In a message dated 8/4/00 11:56:26 PM, peggyh@i... writes:
<< I agree that Maria Callas had problems with her voice. However, I'm not aware of any consensus as to the cause. I am certain, however, that Maria Callas did not in her performing mistake acting for reality. Actually, I always thought her drama on stage was very disciplined and planned, and that she used her voice very well technically to convey the drama of the music. I also think that a major reason she was so compelling was not that she let all her emotions hang out. Instead, she made sure that every musical aspect of the drama tha the composer wrote into the music was realized. She did this with legato, phrasing, dynamics, stage movement, etc. Rehearsed and rehearsed and rehearsed. >>
Yes! Thank you for defending Callas so well.
Actually, I think that this discussion has gotten off onto a different track than what I was trying to explore. My original post about "honest" singers was not intended to be about volume, vocal technique or even acting. I've just found that many very accomplished singers often seem rather artificial to me, and wondered if it was a matter of personality or training.
Of course we singers cannot be actually weeping or suffering when singing a tragic aria, or it would be difficult if not impossible to get through the performance. And it would make our audience very uncomfortable. But we must know how to convey the emotions of the music to our audience in a clear and convincing manner--even without extraneous gestures, posturing, costumes, etc.--but by letting the music express itself through us.
Callas said somewhere that "you must make love to the music"--and perhaps that (along with an incredible level of discipline and stunning musicality) was the reason that she was so convincing. Perhaps other performers put themselves ahead of the music. Isn't there a Vocalister who signs off with something like "Allow yourself to serve the music, not the other way around."
Judy
|
| |