Does it matter what opera singers look like?

[LHC]

thanks.

Why do we think that Strauss made it a mezzo role - just to emphasise his youth ? Or to create some sort of sexual-ambiguity-subtext-thing. Or just following a long tradition of theatrical crossdressing for the humourous potential....... or other reasons ..

The role of Oktavian is intended to echo Cherubino in Le nozze di Figaro, but the casting of a woman is also intended to emphasis Oktavian's youth and inexperience, in contrast to the Marschallin.

Strauss actually specified a soprano for Oktavian, although it is now usually sung by a mezzo.

[mercia]

thanks. Yes sorry, when I asked why mezzo, I really meant why female.

[gradus]

Suitability for roles in theatre? How about a leading actor with a wooden leg? Imv operatic/theatrical suitability is about talent and not physical appearance unless you choose to let it be. Do composers care, I can't think of any examples but perhaps others can?

[Mary Chambers]

I only mean reasonable suitability. The problem is that if a singer looks very unsuitable for a role it's a distraction - unless the singer is a supreme artist perhaps, but there are very few of those.

I expect composers vary in their ideas about this.

[Richard Barrett]

I expect composers vary in their ideas about this.

It seems to me (never having written an opera or having any wish to) that the physical appearance of an opera singer detracts much less from the verisimilitude of their performance than does the fact of their singing rather than speaking.

[Richard Tarleton]

The problem is that if a singer looks very unsuitable for a role it's a distraction - unless the singer is a supreme artist perhaps, but there are very few of those.

Thomas Quasthoff said in an interview how he had thought live opera was not for him because of his unusual (his word) appearance, but how Simon Rattle persuaded him to do Fernando in Fidelio.

[Flosshilde]

Why do we think that Strauss made it a mezzo role - just to emphasise his youth ? Or to create some sort of sexual-ambiguity-subtext-thing.

I think he liked the sound of the voices combined - it's a combination he used several times. Having said that I think there are other examples where a male role is sung by a female, so perhaps the ambiguity was also something that appealed to him. Octavian is 17 and his voice would have broken by that age so a light tenor would also be approriate. I wonder if he would have written the role for a counter-tenor if the counter-tenor revival had happened at that time?

[Rue Dubac]

Was it ever suggested that Pavarotti's ample girth made him unconvincing in certain roles? I never heard/saw him on stage, but his appearance was hardly that of a romantic hero. Did it matter?

[Richard Tarleton]

There's just been an entertaining discussion on Today, 0855, about diva-ish behaviour following Dame Kiri's comments the other day about inappropriate costumes - Deborah Bull, Michael Simkins and Sarah Montague.

[Demetrius]

Just looked through the pictures google has to offer. Several things come to mind: it is indeed a bit of a stretch to cast the singer in that particular role, and the costume didn't help a bit. However, lets just contrast for a second these comments (quoted from slipped disc):

Andrew Clark in the FT refers to a singer as ‘a chubby bundle of puppy-fat.’
Michael Church in the Independent sniffs at ‘a dumpy girl’. Andrew Clements in the Guardian calls her ‘stocky’.
‘Unbelievable, unsightly and unappealing, writes Richard Morrison in the Times.
Rupert Christiansen in the Telegraph calls one singer ‘dumpy’ and another ‘stressed by motherhood’ (how would he know?).

and pictures of the singer in question:

https://www.sfcv.org/sites/files/u19/erraught-tara.png

http://ums.org/wp-content/uploads/performance/Tara-Erraught_420x420-4.jpg

http://www.der-neue-merker.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/DSC_7553_TaraErraught.jpg

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/74997000/jpg/_74997702_1f7aa6f9-9d20-4ed3-89e9-cb2ff469c3d0.jpg

It is one thing to question the casting, but these comments slander a frankly rather attractive woman (keep in mind that this spurred a discussion about obesity here). The concept seems to be that any woman who is not necessarily rail-thin is a failure that deserves any disparring remark people can come up with.

From a professional critic I expect a reasoned opinion - these don't come close to that.

[Stanfordian]

Just looked through the pictures google has to offer. Several things come to mind: it is indeed a bit of a stretch to cast the singer in that particular role, and the costume didn't help a bit. However, lets just contrast for a second these comments (quoted from slipped disc):

Andrew Clark in the FT refers to a singer as ‘a chubby bundle of puppy-fat.’
Michael Church in the Independent sniffs at ‘a dumpy girl’. Andrew Clements in the Guardian calls her ‘stocky’.
‘Unbelievable, unsightly and unappealing, writes Richard Morrison in the Times.
Rupert Christiansen in the Telegraph calls one singer ‘dumpy’ and another ‘stressed by motherhood’ (how would he know?).

and pictures of the singer in question:

https://www.sfcv.org/sites/files/u19/erraught-tara.png

http://ums.org/wp-content/uploads/performance/Tara-Erraught_420x420-4.jpg

http://www.der-neue-merker.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/DSC_7553_TaraErraught.jpg

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/74997000/jpg/_74997702_1f7aa6f9-9d20-4ed3-89e9-cb2ff469c3d0.jpg

It is one thing to question the casting, but these comments slander a frankly rather attractive woman (keep in mind that this spurred a discussion about obesity here). The concept seems to be that any woman who is not necessarily rail-thin is a failure that deserves any disparring remark people can come up with.

From a professional critic I expect a reasoned opinion - these don't come close to that.

She didn't look right for me in that role

[Demetrius]

That clear and simple sentence would have been enough, a perfectly viable position - not objective, but anyone who asks that from criticism is out of his or her mind anyway.
I agree that the casting is maybe a bit awkward, and that the costume was a seriously bad choice. Not her fault, though, and the personal attacks against her were way out of line.

[Rue Dubac]

It would be really nice if some knowledgeable contributor answered my query re Pavarotti - if only to tell me not to be stupid! If such criticism was not thought appropriate for him, then to be so personal and judgmental about the appearance of a female singer can only be sexist - i.e. there is (again!) a double standard. And Mr. Christiansen needs to understand that no one's gender or sexuality makes them immune from misogyny.
Also, obesity, unlike skin colour or genetic/accidental physical abnormality, is generally considered blameworthy, a personal fault. (I speak as one chronically somewhat underweight, so no axe-grinding.)
It was the poor woman's first major role in a world-class house - they could have been kinder and cut her some slack, surely? Agree tight costume not helpful, but that was not her fault, as has been said above. It's just mean.

[doversoul1]

It is one thing to question the casting, but these comments slander a frankly rather attractive woman (keep in mind that this spurred a discussion about obesity here). The concept seems to be that any woman who is not necessarily rail-thin is a failure that deserves any disparring remark people can come up with.

From a professional critic I expect a reasoned opinion - these don't come close to that.

I am sorry to be mean but I call this a ‘jumping on the bandwagon’ remark. These are people who make living out of watching women who are often far from slim and not even particularly beautiful playing princess and tragic heroines. Personal appearance in itself is the least of their interest. This singer is unsuitable for this role because of the way she looks on the stage, is a perfectly good reasoned opinion.

I think the whole thing has been made unnecessarily fussy by being taken out of the context.

That clear and simple sentence would have been enough, a perfectly viable position - not objective, but anyone who asks that from criticism is out of his or her mind anyway.
I agree that the casting is maybe a bit awkward, and that the costume was a seriously bad choice. Not her fault, though, and the personal attacks against her were way out of line.

I enjoy reading reviews because they are not clear and simple statements. I learn a lot from reviewers’ opinions and comments, and have a great respect for them. They could have restrained a little in this case but it is after all, ‘only’ newspaper reviews, not an official statement that would have made or broken this singer’s career. The comments may be personal but they are not personal attacks. I don’t really think these reviewers deserved to be called ignorant sexist bullies.

[Rue Dubac]

Ah, but they did not simply say "This singer is unsuitable for the role because of the way she looks on stage", did they? If they would not comment in similar terms on a male singer, they are sexist bullies. End of.
Were opera a more popular art form, she would likely have had worse on Twitter by now. Everyday misogyny alive and well.