27 November 2007

Diva, from head to mistletoe

Our Own Gualtier Maldè reflects on Maria Guleghina's first Met Norma.

True confession: I love Maria Guleghina, I really, really love her. I know her flaws but her strengths are such that they sweep aside severe demerits that would consign any other artist to filth. Among contemporary singers she is one artist who thinks big, sings big with a big voice and gives everything she has even when it is more than she can afford vocally or artistically. She lives dangerously onstage and at the end of the night there is blood on the stage floor, sometimes hers, sometimes the composer's. She may flirt with vocal disaster but she is never routine or boring.

When she was announced as Norma, I felt some trepidation - would this be the breaking point in my love affair with the Russian diva? This is a role where guts and temperament can only get you so far. A lot of the substance of the role is written into the notes and the range of vocal demands is superhuman. Guleghina's rough, approximate singing at the "Macbeth" new production premiere had earned her critical brickbats (the second performance I attended was much better) and it seemed that bel canto was something beyond her reach at this point. Guleghina has sung Norma before but somewhat outside of the main international circuit and not for a few years.

Now I am sure that over the Sirius network this was not anywhere near a complete musical triumph. However in the house it was certainly impressive and often very, very moving. Guleghina's conception of the role is greater than her technical means of achieving it but she shirks nothing and doesn't shy way from emotional extremes or vocal challenges. As an actress and interpreter she is more consistently successful than as vocalist but she cannot be dismissed as totally provincial or crude. Though a few attempts at delicacy, accuracy and finesse may fail, others will surprise you by succeeding and she scored many points in her acting and singing. The voice is major and imposing and suggests a force of nature. Unlike Papian, she was a fearsome rival and didn't sound like the junior priestess next to Dolora Zajick's majestic Adalgisa.

First of all, she is glorious to behold on stage. She has lost some weight in anticipation of the January "Macbeth" satellite moviecast and the often rather soignée new gowns suited her. Tall and majestic with wide-set flashing eyes, she commanded the stage at all times.

Guleghina is often happiest when she can hurl her voice like steel javelins at the music - preferably in the higher range. Some of these vocal assaults miss the target but the energy and force is always exciting. However as Norma, Guleghina attempted many soft attacks, sustained piano singing and modulated phrasing. This in itself was admirable but years of daredevil oversinging are hard to shake off for one role. These piano phrases - including the opening and ending phrases of "Casta Diva" - suffered from hollow, unsteady tones and fell short of the intended pitch. Whereas Papian was capable of more lyricism and delicacy, Guleghina could sweep you away with passion and terrify you with her rage. The two divas strengths and weaknesses seem to be polar opposites of one another. Neither had pinpoint coloratura control but Guleghina had expressive vocal attack and excitement in her fioritura.

Guleghina's control of her forte top was better than before, none of the many B's and C's turned into a squall though she can sharp. She had good clean attacks on some of the killer high cadenzas which will swoop up to a high note and then spiral downward on a chromatic scale. The downward scale was often smeared and sloppy but the top was responsive including a short but firm high D at the end of the trio climaxing the first act.

Though the first act found Guleghina at times managing the role and thinking through her vocal choices phrase by phrase, the second act showed her in greater command of the role. As the role of Norma goes on the vocal gestures become broader and the phrases grander, better suiting Guleghina's big-boned vocal framework. The scene where Norma ponders murdering her children was a different woman from the proud and almost otherworldly priestess of the first scene - this was a tortured, desperate woman. The maternal aspects of the role were powerfully communicated - the way that she embraced her two boys you knew Guleghina has had children of her own. Maria managed to match Dolora phrase by phrase and staccato scale by staccato scale in "Mira, O Norma".

In the scenes where Norma incites the Gauls to battle showed Guleghina tearing up the stage as the epitome of the warrior diva. The confrontation with Pollione "In mia man alfin tu sei" showed one Norma who was truly in love with Pollione even as her anger turned her against him and eventually against herself. The final scene with the moving "Qual cor tradisti" and "Deh non volerli vittime" plumbed real depths of emotion. Guleghina's Norma was relieved to be able to admit her love and free herself from her lies even at the cost of her life. But then there were her children who were now unprotected. Guleghina's plea to her father could have moved a stone to tears.

Throughout there were pitch problems, phrases broken by inadequate breath control and approximated passage work. But also throughout was a real, larger than life yet very human Norma who was compelling and moving whether alone or interacting with her colleagues. Imperfect? Definitely, but this seemed to be the real thing unlike Papian's often elegant but unconvincing attempt at the role. So though the singing was anything but "casta" in many respects, the "diva" in her human and divine aspects propelled the story. At the end of the night there was blood on the stage but tears too and the fire of Bellini's genius burned brightly. -- Gualtier Maldè

Labels: , , , ,



112 Comments:

Blogger Peter W said...

I may or may not have been a great performance, but it definitely was a great review.

November 27, 2007 8:17 AM  
Anonymous Nerva Nelli said...

"Not since Elinor Ross."

November 27, 2007 8:19 AM  
Anonymous barb said...

La Cieca, Please don't give us any more reviews from Gualtier Malde.

November 27, 2007 8:38 AM  
Anonymous barb said...

Not since Jane Eaglen!

November 27, 2007 8:40 AM  
Blogger TKLogan11809 said...

I left after act 1. Guleghina was inferior to Papian and Papian was mediocre.

Guleghina is like Millo now, she can't get her voice to do what she wants. Her attempts at pianissimi resulted in cracks/flat singing. Power to her simply means screaming your lungs out. The Casta diva was dreadful, though the cabaletta was decent. She attempted a D at the end of the act but quickly dropped it, making a mess out of everything.

Benini is a pig, worst than Carlo Rizzi. What a sad night for Bellini.

November 27, 2007 8:44 AM  
Blogger Chalkenteros said...

Wow after the orgy of snark last night in La Cieca's chatroom, the last thing I expected to read here this morning was a love letter to Maria Guleghina! Interesting review, and one that gets me excited for my date this Friday.

November 27, 2007 8:45 AM  
Anonymous arepo said...

Gualtier Malde, move on over, I am in your camp.
It's not so bad being in the minority, wot?

November 27, 2007 8:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Throughout there were pitch problems, phrases broken by inadequate breath control and approximated passage-work."

Standards get lower and lower. Singers get away with complete vocal bullshit and yet we are supposed to think highly of them? Guleghina has been a vocal joke for ten years. All this excuse-making and pandering to vocal mediocrities is a disservice to opera. If Met audiences accept crap, and applaud it, there is no reason for Gelb to seek better singers. He can throw on any old windbag and know that a few blogging queens will rave about the results. It's really come to a sorry pass.

I've known Walter Malde for years and this 'review' makes me seriously wonder how much lower he can set the bar.

November 27, 2007 8:51 AM  
Anonymous HC said...

Amazing the vocal garbage people accept at the Met these days...

November 27, 2007 8:54 AM  
Blogger OperaSouth said...

Isn't it rather similar to the garbage Gina Cigna offered at the MET in the 1930s? Like Gualtier- I thought it was impressive for what it was: a no holes barred, take-no-prisoners approach to the role.
I thought it was more successful than the "Macbeth."

November 27, 2007 9:02 AM  
Anonymous former standee said...

I was truly sorry to hear how badly Guleghina sounded in the Sirius broadcast last night. So many unfortunate instances of no control, no breath, no voice. I hoped that she might simply walk off (ala Alagna in Milano) and someone from the audience would have shouted for LA ZAJICK to take over.

November 27, 2007 9:04 AM  
Anonymous wonderlust said...

Guleghina makes Cigna sound good, and Papian accomplished the unthinkable of making me forgive Jane Eaglen.

November 27, 2007 9:25 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"the orgy of snark": truly everyone's favorite vivaldi opera.

November 27, 2007 9:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bel can'to

November 27, 2007 10:02 AM  
Blogger DirkVA said...

I'm astounded that we have come to a point where "These piano phrases - including the opening and ending phrases of "Casta Diva" - suffered from hollow, unsteady tones and fell short of the intended pitch" can be almost parenthetical in an appreciation of a terrible singer.

November 27, 2007 10:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Malde's low standards (a la "pitch problems, phrases broken by inadequate breath control and approximated passage-work") show what happens when a fan has a preconceived relationship with a singer -- she gets huge breaks. If that had been Netrebko giving such a performance last night, she would have been crucified by most people (and probably cheered by many of the same people screaming BRAVOOOOO). But she at least could have acted. As many times as she missed notes in Puritani, she was nevertheless riveting. If last night was what Malde considered good acting (I was in row G), his eyes are as flawed as his ears and judgment. She had such bad vocal control that she was constantly swallowing nervously, her interactions with the children were unnatural, and the first act she looked lost, scared and defeated - by the role and being on stage, not because of anything to do with love or the Romans. True the second act, particularly scene one, had some good moments, but by that point I was just hoping for a note on pitch, not screeched and falling painfully flat. Act two was tolerable, because our standards too had been lowered. Basically considering the leading roles, I sat there thinking "This is the MET? This is sad."

November 27, 2007 10:17 AM  
Blogger La Cieca said...

Opera South: Of all the comments made about Guleghina's singing last night, the last thing anyone might report is "no holes."

November 27, 2007 10:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great review!
i was in the house last night and have to say that despite all the flaws, she was impressive.
Act I was very hit or miss but in the second half she was on fire.

November 27, 2007 10:24 AM  
Anonymous Hercule said...

It's "no holds barred", a wrestling term...

November 27, 2007 10:39 AM  
Blogger La Cieca said...

Hercule: a metaphor drawn from wrestling would certainly be appropriate for Mme. Guleghina's efforts last night.

November 27, 2007 11:03 AM  
Blogger balabanov11 said...

Okay, it's time for these love letters to a singer to end. You love Guleghina, in spite of all of her many, many shortcomings. You think she's an exciting, viseral singer - we get it, and that's totally fine. I don't need then to read paragraph after paragraph of your defending your love for her, in spite of her obvious problems and obvious unsuitability for this part. Don't sh*t all over the role of Norma, trying to find a way to tell us she was fabulous in it - she wasn't, she wasn't going to be, and all your well-written kisses to her aren't going to change that.

November 27, 2007 11:04 AM  
Anonymous scifisci said...

GM also LOVED fleming's traviata

November 27, 2007 11:05 AM  
Anonymous scifisci said...

GM also LOVED fleming's traviata

November 27, 2007 11:05 AM  
Blogger TKLogan11809 said...

Malde's review is fraudulent, like Guleghina's Norma last night. And the sugarcoating is nauseating.

November 27, 2007 11:17 AM  
Anonymous wotan said...

I was in the House last night...and while I found it overall one of the most dismal nights spent at the MET(and that's saying A LOT...), I actually enjoyed reading GM's very well written take on it--enjoyed the review far more then the performance.

What was up in the pit, last night? These players must know this piece backwards...and it sounded like that's how they were playing it. I have never heard the MET orchestra sound so bad---even under Rizzi's baton. Even the newly revved up chorus seemed to be dragged down by the hideous sounds coming from the pit

November 27, 2007 11:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, TKLogan11809 is more-than-reliable with his comprehensive opinion on Maria Guleghina's "Norma" since he didn't even see the whole performance. Wouldn't it be great for all reviewers to leave after an hour and then proclaim their opinions as fact? I'm sure it saves them plenty of time.

November 27, 2007 11:38 AM  
Anonymous sharon graham said...

who is gulatier malde and why is there so much hoopla over his thoughts?

November 27, 2007 11:43 AM  
Blogger Kekszakallu said...

Gualtier Malde is an anagram of "M.G. aural delite"

November 27, 2007 12:01 PM  
Anonymous Violetta D. Pensataci said...

Having heard Guleghina in two roles now (one live, one Sirius) I can't believe anyone would consider her singing in Norma last night acceptable for the Met, NYCO, San Francisco, Santa Fe, St. Louis, Julliard, Indiana or Fred's Fill Dirt and Opera Studio.

Learn to breathe. Learn technique. Learn bel canto technique! Learn the damn score!! If you can't sing it the way it was written, don't sing it. THEN bring fire, passion, take risks, embellish. If you can't even sing the opening phrase of Casta Diva with impeccable technique, you're not ready for Norma at the Met. As for nerves, well, the whole point of vocal training is to give you a rock solid technique that allows you to forget about how to sing and inhabit the role despite nerves, illness, distractions or whatever. Certainly, the conductor was no friend to the singers last night and he made things worse.

It's one thing to have an off night, and maybe you leave out a high D. Maybe you're sick and so you sing more carefully to save your energy to get through the night. That happens. It's another thing if you just can't do it.

I suspect Mme. Guleghina has gotten as far as she has because she's really loud and there are a few roles she can sing acceptably, or maybe even brilliantly. But between her, Farina and Benini's conducting last night, that Norma was just not good by any reasonable standard.

November 27, 2007 12:01 PM  
Anonymous hc said...

Well, anonymous, why should TK Logan or any other reasonable person waste another 90 minutes of their life listening to a washed-up singer try to slosh her way thru one of the greatest opera roles ever created when he's already suffered through the first act? Not everyone is an opera masochist although some people here seem to revel in sub-mediocrity.

Anonymous, are you W.M. back in another guise now, taking pot-shots at those who question your adulation of Madame Guleghina?

November 27, 2007 12:07 PM  
Blogger TKLogan11809 said...

There was NOTHING Guleghina could do in act 2 that could excuse/redeem her appalling singing in act 1, so what's the point of staying?

I know her well, I know what she can accomplish at this stage in her career and a decent Norma it is NOT.

November 27, 2007 12:07 PM  
Anonymous Diamonda Perez said...

Well, we can no longer take anything Gualtier Malde says seriously.

November 27, 2007 12:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

but then here's the perennial question:

Is there anyone who can do it better?

I understand that the lack of a better alternative shouldn't exalt her status. But given how treacherous the role is, she should get some credit just for taking on this assignment, let alone singing with such commitment.

November 27, 2007 12:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Well, we can no longer take anything Gualtier Malde says seriously."

Why??

November 27, 2007 12:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gladys

TKLogan11809 said...

"I know her well, I know what she can accomplish at this stage in her career and a decent Norma it is NOT."

But you still paid money to go to Norma. Masochist? Loopy? Money to burn?

November 27, 2007 12:32 PM  
Anonymous rd said...

I haven´t seen Guleghina´s Norma, but have seen her sing other roles, such as Aida and Tosca. From what I heard, I cannot imagine how she could possibly sing a stylish and accomplished Norma. That said, I have enjoyed Gualiter Maldè´s text. It is beautifully written and acknowledgedly subjective in his appreciation of a probably doomed-from-the-start effort of an artist he appreciates. I am sure everyone of us have similar feelings for favourite artists whose flawed efforts still reserve some interest for us. I hope GM will still post his comments here.

November 27, 2007 12:56 PM  
Blogger TKLogan11809 said...

I paid nothing. I see all MET performances for free, which is one of the reasons some people choose to work in theater. If I did have to pay however, I wouldn't cough up $12.

November 27, 2007 12:58 PM  
Anonymous quoth the maven said...

Although from the evidence of the first act, heard on Sirius, I would not agree with M. Maldé's assessment of Guleghina's effort, I appreciate the t

November 27, 2007 1:00 PM  
Anonymous Quoth the Maven said...

Although from the evidence of the first act, heard on Sirius, I would not agree with M. Maldé's assessment of Guleghina's effort, I appreciate the seriousness--and kind-heartedness--of his efforts to defend her. He has at least expressed his reaction in articulate, intelligent fashion, which is more than can be said of the people on this board who have delivered ad hominem attacks.

November 27, 2007 1:06 PM  
Anonymous Violetta D. Pensataci said...

At the risk of being stoned by the esteemed commenters of this blog, I'm not a big Callas fan. I've always thought her sound was, I don't know, mushy, or as if she were singing through wads of cotton in her cheeks. It's not a pretty sound. But my God, the size of that voice! And her technique was beyond reproach. I've heard her many times now, including Norma, and while I still think her tone is odd, I cannot deny she knew bel canto technique, and up until the last couple years of her career, could make her voice bend to her will to create amazing and dramatic sounds. I never once thought, "She doesn't know how to sing." She set the bar for all future Normas. Callas, I forgive the flaws in tone, and the wobble and slight tendency to go sharp in later years, because she clearly was a consummate artist and master of her craft. Guleghina may have created a dramatic Norma on stage, but she is not a master of the craft of singing the role. let alone bel canto.

If it's only a matter of who will take risks and bring passion to the role, why stop at Guleghina? How about Britney Spears? Bette Midler? RuPaul? Charlotte Church? Hell, if you want to pay me, I'll go sing a fiery and passionate Norma on the Met stage, I'll take risks. With Michael Bolton as Pollione, yet.

November 27, 2007 1:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sadly, to trash Papian at the end of your review is the worst of all. Papian was elegant and had bel canto style. I like Guleghina and thought there were some impressive moments in the house last night (alas more of them were visual then aural) but as I said to someone next to me Norma has been good to Guleghina but Guleghina has not been good for Norma. By studying the role maybe she will take away a little more subtlety in other performances (she was better than I expected her to me- I planned on seeing a real trian wreck) but she still does the role no great service and definitely should not be singing it at the MET, this would pass muster during an outdoor festival in Italy or at a B opera house in Germany, we deserve better. and especially after hearing Papian's performance which showed a much better technique and far superior command of the style. Unfortunatley, GM's reviews are just a masturbatory act that the rest of us seem to have to endure for the time being.

November 27, 2007 1:25 PM  
Blogger paddypig said...

I agree with the last post

November 27, 2007 1:26 PM  
Blogger Evenhanded said...

Well, it is a shame that so many knuckleheads have chosen to rant against Gualtier's eloquent text. He has clearly delineated Guleg's faults - something many a lesser critic (including most of those contributing to this thread) THRILLS at the opportunity to do. What is much more uncommon (and admirable!) is Gualtier's attempt to shed some light on the GOOD things Guleg accomplished (even if they were few and far between). Many of you one-note-Charlie respondants need to shut your traps and try to learn something from Gualtier's more balanced, evenhanded approach.

No NORMA will ever be perfect. Guleg gave it her best shot. Some liked it, others did not. But one thing is for sure: on a scale of 1 to 10, her performance was neither a 1 (total trash) nor a 10 (total success). As with Papian, and legions of other would-be Normas, it was simply somewhere in between.

I applaud her for having the guts to try it. And I applaud Gaultier for his balance and intelligence.

November 27, 2007 1:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eli's Coming...

November 27, 2007 1:41 PM  
Anonymous hc said...

Balance? It's just a fan's gush...

November 27, 2007 1:43 PM  
Blogger Parsifal said...

All that i had in my mind but couldnt put down on paper while listening to La Gule singing Norma is actually in Gualtier Malde´s excellent review! Not hysterical, neither ¨critical¨and cynical...La Gule gives her soul to the public, and leaves her blood on the stage but we already knew that she is no Norma, she´s no Callas, neither Cerquetti, not even a Theodossiou in Norma BUT...Whoever had the chance to see her perform live can testify that no matter what, she is an artist with a capital A. L´ho datto tutto a te!

November 27, 2007 2:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In house assassin TK Logan? So far you aren't batting a thousand. Takes all kinds. The right color has Guleghina and the right dramatic size to that color. Norma needs more. The basic criteria of bel canto alone shuts the door on her. the bar is so low it is embarrassing.

November 27, 2007 2:11 PM  
Blogger TKLogan11809 said...

oh sure Evenhanded lol we have a lot to learn from Gualtier Malde, the same way Sutherland or Caballé have a lot learn from Guleghina in the role of Norma.....give us a break honey.

I saw Guleghina live many times and she has indeed a unique stage presence, but so does Rosie O'Donnell. Performing opera requires more. Like singing the notes AS WRITTEN and IN TUNE.

November 27, 2007 2:15 PM  
Blogger TKLogan11809 said...

to anonymous: just because one works for the company and doesn't like the singing of one performer doesn't mean he/she is an in-house assassin. Get a grip.

November 27, 2007 2:19 PM  
Blogger Gilg@mesh said...

An Anonymous commenter says, "but then here's the perennial question: Is there anyone who can do it better?"

Let's bat that around for a while (rather than Gilda's boyfriend and La Guleghina!)

Who is out there now that we would like to hear and see as Norma? Someone who isn't known currently for the role?

While listening last night, I thought of the lovely bel canto musicality of Annick Massis and was interested in how she would interpret the character.

How about Ruth Ann? Does she have a Norma in her? I heard her Lucia in the 90s and liked it.

Who else?

November 27, 2007 2:23 PM  
Anonymous Alice Roberts said...

I'd be curious to know if Leyla Gencer's post career enthusiasts would be so legion if she had given HER performance of Norma at The Met.

November 27, 2007 2:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ha! you get one first. TK= bitter gripless hag in the wings but the hag is not not gripeless to be sure. HA! can't take it when it is directed at your clueless head. I don't think Guleghina is a Norma either, and certainly not Massis, as fancifully suggested, TOO SMALL. It needs a dramatic soprano or at least a lyrico with real dramatic accents.

November 27, 2007 2:35 PM  
Blogger Constantine A. Papas said...

After the fiasco of Norma with the previous cast, I didn't bother with last night's. On Siruis, liberated from visual elemnts, it's natural to concentrate on singing, and any vocal lapses are amplified. However, I enjoyed GM review because for the first time, a critic analyses the strengths and weaknesses of two sopranos who have recently sung in succession Norma-a meciless killer in all the soprano repertoire. Main-press music critics seldom revisit the same productions, and it's unheard of to compare singers and voices of the same range, singing the same role. Don't blame Gelb. Where are the Normas of today? He tries to get what's available. Maybe some productions should be shelved until appropriate singers come around.

November 27, 2007 2:37 PM  
Anonymous Nerva Nelli said...

Yes, the shelving might profitably have started with I PURITANI.

November 27, 2007 3:19 PM  
Blogger La Cieca said...

Nerva: I would disagree. Netrebko's Puritani was at worst an interesting failure. Based upon the Sirius broadcast last night, Guleghina's Norma never achived the "interesting" part.

November 27, 2007 3:29 PM  
Blogger scifisci said...

netrebko's puritani was at least beautifully sung in the lyrical passages, though tremendously frustrating given her obvious talent and obvious lack of preparation.
and for those who asked, there ARE other normas out there. Gruberova, Anderson, Urmana etc.

November 27, 2007 3:38 PM  
Blogger iltenoredigrazia said...

Just heard from a friend of mine whose musical knowledge and taste I respect. He was at the Met last night but left at intermission. I suspect there were others like him.

November 27, 2007 3:49 PM  
Anonymous il_guarany said...

Exactly. The who-can-sing-Norma question rears its head repeatedly, and at last sighting many bloggers agrred that Papian was the best Norma around. There was general rejoicing when the Met announced she was going to sing it - and now this.

June Anderson comes up again and again, and she did do a very passable Norma here in Toronto.

Those of us who stuck through the whole thing last night did so because 1. the music is glorious, warts and all and 2. the chat room more than made up in wit and insight for the appalling standards on Sirius.

"That definitely looks like something," or whatever Juntwait said about Ghouley's "primitive" gesture at curtain call. And the audience participation noises of boos and sirens and toilets!

Bad opera doesn't get better than that.

November 27, 2007 3:54 PM  
Anonymous Violetta D. Pensataci said...

Great debate, but why the anonymous name calling. TKLogan raises valid points and someone anonymously attacks him or her. What are we, 12?

I must respectfully disagree with Evenhanded's comments. GM may have written a fair and balanced review, but it begs the question of whether MG should be singing Norma at the Met at all. The Met, La Scala, Covent Garden, Lyric of Chicago, the standard should be set and held high. Lord knows the prices are. If you don't have a soprano who can sing Norma, don't stage it. There are enough recordings for those of us who want to hear the music.

Every time we settle for a little less, we lower the bar.

November 27, 2007 4:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While last night's performance was hardly a model of good singing, I do think it is also important to stress again that the performance over the Sirius airwaves is not always the same as it sounds in the house.

And Guleghina is one of those singers who *has* to be heard live for full impact.

November 27, 2007 4:32 PM  
Anonymous brian said...

I'd love to hear voigt take a shot at norma. i can hear her and dolora harmonizing....beautiful. Or let Radvanovksy take a crack at it. Give her a break from all that Verdi.

I saw Papian and she certainly didn't soar. But it was nice and she and dolora sounded pretty good in those two duets.

I realized on Friday night that the reason you need a great norma is the fact that you need someone to elevate a rather trite opera. The tenor is a louse and the part is vastly underwritten. So someone has to carry the drama.

November 27, 2007 4:35 PM  
Anonymous albicocca said...

Well chacun a son gout, but I take issue with the GM's statement

"She may flirt with vocal disaster but she is never routine or boring."

There is nothing more boring than bad, ill-tuned singing - I was in the house for both her Lady M. and Norma, and, despite my best efforts, I found my mind wandering whenever she was singing - probably a subconscious effort to avoid the wince-inducing pain of her vocal histrionics.

November 27, 2007 4:40 PM  
Blogger NYCOQ said...

Hmmm...very intersting. Well I am certainly no fan of Gulag-ghena. I actually purchased my ticket for the 12/4 because I thought she was not performing on that date. However a lot of persons who only heard the broadcast keep forgetting that "in the house" can make all the difference. While I detest her attempts to hurl her voice toward coloratura and that it sticks type of singing - one must admit admit that in a world of bland (Ummm calling Renaaaay, Ruth Ann et al)singers she certainly does make an impact in the house. Honestly did anybody really expect to hear the defnitive interpretation of Norma from this singer. If you did, you have not been paying attention to her over the past decade or so. The sad part is that this is really the telling point about Mr. Gelb. He is a masater of creating hype and expectiation, but has yet to deliver artistically on anything yet. The only singer performaing today that I can imagine who could bring anything to Norma these days is Guberova. I am not a Gulag hater. I thouroughly enjoyed her in the Nabucco & Il Tabarro. Aside from that everything esle she has sung at the met has been FILTH. But I would rather see her match Zajick's intensity than walk away with Adalgisa being the highlight of Norma. Again isn't there a mezzo version out there? Please please please somebody mount this for Zajick while she is in her prime. Now that my dears would be the Norma to see.

November 27, 2007 4:41 PM  
Anonymous il_guarany said...

Oh please, blaming the broadcast only takes you so far. True, one needs to BeThere for the full experience, but the bad pitch, faulty breath and wobble we heard last night were not Sirius's doing.

I saw The Rake's Progress a few years ago and was underwhelmed. Upon my return to Canada, however, as I transferred the Met broadcast of the same performance from VHS to CD, I thought it sounded great. Go figure.

It was a flawed performance and unworthy of a major-league opera house. The bright side is that it could have been Cheryl Studer singing the role, in which case..., well, you know.

November 27, 2007 4:45 PM  
Blogger NYCOQ said...

This post has been removed by the author.

November 27, 2007 4:46 PM  
Blogger NYCOQ said...

Sorry about all of the typos

November 27, 2007 4:48 PM  
Anonymous Little Stevie said...

For what it's worth Guleghina was EXTREMELY nervous last night...actually shaking in the wings before her entrance. She probably knows her voice isn't really suited to Norma - and if you couple that with the very limited rehearsal preparation that she had because she is in the second cast the nerves are understandable. I'm curious to see if things improve by next week when I see her on 12/4.

November 27, 2007 5:02 PM  
Blogger La Cieca said...

NYCOQ: It is pretty generally agreed that the casting of Guleghina as Norma was accomplished during the Met's previous regime. I suppose Gelb could have paid off Guleghina, giving the whole run to Papian, or else he could have substituted some other opera. But the point is that whatever Gelb did with the "Guleghina Norma" situation, it would be reactive, basically trying to mend someone else's broken sword.

Now, the Adriana next season -- there's plenty of lead time to get that cleaned up, and a wider talent pool of Adrianas than Normas who might be asked to save the day.

There is no official "mezzo version" of Norma but for a special revival with Zajick in the title role and a lyric soprano as Adalgisa, suitable alterations could easily enough be made. (For example, Norma and Adalgisa could trade off some of their lines in the duets.) The real question would be whether Zajick would be willing to take on Norma and all the pressure "The Role" entails.

November 27, 2007 5:02 PM  
Anonymous orestes said...

A question: what is the rehearsal routine for a second cast? I wondered last night if there had been a full orchestra rehearsal with Guleghina? There were many disconnects between pit and stage.

November 27, 2007 5:16 PM  
Blogger Evenhanded said...

Well,

Even LC thinks Zajick would be a reasonable Norma. I have to disagree. Here is the problem (and it is obvious - even when one listens to her assay of Adalgisa): it is all just so careful - so "placed". Zajick has tremendous vocal security - yes she does, but she has BIG issues with temperament (i.e., a lack thereof). Don't get me wrong - Zajick is an outstanding singer - one of my favorites for sure, but she just doesn't strike me as the sharpest knife in the drawer, and this would be a HUGE problem were she to attempt Norma. All of her vocal effects, while well-executed, sound like they have been pasted on, rather than springing from the texts and dramatic situations. Sometimes this is enough - and from a vocal standpoint (especially compared to Guleg's Norma) this may be the case here. But would she be a "great" Norma, no, I doubt it. Zajick (with the possible exception of Amneris) doesn't really ever "live" her characters. The roles she plays spring to life by virtue of her vocal security, but she does not have the soul or talent of an actor (nor does she truly understand the tenets of "bel canto" singing - at least to my ears). She is a "good" Adalgisa - but far from a great one, IMO.

On another note, I agree with Violetta's criticism that the bar has been set too low. I happen to be in the camp that would rather hear the opera performed (even poorly) than have it disappear from the stage, but I understand those who feel differently.

November 27, 2007 5:22 PM  
Blogger Constantine A. Papas said...

Some question if on Sirius we get a good "aural" picture to assess the quality of voice. I've heard the same opera- Aida-in the house and on Sirius with the same singers. With the primium sound option downloaded on a digital media center PC, and with a good set of speakers and a subwoofer, the quality of sound is excellent, and vocal slides are amplified. The reason is that microphones- not in house- are used for the transmission, and acoustically you have the perception that you're closer to the voice.
It's amazing, no matter what, that Netrebko's name kreeps up in any discussion concerning sopranos. Even if you love to hate her, she has made her mark in the history of opera!

November 27, 2007 5:24 PM  
Anonymous tingle said...

Guleghina did not get a rehearsal with the orchestra, or a rehearsal with the cast, or even a full rehearsal onstage. That is the plight of 2nd casting such as this. The artist must create it all in the rehearsal room with piano and then bring it to the stage their first performance.

November 27, 2007 5:26 PM  
Blogger UWS said...

Has Guleghina done the role before staged? I know she's sang a number of concert versions....

Also, La Cieca, do you have a transcript of the "chat simulcast" from last night ? I'd be curious to hear the live comments.

November 27, 2007 5:28 PM  
Anonymous orestes said...

Tingle - thanks. That explains much. Not all, but much.

November 27, 2007 5:42 PM  
Anonymous Baryton francais said...

When one can't even use the correct accent in one's own name, why would we bother to read the filth within?

I knew this would be a major filth-fest, and am almost glad I missed hearing it last night - although I always have that nagging itch to hear a touch of things gone completely wrong.

This whole BS is why I tend to stay away from the Met now. Much better stuff to be found elsewhere folks... I personally think the Chicago Lyric really has their heads screwed on in comparison. Perhaps this was a casting that someone made as a complete joke and publicity stunt? I believe the saying is something like "even bad publicity is good publicity."

I think the number of comments reflect this (currently 74 before I post). Apparently filth is high on people's lists these days...

I enjoyed the snarky comments though, so I guess I'm included? Ah well...

November 27, 2007 5:51 PM  
Blogger NYCOQ said...

La Cieca -

Point well taken. Surely there was something that could have been done. Chalk my enthusiasm for Zajick up to me never getting enough of her. I will hold my comments till 12/4. But trust me I won't be holding my breath. It's just so sad that after my bitter disappointment with Eaglen's performance to be given this Norma almost leaves me in tears. I was hoping to hear Papian.

November 27, 2007 5:57 PM  
Anonymous sandra said...

Is this gualtier malde review meant to be taken seriously? The performance was atrocious.

November 27, 2007 6:31 PM  
Blogger mark2 said...

It was interesting reading ALL the comments. I would trust Guleghina in MAN-eating roles like Tosca,Abigaille,even Lady Macbeth. But for NORMA, the search continues, sigh.
Hey guys, anybody hear any rumors when Renee Fleming will tackle NORMA or is she going to play a coy-Violetta-like game she did in 2003??? (Fleming: "Oh,please do NOT review my Houston Traviata")
Also, how is the Gruberova Norma DVD, any good?

November 27, 2007 7:23 PM  
Anonymous Little Stevie said...

I saw Guleghina in Macbeth at the third performance and she was much better than on opening night. If what was posted here about her rehearsal time is true (and I'm going to check that out with my contact at the Met) then this could be an unfortunate case of simply being ill-prepared. This doesn't excuse the fact that the audience paid full price to see Norma and shouldn't have to indulge an artist that needs to warm up into the role. Apparently she has not performed Norma in some time (there are clips on YouTube from 2004 - has she done it since?) so as with Macbeth I am hoping that by next week when I see her on 12/4 the role will be more in her voice.

As for Guleghina being a "joke" for the last 10 years and all the other similar cruel comments - I only need point out to you her tremendous success last year in both Cavaleria and Tabarro - both roles suited to her in which she was excellent.

November 27, 2007 7:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In response to "Can anyone sing Norma these days?" my answer would be Krassimira Stoyanova, though she has never (to my knowledge) undertaken the part.

I wouldn't turn down a chance to hear Zajick take it on either.
- Hans Lick

November 27, 2007 7:51 PM  
Blogger Constantine A. Papas said...

If I'm not mistaken, Fleming- and wisely so- has withdrawn from Met's Norma.

November 27, 2007 8:06 PM  
Blogger sugarmezzo said...

best decision she's made in years

November 27, 2007 8:25 PM  
Anonymous thomas said...

As usual, another good review, Gualtier.

I'll believe Renee has withdrawn from the Met Norma when Brad Wilber removes it from his Futures page.

November 27, 2007 9:42 PM  
Blogger iltenoredigrazia said...

Frank Guarrera, a lyric baritone who sang at the Metropolitan Opera for nearly 30 years, died on Friday at his home in Bellmawr, N.J. He was 83.

(From The New York Times)

November 27, 2007 10:04 PM  
Blogger DirkVA said...

Well, the Met stage was exorcised of all that filth tonight. I'm just back from the Gluck premiere, and I have to say that, while none of the singing was perfect, it was all *singing* that one respected, in a show beautifully acted and lovely to the eye.

I kept thinking, "Now THIS is more like it!"

November 28, 2007 2:19 AM  
Blogger DirkVA said...

Oh, my. I have to take part of that back. How could I momentarily have forgotten William Shimell's horrible caterwauling? Fortunately it wasn't enough to ruin the other fine performances, but I wearied of trying to find the pitch he was aiming at much of the time.

I was not one of those who piled on the British in that other thread. But I couldn't help thinking tonight that it was a scandal that they had to import someone who sang this terribly when there must be a number of students next door at Juilliard who could do far better.

One reason his singing wasn't more distracting to the beautiful production than it was could be that one could take Thoas to be a decrepit old man whose infirmity resided partly in his vocal apparatus.

November 28, 2007 2:27 AM  
Anonymous La Cuntessa said...

Who can sing Norma:

Elizabeth Blancke-Biggs
Marie-Adele McArthur
Lucrecia García (once she ripens for about five more years)
Louise Hudson

Have any of you ever heard of any of these singers? Probably not, more's the pity. But that is the state of the art, isn't it? Any of the four I mentioned, and I'm probably missing a few, can sing all of the notes Bellini wrote and plug in acuti here and there, can sing them legato and with correct bel canto style and enough volume to please anyone but the deaf. But who cares? They aren't FAMOUS, after all.

Cruise wept, I tell you. Cruise wept.

November 28, 2007 6:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did Matila ever tried it? I'm not sure she has real coloratura in her bag but what a druidess it would be!
Alex

November 28, 2007 9:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think of Mattila as an italian or bel canto stylist.She is at her best in the German rep.

Although I am sure she would make an interesting Norma.

November 28, 2007 10:23 AM  
Blogger Constantine A. Papas said...

DirkVA,

"Perfect singing" is a utopia attained only in your dreams. I heard Iphigenie ed Tauride on Sirius. The performance, vocally and dramatically, was one of the best, if not the best, this season. Singers, chorus, orchestra playing, and conducing were tuned to perfection. Graham deserved Diana's love and protection, like no other mezzo at this particular time. That was the Met at its best!

November 28, 2007 11:37 AM  
Anonymous Nerva Nelli said...

Back to shelving PUTITANI due to inadequate singers. In the 19th century this was known as a four star opera. Whatever your take on Anya's head-in-the-pit performance, none of the other singers belonged up on that stage in that work except the Enrichetta. and Gualtiero of Zifchak and Ruminski ( who should have been Giorgio instead of "Big Hair John", that dull dog.

November 28, 2007 12:14 PM  
Blogger DirkVA said...

"That [the Gluck premiere] was the Met at its best!"

I couldn't agree more, and I hope I conveyed that. Nor, I protest, do I demand "perfect" singing. I mentioned the incidental vocal imperfections in the performances of Graham, Groves, and Domingo because I assume most reading this will have heard it on the radio without the dazzling drama you'll find in the theater it