Maria Callas

[Tsaraslondon]

Haha amazing story re: the aria!

So the objection was only that it wasn't challenging vocally enough? Or did she object to the characters/libretti/musical substance too? Wagner doesn't require much flexibility either...

(sorry for asking - I have tried googling extensively, but can't find anything).

I believe she didn't think Puccini's music on a par with that of her favourites, nor the subject matter. I have to say I agree with her. Puccini was a great man of the theatre and his operas work brilliantly on the stage, but I don't feel he has the depth or the breadth of Verdi. You can't imagine Puccini doing justice to a subject like Don Carlos, or even La Traviata. (Nor, for that matter, do we come across a character with the depth and complexity of Norma.) Like Shakespeare, there is a uiversality about Verdi's work that we don't find in Puccini.

[Guido]

I believe she didn't think Puccini's music on a par with that of her favourites, nor the subject matter. I have to say I agree with her. Puccini was a great man of the theatre and his operas work brilliantly on the stage, but I don't feel he has the depth or the breadth of Verdi. You can't imagine Puccini doing justice to a subject like Don Carlos, or even La Traviata. (Nor, for that matter, do we come across a character with the depth and complexity of Norma.) Like Shakespeare, there is a uiversality about Verdi's work that we don't find in Puccini.

I do of course agree about Verdi (though wouldn't quite put him on a level with Shakespeare, but I very much know what you're getting at here), but don't about Puccini - as drama it seems cheap, designed to appeal to the lowest in us, but very effective for that - it's made of high impact, shocking things, all tricks and effects, superb arias held together with music of extraordinary banality. It's good drama in the way that Dan Brown's Da Vinci code is a good book - he knows exactly what he's doing with his materials, and it holds you in its grip whilst you're experiencing it, even whilst you acknowledge its paucity of artistic resource and recourse to cliche, but it's highly effective in its own way. At the end though one feels absolutely no sense of spiritual uplift of even of having witnessed something truly tragic - we get our dose of emotion and leave the theatre unchanged and unreflecting.

Was just interested to hear Callas' take on it. Of course she famously disliked Mozart too, which is difficult to fathom for most of us who love opera, but when you hear her sing it, you understand why she had her misgivings perhaps - it just seems like child's play to her - she sings it perfectly as if there's nothing to it and there's absolutely no sense of risk or challenge when she sings it. Also the voice is hardly timbrally suited to her, which in Mozart is absolutely key.

[Tsaraslondon]

Was just interested to hear Callas' take on it. Of course she famously disliked Mozart too, which is difficult to fathom for most of us who love opera, but when you hear her sing it, you understand why she had her misgivings perhaps - it just seems like child's play to her - she sings it perfectly as if there's nothing to it and there's absolutely no sense of risk or challenge when she sings it. Also the voice is hardly timbrally suited to her, which in Mozart is absolutely key.

Callas once made a comment that she found most of Mozart's music dull, and it dogs her to this day. She also said that Mozart was often sung too delicately, as if the singer was performing on tip toes, and that it should be sung with the same open frankness one sang, say, Leonora, in il Trovatore. Considering the Mozartian grace with which she sings Leonora, one can see her point. I know many don't feel the same, but I absolutely love her early test recording of Non mi dir, partly because it is sung with such ease, and refulgent tone, and of course perfect legato.

She did, as you probably know, sing Kostanze on stage at La Scala, and must have made an electrifying impression, if her performances of Martern aller Arten are anything to go by.

[mc ukrneal]

I do of course agree about Verdi (though wouldn't quite put him on a level with Shakespeare, but I very much know what you're getting at here), but don't about Puccini - as drama it seems cheap, designed to appeal to the lowest in us, but very effective for that - it's made of high impact, shocking things, all tricks and effects, superb arias held together with music of extraordinary banality. It's good drama in the way that Dan Brown's Da Vinci code is a good book - he knows exactly what he's doing with his materials, and it holds you in its grip whilst you're experiencing it, even whilst you acknowledge its paucity of artistic resource and recourse to cliche, but it's highly effective in its own way. At the end though one feels absolutely no sense of spiritual uplift of even of having witnessed something truly tragic - we get our dose of emotion and leave the theatre unchanged and unreflecting.

I realize this is a Callas thread, but taking pot shots at Puccini is unwarrented. Maybe he leaves you unchanged and unfeeling, but that is not the case with many (most?) others. In Tosca, you cannot help but wonder what might have happened if events had gone differently. When Cavaradossi sings 'Victorria', this is perhaps the most thrilling moment in all of opera (and really brings drama to the moment). Or in La Boheme, at the end when she dies, it is very real and connects with most people. Turandot is not really very human, but Liu makes up for that, and I often leave that opera thinking about people who love someone, but never get that love returned (despite the devotion, et al that they bring). 

Paucity of artisitc resource - what? The music is so beautiful and so well orchestrated - it's like you and I are in parallel universes when we listen.

[Guido]

I realize this is a Callas thread, but taking pot shots at Puccini is unwarrented. Maybe he leaves you unchanged and unfeeling, but that is not the case with many (most?) others. In Tosca, you cannot help but wonder what might have happened if events had gone differently. When Cavaradossi sings 'Victorria', this is perhaps the most thrilling moment in all of opera (and really brings drama to the moment). Or in La Boheme, at the end when she dies, it is very real and connects with most people. Turandot is not really very human, but Liu makes up for that, and I often leave that opera thinking about people who love someone, but never get that love returned (despite the devotion, et al that they bring). 

Paucity of artisitc resource - what? The music is so beautiful and so well orchestrated - it's like you and I are in parallel universes when we listen.

I wouldn't say it was a potshot - this is a considered opinion after listening carefully to most of his operas (haven't heard the very early one/ones). I think he's a master of what he does but also think his best are the early ones: Manon and Boheme.

Callas obviously thought there was something wrong with Puccini to disparage his music so publicly, which is why I mention my own misgivings - I wonder how much we would have agreed. Sounds like, from what Tsaraslondon was saying that she agreed that there is a lack of convincing drama.

You are right that we must be looking for very different things in opera, though for me beauty and good orchestration are prerequisites, rather than ends in themselves.

[zamyrabyrd]

Besides a definitive Floria Tosca, she was also the quintessential Cio-Cio-San and Mimì.

Her penetration into the character of Butterfly is uncanny, going into such detail that most singers would not have bothered. One moment among many is when she is questioned by the Consul, somehow she got into the skin of a young girl and really sounds 15. Another is her "dimmi su" (tell me) when asking or rather pummeling Suzuki why Pinkerton made such arrangements for their protection, she could have burned a hole in the ground with that sizzling "sssss".

But on the subject of adolescence, and I don't know if this subject ever came up here, was she Nina Foresti , March 1935, singing "Un bel dì" on Major Bowes Amateur Hour? The speaking voice could be hers but it is difficult to imagine the future singer here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCK29If2pUI

These two links are fascinating, an actual letter to the Radio Show and the audition application.

http://www.mariacallasmuseum.org/_documents/mc-doc-005.htm
"...Considering such modest training, it is possible that Mary Ann learned the music she performed in public between 1934 and 1937 mainly by listening to records and radio programs. Since Callas always had an impeccable ear, learning to sing "Un bel di" by imitating the singing style and timbral characteristics heard on a recording would have posed no difficulty. This might explain why neither Nina Foresti's singing nor her timbre, curiously mature-sounding for an eleven-year old girl, resemble anything known to have been recorded by Callas from 1949 to 1977."

http://www.mariacallasmuseum.org/_documents/mc-doc-006.htm
I don't understand the convolutedness of hiding behind yet another pseudonym, Anita Duval. But the handwriting could be hers, even if it is somewhat advanced for a girl who just turned 11 a few months before.

ZB

[Tsaraslondon]

Besides a definitive Floria Tosca, she was also the quintessential Cio-Cio-San and Mimì.

Her penetration into the character of Butterfly is uncanny, going into such detail that most singers would not have bothered. One moment among many is when she is questioned by the Consul, somehow she got into the skin of a young girl and really sounds 15. Another is her "dimmi su" (tell me) when asking or rather pummeling Suzuki why Pinkerton made such arrangements for their protection, she could have burned a hole in the ground with that sizzling "sssss".

But on the subject of adolescence, and I don't know if this subject ever came up here, was she Nina Foresti , March 1935, singing "Un bel dì" on Major Bowes Amateur Hour? The speaking voice could be hers but it is difficult to imagine the future singer here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCK29If2pUI

These two links are fascinating, an actual letter to the Radio Show and the audition application.

http://www.mariacallasmuseum.org/_documents/mc-doc-005.htm
"...Considering such modest training, it is possible that Mary Ann learned the music she performed in public between 1934 and 1937 mainly by listening to records and radio programs. Since Callas always had an impeccable ear, learning to sing "Un bel di" by imitating the singing style and timbral characteristics heard on a recording would have posed no difficulty. This might explain why neither Nina Foresti's singing nor her timbre, curiously mature-sounding for an eleven-year old girl, resemble anything known to have been recorded by Callas from 1949 to 1977."

http://www.mariacallasmuseum.org/_documents/mc-doc-006.htm
I don't understand the convolutedness of hiding behind yet another pseudonym, Anita Duval. But the handwriting could be hers, even if it is somewhat advanced for a girl who just turned 11 a few months before.

ZB

Though she only once sang Butterfly on stage in Chicago, shortly after the studio recording was made). Mimi and Manon she never sang on stage, and much though I enjoy her in these roles, (in her hands, Butterfly beccomes geniuine tragedy, rather than the sentimental pot boiler it can often seem), I do rather wish Legge had made studio recordings of some of the roles she sang more often on stage, particularly Anna Bolena and Macbeth.

Early in her career she sang Turandot quite a lot, and is quoted as saying she hoped and prayed she'd emerge with her voice in tact. She gave up the role as soon as she could . Even Tosca was less important to her career than the bel canto roles, for which she became famous. That she is so much associated with the role is due to the success of the 1953 De Sabata recording, still, arguably, the best available, and to the famous Zeffirelli production at Covent Garden, which forever changed peope's perceptions of how the role should be performed. Vocally, though, she was hardly a patch on her earlier self. Incidentally, after making the recording in 1953 she hardly sang the role again, apart from a couple of times at the Met, until Zeffirelli convinced her to make it the role of her come back at Covent Garden in 1964. Typically she would only agree if they could also do Norma, which she sang at the Paris Opera, though by that time her voice was clearly not what it was even 4 or 5 years before, and though her concept of the part was, if anything, more eloquent than ever, her voice often let her down. Where she could wing through Tosca, letting the drama and music carry her, Norma was a much greater challenge.

I thought the Nina Foresti tape had now been discredited - sure I read it somewhere. I'll try to find the source and post it here.

[Guido]

Late night youtube watching dangerous - one video leads to another which leads to another...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CITvRM3XdY

that for instance. Did any mezzo sing it as well? OK she's way past her prime, the top notes are squally, but dear Jesus, what a sound, what expression, what singing! I also LOVE her London Carmen arias.

[Tsaraslondon]

Late night youtube watching dangerous - one video leads to another which leads to another...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CITvRM3XdY

that for instance. Did any mezzo sing it as well? OK she's way past her prime, the top notes are squally, but dear Jesus, what a sound, what expression, what singing! I also LOVE her London Carmen arias.

I couldn't agree more. Though the voice falters, her intention is never in any doubt.

[mc ukrneal]

Late night youtube watching dangerous - one video leads to another which leads to another...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CITvRM3XdY

that for instance. Did any mezzo sing it as well? OK she's way past her prime, the top notes are squally, but dear Jesus, what a sound, what expression, what singing! I also LOVE her London Carmen arias.

Better than usual. First time I can remember when I didn't want to turn it off after 5 seconds of her screeching!

[Tsaraslondon]

Better than usual. First time I can remember when I didn't want to turn it off after 5 seconds of her screeching!

Then all I can assume is that you have never heard any of Callas at her peak, and are making judgements based solely on her later recordings, which even I admit can be something of a trial, though I am generally won over by the musical imagination.

[mc ukrneal]

Then all I can assume is that you have never heard any of Callas at her peak, and are making judgements based solely on her later recordings, which even I admit can be something of a trial, though I am generally won over by the musical imagination.

Ok, the 'screeching' comment was a cheap shot. Sorry. But nope. I've heard a number of her recordings. I don't hold the later recordings against her - mother nature catches up to us all and that is too easy to criticize. I've always had two problems with her voice: 1) Out of tune too much and 2) That irritating vibrato/beat (well, irritating for me anyway). On #2, it is possible that the older recordings are emphasizing something that wasn't as acute as I hear it. But I listen to these, for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM9t6azei-E&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8ThxRV6VNw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeOek51Y2TI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdejQlMlrEM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFggRqk16Zo&feature=related (this one is the best of the lot in my opinion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SRndMZDGz0&feature=related

...and I remain disappointed. I've heard several of her EMI recordings too. I've always wondered if I would have a different view had I heard her live.

[zamyrabyrd]

Ok, the 'screeching' comment was a cheap shot. Sorry. But nope. I've heard a number of her recordings. I don't hold the later recordings against her - mother nature catches up to us all and that is too easy to criticize. I've always had two problems with her voice: 1) Out of tune too much and 2) That irritating vibrato/beat (well, irritating for me anyway). On #2, it is possible that the older recordings are emphasizing something that wasn't as acute as I hear it. But I listen to these, for example:
...and I remain disappointed. I've heard several of her EMI recordings too. I've always wondered if I would have a different view had I heard her live.

In the O Don Fatale aria, Callas is more than a match for the full orchestra. And by the way, her last two notes are slightly sharp, which is acoustically acceptable for such high notes. At least one of my teachers pointed this out.

As for the others, you didn't seem to choose even the best recordings. I tend to prefer those done in the studio for Macbeth. Here is the letter scene and you can follow the score as well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nb3SM95uyQ8&feature=related

"Out, damn'd spot! out, I say! The perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh! oh! oh!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x7lQWXmalc&feature=related

ZB

[Guido]

That Trovatore (your favourite one) you linked to is amazing. Truly astonishing.

Sometimes I almost like the slightly later recordings more, when she's struggling a bit to control the voice. Sometimes there can be even more intensity there, the sheer will to expression winning out. Perverse I know, and the perfection of her prime is just unbelievable, but there we are. I like it all really (apart from those sad final concerts).

[mjwal]

I wouldn't say it was a potshot - this is a considered opinion after listening carefully to most of his operas (haven't heard the very early one/ones). I think he's a master of what he does but also think his best are the early ones: Manon and Boheme.

Callas obviously thought there was something wrong with Puccini to disparage his music so publicly, which is why I mention my own misgivings - I wonder how much we would have agreed. Sounds like, from what Tsaraslondon was saying that she agreed that there is a lack of convincing drama.

You are right that we must be looking for very different things in opera, though for me beauty and good orchestration are prerequisites, rather than ends in themselves.

It is of course on record that Puccini himself considered dropping "Vissi d'arte" for the same reason given by Callas. Joseph Kerman in his Opera as Drama dismissed the work as a "shabby little shocker", an opinion shared by Benjamin Britten. I am in two minds about both the work and the aria - sometimes I think the most appropriate interpretation was given by Michael Aspinall (almost as good as his "Erlkönig") - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIfnKhTJw14 - though I think I prefer the version s/he did on the LP.

[zamyrabyrd]

It is of course on record that Puccini himself considered dropping "Vissi d'arte" for the same reason given by Callas. Joseph Kerman in his Opera as Drama dismissed the work as a "shabby little shocker", an opinion shared by Benjamin Britten.

Well, "Vissi d'arte" is not a long piece, shorter than "Un bel di". Puccini in stagecraft was not a dunce. And these are not conventional arias in the sense of Rossini or Verdi where they might be in 3 parts.

I like Magda Olivero's concept (although not completely her singing) as though she is in shock, even panic, rather than standing like a statue and emoting.  They have her standing in front of Scarpia, though, which is a bit strange. At least Callas in Covent Garden was on other side of the stage from him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaIPjW1u1TE

ZB

[Tsaraslondon]

Ok, the 'screeching' comment was a cheap shot. Sorry. But nope. I've heard a number of her recordings. I don't hold the later recordings against her - mother nature catches up to us all and that is too easy to criticize. I've always had two problems with her voice: 1) Out of tune too much and 2) That irritating vibrato/beat (well, irritating for me anyway). On #2, it is possible that the older recordings are emphasizing something that wasn't as acute as I hear it. But I listen to these, for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM9t6azei-E&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8ThxRV6VNw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeOek51Y2TI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdejQlMlrEM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFggRqk16Zo&feature=related (this one is the best of the lot in my opinion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SRndMZDGz0&feature=related

...and I remain disappointed. I've heard several of her EMI recordings too. I've always wondered if I would have a different view had I heard her live.

Well you and I (and millions of others) must have very different ears. I listened to all of the excerpts above and didn't hear any out of tune singing (though I heard quite a bit of off pitch orchestral playing). Nor did I hear excessive vibrato or beat. What I did hear was superior musicianship, incredible breath control and superb legato.

Taking the recordings in the order you placed them, I would agree that this Casta diva is not her best. I am not sure of its provenance. John Ardoin in The Callas Legacy states that all that survives of the 1949 Buenos Aires performance is the O rimembranza duet (with Fedora Barbieri. It could be the Mexico performance from the following year I suppose. Either way the sound is pretty bad, the orchestral playing execrable and Callas, singing with a deal of occluded tone, doesn't bring her usual air of mystery to the aria, though the gruppetti are, as usual, exquisite.

Next up is the first of the two Leonora arias in your selection. This was only the second time she was singing the role on stage, and the first time with Serafin as conductor. She keeps Verdi's written top D in the cadenza here, which she later drops, obvously thinking the note obtrudes on the wonderful nocturnal atmosphere she creates. The note is rock solid (without a trace of wobble, beat or excessive vibrato), but it is too loud, and she was wise to make the adjustments she makes in the later La Scala performance. Otherwise her singing is a wonder of detail and elasticity, those trills emerging as the sighs of a wounded sole.

The Macbeth aria and cabaletta were recorded for a radio broadcast, and this was their first public outing, almost a year before she sang the role at La Scala. They are a further example of how Callas could create theatre for the mind without the benefit of stage costume or scenery. Though De Fabritiis takes both the aria and cabaletta a mite too slowly (De Sabata paces them perfectly at La Scala), Callas's voice is in such splendid shape and so supple that she renders the score with an accuracy that is uncanny. Note the way she carries out Verdi's instruction to sing the rising phrase Accetta il dono, ascendivi a regnar con slancio, as he requests, observing the sforzando markings, and yet maintaing her superb legato. Again her voice is rock solid, with ringing high notes. This is singing on the highest level.

As it is again, in this second performance of Leonora's D'amor sul'ali rosee. I note this is your favoutite, and, perhaps not coincidentally, it benefits from better orcehstral playing from the La Scala orchestra (and better sound). Elisabeth Schwarzkopf was at this performance and was heard to utter, tears streaming down her face, "That woman is a miracle." High praise indeed from one of the hardest task masters in all opera. Callas's breath control is prodigious, the phrases spun out and coloured almost weightlessly. Unerringly she captures the nocturnal mood of this beautiful piece.

The last Macbeth aria is actually the same as the first, so no need to comment, except to say the sound is slighly better here.

I realise there are, and have always been, some who are deaf to the miracle that is Callas, though they appear to be in an even smaller minority now, almost 50 years after her final operatic appearance, than they were when she was still singing. I doubt anything I say, or anyone else says for that matter, will change their attitude. That she is still being discussed and is still contraversial is surely testament to her greatness. Victor De Sabata once said, "If the public could understand, as we do, how deeply musical she is, then it would be amazed." The more I listen to her, the more amazed I am.

[Guido]

Did Callas ever comment on Schwarzkopf?

[Tsaraslondon]

Did Callas ever comment on Schwarzkopf?

Actually I don't know. That she admired Schwarzkopf, though, is not in doubt. There is a famous occasion when they were lunching at Biffi Scala. Callas turned to Schwarzkopf and said, "Elisabeth, show me how you sing top As and Bs and make a diminuendo on them. Walter says mine make him sea sick." Schwarzkopf at first demurred as they were in the restaurant, but eventually started singing, much to the amusement of the other diners, whilst Callas prodded her rib cage and diaphragm. Callas then sang the same notes full voice, whilst Schwarzkopf did the same to her. "Thanks, I think I've got it. I'll let you know how it goes." This was during the recording of La Forza Del Destino. As can be heard on the recording, Callas didn't completely solve the problem, though hers is still arguably the greatest Leonora on disc, and I am not forgetting Leontyne Price.

Incidentally Schwarzkopf also relates how when Legge first heard Callas, he had left Schwarzkopf at their hotel. He rang her at the interval to ask her to join him, telling her he was seeing a wonderful soprano. Schwarzkopf refused, saying that she was listening to a radio broadcast, also featuring a tremendous soprano and wild horses wouldn't drag her away. The soprano in question? None other than Maria Callas.

She also said that after she heard Callas sing La Traviata, she never again sang the role. For her Callas's Violetta was perfection and she decided never again to attempt it.

[Guido]

That famous story shows she admired her technique. I wonder what she would have thought of her protrayals? Too fussy, too artificial? Or would she have appreciated the fidelity to the text. How about the scooping portamenti, so much more extreme than Fleming's, and so different on the whole from Callas' own portamenti?

Schwarzkopf as Violetta is hard for me to imagine... I'm sure she would have sung it beautifully, but could that voice, that person really be a convincing prostitute?... I guess Verdi's opera makes it hard for us to imagine Violetta as a prostitute anyway - sentimentalised as it is.