ROH 'William Tell'

[teamsaint]

So, what is the audience of an opera production ‘reading’? The ‘original’ work or someone else’s ‘critical analysis’?

they are reading what they choose to read. That is the privilege of the reader/analyst.
They could be solely reading the words of the libretto as presented. Or they could be reading the production in one of various possible structures, EG a series of performances of that particular opera.Or they could choose to deconstruct that specific production by looking for discontinuities, in the production, perhaps reading the production against the text. This might be done by closely analysing a particular scene and the libretto text , which might be rather an effective tool in the William Tell example.

In response to DS's #90, isn't the "recreative" element a red herring?
One can apply various critical theories to , say ,a Dylan Thomas Poem, so why not to a production/reading of the Poem ?
there is a "production element" tour own private reading anyway, which must draw from other productions in some way?

Hands up, who can read " under Milk Wood " without hearing Richard Burton?

anyway, some much more interesting and coherent thoughts here......

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Q0QjThs1l84C&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=structuralist+opera+theory&source=bl&ots=RlpTQBicJa&sig=qCTsO3cjeYqXgpsrzf3-NfhX6HE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4L6VVcCRB-TD7gbIwoywAw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=structuralist%20opera%20theory&f=false

[jean]

I always lke the bit where Derrida says that the translation precedes the 'original' text.

[doversoul1]

they are reading what they choose to read. That is the privilege of the reader/analyst.
They could be solely reading the words of the libretto as presented. Or they could be reading the production in one of various possible structures, EG a series of performances of that particular opera.Or they could choose to deconstruct that specific production by looking for discontinuities, in the production, perhaps reading the production against the text. This might be done by closely analysing a particular scene and the libretto text , which might be rather an effective tool in the William Tell example.

In response to DS's #90, isn't the "recreative" element a red herring?
One can apply various critical theories to , say ,a Dylan Thomas Poem, so why not to a production/reading of the Poem ?
there is a "production element" tour own private reading anyway, which must draw from other productions in some way?

Hands up, who can read " under Milk Wood " without hearing Richard Burton?

anyway, some much more interesting and coherent thoughts here......
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...theory&f=false

My understanding of the reader in reader response theory is not (necessarily) a critical or analytical reader but just a reader with his/her distinct knowledge and experience of life in general, which produces individual response.

When a literary text or a poem is read aloud, the recipient’s activity is no longer reading, as the work is performed or re-created, and the performance is an interpretation (critical response, if you like) of the performer. I think Reader Response Theory is strictly of written text and its reader.

The point I am trying to make here is that someone who is watching an opera production has no choice but to respond to the director’s response to (or interpretation of) the work. Yes, s/he can go home and read the libretto but then, that is not the response to the production. I suppose it is the question of the responsibility of the director/producer to the audience, and maybe to the work.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...theory&f=false

from this page, the author seems to be concerned with opera as work and not production. What do you think?

[teamsaint]

My understanding of the reader in reader response theory is not (necessarily) a critical or analytical reader but just a reader with his/her distinct knowledge and experience of life in general, which produces individual response.

When a literary text or a poem is read aloud, the recipient’s activity is no longer reading, as the work is performed or re-created, and the performance is an interpretation (critical response, if you like) of the performer. I think Reader Response Theory is strictly of written text and its reader.

The point I am trying to make here is that someone who is watching an opera production has no choice but to respond to the director’s response to (or interpretation of) the work. Yes, s/he can go home and read the libretto but then, that is not the response to the production. I suppose it is the question of the responsibility of the director/producer to the audience, and maybe to the work.



from this page, the author seems to be concerned with opera as work and not production. What do you think?

I'm not really well versed in Reader Response theory, and only slightly more in the the post structuralism that it is connected to !
However, one of the significant aspects of critical theory is the usefulness of the tools that they offer in approaching cultural artefacts, such as film, from different perspectives.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Y5UDCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=barthes++cultural+artefacts&source=bl&ots=wTGopdnHp7&sig=9qlqm1fXqRbljhHJv0M-_wZF1AE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RxyWVbeEBaTA7AbdlbGgAw&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=barthes%20%20cultural%20artefacts&f=false

the second full paragraph on page 8 here puts this well. of course a production of a live opera isn't a cultural artefact in the way that a film ( possibly of an opera) is, but I would assume that the book I previously linked was looking at opera using similar techniques, but you may be right, and the writers may just consider the text/Libretto. ( Edit: in fact on reading more of it I think you are right).

There are obvious problems in applying techniques that originate in very close specific analysis of (possibly) short pieces of written text, to a large scale live event, ( in the way and for the reasons that you suggest ) but it doesn't mean that the techniques don't have some value, such as encouraging awareness of the active role of the audience in interpretation.
It all, including reader response theory, seems very relevant to this production of William Tell.

[Giacomo]

or simply to sell tickets (not really neccessary in this case as the dates I looked at - before the first performance & hence before the publicity - were pretty much sold out) which would be artistically bankrupt.

168 unsold tickets at 4pm yesterday, 2 hours before the start and close of internet sales, far more than is usual and many were cheap tickets that normally sell quickly.

[doversoul1]

ts
We, as individuals respond differently to work of art in any form, but the point I am making is, in the case of opera productions, the response of the audience (the readers) can be easily manipulated in the way that is not (usually) possible when we read books. Therefore, we need to look at the role of the ‘middleman’ when we think about re-creative arts and audience response.

But I think I’ve said enough about this point. Thank for the link. How did we manage when we didn’t have all this?!

[MrGongGong]

Therefore, we need to look at the role of the ‘middleman’

A few thoughts (which have nothing to do with literary theory, though it IS interesting that all the folks in here are well versed in this but no one has mentioned Adorno yet)

When one makes a performance it is (unless you are a solo busker) a collaboration.
It's relatively straightforward (though not always easy) to collaborate with people who are physically present but much harder when they are no longer with us.
The relative weight one might give to different aspects and elements within a performance varies greatly with the context.
It's not very healthy (or even a way of creating things that are interesting to experience) to give too much weight to any single view.
The producer, director, conductor and orchestra aren't a 'middleman' but co-creators.
There is much written in the aesthetics of music (but at the back of my mind) about the idea of "the work" (and other folks will have the references more than I do).

The way in which the OEA present music surely demonstrates that even music which is based on 'historical research' is perfectly able to 'stand up' to a variety of performance contexts and interpretations.

I think many people have a misunderstanding about the nature of what composers actually do.
Those who really want to control everything often stop creating instrumental or vocal music and make things for diffusion in the acousmatic domain.

[Stanfordian]

Cor blimey people! This thread has turned into 'pseuds corner'. What on earth are you talking about?

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

What on earth are you talking about?

"Interpretation", Stanf - what the reader/viewer/listener "gets" from what the writer/performer "gives".

[teamsaint]

"Interpretation", Stanf - what the reader/viewer/listener "gets" from what the writer/performer "gives".

or "brings to".....

[Nick Armstrong]

Cor blimey people! This thread has turned into 'pseuds corner'. What on earth are you talking about?

This and the G&S thread have turned into the strangest threads, must be the heat. Can't bring myself to try and understand either, being on topics which make me want to turn on the TV!

To the poster who wanted suggestions for a London activity preferable to going to W. Tell, I can however indicate that they're painting a big wall near here, might be worth a watch once they've finished for the evening

[Conchis]

Or direct Zimmermann's Die Soldaten or Karl Amadeus Hartmann's Simplicius simplicissimus ?
Those I would love to see in a Holten staging.

Not that long ago, I recall reading that 'Die Soldaten' is now considered a '60s opera' and one that is highly unlikely to be revived (or premiered, in the case of the UK).

The reason being: it was written for the days when opera houses had lots of money to splash around. They don't, any more: not even, comparatively speaking, in continental Europe.

[Giacomo]

To the poster who wanted suggestions for an alternative London activity to going to W. Tell

In keeping with intentions of the director, Holten and Panano, a trip to the Imperial War Museum:

http://www.iwm.org.uk/exhibitions/iw...ust-exhibition.

[french frank]

A few thoughts (which have nothing to do with literary theory, though it IS interesting that all the folks in here are well versed in this but no one has mentioned Adorno yet)

I think theory and theoreticians are red herrings. You either think the director's addition was a good idea, subtly(!) enriching the operatic experience, or you don't and you think it detracts. You work out your own answer.

[MrGongGong]

To the poster who wanted suggestions for a London activity preferable to going to W. Tell,

THIS

http://www.factmag.com/2015/04/13/carsten-nicolai-unicolor-installation-london/

is worth a look IMV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuEp5lkUtb8