David Geffen Hall at Lincoln Center. Orchestra (Seat Y103, $50).
Hannigan at the end of the concert. One of the cameras can be seen to her right.
Program
Metamorphosen, A Study for 23 Solo Strings (1945) by R. Strauss (1864=1949).
La Voix humaine, Tragedie lyrique en un act (The Human Voice, Lyric Tragedy in One Act), FP171 (1958) by Poulenc (1899-1963).
We had no idea what to expect from the concert, especially the second part. We have seen instrumentalists (mostly violinists and pianists) both simultaneously performing as soloists and leading the orchestra at the same time; this would be our first encounter with a vocalist in that role.
First things first. Metamorphosen was a piece written by Strauss just before the end of World War II. Per the Program Notes, by that time Strauss had gone through two world wars, and was in declining health, so this work was in part "an agonized cry from the heart, a dark report from a dark time." I frankly didn't find the work dark, and failed to appreciate the title until the work was more than half-way through. Metamorphosis is a drastic change - think caterpillar to pupa to butterfly - but the piece begins as a very long serene statement; I couldn't detect any pause for a while. It only got a bit agitated towards the end.
While Strauss indeed gave the work its title, he also called it "a study for 23 solo strings." (5 each first and second violins, violas, and cellos; 3 basses.) Did he really have 23 instruments all going in different directions? And can anyone trace all 23 at the same time? There are only twelve notes in a scale. I looked at the score, the staffs are 2 violins, 2 violas, 2 cellos, and 1 bass; sometimes lines are "divisi," but far fewer than 23.
Hannigan and the 23 string players performed Strauss's Metamorphosen.
The beginning measures of Metamorphosen.
A page in the score where all 23 players have a line.
This from a YouTube video screenshot. Evidently there is a septet version of the work.
Strauss makes sense after one understands what he is trying to do. For this first listening, I think "study" is a more appropriate title.
La Voix humaine is best described as a one-woman single-act opera. The story is simple enough. Elle (simply means she/her in French) is talking on the phone with someone who is probably her former lover. During the course of the 45 minute act, she pleads, cajoles, contradicts herself, and sprinkles in a good amount of incoherence. The audience doesn't hear what the party at the other end says. The telephone technology in the 1950s also results in disconnects, interferences on the party lines, and noise. Therefore Elle spends a good amount of time asking the operator to reconnect. She evidently has taken 12 pills (type not specified) and eventually wraps the phone cord around her neck. The audience is left to decide if she succeeds in killing herself. The stage directions call for her letting the receiver go and dropping her head at the end.
What we saw today was even more of a one-woman show: Hannigan both conducted the orchestra and sang the role of Elle. Not what I expected, but it was still an interesting experience.
When I saw the large screen on stage, my assumption was that some kind of projection would provide the backdrop for the opera. It turns out there were (I think) three cameras pointed at Hannigan. Most of the time it was a frontal shot, but two side cameras (which I couldn't locate) would provide shots from the sides. Images are superimposed, reflected, or repeated to create some visual effects. Orchestra members (most of the time the first violins and the hair of a violist) would sometime be in the shot. At one point, the image on the screen was frozen for a few minutes, Hannigan turned around and sang directly at the audience. What it spontaneity? Since it happened again later in the play, I'm not so sure.
It must have taken a lot of planning and rehearsal to pull the thing off. At least as far as the videography is concerned. The story itself, while tragic, is typical for a tragedy. Since Hannigan sang most of the time with her back to the audience (she was conducting, after all), the sound didn't project all that well. And I am quite sure some sort of sound enhancement was used. The exception would be the time she turned around, her voice projected very well at that time. There was a bulge on her back which was probably part of the transmitter.
The camera sometimes would zoom in very close, so only her mouth would be on the screen. That was a bit too close for comfort, even though we were seated in about the middle of the auditorium.
The opera ended with her arms still in the air, so not quite the "letting the receiver go and dropping her head" called for in the stage direction. And of course there was no physical telephone or phone cord either.
Curtain call. Imagine the screen filled up by a close up of Hannigan's mouth.
Taken from the NY Times.
I have also been amazed that conductors give singers very clear cues during an opera's performance; I guess that's mostly to sync up the vocalists with the orchestra. Perhaps if one is familiar enough with the full score then it is unnecessary?
Hannigan is Canadian, so I assume her fluency in French is excellent. We saw her in the Opera "Written on Skin" by George Benjamin about 10 years back. She was in the lead role, my blog entry for that event didn't talk about her specifically, other than that the singing was generally good.
We got these tickets because we couldn't pass up on the $50 deal. It was definitely worth that, perhaps more.
No comments:
Post a Comment