Tuesday, June 19, 2012

On seeing a friend do her show for the first time...

So, on the weekend, I got to see a friend of mine perform her show for the first time. And yes, I realise that sounds like a bit of a brag, but, yes, it is true.  I have long known she was a singer, both teaching at a school, and performing. Most of what she gets to do is entertaining kids via her YellowKat routine, but she does also write and sing songs from an adult point of view. And they are all highly personal, dare one say, therapeutic songs.

Now I have to say, before anything else, how wonderful it is to hear a singer whose words you can actually hear, because their diction is so clear. The fact that I hardly knew any of her songs did not matter, because she is such a vivid performer. She brought her songs to life with the passion that inspired them to be written in the first place.

And, as a singing teacher, she knows how to use her voice to bring things to life, without putting her voice under massive strain, so the last song came through clear, just like the first did. And those songs told stories, of her concerns for her son, of how some people annoyed the hell out of her, of her troubles with the house she and her husband bought.

I will also state for the record, that her music style is not really my kettle of fish per se. I mean, my love of opera and other classical music is hardly a secret here. But, considering it was a pop concert, the fact that I did enjoy it, says a lot about the skills of the performer.

And really, I could try to describe why I liked it, but really, just know it was good. Very good. You too can sample how good. She is performing again 7th July at Mars Hill Cafe in Parramatta. Or, you can try/buy her music via Bandcamp here 

I might also add, she is one of those people who deserve to be much more popular than she is. Trust me on this.

Yes, I saw Helen Perris and I enjoyed it. I may start buying friends her EP, for birthday gifts, just because...


Sunday, June 03, 2012

Thoughts that arose after seeing "Wagner's Dream"

Ok, so I have now seen "Wagner's dream" - the documentary to pull more money for the Met. Sorry, raise the profile of The Met's Ring cycle. That was a bit cynical wasn't it? It's actually worth seeing if you went to the Ring operas from this new production, either at the opera, or at The Met itself. And yes, I am glad I saw it.

But, for me, what was most telling is what was not covered. Yes, I get that the machine, and the staging was the big deal about this new production. And, to be sure, this is probably what most people were interested in, but, really, that is only one part of what goes into making a production like this.

Where was the sections of the orchestra rehearsing with James Levine, before he had to leave for health reasons? Or him working with some of the singers? Or, how about some stuff of Debbie Voigt working on learning the words and music of what is a humungous role, which she had never learnt before? I mean, even the preparation of some individual scenes, which were shown, in every case focused on the interaction of the characters and the machine, not even once did I hear a performer talk about motivations or "how do you want me to play this scene?"

Of course, I do know why none of this featured.

This was a production by a director, who while known for innovation, is not exactly known for depth. This is not a production to make people discuss what was meant, or why someone did what, it was opera as spectacle, as a literal reading, utilising technology to bring things to life that have always been essentially unstageable.

My spies, who include people who sang in the show, inform me that they did not have much in the way of interaction with Robert LePage. Most of the blocking, that is, the building up of how the characters move around and interact was worked out with assistants. LePage was more focussed (dare I say, obsessed?) with his monster of a set, and all its technical challenges.

Yet ultimately, what matters with any opera, in the end, is the music, the characters and the performances. Do we believe in them as individuals enough to care what happens? Are the musical values strong enough to make us care? And, is the music working to strengthen the performances, or do those actually work against the music being sung?

And to be honest, having seen this production in cinema, and now having seen the documentary, I am truly convinced that what worked owed most to Richard Wagner, then to James Levine and his musical staff, then the performers and finally to Robert LePage's organisation. This, for all its marketing as an innovative production, was really at its heart a very traditional telling of the story. Yes, the set was unusual, and used in interesting ways, but that does not detract from the fact, this is a very traditional Ring.

And I say that, not meaning it in a bad way. This is a Ring cycle to show to people who do not "get" Wagner. It presents the operas in a way that is clear, does not clutter the stories with unnecessary details and is performed by people who mostly are at the top of their careers. There are a couple of smaller performers who, in the performances screened in cinemas, seemed outclassed, but they were minor roles, compared to most.

But, Wagner is expected to offer more. As a writer, he was concerned much more with the meaning of the tale, than just the tale itself. Normally, in modern productions, you come away with a sense of what the director thought the operas were about. You gain a sense of what his or her pet theories are, or his choice of things to fetishise. With this production, you only get opera as spectacle and storytelling. Which, while enjoyable, does leave you wondering, "is that it?" I think for the length of time we commit, we (and Wagner) should expect more.