Often quite the contrary.

Does someone have a link to this list of 20 most popular operas in the US that y'all are talking about?

[Jaakko Keskinen]

For instance, I love much of the music in Der Rosenkavalier, but the story's a bit of a mess.

Yeah, like fully armed chief of police getting murdered by a chick (and everyone in the building are like they don't hear anything) isn't messy at all.

@Mensch: http://listoftheday.blogspot.com/2007/10/top-20-operas.html

[Scarpia]

Yeah, like fully armed chief of police getting murdered by a chick (and everyone in the building are like they don't hear anything) isn't messy at all.

It happened in the town were I lived.

And then, the next year, this little dwarf dude stole all the gold that the thee blond chicks had stashed in the bottom of the river, and by the next week the whole place had burned down.  Oh wait, that one didn't happen.

[MishaK]

@Mensch: http://listoftheday.blogspot.com/2007/10/top-20-operas.html

Thanks. Wagner has always had a hard time in the US, post-WWII, given the association with anti-Semitism. Funny, of course, that US audiences will nevertheless watch operas that are openly mysoginistic (Magic Flute) and glorify enslavement of Africans (Magic Flute, Aida), as well as operas that are kitschy pastiches of exoticised Asia (Butterfly and Turandot). That doesn't seem to bother anyone. 

Of course, then there is the problem that Wagner is often difficult to cast and expensive to produce, requiring also larger orchestras than most US opera houses have on their regular roster.

I seem to recall another list here on GMG recently that had Holländer in the top 20. Was that a global popularity list?

[jlaurson]

Full circle in just ten pages.

Does outrage preclude honest inquiry into the reasons these works are not as popular as you would like them to be?  If not, then the next logical step is asking why that is, and whether something about the nature of the works themselves inhibits such popularity.  Thus http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,113.msg490404.html#msg490404
* * * * * * * * * *
Couldn't it be that there are just far more operas that offer more dramatically convincing story and more musically satisfying song of the sort that appeal to most audiences?  For instance, I love much of the music in Der Rosenkavalier, but the story's a bit of a mess.

You're right on the money with the first point--but I'd have to agree with the others on the second; before Wagner, dramatically convincing stories were the rare exception. True drama-with-music gets an unparalleled boost from Wagner. The only reason these operas don't make sense to modern audiences (apart from the mentioned difficulties of getting into them in the first place) are the asinine "conservative" [actually: reactionary] productions that have been put on so often in the US.

[Jaakko Keskinen]

It happened in the town were I lived.

And then, the next year, this little dwarf dude stole all the gold that the thee blond chicks had stashed in the bottom of the river, and by the next week the whole place had burned down.  Oh wait, that one didn't happen.

I stole purse from few chicks, melted coins into a magic ring and then some pyromaniac burned some place down, in name of Loge, of course.

And if that police thing really happened, I would say: good riddance. Even my granny could hold her own in situation like that... and she's dead.

// You know, there is difference between complaining about quality and wishing for good productions. And since so many people keep yammering about lack of action in Wagner's operas, wouldn't lack of action make frequent performances rather easy?

Edit 2: Oh well, if one is looking for realism in operas, he/she is about to get disappointed. But in fact: I love Tosca. I just don't see what makes Wagner operas so boring compared to others (oh come on, if because of the long monologues, then Hamlet would be boring too!)

[Scarpia]

And if that police thing really happened, I would say: good riddance. Even my granny could hold her own in situation like that... and she's dead.

Don't underestimate the element of surprise.  Chief detective was called on a domestic disturbance, was trying to calm down mentally disturbed woman, who suddenly lunged at him and stabbed him in the neck.  I don't see anything wrong with Tosca as a well constructed bit of drama.  Maybe not the most sophisticated bit of drama in the world, but it works for me, especially with the music. 

[karlhenning]

One of Alberich's errors is in equating [non-appearance among the 20 most frequently performed operas] with [total dismissal of German opera]

[Jaakko Keskinen]

One of Alberich's errors is in equating [non-appearance among the 20 most frequently performed operas] with [total dismissal of German opera]

With all due respect, haven't thou ever exaggerated? Kind of funny how almost every single positive comment about Wagner leads into fierce struggle (I am not completely blameless in this case) while unreasonable and unwarranted mocking is ignored.

//  @Scarpia: Ok, my granny comparison about that cop was completely uncalled for. My douchebag line of the day.

[DavidRoss]

That's a silly point. Many of the most popular operas have completely preposterous plots, two-dimensional characters, etc. etc. Popularity has never been a measure of artistic quality. Often quite the contrary.

Does someone have a link to this list of 20 most popular operas in the US that y'all are talking about?

But we are talking about popularity.  And the question is not about some hypothetical agreed on standards of preposterous, dimensionality, or artistic quality, but of what appeals to American opera audiences enough to get a work on the top 20 list.  Plots that can be easily followed over 3 hours that feature human beings (not Gods and dwarves and magic Easter bonnets), packed with plenty of pleasingly tuneful songs, pretty well describes the top 20 operas referenced above.

Dismiss the point as silly if you like. 

Hmmm...Der Rosenkavalier didn't make the list, either.

[karlhenning]

@Mensch: http://listoftheday.blogspot.com/2007/10/top-20-operas.html

Thanks for this!

(The accent circonflexe on Così is peculiar . . . .)

I think it fairly obvious, in the first place, that Wagner's operas demand professional production.  Wherever you have smaller-budget companies, and summer stock opera, in North America, you'll find that their repertory is dominated by the titles in this list.

[MishaK]

But we are talking about popularity.  And the question is not about some hypothetical agreed on standards of preposterous, dimensionality, or artistic quality, but of what appeals to American opera audiences enough to get a work on the top 20 list.  Plots that can be easily followed over 3 hours that feature human beings (not Gods and dwarves and magic Easter bonnets), packed with plenty of pleasingly tuneful songs, pretty well describes the top 20 operas referenced above.

Dismiss the point as silly if you like. 

Hmmm...Der Rosenkavalier didn't make the list, either.

Your point was that supposedly the more popular operas, not by Wagner, have:

more dramatically convincing story

That's of course a subjective point. But taking that into account, you can't necessarily say that the top 20 are the best in those regards. Turandot, Magic Flute, Fledermaus, Trovatore, to name but a few, have rather silly stories. And again, popularity has nothing to do with quality. Otherwise we should all subject ourselves to the implied superiority of Michael Jackson and Britney Spears.

[DavidRoss]

Kind of funny how almost every single positive comment about Wagner leads into fierce struggle

How is

I find kind of outrageous how top 20 most frequently performed operas in North America don't include single one from Wagner.

a positive comment about Wagner?

And I and others have made many positive comments about Wagner that haven't provoked struggle.  Could it be that it's not positive comments, but unwarranted and exaggerated comments supported only by subjective opinion, that provoke the struggles?  If you look around, you'll see that it's not only such comments regarding Wagner that provoke a response requesting support for them.  Similar struggles have occurred following such comments about Elgar and Mendelssohn, for instance, both significant composers of considerable (but not Godlike) merit.  But scarcely any conflict at all arose when one of the members claimed, in all earnestness, that Dittersdorf was among the greats.

Odd that you and some other big Wagner fans don't see the interest in discussing Wagner and evaluating his musical and theatrical achievements as an indicator of the high esteem for him around these parts.

[DavidRoss]

Your point was that supposedly the more popular operas, not by Wagner, have:

That's of course a subjective point. But taking that into account, you can't necessarily say that the top 20 are the best in those regards. Turandot, Magic Flute, Fledermaus, Trovatore, to name but a few, have rather silly stories. And again, popularity has nothing to do with quality. Otherwise we should all subject ourselves to the implied superiority of Michael Jackson and Britney Spears.

How strange that you either lose or pretend to lose the ability to read when you feel like attacking one of my posts.  Look at the damned sentence again:

Couldn't it be that there are just far more operas that offer more dramatically convincing story and more musically satisfying song of the sort that appeal to most audiences?

I feel certain that if you were as interested in understanding what I say as you are in attacking what I don't say then you would have no trouble with this simple concept.  Whether you or I or Alberich or Jens finds X dramatically convincing hardly addresses the question of what most US audiences find dramatically convincing.  I, for instance, regard LOTR as a noteworthy literary achievement--but I know many people who disparage it (without reading it) for being fantasy fiction about wizards and elves and other imaginary creatures.  They're simply not interested in such stuff and don't imagine that they could relate to it.

[Scarpia]

I find kind of outrageous how top 20 most frequently performed operas in North America don't include single one from Wagner.

Let's start over.  Who, exactly, are you outraged at?  Audiences who go to opera who don't like Wagner, potential audiences who like Wagner but don't go to the opera, opera company music directors who program operas that audiences pay tickets to see (in sufficient numbers to pay for the production) or Wagner for not writing better operas?   Sounds like you are outraged at the universe in general for conforming to your idea of what it should be like.

[MishaK]

How strange that you either lose or pretend to lose the ability to read when you feel like attacking one of my posts.  Look at the damned sentence again: I feel certain that if you were as interested in understanding what I say as you are in attacking what I don't say then you would have no trouble with this simple concept.  Whether you or I or Alberich or Jens finds X dramatically convincing hardly addresses the question of what most US audiences find dramatically convincing.  I, for instance, regard LOTR as a noteworthy literary achievement--but I know many people who disparage it (without reading it) for being fantasy fiction about wizards and elves and other imaginary creatures.  They're simply not interested in such stuff and don't imagine that they could relate to it.

In that case, your entire point is moot. Why are we discussing what we find interesting or what US audiences find interesting? What is your point? If you think that the US popular vote gives some measure of objectivity to your dislike of Wagner, you're flat out wrong.

BTW, as I mentioned above, frequency of performance has less to do with popularity per se, but more to do with the ease of producing a given opera on a limited budget. We are after all talking not just about the Met, the Lyric and the LA Opera, but lots of small opera houses in flyover country you've never heard of. They don't have the budgets or the musicians to stage difficult, long works, and can't pay the fees that the few major singers charge who can actually sing a Brünnhilde or Tristan. Same thing goes for a lot of Strauss operas, Janacek and others who don't make the list. I don't think Wagner is really underperformed at the Met or the other top international class opera houses in the US.