30+ years ago, I had the thrill of hearing Joan Sutherland and Marilyn Horne sing Norma live at Lyric Opera in Chicago. It remains one of the two most thrilling live performances in my memory as an audience member. Right now, I'm listening to them on Sirius radio from a Met broadcast, and it prompts me to ask this question:
If you could cast Norma today, using sopranos and mezzo sopranos active today anywhere in the opera world, who would you cast in those roles?
I cannot think of anyone I would want to hear as Norma. Most of the voices I can think of are not robust enough, the others, threadbare or wobblers.
Mike
Renee Fleming sounds pretty convincing to me as a candidate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnDo8pIPQ9Y&feature=related
Don't know what she is doing now..
(The orchestra and singer here are not exactly in synch sometimes.)
ZB
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 23, 2008, 10:44:16 PM
Renee Fleming sounds pretty convincing to me as a candidate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnDo8pIPQ9Y&feature=related
Don't know what she is doing now..
(The orchestra and singer here are not exactly in synch sometimes.)
ZB
There was talk in the last couple of years that Fleming would do the role first in Zürich (IIRC), then at the Met in a new production by Robert Wilson in the 2011-12 season, but according to an article in the New York Times last December, she decided the role "wasn't a fit" for her:
Quote"She came to the conclusion it was not something she wanted to live with," said the spokeswoman, Mary Lou Falcone. "It was just the overall feeling. It's one thing to sing it. It's another thing to bring the drama to it. At the end of the day, the decision was: 'This is just not for me. There's a lot of other repertoire to do.'"
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/01/arts/music/01norm.html
Luba Orgonasova (is she still singing?) or Anna Caterina Antonacci might be interesting Normas.
What about Debra Voigt? She sings a lot of Strauss and Wagner. If she would be wrong, what would be the reason?
I agree with Anne. Deborah Voigt as Norma and Christine Brewer as Adalgisa. They sang in Die Frau ohne Schatten in Chicago's Lyric Opera broadcast as the Empress and the Dyer's Wife, respectively. I've never heard either of them in better voice. It does sound strange that the epitome of bel canto operas would be cast with Hummer-sized straussian sopranos, though. But OTOH no opera today is sung in the small theatres of Bellini's days.
Quote from: Anne on June 24, 2008, 04:01:25 AM
What about Debra Voigt? She sings a lot of Strauss and Wagner. If she would be wrong, what would be the reason?
The reason is that this is Bellini and the vocal requirements are completely different. Accomplishment in Strauss and Wagner by no means qualifies a singer for the role of Norma.
I'm with Mike. I really can't think of a singer today who could do justice to the role. Fleming might just have the technique, but I doubt she has the temperament (though it could be argued that neither Caballe or Sutherland did either). It seems to me that people are misunderstanding the requirements of the role as they did before Callas sang it in the 1950s, and we are forgetting that this is a
bel canto opera, written, in fact, for the same singer who created Amina in
La Sonnambula, Guiditta Pasta. The first Adalgisa, the soprano Giulia Grisi also went on to sing Norma, though evidently without Pasta's passion. Later on it became one of Ponselle's greatest roles, but after her it went to such singers as Gina Cigna and Zinka Milanov, neither of whom could do justice to the coloratura demands of the role. Furthermore Callas, like Pasta and Malibran before her, was able to invest the coloratura with meaning, so that it became an aid to expression and not just a vocal display. One only has to hear her hurling roulades at Pollione in
oh non tremare (not a note out of place or an aspirate in sight), and compare it with the same section sung by Cigna or Jane Eaglen to hear the difference. They have the power but not the techinique. Sutherland and Caballe have the technique but not the power. Callas had both.
It is not therefore without reason that it has a reputation for being the hardest role in the soprano repertory. Lilli Lehmann said she would rather sing all three Brunnhildes in one night than one Norma; and she should have known. Let me quote Lord Harewood writing in Kobbe in 1976.
In the two periods before and after the 1939-45 war, Norma acquired two great protagonists:Rosa Ponselle and Maria Callas, something I know from first-hand knowledge in the one case and from reliable hearsay and gramophone records in the other. With such exponents, Norma, above all Bellini's opera, flowers, gains in expressiveness and dramatic impact and the music grows to full stature as it cannot when the performance is in lesser hands. Partly, this gain is general and the result of technical attainments, of superior, more penetrating imagination;partly it is particular and the product of an ability to colour and weight every phrase individually and leave nothing open to the risks of the automatic or the routine. But, whatever the reason, let no one imagine he has genuinely heard Norma without a truly great singer in the title role. Not to have one is as dire in its consequences as a performance of Gotterdammerung with an inadequate Brunnhilde. The trouble, as far as Bellini is concerned is that, in the twentieth century, there have been fewer great Normas than Brunnhildes.I see no reason to alter this assessment for the twenty-first.
Thanks TL for that and for the quote. It is difficult to nail in words what is so difficult. Although the voice needs substantial reserves, that is the point, reserves, not sailing through it as though it were Wagner. Those reserves must be implied rather than used. I think that is what is so hard about the piece. There are very few singers who get inside the Bel Canto style. It is not early Verdi or late Mozart, it is a niche all of its own and Norma is probably the most problematic role of the entire Bel Canto output.
Deborah Voigt I would suggest would not have the innate ebb and flow way with it, Fleming I don't think has the iron hand in the velvet glove that it needs. I very much admire Anna Caterina Antonacci; temperamentally she has it in her, but you are likely to detect the sharp fingernails just under the velvet of the glove.
Mike
I myself doubt Voigt and Brewer would be credible stylistically in Norma. Both have what it takes vocally (including pure soft singing - do listen to that 2007 Lyric Opera production. It's revelatory). But the florid bel canto style would require drastic retraining in both cases.
Dramatically, Brewer would be a non-starter. At over 300 pounds there's no way she could be credible as Pollione's new flame on stage. Voigt has shed over 100 pounds in the past couple of years and now cuts a womanly and alluring figure. But ideally, and certainly that is the case on records, voices are what count, not appearance. I don't think Fleming would last past the first act. She doesn't have the cutting power and stamina required. Not to mention the considerable dramatic armoury that needs to be heard in the voice. It was not jokingly that Lehmann referred to Norma as being tougher than Bunnhilde x 3.
Tsaraslondon makes very good points and Callas' shadow will always loom overwhelmingly large in this area. But it should not be forgotten that Callas's first Normas were immediately preceded by a string of Kundrys, Brunnhildes and Isoldes. These wagnerian roles' huge vocal demands met head on were probably what caused Serafin to propose Callas the roles of Elvira and Norma in the first place. He was acutely aware that modern operatic productions needed to fill much vaster expanses than was customary in 1830. So, IMO, nothing less than the full laser beam treatment - or astute microphone placement - will do.
Quote from: Tsaraslondon on June 24, 2008, 07:21:20 AM
The reason is that this is Bellini and the vocal requirements are completely different.
In the two periods before and after the 1939-45 war, Norma acquired two great protagonists:Rosa Ponselle and Maria Callas, something I know from first-hand knowledge in the one case and from reliable hearsay and gramophone records in the other. With such exponents, Norma, above all Bellini's opera, flowers, gains in expressiveness and dramatic impact and the music grows to full stature as it cannot when the performance is in lesser hands. Partly, this gain is general and the result of technical attainments, of superior, more penetrating imagination;partly it is particular and the product of an ability to colour and weight every phrase individually and leave nothing open to the risks of the automatic or the routine. But, whatever the reason, let no one imagine he has genuinely heard Norma without a truly great singer in the title role.
A possible influence of Rosa Ponselle on Maria Callas via recordings may have been discussed or speculated on before, but your quote above reminded me somewhat of what I had in the back of my mind. In fact, I don't know or remember if Callas actually said anything about Ponselle. I have been recently raiding youtube for clips of Ponselle. Over and over again, I feel that her sense of drama, vocal coloring, etc., could have had an impact on an aspiring singer. Claudia Muzio's recordings in the 30's may also be considered.
Did anyone ever wonder about who may have been Callas' role models?
Ponselle as Violetta with Tibbett:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw-j9Qfanbk&NR=1
the "tired voice" that Callas spoke about in "Addio del Passato":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw-j9Qfanbk&NR=1
The dramatism of the latter fairly gave me chills...
ZB
Yes I have wondered, especially when I heard Muzio and discovered that she must have been an influence. It was akin to listening to Mehul and hearing the Berlioz soundworld before Berlioz had put pen to paper. In that latter example, there was a formal teacher/pupil relationship.
TL will know for certain; but although Callas often mentions mentors, they were conductors, such as Serafin. I cannot recall her paying homage to the direct influence of earlier singers. I had rather assumed this was to retain the originality of the brand. However, it is clear that Muzio at least was a partial role model, perhaps there were others.
Mike
Quote from: knight on June 28, 2008, 10:19:11 PM
Yes I have wondered, especially when I heard Muzio and discovered that she must have been an influence. It was akin to listening to Mehul and hearing the Berlioz soundworld before Berlioz had put pen to paper. In that latter example, there was a formal teacher/pupil relationship.
TL will know for certain; but although Callas often mentions mentors, they were conductors, such as Serafin. I cannot recall her paying homage to the direct influence of earlier singers. I had rather assumed this was to retain the originality of the brand. However, it is clear that Muzio at least was a partial role model, perhaps there were others.
Mike
I have read, I think it was in Walter Legge's memoirs, that the only pre-war singer that Callas did admit to admiring was Rosa Ponselle. In fact, I think she tells one of her students in the Masterclasses to listen to Ponselle's recording of
Ernani involami as a benchmark performance, though actually Callas's performance of the aria has much more grace, even if Ponselle makes the more attractive sound. Walter Legge also recounts that he suggested Callas went to see Ponselle when she first started having difficulties. She flatly refused, saying that she (Ponselle) started out with much better material than her.
On the subject of
Norma, I know we only have
Casta diva and
Mira o Norma as examples of Ponselle's performance, but I find it hard to believe that she was better than Callas in the role. Both were great artists with differing strengths. I'd say they probably came out about equal in the end. Though Ponselle undoubtedly had the voice and the technique for the role, to my mind she doesn't have the ability to bind all those cadenzas and the filigree of the role into the musical fabric as Callas does. What ever role Callas sings, I am always astonished by the way she can make a cadenza a natural form of expression, not just a moment for vocal display.
On the other hand, Mike, I don't remember her ever mentioning Muzio.
I've never been able to 'root' for Ponselle. However beautiful the sound she makes (admittedly one of the purest and fullest, with no discernible break throughout a very considerable range), like all other great singers she has chips in her armoury (inelegant aspirates abound in the Addio del passato and some portamentos nowadays would be considered a damning fault). Truly admirable are a very pure, classical handling of the musical line and an absolute control of her voice. I did wonder at the final note of the aria, though (thanks ZB for the youtube links). Isn't it slightly flat?
She seems content to find in the notes only the message of the music. I don't detect much of a singing actress in her artistic personality. Words are seldom inflected in a meaningful way and whole phrases pass by that in other singers' throats project with more dramatic force ("misero pane" in Pace pace mio Dio seems like a mild annoyance indeed). After a while the stunning vocal effects become predictable - the grand tenutos on softly floated high notes, or the powerful descents into her very potent lower range (*) for example - but that's ok. Every singer who 'owns' such desirable vocal trademarks wants to showcase them. In D'Amor sull'alli rosee for example the long held climactic high C doesn't convey the pregnant suspension of time Price achieves in her later recordings.
(*) That's the only vocal specialty I can find mirrored (imitated?) in Callas' own singing. Comparing the two divas' Suicidio is quite revealing.
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on June 29, 2008, 06:40:03 AM
I've never been able to 'root' for Ponselle. However beautiful the sound she makes (admittedly one of the purest and fullest, with no discernible break throughout a very considerable range), like all other great singers she has chips in her armoury (inelegant aspirates abound in the Addio del passato and some portamentos nowadays would be considered a damning fault). Truly admirable are a very pure, classical handling of the musical line and an absolute control of her voice. I did wonder at the final note of the aria, though (thanks ZB for the youtube links). Isn't it slightly flat?
... Comparing the two divas' Suicidio is quite revealing.
Pure sound or a beautiful voice of course is not enough. So I pretty much agree with you. What was prized 80-100 years ago surely is not the same as what would not even pass as acceptable now, like scooping or
coup de glotte. Also, there were other notes off pitch in the "Addio" but with all due respect this was from a live performance in 1935 and her expression more than made up for it. She retired shortly after the disastrous attempt at Carmen in 1937 before the age of 40.
Putting bits and pieces together from what I gleaned over the years, like from LP's of her and reading time and again how she felt inadequate, extremely nervous before performances, etc., perhaps it was a bit premature to throw her in the deep end with
Forza while she was barely 22 years old. There are a lot of similarities with Callas even if some of them were by chance. She did have increasing trouble with high notes and maybe it was because her voice in her early 20's was not mature enough to do the heavy roles.
She was the daughter of Italian immigrants (b. 1897) whose older sister was also musical. I really believe that growing up with another Mediterranean language gives what no diction class can offer. I was always a little confused when reading that she was a native born US citizen, as her claim to fame was being the "first" American opera star. Her name changed from Ponzillo somewhat obliterated the Italian connection. This is odd at a time when performers used to Italianize their names like Melba, whose English dipthongs, albeit Australian, crept into her Italian arias.
As a teenager she was overweight and it seemed she liked to eat. I remember that Luciano Pavarotti mentioning that it was hard for him to keep up with her when they dined together!!! She did lose weight though and became not only svelte but attractive. Her pictures and costumes are fascinating, even one that shows her hands in an expressive gesture. One photo in particular has a kind of sculpted train is very reminiscent of Callas in Tosca.
I first encoutered Ponselle on film in "Great Singers of the 20th Century". I had a hard time believing it was her in the test tape for Carmen, since it was overly prettified, but at any rate, typical of the Hollywood style of the 30's and 40's. Also, there she didn't exploit her chest register that she did in other recordings (also similar to Callas).
Oddly, her talents were probably not used or exploited as much as they could have been. In an interivew she said (also speaking with low chest tones a la Callas) that she wanted to do
Adriana Lecouvreur, for instance and even asked for it but instead was cast in the safe operatic repertory.
Here are some more clips. The Vergine dell'Angeli is exceptional; Suicidio, extremely interesting and the Tosti song very charming.
Vergine dell'angeli with Pinza
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=KLVoJkN6znc
"Suicidio" Ponselle (1925)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVJjRuBpb2s
Rosa Ponselle - A vucchella ("Arietta di Posilippo") 1926
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9CD2YOC3ZA&feature=related
ZB
Maria Guleghina. 0:) Although...she turned her head to the role of Turandot (poor, poor Calaf)...and even tried Violetta :o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2olFAyy2PcE
Quote from: Sarastro on August 10, 2008, 04:41:22 PM
Maria Guleghina. 0:) Although...she turned her head to the role of Turandot (poor, poor Calaf)...and even tried Violetta :o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2olFAyy2PcE
Er, you must be joking. Norma is still a
Bel Canto role, not a prize for the soprano who makes the most noise.
ZB
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on August 11, 2008, 04:51:18 AM
Er, you must be joking.
How could I be serious after the dazzling Violetta! ;)
Quote from: Sarastro on August 11, 2008, 07:52:10 AM
How could I be serious after the dazzling Violetta! ;)
It depends on one's definition of "dazzling", in this case being run over by a bulldozer and seeing "stars".
By way of comparison Moffo should be breath of fresh air.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGRnNA33Ww
This IS a difference between
dramatic and
aggressive. The first is having control over one's emotions but at the same time channeling them though the music. The second is being consumed by them and burning up everything in one's path.
(BTW, if Tsaras is reading this, I managed to listen through a few clips on youtube while searching for a really good example of the "Sempre Libera", and was disappointed by Tebaldi's live performance.)
ZB
Violetta is one role Tebaldi wasn't really fit to sing. Coincidentally, as I was walking in the record store last month she was singing that very same aria. It took me a few seconds to recognize her. The tessitura doesn't sit comfortably for her in that particular portion of the role (Violetta as the carefree demi-mondaine). There's no exit door for the soprano in this aria if she starts it out as Un bel di. The final flights of coloratura are hammy and of course she ends it without an interpolated high E flat. De Los Angeles also eschewed that note in her recordings, but everything that came before was so smiling, glittering and downright tummy wobbling that one doesn't mind. Violetta is one of these roles that may forever be the domain of fantasy. I read in an Avant-Scène Opera article about the "three voices" of Violetta and how it constantly challenges every diva. They always come short in one aspect or the other. Being a French magazine, the inevitable conclusion was that Callas was unapproachable ::).
Tebaldi is best remembered for her Puccini, verismo and heavier Verdi roles, for which she was uncommonly well suited. The 15 disc Decca box that collects all her Puccini roles is one of the bargains oif the catalogue (30$ for the whole shebang - grab it :o).
Very interesting, Lilas. "La Tebaldi" on Decca has the main Verdi, Puccini and Rossini roles, lush and beautiful, one right after the other, but without those arias that require coloratura effort. The voice itself should have been suited for roulades but perhaps she didn't have the training or the willpower to sustain all that practice required for working the difficult passages into the voice.
Purists may smile at the omission of the traditional Eb at the end of "Sempre Libera", but since it is leading to the tonic anyway it is not out of place but can be the crowning glory if done right.
However, I did appreciate Tebaldi NOT going to the high Db at the end of Butterfly's entrance and the high C at the end of Act One that happens to be the dominant note of the two scales. It's just awful to hear soprano and tenor compete with each other on such a note that contrary to the composer's design goes nowhere (similarly with the high C written for the soprano but NOT for the tenor at the end of the first act of La Boheme that usually sounds awful when louder than Mimi's floating tone).
ZB
I totally agree with Puccini's way of ending Act I off :La Bohème ;D. Another instance in which the composer's instincts are proven right.
However, I was not aware that the high D Flat in Butterfly's entrance was an interpolation. I've always looked forward to that bit of anticipatory drooling from the girl-bride. So in character. So much for one's illusions... ;)
Hi, I just went to the score of Butterfly to make sure I wasn't making my own interpolations.
According to the Ricordi edition the first Db is an oppure or alternate version that got perhaps enshrined in tradition due to its popularity. But the strange part is the high C at the end of the first act, identical to the oppure in smaller print below it. I clearly remember Tebaldi NOT going to the high note at Butterfly's entrance on the LP, because it was so different than what I had been used to. I don't remember if she sang a high C at the end of the first act, or if she is the ONLY exception.
The high C at the end of the first act of Boheme is the tonic note so it is OK and not sounding out of place. Is it possible that the tradition of singing the high C at the end of Butterfly is linked up to the other opera? If the high C is indeed from Puccini in Butterfly (but WHY are there two same possibilities?) then the pattern may have been applied backwards in a place that has the same harmonies but with a difference of a semitone.
Puccini really knew the voice and harmony as well so I wonder what his real intentions were. The entrance is an etherial Gb major but not expected to be crowned with a shrill Db. In fact, the resolution (high enough) to a Gb is more in character, humble if you will.
When the same musical patterns repeat themselves at the end of the first act in a key a semitone lower, the high C would not be out of realm of possibility or character as there would be an unsettled feeling about it since it is the dominant note of F. (After all, he does end the entire opera in a 6/4 chord, about as unstable as one can get.)
This kind of nutty detail might be boring to some, but structure and harmony do give very important clues for interpretation.
ZB
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on August 12, 2008, 10:00:55 PM
But the strange part is the high C at the end of the first act, identical to the oppure in smaller print below it. ...
If the high C is indeed from Puccini in Butterfly (but WHY are there two same possibilities?)
But the
oppure in smaller print below it is actually in
Pinkerton's part, not Butterfly's, at least in the Schirmer vocal score. Butterfly doesn't have an
oppure there.
Of course, Butterfly went through several revisions. I wonder if Puccini played around with the ending, and different publishers have used different endings. Here's the last page of the act, from a Ricordi vocal score:
http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/variations/scores/bhr3491/large/sco10120.gif
and the page before that:
http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/variations/scores/bhr3491/large/sco10119.gif
There are a couple of differences between that and the Schirmer score. In the Ricordi, both singers go up to the C, but both have an
oppure that only goes up to A. In the Schirmer, Butterfly has the C (no
oppure) and Pinkerton an A (with the optional line going up to C). Also, starting in the last bar of the penultimate page, Pinkerton sings (in the Ricordi score) "Ah! vien,
ah! vien sei mia!, ah!, vien! [plus "sei mia!" if he doesn't sing the C]. In the Schirmer score, he doesn't sing the "ah! vien sei mia!" I bolded, he has rests there.
The two scores also differ at Buttefly's entrance. In the Ricordi
http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/variations/scores/bhr3491/large/sco10042.gif
the line that
doesn't have the high D-flat is the
oppure, in the Schirmer, it's the other way around.
I checked Charles Rosenkrans' Vox recording with Maria Spacagna and Richard Di Renzi that has "the complete tests of the original 1904 La Scala version and Puccini's revisions for Brescia and Paris". Spacagna sings the D-flat in the La Scala version, but not in the revisions. In all three versions, both singers sing the high Cs at the end of the act, and Pinkerton doesn't get those rests.
I really like the D-flat, if it can be sung softly and sweetly, but most singers who can sing the rest of the role don't seem to be able to pull that off, so singing the alternate is probably best.
Gee, I haven't heard Butterfly in a while. While I have the recordings out...
Thanks, Wendell.
Differing editions sure give performers a run for their money. But you are right about the Ricordi--the alternative is for Pinkerton at the end. The buildup and culmination at the conclusion of an act is different from when the music appeared earlier. And it is interesting how the same musical material is transformed. Also, it is a good idea to search up recordings closer to the time of the composer. I love this sort of detective work. :)
ZB
Very interesting indeed. High notes more or less signal the climax of a vocal line. In a very real sense they are extremely important because of the light/colour they give to the vocal line and the character they impart to the vocal part. As I mentioned, this high Dflat pictures the virgin pre-orgasmic ecstasy of Butterfly as she is to meet her husband. I hope I'm not making that up, but honestly I don't think so. Afer all, could there be real drama and all those wet eyes in the theater if Butterfly's expectations were not at that level?
I love the Freni high note here (Sinopoli on DG - I never heard the famous Karajan in toto). It should be qualified with the suspicion that it seems to be audibly spliced into the recording. But isn't artifice part of the Ewige weibliche ? I think Puccini understood that better than any other composer.
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on August 11, 2008, 10:37:37 AM
(BTW, if Tsaras is reading this, I managed to listen through a few clips on youtube while searching for a really good example of the "Sempre Libera", and was disappointed by Tebaldi's live performance.)
ZB
I don't know if you heard a live version, but in the one I heard, Tebaldi transposes
Sempre libera down a tone (as did Ponselle), and still does not attempt what would now be a Db
in alt.
Going back to this topic's original question, I happened to be talking to a very well known opera producer about Norma just the other day. I can't really give his name on here, but he has produced opera all over the world, including renowned productions at Covent Garden, the Met, Vienna and Australian Opera. He has worked with such singers as Vickers, Domingo, Sutherland, Baltsa, Carreras, Gheorghiu and many more. We were discussing Callas's 1955 La Scala Norma (in my belief, the best of all Callas's preserved Normas, where voice and artistry find their greatest equilibrium), when he stated quite simply, "Of course, the opera is quite uncastable today."
To paraphrase Mike in another post on here, when it is performed these days, it is cast with "what passes for a Norma voice today."
"What passes for a Norma voice today" is usually a Brünnhilde (like Jane Eaglen), where most of the vocal weight is in the middle range, with the occasional wind machine high C. What's not to be found in such a voice is the agility and the colours that give Norma a vocal "face".
Coincidentally, I just received from BRO a 1958 Rome Opera Norma under Santini with Anita Cerquetti. Corelli sings Pollione, with old hands like Miriam Pirazzini and Giulio Neri completing the cast. I'm realy curious to see how it goes. Will report when I get there.
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on September 06, 2008, 05:35:59 AM
"What passes for a Norma voice today" is usually a Brünnhilde (like Jane Eaglen), where most of the vocal weight is in the middle range, with the occasional wind machine high C. What's not to be found in such a voice is the agility and the colours that give Norma a vocal "face".
Coincidentally, I just received from BRO a 1958 Rome Opera Norma under Santini with Anita Cerquetti. Corelli sings Pollione, with old hands like Miriam Pirazzini and Giulio Neri completing the cast. I'm realy curious to see how it goes. Will report when I get there.
I've heard the Eaglen version on CD, and, for me, she doesn't even begin to pass muster. It's not just that she doesn't have the vocal agility, but somehow that the style is all wrong.
I think you'll find the Cerquetti recording is of performances, where she replaced Callas after the infamous Rome walk out. Cerquetti was very much considered a second string Norma in those days, though I've no doubt she was a good deal better than the best we could produce today. I'd be interested to hear your impressions.
As a footnote, though the scandal dogs the name of Callas to this day, she did sue the Rome Opera in a case that went on for years. When it was finally settled in Callas's favour, the Rome Opera having been found negligent in not providing a satisfactory cover, though already informed of Callas's ill health, her career was already over and it proved a somewhat hollow victory. The damage done to Callas's reputation and to Callas herself was already profound and far reaching. The money she received in compensation can hardly have made up for the problems she encountered with the press as a result of their negligence.
I've read that story and all the hoopla it caused. But if she didn't have a cover (which is an acknowledged fact), how did they get Cerquetti to replace her?? I mean, she was not as famous as La Divina, but she was major a league diva by any standard. This is dated "4.1.1958" Is it January 4, or April 1 ?? Callas' Roman Holiday took place in January, but at what date exactly ?
There are Youtube (http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt51XT50I5g) extracts of the first Act and the walkout announcement.
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on September 06, 2008, 04:07:12 PM
I've read that story and all the hoopla it caused. But if she didn't have a cover (which is an acknowledged fact), how did they get Cerquetti to replace her?? I mean, she was not as famous as La Divina, but she was major a league diva by any standard. This is dated "4.1.1958" Is it January 4, or April 1 ?? Callas' Roman Holiday took place in January, but at what date exactly ?
There are Youtube (http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt51XT50I5g) extracts of the first Act and the walkout announcement.
It's January. Cerquetti was not standing by on the night in question, but the Rome Opera then went on to engage her for the rest of the performances and cancelled Callas's contract. This is where she won her case, the court adjudging that they had no right to cancel her contract, as she had recovered by the time of the second performance and told the management she was fit and ready to perform. I can think of numerous occasions where this sort of thing has happened to other singers, and it is not uncommon for an opera house to engage another famous singer, who just happens to be free.
Whatever the rights and wrongs, it has contributed to the image of Callas as a capricious prima donna who would cancel on the least whim, when in fact the reverse was true. She was actually the most professional and dedicated of artists, and her cancellation record was in fact better than almost any other famous singer you could name. The Edinburgh incident of the same year was also a fabrication of the press. She was contracted to do 4 performances of
La Sonnambula, which she sang against doctor's orders, before leaving Edinburgh for a needed holiday. When La Scala announced a fifth, she declined, an eventuality for which La Scala was fully prepared as they had non other than Renata Scotto standing by. The press screamed that Callas had walked out to attend a party in Venice. However, the management did not come to her defense, and thus started the rift with La Scala, though it was mended two years later. Looking back, it is possible to see the Rome walkout as the beginning of the end of Callas's career. Rarely has an opera singer had to contend with such an antagonistic, vitriolic press.
I've compared the Callas 1953 and Cerquetti 1958 versions. They are very different in most respects.
Norma is an opera that requires great singers across the billboard. Casting the title role is hard enough (always has been), so when a record company has a good candidate the least they should do is surround her with very good singers. There are three important roles that need to be cast from strength: Pollione, Adalgisa and Oroveso. And a good tenor, mezzo and bass are not all that hard to find.
Which is where the two versions at hand differ the most. The 1958 Rome version has a terrific Pollione (Corelli), a very good Adalgisa (Miriam Pirazzini) and a noble, stalwart basso cantante in Giulio Neri. Cerquetti herself is very effective dramatically and she just knocks away all the role's enormous vocal difficulties. Her forte is her beautiful middle range and trumpet-like high notes. Mind you, she can turn those into dulcet tones as well. She is an inspired, subtle Norma. She also does justice to the coloratura (better than Corelli who surfs around the runs and divisions in a very generalized manner). The sound is ok once past the overture. It's cottony but the voices bloom and sound natural. Lo-fi, but quite tolerable.
Callas in 1953 had been singing Norma for a few years already. But at times she sounds as if some phrases have not really been internalized. She would appropriate the role in all its dimensions in later years. I've heard excerpts (on LP) of a 1955 performance (Del Monaco) as well as the EMI stereo version from 1960. The latter finds her in sometimes frayed voice, but the command of lines has such an imperious sense of rightness that the squally high notes can be forgiven. Those high notes are just perfect in the 1953 recording. So, this is for Callas enthusiasts mainly, as La Divina would be caught in better dramatic form later on. It doesn't help that all the other roles are so provincially cast. Stignani's barking dowager makes a travesty of Adalgisa (she looks at Norma 'like a mother', but here she sounds like she's at least 15 years older than her 'mother'). Fillipeschi is wan of tone, bland of expression and has NO clue whatsoever about coloratura. Rossi-Lemeni's woolly Oroveso robs this potentially imposing character of any dimension. A cardboard chief. The solo voices are recorded too close, esp. Stignani's Adalgisa. At her entrance in Act Two she is much louder than Norma :P.
LP, I've said it elsewhere, but IMO, the very best of Callas's Normas is to be found in the live La Scala performance from 1955. Here voice and artistry find their greatest equilibrium; indeed this seems to be one of those occasions where the voice was responding to her every whim. The rest of the cast isn't bad either. Del Monaco, like Corelli, is not exactly fluent in coloratura, but the voice certainly sounds right for the role, and Simionato makes a warm, womanly Adalgisa. Votto may not be the most inspired of conductors, but he accompanies Callas and the other singers most sympathetically. It's best incarnation is probably the one from Divina Records, where documentation is also exemplary.
Jürgen Kesting's mammoth 26-disc Callas box features 6 different performances of Norma occupying 3 discs. One of these is from the December 1955 performance (the one you recommend and that I heard excerpts of when I owned the LP). CD 13, 67 minutes long. There are four other performances: a Juner 1955 performance (Serafin), but it has Stignani again as Adalgisa (only three years older :P). There's also a 1950 Mexico, 1953 Trieste, 1952 Covent Garden (Stignani again...). I'l lbe listening to those this week. I only hope I can find that famed 12.1955 performance complete, in reasonably good sound and at a decent price.
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on September 16, 2008, 04:05:38 PM
I only hope I can find that famed 12.1955 performance complete, in reasonably good sound and at a decent price.
This is why I suggest the Divina Records version. The performance was not captured absolutely complete, though, fortunately Callas's contribution is, and Divina records make clear where they have had to use parts of other performances (the first 15 minutes of the opera). The major difference is that there was some electro-static distortion during Norma's
Dormono entrambi. All previous issues replace this section with the 1955 RAI version, whereas Divina records leave it as it is, so we finally get to hear some of Callas's most moving singing of the night, http://www.divinarecords.com/ (http://www.divinarecords.com/)
Thanks! I've placed the order ;).
Before I give a brief assessment of the 1953 Trieste and 1950 Mexico City versions (short extracts of Act I only), here's something I forgot to mention about the 1958 Rome Cerquetti Norma.
Right after the cavatina (Casta Diva), there's a round of applause, followed after some 30 seconds by a smattering of boos (Callas fans?), and there starts a shouting match involving the audience, all of which (1m30s) captured by the microphones. It really is quite extraordinary. The aria has been sung with great beauty and power, so there's no doubt Cerquetti's performance is not the object of the turmoil. I can only imagine the star of the show standing still (arms crossed? extended?) witnessing the opera audience shouting about the Norma who wasn't there. What a disturbing feeling !
That portion of the opera is precisely what's on offer in the Mexico and Trieste performances: Sediziose voci - Casta Diva and the cabaletta Ah! Bello, a me ritorna. This is very instructive. The 1950 performance finds Callas in full possession of the role's vocal and dramatic demands (admittedly the most famous moment). I couldn't really find anything to detract from the balance sheet. The 1953 Trieste is, according to Jürgen Kesting, Callas' most perfect portrayal of the druid priestess. He is absolutely right to point to the crescendos of both verses that end with a huge, gleaming high B flat. Very delicate shadings, mostly of the soft phrase end kind. More imaginative vocal shading within phrases was to come later. The very difficult interpolated high A flat in the recitative ending with E il sacro vischio io mieto is totally secure in 1953, rather less so in 1950. So much for the idea that early Callas was best in all vocal respects. If I'm not mistaken it's the same interval and note that always gave Callas so much trouble in the Addio del passato (La Traviata) - a phrase that usually ended with a cracked note.
Next is the 1952 Covent Garden performance, about 65 minutes of extracts, and then two 1955 performances - including that vaunted 12.1955 one I just ordered (not exactly cheap BTW ::)).
Quote from: Lilas Pastia on September 17, 2008, 05:46:57 PM
including that vaunted 12.1955 one I just ordered (not exactly cheap BTW ::)).
No agreed, not cheap. But I think it's worth the extra outlay for the superior sound, the correct pitches, and the excellent documentation. There are some extraordinary noises from the audience in this set too. Hard to make out exactly what is going on, but it somehow adds to the excitement.
All making for interesting reading, thanks both.
Mike
I've listened to excerpts form the June 55 Callas Norma, as well as the complete December performance and large extracts of the 1974 Orange production with Caballé, Veasey and Vickers. The latter is available in multiple 10 minute snippets on YouTube and I urgently commend anyone interested to sample it. I was amazed at the mastery shown by Caballé. Once past her first scenes (From Sediziose voci to Ah! Bello a me ritorna) she is in complete command of the role. Her range of vocal colours is amazing. In mia man alfin tu sei is tinged with a contained ferocity I wouldn't have thought Caballé capable of. Her trademark range of arm movements draw one in the drama like a magnet. Vickers is easily the most formidable Pollione on can imagine. Powerful stuff. The constant wind blows those antique robes in a strong evocation of the implacable drama enacted on stage.
The Callas Normas are something else. In June 55 her voice had lightened remarkably compared to the previous incarnations I've heard (1950, 52, 53 and 54). Her dramatic loss of weigth took place in 1954 and although I can't hear that much of a difference between 1952-54, there's a substantial vocal transformation in 1955. Not only is the tone lighter, but the attack and release of the notes are freer, the coloratura more agile and the voice seems to respond to her dramatic instincts with much more flexibility.
Dynamic markings are emphasized, with a greater range between pianissimo, floated high notes and full-voiced fortissimo phrases. On the debit side, gone is the Nilsson-like pulverizing power she use dto hurl some phrases in 1952. She has to make some adjustments to keep the voice under control in the biggest moments. She has clearly worked on the characterization to offer a more complex portrayal.
Very good singing from Simionato, but she still booms shamelessly, Azucena-like when she lets it all out . Del Monaco has a strong voice and sings very well, but I much prefer the June Pollione, Mirto Picchi. His is one of the most arresting portrayals of that cardboard character I've heard. Corelli (with Cerquetti) and Vickers are very different but just as good.
It helps that the sound is generally very good - much better that in the Membran edition I have. No distortion, some peaking in loud passages, good placing and a strong presence from the orchestra. The December 55 version is - as Tsaraslondon has already mentioned - the way to go to hear Callas' Norma in all its glory. But for special vocal insights and some spectacular vocalism I'll return to the 1953 Trieste and 1952 London versions (excerpts only).