Don't panic, it's not all about me.....need to have a quick chat about some Ghost boat thing.

If you regularly read this drivel you may have noticed that I have a penchant for opera at the cinema. I like seeing opera in this way because the atmosphere in a cinema compared to an opera house is so chilled out and the place is unlikely to sell out so you tend to find yourself having a whole row to yourself and nobody notices if you fall asleep. Always a bonus.

I used to love opera. I still appreciate it but I can't say I love it now. To be fair watching in a cinema is no substitute for seeing the genre live really. The sound in a cinema, no matter how good, can never replicate the power of the voice of an opera singer going at full pelt. There are advantages though. As long as you don't have a chorus who feel it necessary to react to every tiny little thing, being up close, in the middle of the action can be quite exciting. Having said that you are at the mercy of the editor as to what you get to see as they will decide what we as an audience need to see at any particular moment in time but that's just a small quibble.

I am not a fan of Wagner. Last night I saw, in it's entirety, only my second Wagner opera. I saw "Die Walküre" a couple of years back, again at the cinema, and last night I saw the ROH production of "Der fliegende Holländer" with the mighty Bryn Terfel and Adrianne Pieczonka. The singing was stonkingly good, truly fantastic. Bryn was brooding and dark while Pieczonka was hopeful and bright. I have always loved Pieczonka. I think she has the most incredible instrument housed in her body. It is a big voice but because of the shimmer she has at the top you never feel like she is beating you over the head with it the way some dramatic female voices do. She is also a stunningly good actress. It is an overused phrase these days but she really is a true stage animal. 

These two giants of the operatic world were joined by another giant but one who was feeling a little under the weather so an announcement was made at the beginning to ask us to bear with him. They needn't have as far as we in the cinema were concerned, Peter Rose was actually on good form. Totally holding his own as Daland with the other two even if he did resemble a Sontaran from Doctor Who. The chorus, too, were better than I have heard them in a while. The regular chorus were joined by a large number of extra chorus members and I kind of wish I had been in the theatre itself as at one point the stage was filled with men. Don't get the wrong idea, I wish I had been there because the sound must have been enormous.

All in all, I enjoyed it and the two and a bit hours, no interval, flew by. It was a surprise when the end came as it felt there should be another hour to go. This was where I got confused. I wasn't totally up on the story before I went to see it but I knew the legend of the Flying Dutchman and figured that Bryn Terfel's character was probably not going to get the girl, well not in the conventional sense anyway. I am assuming Senta is supposed to be seen doing summat she shouldn't with Erik to make the Dutchman spurn her and set sail alone but in this production she didn't appear to do anything (I might have missed it of course). Then I assumed, after Senta yells after him (The Dutchman that is) that she will remain true to him until death, she would probably kill herself but she just carried her little model boat, she had had since the beginning, to the centre of the stage and cried a bit. A total anticlimax.

That said I had a nice time. Still not convinced by Wagner though. Now, feel free to stop reading here as I am going to write a teeny tiny bit about my cabaret that DID happen on Sunday. So if you are fed up of hearing about it please go about your business and think no more about it.

There was a good turnout, about 44 people turned up (mostly friends or friends of friends, I think there were only 7 people who had no connection to me in attendance) so it was more successful in that respect than I had been expecting. It was only once it was done that I realised what an undertaking it had been. The running times were 45 minutes first half and 40 minutes second half. That is a LONG time to hold your own. I totally understand why people invite "guests" to join them on the stage during these affairs. Takes the pressure off a bit.

Everybody asked afterwards "did you enjoy it?". The honest answer was no, but not in a bad way. I didn't hate it and I want to do it again, and I want to do it again soon, but as a friend said to me, Sunday night was like having your tech rehearsal, dress rehearsal and first night (and last night) all at the same time. This was the first time I had tried out the show. In the future it might be an idea to rent a small hall and invite a few friends to come and see it for free just to give myself the opportunity to try out my material to see what works and what doesn't. To be fair there wasn't much I would change in the material I had but I hope I can deliver it better next time. I forgot a lot and got a bit lost at times, however, I am not terrible at getting myself out of a hole so I don't think I made any of my audience feel uncomfortable when I lost my way.

With hindsight, I am SO proud of myself for getting up and doing it. There is a huge difference between doing a 25 minute set on a bill with 3 other acts and what was, effectively, a one-woman show with 90 minutes of just me (and, of course, the wonderful Simona Budd on the piano). This was an immense achievement and one I need to do again. Who would have thought that 4 years of opera training would have led to this.

If anyone is interested in reading someone else's opinion of Sunday night then follow this link:

How did it come to this? The Pheasantry

Opera....in the cinema?.....should we be eating popcorn?

So the new trend seems to be to show operas from big opera houses in the cinema. I am not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand it means a lot more people can get to see opera but on the other it really doesn't give you a real sense of what opera is all about. Opera is over the top. The whole art form is, in many ways, ridiculous. You have to suspend your disbelief and believe that people do sing at each other in life. On top of this there is the added element that we have to sing the same thing over and over again, often while someone is singing something totally different at the same time, to get our point across. It is very silly to begin with, but a camera honing in on an opera singer gurning their way through tricky coloratura (really fast, florid runs and stuff for those who have never encountered the word) could put people off. We opera singers were never meant to be seen in close up.

Now, I like a trip to the Royal Opera House. I love it's grandeur and red velvet seats but there is a lot to be said for sitting in the informal setting offered up by a cinema. No one tuts if you have to get up and nip to the loo halfway through. You can eat and drink to your hearts content while watching, something totally verboten at an opera house (however, I must stress I did not eat popcorn or even a hotdog and I did roll my eyes when someone brought nachos in for the second half of "La Donna del Lago" the other week). So the relaxed nature of the experience is a definite plus point. Another plus is that it costs around £12 to see an opera at the cinema and you can see a lot more than you might see in a similarly priced seat at the actual opera house it is broadcast from. However, no matter how good a cinemas sound system is, it can never recreate the phenomenon that is the opera singer's voice.

Tonight, I went to see the Scottish play in operatic form (Macbeth, by Verdi, in case you can't guess) with the glorious Simon Keenleyside and an equally glorious Liudmyla Monastyrska. In my eyes Keenleyside can really do no wrong so I was going to love him no matter what but I had never encountered Monastyrska. I have a feeling that, if heard in the flesh, Monastyrska's voice would pin you to the back of the auditorium when in full flight it is that enormous, and, although you could tell it is a big voice, in the cinema you will never feel the full force of such an instrument. Having said that her control over the whole of her voice is incredible. It's big but it can move and her pianissimo top D flat at the end of the sleepwalking scene was the best I have ever heard. 

The other aspect you will find yourself judging, in my case harshly, is the acting. Acting in opera has come a long way but there is still a long way to go. In an opera house an opera singer has to be larger than life and some of the time, particularly with melodramatic pieces like Macbeth, if you watch them on the screen, TV or cinema, a performer will look like he/she is overacting. This is where Monastyrska fell short. No amount of pointing and hand clenching will convince anyone you are "acting". Plus if Simon Keenleyside wants to snog your face off you let him (perk of the job). You don't do that awful pretend "we are kissing" acting. It doesn't work. Especially when you are in close up. (Of course it could have been Keenleyside that didn't want to kiss Monastyrska but I refuse to believe that. He is all about realism.) 

Opera singers like Keenleyside and Joyce di Donato, who I saw in "La Donna del Lago" a few weeks ago, are the benchmark that we opera singers need to work towards. They still give the big performance required in an opera house but it is alway real, always truthful. Theirs are the kind of performances everyone working in opera should be able to deliver. Yes, they are exceptional in many ways but the quality of your voice is not enough to satisfy audiences now. The days of "Park and Bark" are over. Although, that said, I forgive Monastyrska slightly for her acting as, vocally, she is just WOW! Generally, however, it is not enough to just wow me with your vocal prowess. I want to be moved by a performance, to go on the journey with the singer and understand what that character is going through. If I am not a blubbering wreck by the end of "La Traviata", for example, the singers/production have not done their job.

So is opera in the cinema a good thing? Yes. Anything that makes opera as accessible as possible (even for the inherently lazy amongst us) has to be a good thing. Will it ever replace the need to see opera live? Absolutely not. One of the best feelings in world is being pinned to the back of the auditorium by the force of an opera singer's voice......and Simon Keenleyside can pin me to the back of an auditorium any day!