My First Opera Experience
Thanks to the Metropolitan Opera's program, I was able to see--no, not just see, but hear, feel, immerse myself--in Tosca, with true diva Sonya Yencheva yesterday. It was my first opera experience of that kind. Decades ago I watched Madame Butterfly on a little black and white TV, hardly the same.
I went in a little suspicious that this was not really live, but of course was wrong. They show the audience, and since there were children in the audience as well as a lot of elderly people, I could tell it was a real matinee. Also, the two intermissions were 30 minutes long each, because the sets for this production are extremely lavish and detailed--and massively expensive--and take a herculean effort to change. We actually get to watch some of that, along with some interviews with the stars and designers, speaking affably to a beautiful young opera singer called Isabel, who also gives information about the Met and the production.
I read up on the plot before going and read some reviews afterward. Apparently the Met's last production of Tosca, which is certainly high drama, was a dud because of the production design. They apparently spared no expense on this one, and it looked like about 100 people were in the production if one counts the chorus and soldiers and churchgoers.
I also read that the diva took a different approach to the part, and it works. Instead of a haughty and arrogant Tosca, she is human, flawed, brave, lusty (a woman's body, to be sure), kind, jealous, passionate, and tragic.
To say the least, I was enthralled, despite the long intermissions. The third act is written sort of slow, but the first and second were spectacular. The music and singing serve the story overall, and I didn't feel like it was just bel canto for the sake of beautiful singing. But those voices! And how they sing into each other's faces! And how Tosca murders her tormentor! I'm hooked, and hope to go to a couple of others. Sonya Yencheva seems to be the star of the year, because she's starring in two more.
One of the concerns I read about was that the Met sort of hoped this would help local opera companies, but that has not happened--law of unintended consequences. I can see why. If I want to see opera, why would I pay $50.00 to dress up and sit in the nosebleed section of something here when I can watch the supreme players up close in my jeans at the metroplex? (It was a very gray audience yesterday, though--a busload came from Alexian Village. I may have been the youngest there, and I'm not young.)
The reason I would pay $50.00 is if this is what my "set" and my social class does. As the chair of a department that contains music, I have some professional motivation to see what is going on in our community. However, opera is a very expensive proposition, so I know the local company is probably struggling in that regard.
So, maybe in a month I'll see La Boheme and in April Luisa Miller. There are a lot of dejected, tragic female in opera, but they do it so beautifully!
I went in a little suspicious that this was not really live, but of course was wrong. They show the audience, and since there were children in the audience as well as a lot of elderly people, I could tell it was a real matinee. Also, the two intermissions were 30 minutes long each, because the sets for this production are extremely lavish and detailed--and massively expensive--and take a herculean effort to change. We actually get to watch some of that, along with some interviews with the stars and designers, speaking affably to a beautiful young opera singer called Isabel, who also gives information about the Met and the production.
I read up on the plot before going and read some reviews afterward. Apparently the Met's last production of Tosca, which is certainly high drama, was a dud because of the production design. They apparently spared no expense on this one, and it looked like about 100 people were in the production if one counts the chorus and soldiers and churchgoers.
I also read that the diva took a different approach to the part, and it works. Instead of a haughty and arrogant Tosca, she is human, flawed, brave, lusty (a woman's body, to be sure), kind, jealous, passionate, and tragic.
To say the least, I was enthralled, despite the long intermissions. The third act is written sort of slow, but the first and second were spectacular. The music and singing serve the story overall, and I didn't feel like it was just bel canto for the sake of beautiful singing. But those voices! And how they sing into each other's faces! And how Tosca murders her tormentor! I'm hooked, and hope to go to a couple of others. Sonya Yencheva seems to be the star of the year, because she's starring in two more.
One of the concerns I read about was that the Met sort of hoped this would help local opera companies, but that has not happened--law of unintended consequences. I can see why. If I want to see opera, why would I pay $50.00 to dress up and sit in the nosebleed section of something here when I can watch the supreme players up close in my jeans at the metroplex? (It was a very gray audience yesterday, though--a busload came from Alexian Village. I may have been the youngest there, and I'm not young.)
The reason I would pay $50.00 is if this is what my "set" and my social class does. As the chair of a department that contains music, I have some professional motivation to see what is going on in our community. However, opera is a very expensive proposition, so I know the local company is probably struggling in that regard.
So, maybe in a month I'll see La Boheme and in April Luisa Miller. There are a lot of dejected, tragic female in opera, but they do it so beautifully!
Comments