Experiment

This period we will concentrate on the creation of characters and how the very same technique of imagination, arising from within, spills over to art songs and even pops. We can all sing superficially, which is the defining factor of most entertainers of today. Pop songs, today, are handled superficially which explains why the beat is often the strongest impression remembered by the listener. If you stop to think of it, the pop-artist of today needs all sorts of visual gimicks in order to make an impression whereas the pop-artist of yesterday just conveyed a message upon the words. That message was often very strong as the men and women of World War 2 can attest. Perhaps war brought out the best in artists but when Vera Lynne sang "When the lights go on again all over the world" there was something in the voice that touched every listener. She gave meaning to the words - a mixture of loss, nostalgia, longing and hope . Similarly, when Richard Tauber, in accented English, and Peter Dawson, in the universal English of the common soldier sang, "The Roses of Picardy", they moved the world.

One of the greatest singers of art songs I have ever heard was a man called Gerard Suze (with each e an acute) who breathed life into every word. Alexander Kipniss singing Brahms, Schumann and Schubert had no peer. Chaliapin, singing a song that painted a picture, had no peer. Vittoria di los Angeles was unique on the concert platform. Tauber read his audience like one would read a letter and gave them just what they wanted. He never sang a song twice the same way. But as different as their individual styles were, they shared one thing in common; they made the words sing; they breathed life into every word. Gigli and Schipa actually painted with their words.

In singing opera, one must not only bring out the character that one is representing but one must also be familiar with all the characters that interface with that character. Clearly one cannot do that if one does not know every part. Here's what Florence Easton, a great singer from the Metropolitan's past had to say on the necessity of knowing every part.

"Nothing can take the place of routine in learning operas. Many, many opera singers I have known seem to be woefully lacking in it. In learning a new opera, I learn all the parts that have anything to do with the part I am expected to sing. In other words, I find it inadvisable to depend on cues. There are so many disturbing things constantly occurring on the stage to throw one off one's track. For instance, when I made my first appearance in Mascagni's Lodoletta, I was obliged to go on with only twenty four hour's notice, without rehearsal, in an opera I had seen produced only once. I had studied the role only two weeks. While on stage I was so entranced with the wonderful singing of Mr. Caruso that I forgot to come in at the right time. He said to me quickly, sotto voce, "Canta! Canta! Canta!" My routine drill of the part enabled me to come in without letting the audience know of my error."

Well, she speaks only from the musical viewpoint but that is, at least, a start. Let me pose a few questions: Can there be a Mimi as Puccini intended if there were not a Rodolfo? Should not Rodolfo know both his own and Mimi's parts intimately? If he does not, how is he to converse, react and and act? Should not Mimi be thoroughly reacting to, and therefore intimately know, every single word that Rodolfo utters? If you are playing Mimi and you have not approached your role in that way, you have hardly begun to work on her character. How many characters in real life do you know, who can stand absolutely alone, who can go through life without needing at least someone else to bring out either the best or worst in themselves. Can there even be a Boris Goudonov without a Pimen? Can there be a MacBeth without a Lady MacBeth or a MacDuff? It is very necessary to learn all parts and how they bring out the various traits of your character. Mention the word, "American, Jew, Infidel or Christian to a Jihadist and you certainly bring out the worst in him. When we work on characters, we must work from within. We just cannot impose a character upon our body. That is superficial. We must start by asking ourselves what we would do in that time period of the opera if we faced those circumstances that the character faces. Let us say we are playing Iago. Then, by all means we should try to imaging how we would function if we cast out all pity, all love, all music, all compassion and filled the void with envy and hate? We would start to develop a character of pure evil, which is precisely what Iago is.

Therefore in this period we will take each of you - so start preparing - and you will state the character you wish to play. Your colleagues will learn from you and most of them will either need to study the same role or an interfacing role in the same opera. This way we will get your imagination to work as well as to be stimulated through a joint effort and input from your colleagues. There will be a lot to discover about the posture, the stance, the walk, the bearing, the facial expressions, the gestures - all coming from within the character itself, not imposed upon the character from outside.

It will be an interesting period.