Turandot discussion

[zamyrabyrd]

This Shafajinskaia video is impressive in parts, but she sings flat a lot of the time. The voice is huge, but she has trouble lifting it up and she sings under the note. I don't know if that's why she moves and sings so slowly, but this Ice Princess fails to light up my fire.

While listening, I had in the back of my mind that this kind of production ends frequently in early burnout and flatness is one of the signs. I never understood some dramatic sopranos in my circle of acquaintance, why they felt the need to overproject what was already BIG. Nilsson knew what she was doing. She didn't strain; there was no need, anyway.

ZB

[Solitary Wanderer]

Attended Turandot on Thursday night; needless to say it was fantastic!

It was great to see a contemporary production after having watched the Mets DVD version the previous night as it made the Mets version look positively old-fashioned!

Actually its a great way to approach these operas; see the traditional approach, then a modern updating. Its amazing how the same story and music can be presented in a completely different way; both excellent!

Heres todays review in our local newspaper 

[Lethevich]

Actually its a great way to approach these operas; see the traditinal approach, then a modern updating. Its amazing how the same story and music can be presented in a completely different way; both excellent!

Yep, updated productions are great and prevent boredom in the long-run, but they are quite bad to watch as a first time, as stage directions or even the setting become confusing, and sometimes it's hard to know what the hell is going on. It's why I find it sad to sometimes find no decent "traditional" production available for an opera I am interested in, so I have to jump into the deep end, so to speak...

[knight66]

The first time I saw Turandot was in a production in which Calaf was really Puccini and dressed as such. Liu was his maid and Turandot existed physically in a different space. They never so much as looked at each other and the whole thing took place in Puccini's head. I knew the opera perfectly well and just found it all alienating and damaging to the drama; but if it had been my first encounter with the work, I would have been clueless as to what was going on.

Mike

[Tsaraslondon]

The first time I saw Turandot was in a production in which Calaf was really Puccini and dressed as such. Liu was his maid and Turandot existed physically in a different space. They never so much as looked at each other and the whole thing took place in Puccini's head. I knew the opera perfectly well and just found it all alienating and damaging to the drama; but if it had been my first encounter with the work, I would have been clueless as to what was going on.

Mike

But then that would appear to be to be a bad production, as it didn't tell the story clearly. Updated productions, as such, need not be a barrier to first time appreciation. Both Jonathan Miller's gangster Rigoletto and Baz Luhrmann's 50s La Boheme were popular with young, first time audiences, and , though the unusual setting might have had something to do with this, they both also scored by clearly telling the story.

[knight66]

Oh, I am not agaimst modern productions, I probably prefer them as it then avoids the moving-museum concept. One favourite is the Glyndbourne Theodora. That Miller Rigoletto was also a complete success.

Mike

[Sarastro]

Dimitrova and Martinucci were a great couple...i wish they would publish this recording from Arena di Verona some day.
Alas, Sutherland is stupendous, Pavarotti and Caballe too, but the person I like there is Mehta! Nilsson and Corelli are already classics.  Though I like Marton-Carreras too.
And that black-and-white film with Udovich, Corelli and Mattioli? She's probably the Liu's I've ever heard and seen.
And, as in my opinion, Turandot, even with its unfinished finale, is still the most exciting opera...it's may be the top of all opera...of course I just think so, but it's a genial masterpiece, the music makes me tremble and awe.

[wagnernn]

How about Eva Turner ,I enjoy her Turandot.Her voice is as powerful as Nilsson and as glorious as Sutherland.

[knight66]

No doubt you are right about Turner, I find her a tricky one in that when I was much younger she would be interviewed on a reasonably regular basis and all we ever got was the my life as Turandot blah.

I brought myself up on the Callas recording which made Turner seem bland, though in truth her's is the voice more suited to the part.

Welcome Sarastro, I can see you are into vocal music and singers....we need more such people round here.

Mike

[wagnernn]

I've heard that Tebaldi had sung the role Turandot in her career.Yesterday,I saw a album of Tebaldi which has the aria "In questa reggia".A customer said that Sutherland enjoys this aria very much,and she was strongly influenced  .Do you agree?

[Sarastro]

Do you agree?

No...I also heard "In questa reggia" by Tebaldi...of course Tebaldi is Tebaldi, beautiful, but there melancholic, sad, and...it's more like Ricciarelli. Not hers, imho.

[Lilas Pastia]

Neither Tebaldi nor Sutherland sang the role on stage. Tebaldi only sang Liu's part on discs (she wouldn't settle for seconda donna status on stage) and In questa reggia is the only Turandot to be heard from her.

[wagnernn]

What do you thinK about the C3 in the aria "In questa reggia"
For me:
Nilsson :10 points
Callas,Eva Turner,Sutherland:9 points
Caballe,Borkh:8 points
I've not listened to the one by Tebaldi yet,so please vote for it!

[Lilas Pastia]

There are umpteen In questa reggias from Nilsson (2 commercial sets and many, many recitals or broadcasts). The are also quite a few Callas ones: 2 studio discs of the aria alone, a few early recitals and the complete opera. In her case, the EMI disc of the aria is much better than the complete performance.
It's probably my favourite of them all.

With Nilsson, there's couple of youtubes that are better than both complete studio performances. One is a sizzling production with Corelli abetting her note for note in the aria and the ensuing riddle scene. So hot and supercharged that it's the equivalent of musical hyperventilating.

I don't think the others are on their level. But really, you should forget about this rate-that-note game. It doesn't begin to do justice to any of those great singers. FWIW the most staggering high C I've heard in this aria comes from a relatively unknown hungarian soprano. Good as she is vocally, hers is a cold and  marmoreal interpretation. No fever, no hate, no trance-like transport in the Ice Princess' dynastic memories. Just a generalized haughtiness. With Nilsson and Callas you hear a fully developed character.

[Tsaraslondon]

I don't think the others are on their level. But really, you should forget about this rate-that-note game. It doesn't begin to do justice to any of those great singers. FWIW the most staggering high C I've heard in this aria comes from a relatively unknown hungarian soprano. Good as she is vocally, hers is a cold and  marmoreal interpretation. No fever, no hate, no trance-like transport in the Ice Princess' dynastic memories. Just a generalized haughtiness. With Nilsson and Callas you hear a fully developed character.

Just as an aside, I was surprised, the first time I heard the Turner recording, to find that she does what many do when they get to the phrase with that top C. she just eliminates the words and sings a sort of vocalise. As her diction is usually pretty impeccable, you do notice it. On the other hand, Callas, even in the complete studio performance, when she no longer has the ease on top, sings the words exactly as written; typical of her not to try and make things easier for herself.

[Guido]

Just saw this on a Met DVD yesterday. This must be the worst opera in the repertoire. In virtually every parameter it is terrible:

Characterisation - completely one dimentional, and almost as bad worse, all are inhumanly unlikeable (except perhaps for Liu). Puccini doesn't even begin to explore what emotions these people might be feeling in the potentially interesting (if always ludicrous) situations that arise. The father is pointless - he adds nothing whatsoever to the story. The Calaf is sickened by the death of Liu, yet still demands to be kissed virtually in the same breath. Liu's sacrifice is completely gratuitous and doesn't change any of the characters in any way. There's no apparent reason for Turandot's  sudden transformation... presumably its the physical urge that he's awaken in her? This would all be sikck if it wasn't so unbelievably shallow and stupid.

Dramatically: Alternately so risible and so awful that's it's difficult for me to know what people are getting out of this. The opening of act 2 - completely pointless, adds nothing to the rest of the opera. Liu's death, again nothing (it's the best bit of the whole thing admittedly because its damn pretty). The whole opening choral episode also.

Musically: The bargain basement orientalism is without exception vulgar, crudely done, completely unatmospheric. It's in such bad taste that one begins to feel uncomfortable - almost that Puccini is making some kind of racial statement here. The actual themes themselves are almost without exception shockingly trite, floating above harmony so sweet and clichéed and often plain bad that its a miracle he sort of gets away with it by dressing it up with his orchestration (which is impressive for the first five minutes and then one is overcome with the cloying banality of it all). But all of them are flayed mercilessly for all they're worth, repeated over and over again so that they lose their initial appeal, even when they are good tunes (Nessun Dorma and Liu's two arias) - the death scene iof Liu particularly, just keeps repeating the same few maudlin chords again and again with dimishing returns on their emotional impact. And Nessun Dorma in the context of the rest of the scene is fairly sick.

With most  music and opera that I dislike, it's a matter of indifference but very few works actually conjure disgust in me on every level. I'm really surprised at my own response! It's a really visceral dislike! Almost moral!

I can't believe that anyone would find this to be a moving or convincing piece of theatre. The only reason I can think of for it's popularity are those three arias. People please enlighten me!

What I kept thinking was - the singers - what are they getting out of this? Domingo's acting was fairly bad (how could it not be - there's nothing to work with), but for someone who champions Verdi's Simon Boccanegra, what is going through his mind when he's doing this? When he's being all sad and disgusted by the cruelty and pointlessness of Liu's death, and then instantly pressing the princess to kiss him?

[Guido]

In short: It's difficult for me to imagine someone being able to apprecciate say, the Marschallin's monalogue, Simon Boccanegra, Otello, any of Janacek's operas, Figaro, any Wagner and also appreciate this. I'm amazed that people take it seriously! Or if they don't take it seriously, that they actually want to see it at all!

[knight66]

As with so much Puccini, it can be seen as a queasy exploitative exercise in manipulation of the audience. Two of the worst productions I have seen of anything have been of this opera.

It is a cruel fairy tale and can be viewed as such. After all, that is very much a recognised world tradition. No one in it is really believeable. The music I enjoy a great deal, though of course the end is a real letdown. It seemingly holds echos from Puccini's autobiography. But for me that does not add to its interest. It is a great choral opera with a lot for them to do and I do think the music for Ping, Pang and Pong to be amongst his very best.

I can understand the distaste, but if you can distance yourself from it and see it as more of a two dimensional folk tale, you may be less harsh on it.

Mike

[Guido]

As with so much Puccini, it can be seen as a queasy exploitative exercise in manipulation of the audience. Two of the worst productions I have seen of anything have been of this opera.

It is a cruel fairy tale and can be viewed as such. After all, that is very much a recognised world tradition. No one in it is really believeable. The music I enjoy a great deal, though of course the end is a real letdown. It seemingly holds echos from Puccini's autobiography. But for me that does not add to its interest. It is a great choral opera with a lot for them to do and I do think the music for Ping, Pang and Pong to be amongst his very best.

I can understand the distaste, but if you can distance yourself from it and see it as more of a two dimensional folk tale, you may be less harsh on it.

Mike

It's not the story itself which is iniquitous - it's Puccini's treatment of it! The story is scary and horrid of course, but then so are the stories of Bluebeard and Billy Budd... but the treatment of them by their respective composers actually explore the themes that may arise from such a horrible dramatic situation.

[zamyrabyrd]

As with so much Puccini, it can be seen as a queasy exploitative exercise in manipulation of the audience. Two of the worst productions I have seen of anything have been of this opera...It is a cruel fairy tale and can be viewed as such. After all, that is very much a recognised world tradition. No one in it is really believeable. The music I enjoy a great deal, though of course the end is a real letdown.

The music at the end that Puccini was not able to finish is a horrendous cut and paste.  There's actually no reason why it should be kept. Maybe a better Sussmeyer (as in the case of Mozart) can come along and do a better job. As is, it makes the opera even more schlocky.

ZB