Kate Reid wrote:
> I>
> > Dame Joan Sutherland likewise: you must make the
> > people in the audience believe you, you yourself must
> > be removed, after all, you are 'acting'
> >
> Right again. However, we must also remember that
> Sutherland, although vocally splendid, was one of the worst
> actresses to ever grace the lyric stage. A singer should
> be able to act, which, I suppose, brings us back to the
> original issue addressed here.
Having seen Sutherland live on the operatic stage, in the late 70s and
early
80s, I cannot agree that she was as unconvincing an actor as some
would
have us believe. (The ease with which she coped with the vocal and
expressive/dramatic demands of the music would certainly have helped
give me
the impression that her acting was OK.) She is/was, however, neither
diminutive in stature nor sickly in appearance, which worked against her
looking the part at times. She certainly was able to convey the twinkle
in
the eye when necessary, and in 25 years of regular opera-going I have
only
very occasionally seen, among men and women, stage presence to rival
hers.
In recent years I have occasionally felt that the director of an
operatic
production has been unable
1) to bring him/herself to rely on the music (including the singing) to
convey its share of the dramatic meaning AND
2) to bring him/herself to trust or permit audience members to play
their
own interpretative role.
If there has been a shift in the sight/sound balance towards sight, then
singers will need very well honed acting skills, and the "right"
physical
appearance, more than in the past, perhaps.
Helen Duggan
qed@n...
-----------------------------------------------------
Click here for Free Video!!
http://www.gohip.com/free_video/
|
|  |
