“Touch of a Diva”, the nail enamel of opera *stars***.

But as we all know, this is the same singer who can insert so many sobs and gulps into the opening line of “Si, mi chiamano Mimi” that by the time she gets to the end of the phrase, she’s lost track of the musical argument. Does she do this to avoid seeming bland? Is she determined to give use “her” reading by distorting, even destroying the line? Whatever the reason, the result is vulgar and just plain wrong.

I am auditioning DVD Rings.

Stay away from the Copenhagen Ring!!!!!!!!! Theorin (who is costumed to look like a plumper, younger, Betty White) is wobbly and shrieky on top. Anderson sings okay but the voice doesn’t project well. The staging has some good moments, but (as is the case with almost all regie stagings) there are moments when the performers, the staging and the music just clash with the force of a train wreck.

DON’T WATCH THE FINAL MOMENTS OF SIEGFRIED IF YOU HAVE EATEN WITHIN THE PRIOR TWO HOURS.

I am just now listening to the Mehta Ring.

Let mesay that Jennifer Wilson is AMAZING!!!!!! The first real Brunnhilde of quality since Anne Evans (I have not heard Brewer in the role yet). The voice is large, well-produced, with a gloriously focussed upper register. Please let her record Isolde soon.

Random thoughts – Renee is a great singer. Great technique, lovely timbre, terrific musicianship. She has a true legato and fully understands the importance of dynamics in creating a living musical/singing line. Sometimes, she allows herself to lose the sense of the line in an effort to milk individual moments. That coupled with the fact that her most fundamental musical grounding is in american popular music (like most women her age from the US) and her moments of indulgence can end up sounding stylistically inapt. In that she is a bit like Price (gospel and jazz). The difference in terms of the prevalence is that Leontyne picked her spots much more judiciously. (In reality, Leontyne’s portamento excesses were pretty rare, they just stand out because of the usually sublime legato. That and the fact that her rep was so demanding that there was often less opportunity for self-indulgence.

That said, Renee remains an important singer. Better her indulgences than the empty gray techically and musically unformed crap that we get from far too many top singers today. Also, that Armida from Pesaro was EXTRAORDINARY! The voice was like heavy cream across every register. The coloratura was marvelously accurate and the acting apt.

I am finished with this topic and am earnestly reconsidering the wisdom of taking the time to post here.

I’m clearly wearying of this.

As for the supposed change of characterization of the singers: is it that I didn’t repeat the second time that they are young? I don’t quite get what you mean to accuse me of there any more than I detect my “syntactical error.” Or, for that matter, understand how an anonymous writer on an anonymous board can manage “intimidation.” But I’m always ready to be educated.

Spurious and egregious. Such as what? And whom? I don’t know of any singer in their right mind who would listen to another singer and say to themselves “I don’t like that scooping; I’m never going to use portamento”. And I find it hard to believe any voice teacher would countenance that attitude.

As for Renee, I have to say that while I don’t particularly like her in bel canto, I adore her Shepherd On The Rock, and Mozart (early, not recent). And her performance of the aria from Die Tote Stadt last year was glorious.

Feel free to give that verdict. To strike out, however, I would have had to have entered a competition.

But I don’t get what you’re going on about, honestly. The distinction between how I characterized these singers yesterday and today escapes me. And I never even MENTIONED technique, so far as I remember, which is the subject of your rebuttal.

And as for your reading of my brain. It never even occurred to me to set La Cieca up in such a way. Only after I saw her post did I start thinking about what I had heard that very morning, in very striking circumstances, about these students’ pervasive — and, I’d assert still, unfortunate — Flemingphobia. The fact that I got a e-mailing trumpeting the fab new Web site after I got back home was a mere coincidence. My control of the universe is still imperfect, so I can’t quite arrange things so neatly. And I do often strike out. But not this time and not in the way you invent.

But there is something else running through all your posts that nags at me.

May I be honest? i suspect a passing comment from a friend provided you with more anti-Flem, and in order to share it you notified La Cieca of the website changes (an act which you admit), and then waited for your chance. In short, I think this whole thread has been a troll of your construction. Moreover, in posting #87 you profess to have presented “facts”, but in the interchanges between you and “operadunce,” specifically #77, 79, 82, and 87, I see only intimidation and name-calling.

By my lights, you’ve struck out.

So, in a sense, there is no argument between us. In another sense, you have made a specious one. Sorry.

The singing of hers that some find repellent scares some discriminating young singers away from legitimate vocal devices. That was my original statement, and I did specify extremely, unusually fine singers who were working with one of the acknowledged leaders in today’s vocal arts — one everyone here would probably defer to.

Yes, she makes choices that I dislike, from time to time. But I think intention is important here- I have no doubt that she makes those choices out of a desire to give the best performance she can give. When she does things I consider tasteless, I can forgive them because I don’t think there’s any vanity involved, just a serious, committed, if sometimes misguided, artistic choice.

That still doesn’t mean I want to hear her do Mercury Rev, by the way…

For what it’s worth, I remain a little baffled at all the criticism Fleming attracts. Yeah, she does a few irritating things, but what she mainly does is sing wonderfully.

I wonder can I speak from a personal angle? I’ve often tried to discuss and dissect the RF phenomenon from an “artistic”, “objective’ or “aesthetic” POV. And some very good points were made here about style, taste and (good) conventions.

Personally, and this has nothing to do with other people liking or disliking whatever it is that RF is up to, scenically or vocally, I think that her mannerisms, by taking away the purity of line and simplicity of utterance, also take away the basic sense of vulnerability most female operatic characters need from Monteverdi to Poulenc, like it or not. Even Elektra or Katarina need this basis sense of vulnerability, human dignity even. All this pulling about of the line and little sighs and whatnots take (from me) the pleasure of listening to an admittedly goregous voice and create an unbridgeable gap between the performer performing the character, and myself. I am simply not interested in the character per se, anymore. And that’s about it. For me, this phenomenon also happens, to varying degrees in most of Caballe’s central Italian output, and some of L. Price’s recordings. But these two great lady’s occasional mannerisms look very small when compared with RF’s style (?). I derive no sense of pleasure from the singing.

Yes, I have tickets for her Armida and I am looking forward to it. If only for no other reason than that I have never seen a live production of the opera. I wouldn’t use the term “people’s diva”, but I would definitely give her the title of “Reigning American Diva”. Ya gotta give it to her. She lost the weight, she glammed up and at 51 the voice is still in stellar condition. AND her plastic surgery is beyond amazing. AND most importantly – SHE CAN SELL OUT THE MET! All y’all bee-otches just need to stop hatin’.

That’s a dishonest attempt to cover for yourself. No one ever need apologize — especially here — for offering an opinion. What you offered was an attempt at mind-reading and attribution of invidious motives that were then rebutted by facts. A very different thing.