Post by Christopher WebberPost by ***@hotnail.comHe (I assume) is talking about the 'naturalness' of the libretto, its
flow, and how it relates to 'normal' spoken English.
Yes, I think you are right that Romy and I are talking at
cross-purposes.
But despite your reframing of the question, I'm still baffled: can
either of you give me examples from these contemporary English libretti
which feel so "unnatural" as to cause you a discomfort which the music
can't overcome?
[As Britten's libretti are now up to 70 years old, they no longer count
as "contemporary". The language moves on, and of course the texts for
"Grimes" or "Paul Bunyan" feel antiquated now.]
So the next questions are, who dictates what is "natural", or that an
opera libretto should *flow* or *sound* "naturally" (however we define
it)?
I don't suppose anyone talks/talked like they do in Philippe Quinault's
intensely heightened, artificial and ornate libretti for Lully, but they
are superb all the same. I don't suppose the real Boris Godunov talked
in Pushkin's fluidly Byronic blank verse; that Hoffmanstahl wrote for
Strauss in the mode of the man on the Viennese street; or that Boito's
poetic compression of Italian for Verdi's "Otello" reflected how
Italians in 1880s Milan actually addressed one another... the list could
go on ad infinitum.
Of course we feel a preciosity in second-rate libretti which can be
redeemed by first-rate music ("Peter Grimes", "Death in Venice", "Lucia
di Lammermoor", "Euryanthe" or "Dalibor") but nobody would say those
heightened texts provided directly by the likes of Shakespeare ("A
Midsummer Night's Dream", "Sir John in Love", "Antony an Cleopatra") or
Synge ("Riders to the Sea") were verbally second-rate or second-hand.
I have given plenty of examples of libretti in English which I find
completely "fitted for purpose". That does not mean that they are all
literary masterpieces - they don't have to be. Nor does it mean they
speak as naturally as the Man in the London Street - they certainly
shouldn't (unless that's what the composer needs.)
Do you not think it odd that you think this way about English opera, but
not about the heightened oratorio texts of Jennens for Handel, or the
Blake poems used by Britten in various cycles, or Dryden's words for
Purcell's semi-opera "King Arthur"? Is it - I wonder - because of
atavistic opera-fan prejudice against the very idea of 'Opera in
English'?
Here's a sample of Auden's "Rake..." verses (for Tom's aria in Act 2)
which in my mind are every bit as suitable, and every bit as
"Always the quarry that I stalk
Fades or evades me, and I walk
An endless hall of chandeliers
In light that blinds, in light that sears,
Reflected from a million smiles
All empty as the country miles
Of silly wood and senseless park;
And only in my heart the dark."
Auden's libretto is quite as fitted for purpose as any written in the
20th century. That these particular lines - like many in the work - also
happen to be beautiful and profound in their own right is just a bonus.
Perhaps you think the literal Italian translation below (provided for La
Scala) is intrinsically "more suited for opera" than any of Auden's
English could be? If so, I'd like you to tell me why, or how?
"Sempre la preda che inseguo
svanisce o mi sfugge, ed io cammino
lungo un vasto vestibolo zeppo di candelabri
in una luce che acceca, in una luce che brucia,
riflessa da un milione di sorrisi
tutti vuoti, come spazi in campagna,
di boschi e di parchi senza vita;
solo nel mio cuore – il buio."
--
___________________________
Christopher Webber, Blackheath, London, UK.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Webberhttp://www.zarzuela.net
Christopher, I think we need agree to disagree. Your efforts to
contradict my points are not fruitful but unnecessary. There are no
doubt great exemplas of English language classical songs, oratorios or
musicals but I still think that I am within my constitutional rights
to hate English operas. You see, there are many reasons why a specific
opera might not be liked but only with English operas I frequently do
not like it because of language. It I very frequently the singer who
are trying to sing English Opera sound to me like buffoons with
completely artificial comic linguistic impressions. It never happened
with any other languages I know or do not know. A few weeks I heard
Doctor Atomic. You can argue music of the work (which is not bad) but
listen this torturing libretto. This was a parody of higher magnitude;
I was laughing and felt very bad for the actor who was forced to read
those ridicules lines along with that music.
I was thinking a few years ago about reasons why I do not like English
operas and I concluders that it derives from word Ordering in English
sentences. In English you have subjects, verbs, adverbs, inderact
subjects and circumstances of time, place and other members of
sentences located in a firm order. Try to change order of the words in
English sentences a little and English speaking Moron whop knows only
one language (means American) would send B52 bombers to your house.
Other languages are more flexible in word ordering and mitigating the
position of subjects, verbs, adverbs etc one can create multiple
shadows of expressions. English is a phenomenal language for precise,
well-formed expression that have completed meaning. English imply
completeness of expressions. Try to speak in English with unclosed
thought and people will feel freaky. In Yiddish for instance you can
create verbal fresco that will have no meaning but only an
impressionistic touch of reality – it is virtually imposable in
English as the preciseness of meanings would “ground” most of the
poetic abstractions.
Here is good example for you how I feel about English. Get Thomas
Mann’s “Josef….” translation in English. Pay attention to THAT
language. That is beautiful, that is beyond beautiful – that is music
itself. Mann’s spiraling around the meanings with zillion
circumstances of different reasons, keeping the flow of one sentence
for a page or two. That sound gloriously –musical to me ears. In fact
I always would like to sing Mann’s prose. However, Thomas Mann’s
expressionism is NOT English and I have quite a number of friends of
mine why were not able to read it. I would agree that older English
was more musical. I would agree that even British English is in a way
more musical then American English. The American English that I know
is the very last language I would use for opera or willing to hear in
opera.
I would not sabotage an opera listening just because it was in
English. I however would not have too much expectation to the value of
librettos if it was in English. But it is me, for sure your views
might wary…