Natalie Déshabillée
La Dessay rehearses the "bathtub scene" from Manon.
Sorry, folks, the video is no longer available for embedding at the request of the uploader, Parsifal1979. You can view it, however, on the YouTube site.
Sorry, folks, the video is no longer available for embedding at the request of the uploader, Parsifal1979. You can view it, however, on the YouTube site.
Labels: bathroom humor, dessay, diva, warming the winter-weary spirit, youtube
POSTED at
6:18 PM
87 Comments:
I'm sorry...was ms.Dessay wearing a thong??
More than I ever wanted to know about my favorite Female singer
as for males...well we'll wait and see
Hi La Cieca! Happy New Year! Please add a reference to the original poster of this (that would be me, a couple of days ago for the video on youtuve too). Thanks in advance.
Oh God...no...just no...
Well primodon1...this is a male...a young one at that, and....oh god...
I thought Ms. Dessay couldn't possibly be any uglier than her ideas were on Charlie Rose's show. This proves me wrong.
Please, please, no more of her nude. Please.
Really, please.
Why do you think her comments on Charlie Rose were "ugly"? Did you not think on some level that she was smart, grounded, articulate, and sure of herself (in the best sense)? What she said on that show completely backs up her stage work. Just because you did not agree does not make it ugly. How fanatical!
her comments were fantasy. She is an ACT-tress.
no porno in HER future.
Hideous.
Sing dear, while you can.
Nudity on stage does not equal pornography. Even in that brief video clip it is obvious that Ms. Dessay is not selling sex. Nudity onstage DOES equal pronography in a WASP culture where there are body issues and guilt issues. Manon Lescaut (the novel and the opera) is not necessarily a representative of the WASP sensibility. In fact it could be viewed as a critique of bourgeois notions of respectablity...something that some of you are grappling with, as evidenced by your opinions on this thread. So your comments are understandable but only within the context of your cultrual and intellectual limitaions.
right, sharon. that makes a lot of sense.
because in the middle east, they're all white, anglo saxon protestants, right? oh wait..
read a book. i don't think it's porn, but to say that people who don't want nudity onstage are simply uncomfortable with it because they have body or guilt issues is absurd. i'm a black woman who happens to be an atheist and while i wouldn't necessarily feel uncomfortable with the small amount of nudity shown in the clip above, if/when it gets to be commonplace, i *would* take issue with that---many people are comfortable with their bodies and have no "guilt" as you say, and yet still think there should be something left to the imagination in art. just because you can use proper punctuation and a thesaurus doesn't mean that your ideas are likewise intelligent.
Like many others, I was disgusted by Dessay's remarks in her conversation with the simpering, buffoonish Charlie Rose (speaking of "ugly" . . .), but can someone please explain to me what is "ugly" about her body? She looks fine to me. Does she need to have pneumatic watermelon-breasts to be considered acceptable in the nude? Or is there some other problem?
Well, is opera entering its complete nudity stage and defining itself as pornopera? We've seen in the buff Mattila and now Dessay. Who's next? Netrebko or Fleming? Is "rating" of opera coming soon? There is a trend of gimmickry in opera productions and I hope nudity is not going to be the new standard. Is not a matter of being prude, but the complete loss of wondering and imagination to wanting to see more will be lost, projecting visual distracting imagery and not the voice. Is the voice what opera is all about? Maybe things are changing fast, and pretty soon opera stars will be centerfolds in Playboy and Penthouse magazines. If that day comes, I hope I don't live o see it. Historically and if my memory serves me right, in the mid 70 the Met showed some flesh in the production of Tais, where one of dancers appeared topless. But creating gratuitous frontal nudity not dictated by the text is a skin-deep parody of the story and simple voyeurism.
You know, we make it sound like this is new. Carol Neblett famously appeared topless in Salome. I don't have issues about other people's bodies, only my own. I don't have a problem with nudity in opera (especially Teddy Tahu Rhodes!), as long as it fits the opera. Is there any need for Susannah or The Marschallin to go topless? Probably not. But to illustrate manon's transformation through the opera... perhaps.
Well I mentioned the WASP culture because this discussion is within that culture and not in a middle eastern one. However, when you mention "when it gets to be commonplace," may I know who is the arbiter of that categorization? Exactly what is commonplace in regards to nudity onstage? and who determines that it has gotten "commonplace." At least my argument (even though you think it not intelligent) is more measurable that your subjective statements. On another point about "leaving something to the imagination"....I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that statement is totally based on the audience's expectations from a product that they have paid to see. It completely excludes the artist and her process. The audience has bought the ticket and he/she will determine what is proper. That is a bit consumerist which in fact is the definition of anti-art, don't you think? In some theories of acting at the start of the 20th century (realism) nudity for the actor is a way of reaching a level of physical/emotional freedom. In many avent-garde theatre movements of the mid 20th century nudity is a way of resisting societal norms and expectations. So you see there are arguments for nudity that have nothing to do with pornography. My issue was with the person who equated nudity with pornography which is purely a judgmental perception that comes from how we as a culture view the body. We accept nudity in movies far more comfortably than nudity onstage. I believe that is because we feel embarrased when the nude person is live and present in the room with us vs. when they are merely a projection on a screen. So you see it does ultimately come down to the notions body issues. Any assertion that that is not so is being in a state of denial. And you as a black woman living in a white society should know that!
By viewing Dessay in that brief clip, how did you determine that the nudity had gotten "commonplace?" In closing I appreicate your comments about my punctuation which by the way is not that good.
So the question is: Dessay or Mattila?
http://cultureonthecheap.wordpress.com
I am reminded of that line from Valley of the Dolls: "The French girls zey tend to be, how you say, FLAT in zee bosum"
Keep in mind that this is a rehearsal video of this production. the video camera seems to be mighty close to the actors.
I believe the words "We can't even see that she is nude" are uttered.
Has anyone seen the actual video of the complete Liceu manon? Is Natalie actually visibly naked from the audience?
I can't remember any references in the reviews at the time that she was seen naked on stage - my memory could be faulty though.
Danielle de Niese was staged in a similar situation in the McVicar production of Giulio Cesare in Glyndebourne. Whether she was naked or not was left entirely to the imagination. We just saw her in a bathtub.
I just don't get was is so scandalous about the naked body. We all have one, and we all basically know what one looks like.
The taboo of the naked body comes out of nothing but our own culture and societal constructs. Anybody who claims the opposite need only look at several examples of non Judeo-Christian societies to notice the fear of the naked body is not intrinsic to the human nature.
well constantine--
I know where the anger is coming from. It is the issue of voice vs. theatre. I love voices as well as theatre. And there is a justifiable fear in the opera world that the voice is being pushed back. That is where the anger is coming from. But on the other hand, as you mentioned, things ARE changing. Opera was created as a revival of Greek tragedy. In other words, the historical roots are theatrical. When viewed from that perspective, Bel Canto becomes a betrayal. Now I LOVE bel canto. But that is what we are used to. We are (especially some of us older ones) in love with that glorious voices and we fear that they may be disappearing. But Dessay and some other opera singers today are creating a level of theatricality that in my humble opinion is raising the artform of opera. I hope the vocalism does not suffer in the process. But watching Schafer and Coote today in Hansel and Gretel was astonishing in its physical characterization. Opera singers of the past could not do that. They could do other things much more gloriously but what I saw today is a skill that eludes many a great actor. WOW! The nudity in Manon is an expression of the theatricality of that opera and of course it is going to create controversy especially from those of us who love the vocal sound coming to us. That is what the opposition is. It is not about pornography. Many of us would not complain if Nathan Gunn appeared nude. In fact I have seen intelligent adults turn into school girls at the sight os his chest right here on this site. So there is also a double standard. You see it all goes back to body issues and that consumerist attitude.
i don't see what me being a black woman in a white society has to do with it. i only used that to combat your theory that only WASPs have issues with nudity because they somehow feel guilty.
well, i think there is something to be said about your comparison of nudity in movies versus nudity on stage. i agree that people tend to be more comfortable seeing it projected (because as you suggested, it's not "actually" there, per se). but that doesn't mean that it should be there in either forum, commonplace or not. i agree with your other comment that there comes a problem when nudity permeates opera in situations other than when it is called for in the libretto--like you mentioned, in salome. and as for the porn issue---i tried to make it clear that i didn't see this clip in particular as porn unlike one of the previous posters suggested, rather i was extrapolating this as a reason to talk about the bigger issue. :) and nudity has become commonplace--this clip doesn't prove or disprove that. by commonplace i mean that it happens often enough in non-contextual situations that people accept it as essential when i, personally, don't think that it is, and there are others who agree.
unfortunately (fortunately for me, though!) i've got to go finish packing for my vacation to the bahamas tomorrow, so i won't be able to respond anytime soon. have fun with yours, though!
c
I did not assert that "only" the WASP culture suffers from body issues. But our discussion here is within a predominantly WASP context.
As far as nudity being "commonplace," don't you think that in the bedroom scene in Manon if she were to take a bath (which is what the dramatic action is) that might be appropriate to the scene. I mean they are alone together and she needs to wash up. It is a physical action that is physically acheivable. It is not an idea. IT IS AN ACTION. That is what acting is: doing actions. And yet it heightens the erotocism of the moment. Where is it that it becomes pornography?...she is fucking him...she is not masturbating in the bath tub to titilate YOU the audience. What she is doing is perfectly real and normal within the context of the scene. And it is within the director's right to IMAGINE it.
And by the way everyone, what is her name is packing to go to the Bahamas and you will not hear from her in a long time.
Well honestly I don't have issues with her body (which looks fabulous, better than many hollywood starlets,) ang her comments on Charlie Rose were perfectly valid nothing ugly about them, and a friend of mine from Japan where the DVD has already been released says that the way it is staged there is no actual nudity simply her bareback I believe, and sharon brought up some fascinating points although I also tend to agree with cindy as well.
Oh and Aristotle......thats just mean
oh primodon1--
don't agree with her!!! she is going to the Bahamas! That is as bad as going to Vegas. She is not going to Vienna or Paris or Milan...she is going to the Bahamas. That proves that she knows nothing of opera!!!!!
I don't really get what all the hooplah is about.
She's naked.
She is slim, fit, and has small but perky breasts.
What is the problem?
And while I can't at this moment remember anything specific that she said on Charlie Rose, I remember thinking at the time that she was lovely, and seemed intelligent, devoted to her art, and coming from the right place in terms of how she approaches her work - I am at a loss to understand what was not appealing to you guys about her comments - explain please.
And sadly, I HAVE to make this note to my above request - PLEASE NO PERSONAL ATTACKS. I am not challenging anyone else's authority, nor am I trying to exert my own - I am literally, honestly, truthfully, just curious about what appears to be a totally different opinion than my own, and I am intrigued. If someone thought her comments were ugly and hateful, I would sincerely like to understand where you are coming from. Thank you.
Sugarmezzo
Your post is lovely. You are absolutely right in your estimation that Dessay's comments "came from the right place." And I hope nobody attacks you personally. By all measures Dessay is still a great singer. I loved and appreciated your comments, not because I am a fan of Dessay's necessarily...but because she is true to her art. As much as I praised Schafer and Coote in Hansel and Gretel in my previous posts, you should see Plowright as the mother....totally melodramatic and "UNTRUE"....if she had any more stage time she would ruin the show..awful...awful
If I may offer my opinion as seemingly the only straight male on this site:
Damn, those are nice.
I'm a straight male, and no, they are not.
Baritenor,
I'm straight, too, and I found Dessay's assets not really "hot."
Nudity does not equal pornography per se, but it becomes pornographic if it does not add artistic value to an opera production and does not serve the text.
So what did she say on Charlie Rose already?
What could have been so offensive?
I know I'm going to get flamed for this- but I have to say it. Down here we laugh at attitudes to nudity in the USA. You can show a movie with people being blasted to pieces and not blink an eyelid- yet one peek at Janet Jackson's bejewelled nipple and the whole country goes into an uproar- sponsorships get cancelled etc. It really is quite amusing.
I'm not going to go into it all here but your various States all have various ridiculous laws regarding stripping etc and as to TV- it's a joke.
I thought Ms Dessay looked great in the bath sequence- and a perfectly natural part of the story/action.
Shock horror even Bev Sills did a brief full frontal in Thais in the early seventies and when she did the statue of Liberty didn't drop the torch.
Over here I don't think we've had a non nude Salome at the end of the Dance, for years!
Seems to me the Puritans are still alive and well :0) Flame away.
Baritenor, i'm with you. those are definitely great titties.
lets just appreciate them, people!
dear nerva,
here she is, in all her glory:
http://www.charlierose.com/guests/natalie-dessay
Well, they may not be the most perfect pair of breasts in the world, but for a forty-two year old woman with two kids, those are very....nice. And never have I been more glad for the anonminty of the internet.
Baritenor--
You are not as anonymous as you think. I know who you are...even while making lude comments about Ms. Dessay's breasts incognito. However, I am not going to reveal your name here because that would be really tacky, wouldn't it THOMAS HAMSPON?
It's certainly very strange when an opera star who has been lucky enough to score a plum part like Lucia kinda disses it by saying she would rather be a plain actress. I don't know what it is about it that is so disappointing but to me its like a delusion.
When you see a Sutherland or Caballe you know they are totally dedicated to the art - when you see Ms Dessay you can't help thinking she is just filling time until she gets offered a role in a sitcom. Kinda deflating. I can understand people using the word "ugly" and don't think they are fanatical at all.
Yes sharon said... very very very very extremely tacky! It's bad enough IF you are right- even worse if you are wrong. In short, YOU are the pits.
Daniel:
Oh sweetie...
I've seen the complete DVD and no, Dessay's pair doesn't appear, just her bare back. But you can see zoomed-in close-ups of them on the bonus feature, probably enough reason for the 2 straight guys here to buy. As for the opera itself, let's just say I've seen better Manons. My opinions are here if you would like to read them.
Sharon lude I believe is a drug - lewd is an adjective meaning suggestive or vulgar - not sure which you meant.
And hey there ain't nothing wrong with those breasts - or the rest of the body for that matter.
And who the hell is Charlie Rose and why does he matter to anyone?
Nice review, Steven, but puzzled by this: "MacVicar gives us a grim and seedy view of 19th century upper society"
MANON [LESCAUT] (Prevost's novel and Massenet's opera) is set in the 1720s...
Um, excuse the fuck out of me, but you people consider that body ugly?
Jesus. Go back to your airbrushed issues of Playboy or whatever. Even some of us straight chicks think that rack is hot.
Welcome to the real world of real women with real bodies.
I was confused too, willym....maybe it is neither 'lewd', nor 'lude'. Maybe it was 'louche' as in wet sloppy vagina. I see you have experience with drugs. Do you experience with vaginas?
"...There's a word for women like you...but it's not used in polite society..."
Dessay has always made comments that she'd rather be an actress or has otherwise made it seem like she was deigning to sing a role. I think it was of Fille du Regiment that she said in 2005/2006 "The music's not so good" in an interview with either Classic FM or BBC Music. I think something gets lost in translation with her, because she always seems to be saying something off that mark.
On the same token, I don't blame her if she is saying she'd rather not be singing. It's an incredibly taxing lifestyle, and given her track record with nodes, etc., it's not surprising.
And Bari, I completely agree. I should be so lucky to look like that 15 years and a couple of kids down the road.
http://cultureonthecheap.wordpress.com
Hey Daniel, not all Americans are prudes. I went to see "Take Me Out" on Broadway some years ago, and it featured a few shower scenes and about 9 naked men downstage with all their stuff on display. They weren't run out of town and that play had a long run and some Tony nominations.
I really get sick of smug non-Americans trying to tar us all with the same brush.
okay, concerning Dessay's new-found focus on "acting"...
I think she's a fantastic artist, even now with her diminished vocal ability. But for her to say in various interviews that she's basically above petty vocal display - well, when she HAD a G above high C she'd use it every five seconds in every role she did, so it kind of rings hollow as a statement of artistic sentiment.
First of all, I didn't see any lewd breast-related comments (discounting the word 'titties', if that sort of thing offends you). All I saw were genuine compliments, and may I add mine.
Secondly, think of how many singers, after enjoying long and glorious careers, have said that if the choice was theirs, they wouldn't do it again and that they were never truly happy throughout their lives: del Monaco, Corelli, Tebaldi, and a multitude of others. Many of us here are singers, think of the pressures, the staggering amount of variables that can alter your performance and your physical instrument. Ms. Dessay has given so much to her art and to the public, why should we take her comments as insults? Please let's not act so elitist and turn our noses up at theatre. It's not like she's stumping for the potential opening in Zoey 101.
Not sure if Dessay's focus on acting is exactly "new-found"...didn't she start as an actress? I thought the story went that as an actress, she had to sing a song in a new role...she went to a voice coach and after she sang a bit, they told her, "forget acting, you MUST be a singer..." I'm not sure how true this story is, but from Dessay herself..."I wanted to become an actress when I was very young, and through theater I came to opera. But opera chose me. It was not I who chose opera. I realized that I had a voice, and maybe it was easier for me to go onstage with my singing voice than to be only an actress..."
http://www.playbillarts.com/features/article/7098.html
ah, here it is...
Operanet: How old were you when you discovered you had a voice?
Natalie Dessay: I was 20. Before that, I wanted to be an actress. I was supposed to sing in a play I was performing, and I started to take singing lessons so that it would be all right. That's when they told me I had a nice voice and I should study singing.
http://www.culturekiosque.com/opera/intervie/rhedessay.html
I saw Dessay's interview with Charlie Rose. She came across as a very intelligent woman with excellent command of English. What I found offensive was her egomaniac statement that "She did not discovered opera but opera discovered her!" And if acting is her "thing," why she does not stop singing all together and pursue acting? By doing so, she may have more opportunities to show off her 42 year old nude body!
That's odd. I find nothing egomanical in that comment but rather well-turned phrase (chiamus and all) articulating what really happened. She hadn't gone out hunting for the operatic career, but rather took singing lessons for a part in a play and, voila, was encouraged to take the operatic path. She didn't go looking for it; it found her. What's wrong with that?
And yes, that's one helluva lovely body.
Dessay raises an interesting question; one that I believe we're seeing echoed in the reign of Gelb (and, possibly, when Mortier comes in): Is it better to be a phenomenal singer and an okay actor, or vice versa? And I'm not talking Florence Foster Jenkins compared to Beverly Sills in terms of singing quality.
Where a singer like Netrebko (who also initially wanted to be an actress) falls short, she more than makes up for it in a presence and understanding of her character. Dessay landed at the highest point of New York Magazine's Approval Matrix when she did Lucia. There's a video floating around on YouTube of Villazon's final scene as Edgardo, and watching it is like watching Brando hold Eva Marie Saint's glove in Waterfront. However vocally adept Mattila was in Salome, she'll be remembered first for dropping that last veil. These singers all fall under high praise and heavy criticism, but they're selling tickets and attracting both die-hard fans and newbies to the opera house. Could it be a worthwhile trade-off?
http://cultureonthecheap.wordpress.com
Vox Americana- of course not all Americans are prudes. I never said that...but as a society, generally speaking you do not have the open relaxed attitude to public nudity (onstage and on TV) that many other countries do have and your gun laws leave us agape.
Even on here, the fact that Ms Dessay does a rather discreet brief nude scene..and look at some of the comments.
That won't stop us liking Americans - nor will it stop us criticising our own "faults" of which there are many, which I won't go into here.
balabanov11: On the other hand, people do change their opinions over time, particularly about what aspect of their work they find most fulfilling. It may be that now Dessay has transitioned from nightingale roles to "signing actress" parts, she finds that the dramatic element is what gets her juices flowing. (There's not much of dramatic interest in Fiakermilli, after all.)
oliviagiovetti: I think the opera audience includes a fairly large number of people who don't have a particularly clear vision of what constitutes "great singing" in a classical sense. Their reaction is more intuitive and holistic, and what they take away from the performance is how much they were emotionally engaged. Even historically, I think, not many singers made their effect purely through vocal means. Even so "stimm" a singer as a te Kanawa or a Caruso had a certain onstage persona that the public reacted to; that reaction colored how the audience "heard" the singing.
A better way to put this perhaps is that even a great singer needs to be at least a good performer, or else he's never going to reach the full operatic public.
This post has been removed by the author.
I agree with La Cieca about the opera singer's performative personality and how that affects our hearing of the voice.
Many people here are separating acting and singing as if they were incongrous. I think Dessay's point in her interviews is that she prefers a more integrated way of doing opera. And if she wants to take time off to do a play, more power to her. It means she is a curious artist and striving to find her truth. We learn by stepping outside of our comfort zones.
Remember that James Levine told many singers at the Met that if they want to learn about acting they should go and see Elaine Stritch's One Woman Show. It is synthesis and integration. When Dessay said that she wants people to forget she is singing in Lucia, what I believe she meant was that she wanted to persuade the public to think of the character and the story of Lucia rather than a public thay only waits for the high e flats. She was not denigrating the art of singing. She was thinking about how the art of singing contributes to the whole. This is a legitimate and very necessary question. All the great operatic artists throughout history have grappled with it. The ones that we remember such as Chaliapin, Callas, and so many others were people who integrated several artforms to create a whole and moving experience for the audience.
"Even so "stimm" a singer as a te Kanawa or a Caruso had a certain onstage persona that the public reacted to; that reaction colored how the audience "heard" the singing."
Certamente. There's a whole package aspect that comes with Divo/a-dom. And one aspect or another of that package is what draws audiences and encourages sell-out performances. Look no further than Pav for an example. I remember seeing him a few years ago in one of his last performances at the Met; it was pretty awful (and I'm not a huge fan of his to begin with) but I could care less because I was seeing Pavarotti. It's like going to the Eiffel Tower (or, perhaps in Luciano's case, the Coliseo).
http://cultureonthecheap.wordpress.com
Dessay was arrogant and dismissive of opera in the Rose interview. Among the stupidities was the cheap insult to Sutherland, about her not being an actress, etc. Dessay forgets that in opera, one acts with the voice. Sutherland's mad scene for instance was not only vocally magnificent (while Dessay's is mundane at best) but also physically compelling and involving.
There was always something repulsive and pedestrian about Dessay's overacting/stage presence in every role, as we can see on this Manon video. The Lucia we saw last fall took the vulgarity to new heights. And the excerpts of her Marie on YouTube don't give us the full-of-energy tomboy required by La Fille du Regiment, but a freak. Vocally, it's sad that she's half-way finished, the tops are but a shade of what they were 10 years ago. She's only in her early 40s, Sutherland's voice remained radiant to the age of 65.
I didn't get to see the Met's Lucia, what was so vulgar about it?
http://cultureonthecheap.wordpress.com
Logan, you've missed the point (again). Yes she Says Sutherland wasn't an Actress. By Dame Joan's own Admission, she wasn't. But it's clear from her other comments that she admires Sutherland very much and is in awe of her voice.
Oh, and by the way, Sharon, I am most assuredly not Thomas Hampson. I attended a Masterclass he gave recently, by the way, and boy, did he ever come off as a belligerant, "My way or the highway" know-it-all.
TKLogan, I thought I was the only person who didn't like her. I have watched a lot of videos of hers as she's a part of a lot of contests on Youtube. I think her "acting" is hammy and waaaay over the top. I may not think that Netrebko snag the best Puritani this year at the met, but her acting was restrained and touching. Her mad scene was effective without making it appear as if she herself was mad.
I just heard her say that she wants to "initiate a revolution in opera to take it more and more to theater". Is she kidding? Has she seen the Maryinski "Tales of Hoffman" or the Bilbao "Hoffmann" that was on Gallery HD this week? Or The First Emporer (regardless of what you thought of the music, the production was amazing).
And she's a snob about Americans.
She's soooo pretentious. And Annick Massis got better reviews here for Lucia this season.
HOW MANY DIRECTORS GET HER?!?!?!?! What is she, a virus? And she says that not many do get her. She's soooo deep.
All this from a flash of tits - who the hell is she Janet Jackson?
This blog has been many a time crtical of Netrebko and her management for using PR to promote her looks and acting in order to hide her vocal shortcomings, whatever they may be. Everybody has cried out loud that opera is only about the VOICE. When I brought up Blythe's weight- she possesses a phenomenal instrument- affecting her stage presence a contract was put one me! Now with Dessay, the talk goes on and on about acting, theater, the "whole" package, etc. The communicating power of an opera singer that emotionally moves audiences is rather composite. It's not only the voice, but also acting skills and looks that lead to a mesmerizing presence on stage, which makes the character believable. I you care only about the VOICE get a bunch of CDs with your idols, like Callas, Sutherland, Pavarotti, etc., play then on your expensive high-end sterio, and blast your eardrums off!
All very interesting remarks.
I don't think there is anything inherently arrogant about saying she wants people to forget that she's singing, or that she wants to start a revolution in opera, or that opera directors don't get her.
I don't know her - maybe she's totally arrogant.
But the statements as presented come across to me as expressions of her own desires. She clearly WANTS the operatic experience to be one of theater and drama, not ONLY of music. I get the impression that the hard work of singing well and the desire to be a great singer is a given to her, and she undertakes it the best she can, and realizes her limitations there, so she ALSO feels a tremendous need to flesh out the characters and give something more. There is nothing wrong with this.
And let's be honest people - there are A LOT of opera directors who don't "get" singers, PERIOD. No opera director worth their weight would ever ask a singer to sing upstage during certain parts of their role - they would know better, and would be able to come up with a creative solution to the problem of getting the staging they want while enabling a singer to sing out to the audience - and yet it happens ALL THE TIME.
Having worked with my fair share of great directors and absolute morons, I don't find her statement about directors unusual at all. It doesn't mean she's always right, but we all know there are directors out there who should be run out of town.
I want to agree with Sugarmezzo as a fellow singer.
Directors "getting" singers is rare. Out of the ones I've worked with, I can think of only one or two, and that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy or learn something from the others. It's also a personality thing - how many people out there in the world "get" you? A lot of times as a singer, you are trying to do your best despite what the director wants. Rare are the singers that win those battles, and perhaps Ms. Dessay has been on the losing side of the battle, as most of us have, many times.
Most singers have strengths and weaknesses, and when a director can really understand the individual, and use those weaknesses and strengths as part of a collaborative process, then it's usually a happy experience. It's rare to find a director these days who is interested in anything about the singers at all (unless they're too heavy and then that's a problem!) Singing robots would be better and probably cheaper. There are demands made that are not compatible with the act of singing opera (I believe singing upstage was mentioned). Inevitably, as a singer, when you give in to the director and sing upstage, all your reviews will complain about your "tiny little voice" or how you couldn't be heard in certain "cavernous" houses. The average operagoer doesn't care that you're making the director happy or serving some greater artistic goal. They want you to be beautiful, slim, and audible. It's too easy to feel that you just can't win.
Also, WORD to LaCuntessa. You expressed my feelings exactly.
A very interesting discussion, everyone. The scene is taken from a documentary about this production included in the "deluxe" dvd set. Dessay comments that her breasts are "mostly bone" if I got the French correctly. In any event, I view the staging as credible and not at all lewd. There were two earlier Manon productions, both with Netrebko, and I don't remember a lot of outcry when Netrebko placed Des Grieux's letter in her crotch (that's the Berlin production shared with LA Opera, with Villazon as Des Grieux). By the way, the rest of this documentary is a a cinematic stream of consciousness, more a melange of rehearsal footage--if you want to know who's sex-obsessed, it's director David MacVicar.
"Krunoslav said...
Nice review, Steven, but puzzled by this: "MacVicar gives us a grim and seedy view of 19th century upper society"
Oops, pardon my ignorance; but regardless of which time-period the opera is set in, the "grim and seedy part" still stands though, irregardless of time-period.
That's why one shouldn't be typing with the remaining minutes of lunchtime. What I meant to say was:
Oops, pardon my ignorance; but irregardless of which time-period the opera is set in, the "grim and seedy part" still stands.
I'm a bit sad to see people ripping into one another in here over something that is entirely personal and subjective.
To me La Dessay is just another of a new breed of singer- better than many, no where near as good as "the greats" but she can act better than most.
Aside from that I think she should get over herself- she's not the Messiah where opera is concerned and she'll never be a Sutherland or even a Crespin.
Hell- after her own remarks she doesn't even give much commitment to the art itself long term so who knows how long it will be before she tires of the rigors of being a singer and joins The French National Theatre.
Daniel: I say good riddance if she does indeed give opera the boot permanently in her career.
Another question I want to ask Ms. Dessay in terms of her philosophy on opera-as-art as expressed in her interview with Charlie Rose would be how she feels about concert and/or other vocal repertoire not meant to be staged theatrically. As a fan of both opera as theater and opera as music (and, for that matter, classical music in general), I don't open up a recording on my computer and squeeze my eyes real hard and try to imagine what it would look like if it were staged and ultimately say "oh well...I tried but this is just not the point." I appreciate it many times solely for its musical qualities (something which I'm often forced to do at crappy performances, as well). Does this mean, then, that unless the music she is performing serves the purpose of furthering and creating an otherwordly theatrical experience, it's simply not worth her time or not interesting enough to her? Does she perform recitals where it's just her and a piano or an orchestra and a fancy dress and think to herself "geez...this is so boring, but oh well, I'll take the money and oh, by the way, it's getting me closer to 'pure theater'.."? While I can't read her mind, the possibility seems highly likely given her comments, and if that is the case, she loses many point in my book and seems to me to be spitting on the art form that gave her the very fame she has today.
aristotle--you people act like being an actor in opera is a bonus but not a necessity....I am not going to watch fat ugly talentless people singing about love...get over it...this bus has moved on...Gelb is absolutety right in his choices..it will never go back to what you called opera. GET OVER IT.
Sharon: If that's the case, we can pretty much say goodbye to most of the standard rep: Joan was a phenominal singer, she was also born big-boned, 'plus-sized' and had huge vocal cords, a naturally big girl that explained the big sound that came out, not to mention her huge range. Caballe and Marilyn Horne were not exactly size 0s either. Even Callas was a big star before she slimmed down. These people are the ones who defined opera for us, they they sold out the house before bringing it down. Are you saying you won't pay a cent to watch these 'fat, ugly people' shouldn't be on any stage?
If you want to know how these grand dames will fare in today's opera scene, just look at the career of Ewa Podles: pretty much the only star Rossini contralto around yet how many Met performances has she made in recent years?
Further to my earlier point, if Pavarotti is still singing today, will he then be banned from Peter Gelb's Met?
Aristotle you make a good point- just a word of caution though to you and Steven regarding the sad ass bitch who goes under the names of "sharon said" or "sharon graham".. fact is she's a nasty piece of work just looking to insult people or call you an idiot.
If you look through the posts you'll see she's a creep of the first order and continues to insult heaps of posters. Everyone is an idiot but her and of course she knows everything.I've got a policy of ignoring her now so when she crashes into a conversation like she has now- I won't respond to her at all.
Again- you make a good point. Dessay's attitude doesn't leave much room for recitalists.
Thanks Daniel, got the message. I've got my own share of Sharon's vile when she accused me of being Renee Fleming in disguise when responding to one of her posts, she has no idea how much I wished that was true!
Ah, Daniel... (whack) Who'd of ever thunk you'd eb the voice of reason (whack). Hope your New Year's was good. I think it's so funny whenever we compare the current crop of pretty young things to Sutherland, Caballe, and Horne, over their weight. We could go much further back, because the first Traviata was a fiasco, due to the fact that a large woman was portraying a consumptive. And as for the train having left the station... Really? Maria Zifchak. Stephanie Blythe. Jane Eaglen. Deborah Voigt (pre-surgery).
Thanks Sanford, I'm enjoying the whacks ;0) and yes- NYE was a blast thank you. I hope yours was great too!
So you are Renee Flemming, Steven?
;0) - another brilliant call by our resident bitch. She missed Thomas Hampson too- I don't think there's much she gets right
hehehe
Steven,
You said that "Sutherland had huge vocal cords and that explained the big sound." Your assumption is wrong. The singer who has huge vocal cords is a basso profundo and not a coloratura soprano like Sutherland's. Her vocal cords were thin and short. The thikness and length of vocal cords determine the pitch of the voice and not the size. A mezzo-soprano has a miniscule dufference in length and thikness of the vocal cords which accounts for the lower pitch. This analogy applies to tenors in comparison to baritones and bassos. The same analogy also applies to all string instuments- violin to viola, to cello, etc. The size of the voice depends on body physique and training but it's primarily a gift. There are sevral small-built sopranos who possess big voices.
The vocal cords can be examinened with a podedure called
"laryngoscopy" durng which the vocal cords can be visualized and evaluated. The examination confirms that size and thickness determine the pitch.
Talking about pitch, it can be artificially manipulated but not srtucturally alterted, e.g. falsetto used by countertenors. I once mentioned that mezzo-sopranos are more "natural" subsitutes for
castrati, and La Cieca crucified me.
Castration arrests the developement of vocal cords which remain thin and short and produce the sound of a mezzo or even a soprano. If you check the vocal cords of a countertenor, they'll have the appearance of the vocal cors of a grown man, unless testetosterone insufficiency was diagnosed during pubescence. Since we all talk about the "Godess Voice" certain anatomical and physiological givens should taken into considreation so that we all are on the same page.
Renee has a supple and sexy bare shoulder, but seeing Natalie in the tub, well... please, I need a few minutes to...gather my thoughts.
I see that Parsifal has set his video so that it can't be embedded anymore, even though it's still available on Youtube. It has the feeling "If you won't play by my rules, I'm taking my toys and going home." Classy.
"Constantine A. Papas said...
Steven,
You said that "Sutherland had huge vocal cords and that explained the big sound." Your assumption is wrong."
Fair enough, I'm not medically trained to counter your arguement. I received that factoid from a friend who told me he had read it in Joan's auto-bio where she described what she saw through the larygoscope. Her cord's are apparently as thick as a man's. This is however based strictly on hearsay. Can anyone who has read the book confirm or refute this passage?
Steven,
This is not possible and against the physics of sound. Can a player bowing on a double base produce a violin sound? No! Look at the size of the cords and compare the two instruments. The thicker and longer the cord the lower the pitch. It's the same with the vocal cords. The thinner and shorter vocal cords, the higher the vocal range. If Sutherland had thick, long, and large vocal cords, it must have been an anomaly worthy of reporting it to medical literature. An slight lengthening or thickenig of the vocal cords of a singer will lower his vocal range. On the other hand, by special technique and excersises of the muscles of the larynx that control the vocal cords- Correlli was a master of that- you can tense or contract the vocal cords to change the length and move your vocal range upwards.
Thanks Constantine for that information, its certainly good to know.
Daniel: Of course I'm Renee Fleming, except that Renee is such a plebian name. In the future, pls address me either as Ms Fleming, or (high pitch scream) ReNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY. Thnx.
Hi Steven
I read your review of Manon and found it interesting but since it all looked so formal I need to tell you something...in the second line of your review you say something like "might have went," it is grammatically better to say "might have gone."
Very interesting debate!
I just find it absurd from people like Ms Dessay to ask for more theatre in opera as if all the composers ( of operas we listen to today) were total idiots and as if opera was not meant to be an entertainment, sung theatre. I can hardly imagine that verdi or mozart or bellini wrote their operas with the view that people just stand there and sing.
However, the drama and the theatre do come from within, from what is written in the score and how the singer, or shall we better say the interpretor reacts to it (emotionally, intellectually, musically) .
That is, why one does not really need to see the action on stage and many a great artists recordings are enough to immerse one in the drama of any given piece. Of course it is nicer to see the action and if a singer is especially handsome or has loads of personality or charisma, it adds to the whole experience and can of course also highten a rather mediocre artistic performance.
To call people like netrebko or dessay great singing actresses is rather ludicrous from a vocal dramatic standpoint. That is not to say, either of them are not major singers or this or that, but what they express with their voices alone pales in comparison with greats of the past.
Miss Dessay especially seems to be disadvantaged as the voice itself is now rather small , sour and colourless. Watching several videos of hers, her acting is fine but never is in harmony with the music, the vocal line or the drama itself. Just compare her singing "adieu, notre petite table!" and beverly Sills.
So, yes, there has to be more drama and theatre in opera but not of the sorts N. Dessay talks about, but drama that comes from emotion and musicality.
Hi Everyone
I just want to alert you to read "Daniel's" posts. According to "him" Dessay is "not a Sutherland or even a Crespin". Draw your own conclusions. I will refrain from calling him an idiot for fear of being branded as a resident bitch.
Since the debate continues concerning singing and acting in opera, some reflexion on historical facts is ncessary.
Opera started by intellectuals examining and analyzing classical Greek theater. In the late 1500s in Florence, Italy, a group of artists of various disciplines formed the Camerata group. An important element of the Greek theater is the chorus that supposedly recites or sings. They knew from ancient texts that music was part of the Greek theater but no written music was available. The decision was made to recreate the Greek tregedies by adding music. That's why so many early operas are inspired by Gree