From: Karen Mercedes
To: VOCALIST <vocalist>
Subject: Re: Olympia interpretation?
Send reply to: VOCALIST <vocalist>

On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Kylie Purcell wrote:

>
>
> Hi, Kylie again:)
>
> I was wondering if anyone could offer me some advice on
> interpretation of Olympia from Tales of Hoffmann?
>
> Yes, I know she's a wind-up doll but doing all manner of stiff movements
> just won't work for me, the tension of holding myself rigid
> naturally affects the voice and I'm sure you can imagine the results...

I wish you could see some of the better performances on video of this
role. If you can possibly get your hands on the Covent Garden video with
Placido Domingo, it features Luciana Serra in what is one of her signature
roles.

Ruth Ann Swenson at the Met currently in this role repeated the same
"business" that Gwendolyn Bradley used in the earlier incarnation of this
production, but without all the extreme cartoon-character flourishes of
Bradley (which were, frankly, offensive). She managed to avoid physical
tension by using her arm as a kind of pendulum that kept the mechanism
going when she sang.

The best Olympia I've ever seen, however, was Arleen Auger in Florence in
1983. She had the subtle mechanical-doll moves down so wonderfully, it
was amazing to watch. On the other hand, I didn't like her vocal
performance nearly as much as Serra's (Serra is the best Olympia I've
heard and one of the best I've seen).

There's no reason to be *stiff* just because you're mechanical. What made
Auger's performance so wonderful is that she had obviously first
choreographed her movements as if she were a human being, then she
analysed every transition (e.g., arm raising, body turning, head turning,
etc.) and created a series of linear steps that got the body part from
point a to point b rather than using the human arcs and curves. If you
can imagine an arc, then draw a series of points along that arc and
connect those points with straight lines (lots of points and lots of
lines), you will understand what I mean. Auger first figured out what the
arcs/curves were, then figured out where the points along those
arcs/curves should be, then drew the connecting lines (I say "draw", what
I mean is traced those lines with her movements). I'm not sure this is
clear, but the point is that she never really stopped moving, so there was
no chance for her to freeze or tense up, but the overall "sweep" of each
gesture was definitely broken up into a series of little linear stages
that created the mechanical doll effect.

The most important thing is to keep your posture absolutely unchanging
(except in those points where you wind down - most singers in this role
end up bending at the waist as if flopping over; though I preferred
Serra's version, in which she sang standing in front of a chair, and
basically fell back into the chair when she weound down), and your face
absolutely impassive, with eyes staring, blinking very deliberately (the
way a doll blinks), and when eyes move, moving them from side to side in
deliberate linear movements (again, as a doll would).

I really think your best bet is to scrounge up some videos - even the
Powell/Pressburger film of HOFFMANN might help, though the Olympia in that
(Moira Shearer) was danced rather than sung.

KM
=====
There is delight in singing,
tho' none hear Beside the singer.
- Walter Savage Landor
-----
MY WEB PAGE: http://www.radix.net/~dalila/index.html
MY NEIL SHICOFF PAGE: http://www.radix.net/~dalila/shicoff/shicoff.html