Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Casting From Hell


Recommended Posts

I've wondered about d'Amboise in 'Davidsbundlertanze'. It's touching if you know who he is and was (including previously with Farrell), but did it just naturally come out that way? I assumed that was what was wanted, even though unconventional, because it's powerful that way, and makes Farrell's part seem younger and almost teen-agerish (I liked this) than it did when I saw it live and with someone else. I've watched the video a few times recently, but can't remember who I saw in 1986 do it (I know it wasn't d'Amboise, though), so that I imagine the effect is much different with any younger dancer.

I hadn't as much against Von Aroldingen in 'Emeralds' as most did, but didn't care for Ashley in it at all. This is for the wrong reasons, surely, as Von Aroldingen has a more noble and strong face than most ballerinas, with whom you notice the face less even if they are greater dancers; so sometimes when she was just being stately and tall I like to watch that, although I didn't see her do it in person.

Don't care for Viviana Durante as Aurora, though. Are the roses always so brusquely jerked as she did them? I remembered some of the old New Age talk about 'flowers screaming when picked'.

Well, I agree with Bart about Alicia Alonso, but I don't know if she convinced me that, when 'waning', her will triumphed in 'Carmen'. I just couldn't get into it, too much law of gravity at play from one step to another.

Link to comment
I've wondered about d'Amboise in 'Davidsbundlertanze'. It's touching if you know who he is and was (including previously with Farrell), but did it just naturally come out that way? I assumed that was what was wanted, even though unconventional, because it's powerful that way, and makes Farrell's part seem younger and almost teen-agerish (I liked this) than it did when I saw it live and with someone else. I've watched the video a few times recently, but can't remember who I saw in 1986 do it (I know it wasn't d'Amboise, though), so that I imagine the effect is much different with any younger dancer.

Maybe it was Kozlov.

Link to comment
This led me to think about Alicia Alonso, who was miscast in several ballets, especially Giselle, but who triumped through sheer willpower, and the ability to impose herself and her powerful (even when waning) technique on any role. Who could imagine a Giselle who willed herself through the steps, dominated her own madness, and was actually a stronger personality than Myrthe?

"especially Giselle" :blush: Bart, are you trying to give me apoplexy? I assume you are referring to the Cuban Giselles, of which there are too many clips on the market., They have to be viewed with a grain (pound?) of salt. They are a pale record of a most sublime Giselle. At the time I saw her (live with Youskevitch) I also saw Alicia Markova, Fonteyn, Nora Kaye, Yvette Chauvire, Toumanova and Slavenska. For me, the only one who could touch her at the time was Chauvire. Generally, I avoided the Cuban Giselles and wished they weren't on the market---but then I thought, if people allow for her age, health and partnerships, they might see a glimmer of what made her memorable.

That aside, my favorite casting from Hell is Viviana Durante in Petit's "Carmen"---which I saw live :clapping:

Link to comment
"especially Giselle" :clapping: Bart, are you trying to give me apoplexy?
I'm truly sorry. I did see Alonso live with Ballet Theater when I was very young and found her, from a distance, to be affecting and wonderful. I may even have seen Giselle, though the only thing I recall from that period was a Pas de Quatre and the white pas de deux from Swan Lake. I was told -- and I still believe -- that she was a great ballerina. Stage craft, of course, and the way dancers chose to project over great distances, may have been rather different in those days.

I was indeed thinking of the videos of an older Alonso. Closer camera works brings out the will-power that sustains her technique. Also, a Giselle who must "act young" is exposed terribly by close up.

Link to comment

I've watched the video a few times recently, but can't remember who I saw in 1986 do it (I know it wasn't d'Amboise, though), so that I imagine the effect is much different with any younger dancer.

Maybe it was Kozlov.

In 86-87 Kozlov shared d'Amboise's role Cornell Crabtree, who while at SAB partnered Darci Kistler in a school performance of the White Swan Pas de Deux, home videotape excepts of which can be seen in the documentary Dancing for Mr. B. (It's a bit cloudy and there might not be enough of Crabtree to recognize him.)

Kozlov was at least in his mid-late 30's in 1986; Crabtree would have been, at most, in his mid-twenties. But he had a receding hairline, which sometimes made him look older.

Link to comment

papeetepatrick writes:

I've wondered about d'Amboise in 'Davidsbundlertanze'. It's touching if you know who he is and was (including previously with Farrell), but did it just naturally come out that way? I assumed that was what was wanted, even though unconventional, because it's powerful that way, and makes Farrell's part seem younger and almost teen-agerish (I liked this) than it did when I saw it live and with someone else. I've watched the video a few times recently, but can't remember who I saw in 1986 do it (I know it wasn't d'Amboise, though), so that I imagine the effect is much different with any younger dancer.

With Luders as the ballet's protagonist and Martins occupied elsewhere, it made sense to match Farrell with d'Amboise, I suppose, and the fact that he is older and can't do much more than partner her makes her dancing seem even more fleetly elusive and the pairing more poignant. (I'm going only by the video, never saw it live.)

I hadn't as much against Von Aroldingen in 'Emeralds' as most did, but didn't care for Ashley in it at all. This is for the wrong reasons, surely, as Von Aroldingen has a more noble and strong face than most ballerinas, with whom you notice the face less even if they are greater dancers; so sometimes when she was just being stately and tall I like to watch that, although I didn't see her do it in person.

Her head is a little larger than many dancers’, which adds to its distinction and the nobility you mention (along with those fabulous cheekbones). I liked her in the ‘Emeralds’ video. The longer tutu suits her longer than average torso and she has a face the camera likes – she looks glamourous and striking- some dancers with very small heads look like bland little mouse faces on the screen, their faces don’t register. I also liked her and Lavery together.

Link to comment

Could one of you brilliant people elaborate in a theoretical way about what miscasting actually is in a ballet?

For example, where does the notion that a particular role is to be danced by a dancer of a certain body type? Obviously the role of a old man should be danced to convey old man, but isn't that about the skill of the dancer, or absence of it, for example?

I associated casting with stereotype we have of the character we see, but on stage and in film talented actors have a rather large range... such as Meryl Streep or Susan Saradon or Alan Arkin and more recently Di Caprio or perhaps Sean Pean. Their skill and that of the director is creating the illusion and casting them in a role is proving that skill!

If a dancer is unable to convey the emotion of the part it is more than miscasting, it is "incompetence" and their failure to create the illusion. Body type is a whole other matter... and so casting a tall girl in the role of child is cdertainly a harder illusion to create.

This makes sense for story and romantic ballets where there are characters to which we attach stereotypes. So much of "theater" is about the manipulation of stereotypes... isn't it?

Ironically in opera you find a lot of big female singers who are cast as delicate, beautiful sirens... and only rarely does someone proclaim MIS-CASTING. This did happen at the Met, I recall last year (?) when a soprano (was it Deborah Voight??) was removed from the cast because of her size. Also there are the so called "breeches" roles in opera such as Siebel in Faust which is meant to be a man but is sung by a soprano. How's that for "miscasting"... but the audience accepts the composers choice.

Then there is the miscasting of partners who may seem not to work well together.. because of size for example. This would apply to any type of dance... No?

I find that female dancers tend to look more similar than different... while males have more individual looks from the get go. It's the bun head syndrome no? To me this means that females are more interchangable in roles in dance than males.

And finally, how much of the discussion of mis-casting is about the dancer simply not carrying the role.. something which they might be able to do with more preparation rather than something innate about their "look"? And this applies to technique in dance as well as in acting? How much acting experience / training does a young dancer actually get and what can we really expect from them at such tender ages?

Link to comment
Ironically in opera you find a lot of big female singers who are cast as delicate, beautiful sirens... and only rarely does someone proclaim MIS-CASTING. This did happen at the Met, I recall last year (?) when a soprano (was it Deborah Voight??) was removed from the cast because of her size. Also there are the so called "breeches" roles in opera such as Siebel in Faust which is meant to be a man but is sung by a soprano. How's that for "miscasting"... but the audience accepts the composers choice.

Casting in opera seems on the one had ridiculous--large mature people playing emaciated consumptive 20-somethings--yet on the other hand it's rigourous, carefully delimited by vocal types: if you can sing Zerlina in Don Giovanni you won't sing Brunhilde in Die Walkure (there are other, less extreme examples too). This of course was not always the case; think of all the stuff Callas and others of her generation sung that really didn't "fit" their voices. As far as women singing breeches roles, the main concern is aural, not visual (unles of course a woman dressing as a man is part of a comic plot).

Link to comment

I would not say that a dancer's unsuitability for a role constitutes incompetence, as dancers can almost always do the steps just fine. But dancers have different "personalities" or "perfumes" and someone who is very stately is just not going to look right dancing Canari qui Chant in Sleeping Beauty. Dancers are not usually taught to act, which I think is worth noting, but I think it goes beyond that, and I don't think the comparison to movie actors is apt, as films use all sorts of tricks to create various illusions, and actors and directors can change the "choreography" at their leisure to suit the image they want to project, whereas dancers (except stars) are bound to particular steps. Another thing worth noting is that movie actors often do roles no one has ever seen before, whereas dancers often perform roles that have hundreds of years of tradition behind them--not that a new way of doing the part or a new look is always unwelcome, but certain aspects of various characters have come to be accepted as generally necessary.

There is also a historical division (about which Alexandra has told us in the past, although I don't know on which thread) of employ (emploi in French) that dictates the "type" required for various parts, but it is not used as strictly now as it used to be.

Link to comment
There is also a historical division (about which Alexandra has told us in the past, although I don't know on which thread) of employ (emploi in French) that dictates the "type" required for various parts, but it is not used as strictly now as it used to be.
Emploi still exerts its hold over Myrtha. I've just seen three Giselles in which the Myrtha seemed to have been selected primarily because of height. A talented dancer in the contemporary rep, with good classical technique, was converted into something tall, stiff, and comletely out of her element. She could definitely "do the steps," as you say Hans, but had no authority on stage, no "weight," no force, no menace. Indeed, she looked decidedly uncomfortable trying to project these qualities.

Perhaps the lack of acting training plays a role in what otherwise may seem "bad casting." The Hilarion I saw was a truly marvellous dancer who turned out to be very good at mime and who moved like a young panther. But his face had almost no expression (well, maybe a little petulence at the dramatic high points).

Or, conditions the develop in a single performance might convey a false impression of bad casting. A low-energy peasant pas de deux one night was probably due to the painfully languid tempi set by the conductor. The the problem was corrected the next time these two dancers performed the role.

Maybe these are cases where it's not so much the casting that was bad, but the failure of teaching, coaching, and support.

Link to comment

Ironically in opera you find a lot of big female singers who are cast as delicate, beautiful sirens... and only rarely does someone proclaim MIS-CASTING. This did happen at the Met, I recall last year (?) when a soprano (was it Deborah Voight??) was removed from the cast because of her size. Also there are the so called "breeches" roles in opera such as Siebel in Faust which is meant to be a man but is sung by a soprano. How's that for "miscasting"... but the audience accepts the composers choice.

Casting in opera seems on the one had ridiculous--large mature people playing emaciated consumptive 20-somethings--yet on the other hand it's rigourous, carefully delimited by vocal types: if you can sing Zerlina in Don Giovanni you won't sing Brunhilde in Die Walkure (there are other, less extreme examples too). This of course was not always the case; think of all the stuff Callas and others of her generation sung that really didn't "fit" their voices. As far as women singing breeches roles, the main concern is aural, not visual (unles of course a woman dressing as a man is part of a comic plot).

An awful lot of opera casting requires suspension of disbelief, primarily centered around the physical attributes of the singers, but also their way of acting. Trouser parts, same thing. And Baroque opera requires even more, not only for the the casting but also for the plots which make 19th century plots seem almost realistic.

More and more though opera is being cast with singers who look like their characters (although they may not sound like them :angry2:

Link to comment

Re: Myrtha, this past summer I saw Michele Wiles dance Myrtha. I suppose she was cast because she was tall, but she seemed wrong for the part. Not nearly sinister/regal enough. She could do all the steps, but if she wasn't tall, I wonder if she would have been cast in the part at all.

Link to comment
Trouser parts, same thing.

:angry2:

Although this is not the main topic, I do admit to having some problems with this in 'Rosenkavalier', because I haven't seen one in which there is even any effort to make Octavian at least look somewhat masculine. This is annoying, because while one knows it is a woman, and is a woman only so that the music can be written this way, to emphasize the look of femininity by putting a female singer in tight pants makes it seem desexed. I've mentioned this before in another thread, I think, but I also have seen 12th Nights when Viola/Cesario is dressed so that even though you know it is a girl dressed as a boy, it still looks like a pretty boy, not any longer a girl.

Martins occupied elsewhere

Yes! and this was pure Casting from Heaven, dirac, because this is one of the most perfectly-suited roles Martins ever got. There's a sense, especially from Martins and Von Aroldingen in that filmed version, of an Ingmar Bergman atmosphere, as if parts of 'Davidsbundlertanze' are 'Scenes from Marriages', as it were, and a distinctly northern European feeling. When he swings offstage with Watts (I believe it is), there's this marvelous sexual fire, which has to do with the choreography, of course, but also with the dancers--and the costumes for 'Davidsbundlertanze' are simply out of sight, one of the effects of which is to bring out the Scandinavian-ness of Martins in an especially brilliant way.

Link to comment
Re: Myrtha, this past summer I saw Michele Wiles dance Myrtha. I suppose she was cast because she was tall, but she seemed wrong for the part. Not nearly sinister/regal enough. She could do all the steps, but if she wasn't tall, I wonder if she would have been cast in the part at all.
Wiles' early Myrthas were very promising -- commanding and detailed -- and it's disappointing that her more recent ones have not met the level of her earlier ones. IMO, Myrtha need not be completely sinister. The key to that is the moment when she sees how deeply Giselle loves Albrecht and recalls the love she felt for her betrayer. There is a residual vulnerability. I think that was a crucial element in vanHamel's peerless Myrtha.
Link to comment
Wiles' early Myrthas were very promising -- commanding and detailed -- and it's disappointing that her more recent ones have not met the level of her earlier ones. IMO, Myrtha need not be completely sinister. The key to that is the moment when she sees how deeply Giselle loves Albrecht and recalls the love she felt for her betrayer. There is a residual vulnerability. I think that was a crucial element in vanHamel's peerless Myrtha.

I'm not saying she has to drip evil, but there has to be a sense of her implacable and formidable personality. Wiles seemed like a tall blond girl who could do all the steps, but quite honestly, I thought she could have made a better Giselle than Myrtha. The big Myrtha moments went for naught. The best Myrtha I've seen (on video) is Tatiana Terekhova.

Then again for every huge miscasting gaffe I think there is a success of a dancer that on paper is cast against type. One example is Gillian Murphy in Coppelia. One would think that she wouldn't excel in this kind of girlish soubrette role but I was wrong. Her formidable technique and spunk made up for her lack of "cuteness." Later that week I saw Xiomara Reyes who was a more typical cutesy Coppelia and while she was delightfully sweet I can't say I enjoyed Murphy's performance less.

Link to comment
I do admit to having some problems with this in 'Rosenkavalier', because I haven't seen one in which there is even any effort to make Octavian at least look somewhat masculine. This is annoying, because while one knows it is a woman, and is a woman only so that the music can be written this way, to emphasize the look of femininity by putting a female singer in tight pants makes it seem desexed.

Would anyone think it acceptable to cast a counter tenor in that role seeing as mezzos/contralto's seem interchangeable with counter tenors in opera seria these days. For example at Glyndebourne in 2005 I saw Sarah Connolly in the title role of Handel's Guilio Cesare but David Daniels sang the role in the same production last year.

Link to comment
Would anyone think it acceptable to cast a counter tenor in that role seeing as mezzos/contralto's seem interchangeable with counter tenors in opera seria these days. For example at Glyndebourne in 2005 I saw Sarah Connolly in the title role of Handel's Guilio Cesare but David Daniels sang the role in the same production last year.

I, for one, would like to see that very much. When it's the trouser part understood within the plot and action, and by the characters, as in 'Arabella', I never think about it, but when you are really supposed to suspend the need to see anything at all boyish-youthful there as in 'Rosenkavalier', the only solution for me is to just listen to it, so I do prefer just a recording of Rosenkavalier. I hadn't known about the countertenor in Handel, but that's very interesting.

Link to comment

This is kind of off-topic, but the casting of the 'trouser roles' like Oktavian and Cherubino was never *meant* to be realistic. Mozart and Strauss wanted females to sing these roles. Casting a countertenor would be wrong on so many levels. If there's a parallel to Oktavian and Cherubino it would be the sisters in Ashton's Cinderella.

I liken horrific miscasting in ballet to say, Natalie Dessay trying to sing Brunnhilde. Notes are notes, and Dessay could sing the notes, but would anyone want to hear it? Not only would it sound very, very wrong, Dessay's vocal deficiencies as a Wagnerian singer would be exposed. We would call her a terrible singer. She's obviously a remarkable singer, but just not a Brunnhilde.

Link to comment

Well, Mashinka, tell us what your reactions were to the 2 different sexes in the same role.

Canbelto, I tend to be on the side of tradition, but if the sound can be the same, or very similar, I don't think it's important to always have women in the trouser roles--but mainly, if they do, I do reiterate that it's not a matter of being 'realistic' or not if by some chance there could be a little more bow to their at least looking like the male character they're meant to be portraying. Otherwise, the idea of a 'handsome, dashing kavalier' is way beyond 'unrealistic', it gets all sorts of very specific and surely unintended undertones. I also disagree that a countertenor would not be able to do more than 'just the notes'. Why would he? If a woman can be convincing to many audiences (if not to me) as a man, why couldn't a man be convincing as a 'man who usually is sung by a woman' (I'm beginning to remind myself of 'victor, victoria'). It's one tradition I find hard to see important to preserve at all costs, if the result sounds right. If it doesn't, then there definitely does need to be some balancing out in the other areas, and I have heard some more intrepid operagoers than myself say that it does vary. If the 2 characters are involved in heterosexual lovemaking, it ought to be able to at least suggest that possibility in the appearance. In any case, no one is upset about the WTC of Bach not being played (for the most part, although we do, of course, have Ms. Landowska's great artistry) on the harpsichord. There weren't any Steinway concert grands in those days, and that's mostly where you hear the stuff these days. Tureck was mainly the piano, and Glenn Gould too.

Link to comment

I think baroque operas are a whole different ballgame from, say, Der Rosenkavalier. In baroque operas, the composers specifically wrote the roles for a type of singer (castrati) that doesn't exist today. The only record we have of a castrato was Moreschi, and the record is very poor and we know that, say, Farinelli did not sound like that. What did castrati sound like? There really is no way of knowing other than doing something which isn't socially acceptable anymore. In this case, we have the notes, we have some idea of the vocal style of the era, and that's it. Countertenors are an acceptable (albeit controversial) substitute for something that can't be replicated. Other opera lovers prefer a contralto.

I think you can make a similar case for the casting of many ballets. We have no idea how the first Aurora, Mathilde Kschessinska, would have danced the Rose Adagio. But just looking at pictures, I can guess that she'd never make it into a ballet academy today. Dancers have the steps, they have (or should have) tradition that has been passed down through the generations, but they also have a whole new set of demands and aesthetics. Plus, ballet is a growing art form. Kschessinska got pregnant, and enter the lithe, ethereal Pavlova. Ballet changed forever. I saw an interview with Ninette di Valois where she was quite firm in her opinion that Raymonda should be danced by short, petite ballerinas. Today, audiences applaud Lopatkina and Zakharova's Raymondas. Unacceptable? Maybe, but, as Mr. B said, "Just do the steps, dear."

On the other hand, Strauss specifically wrote Der Rosenkavalier for a soprano, and his vision was to replicate a 17-year old lad who hasn't "grown up" yet. There's a bit of artificiality that I think was intentional -- the wisdom of the Marschallin ultimately triumphs over the blissful but immature Oktavian and Sophie. If he wanted to write the role for a tenor, he would have (in fact, there's a tenor in Der Rosenkavalier). If a tenor (who could sing the notes -- Juan Diego Florez could essay the part, I bet) sang Oktavian, I'd liken it to Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake.

Link to comment

IMO, Leonid Sarafanov as Solor and Siegfried, and Alina Somova as Odette/Odile & et.al. Unfortunately, both have happened. Mercilessly and inexplicably, both continue to happen.

Sarafanov's ideal emploi would be roles such as Colas, Franz or Nutcracker Prince, joyous

uncomplicated roles. Although he has wonderful technique, he's not a danseur noble. For example, if he had been trained in Copenhagen, he might be in his true element because the Royal Danish repertory is suited to his dance temperament. Specifically, Solor and Siegfried do not suit him.

He is however, an excellent Matteo in Lacotte's revival of "Ondine." And he's definitely a Mercutio.

On the whole, he's too cheerful and boyish for the tragic, brooding roles. And Somova? Her overall "approach" to the major roles she's been granted, is like casting Britney Spears as Pamina in "The Magic Flute."

Link to comment
I do admit to having some problems with this in 'Rosenkavalier', because I haven't seen one in which there is even any effort to make Octavian at least look somewhat masculine. This is annoying, because while one knows it is a woman, and is a woman only so that the music can be written this way, to emphasize the look of femininity by putting a female singer in tight pants makes it seem desexed.

Would anyone think it acceptable to cast a counter tenor in that role seeing as mezzos/contralto's seem interchangeable with counter tenors in opera seria these days. For example at Glyndebourne in 2005 I saw Sarah Connolly in the title role of Handel's Guilio Cesare but David Daniels sang the role in the same production last year.

Handel himself never cast countertenors in his operas. High male roles were cast either with castrati or women. He generally preferred castrati for heroic leads (e.g., Cesare in Giulio Cesare), but would cast a women en travesti if a star castrato wasn't available. (Opera Seria heroes were always sung by high voices; it was simply the convention of the day.) Handel did frequently cast women in non-heroic high male roles: the roles of Sesto (Giulio Cesare) and Ottone (Agrippina), for example were both originated by women in his company. The gender of the singer mattered less than the type of voice the singer had and its suitability for the role at hand.

Link to comment
On the other hand, Strauss specifically wrote Der Rosenkavalier for a soprano, and his vision was to replicate a 17-year old lad who hasn't "grown up" yet. There's a bit of artificiality that I think was intentional -- the wisdom of the Marschallin ultimately triumphs over the blissful but immature Oktavian and Sophie. If he wanted to write the role for a tenor, he would have (in fact, there's a tenor in Der Rosenkavalier). If a tenor (who could sing the notes -- Juan Diego Florez could essay the part, I bet) sang Oktavian, I'd liken it to Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake.

But didn't he write the part for a soprano for primarily musical reasons? yes, the '17-year old lad who hasn't "grown up" yet.', but this in itself by no means required a soprano. I think it's the soprano sound that is wanted, not the sense that the not-grown-up lad (yes, that, again, of course) looks like a woman onstage. It could also be that it is indeed a kind of intended artificiality, but one that I simply can't accept personally. I do not believe, however, that Oktavian is meant to seem like a woman, and he does, especially if hips are dressed to be pronounced. And in so doing, the Marschallin does not seem feminine, but rather masculine, despite being a woman--handsome like Susan Sontag when young, not beautifully womanly like Catherine Deneuve when young. If it is likened to Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake, it points to the enjoyment of knowing Octavian is a woman singer and a woman character as well--and gets into more gender-bending subtleties than I'm going to do, because the parallel makes sense to me only in that I am not interested in the Bourne stuff either, but that's men fully in women's roles (which means it does not make sense to me, the Bourne things are all right, but once was enough). Strauss chose this trouser role, and then there are new productions in which the masculinity could be more pronounced in one way or another. I'd still like to see it done with a countertenor, even if it took a while to get used to it. In serious work if there's a heterosexual liaison, I don't want to see men in women's roles either, except as camp.

Your point of view on this is certainly legitimate and obviously shared by most, as this is a very popular opera. I know that I will probably never really care for this opera. If I am going to hear it live, I like the part of 'Vienna Waltzes' where you saw Farrell being Viennese to some of it, and there have probably been many mis-castings by comparison since in this role, about which I'd like to hear. After all, Farrell's final curtain was a la viennoise.

Link to comment

On the other hand, Strauss specifically wrote Der Rosenkavalier for a soprano, and his vision was to replicate a 17-year old lad who hasn't "grown up" yet. There's a bit of artificiality that I think was intentional -- the wisdom of the Marschallin ultimately triumphs over the blissful but immature Oktavian and Sophie. If he wanted to write the role for a tenor, he would have (in fact, there's a tenor in Der Rosenkavalier). If a tenor (who could sing the notes -- Juan Diego Florez could essay the part, I bet) sang Oktavian, I'd liken it to Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake.

But didn't he write the part for a soprano for primarily musical reasons? yes, the '17-year old lad who hasn't "grown up" yet.', but this in itself by no means required a soprano.

No, in this case I think he really did want a woman in the role for reasons other than sound. First of all, the scene in which Oktavian passes himself off as Mariandel would be rather more difficult to bring off theatrically if he were sung by a man in drag (Ochs would seem like an even bigger dolt than he is). Secondly, Oktavian portrayed by an older man (and realistically he would be, given the age at which singers’ voices generally mature) would seem unbelievably cruel: it’s appropriate for the young Oktavian to leave the Marschallin for Sophie; it would be heartless for a man who at least looked to be the Marschallin’s age or older to do so.

Link to comment
No, in this case I think he really did want a woman in the role for reasons other than sound. First of all, the scene in which Oktavian passes himself off as Mariandel would be rather more difficult to bring off theatrically if he were sung by a man in drag (Ochs would seem like an even bigger dolt than he is). Secondly, Oktavian portrayed by an older man (and realistically he would be, given the age at which singers’ voices generally mature) would seem unbelievably cruel: it’s appropriate for the young Oktavian to leave the Marschallin for Sophie; it would be heartless for a man who at least looked to be the Marschallin’s age or older to do so.

Kathleen is right on the money here. Strauss wanted a very young male character which would be difficult

to pull off by an actually male, whether tenor or countertenor.

Musically either voice type would have a very difficult time with the music. Strauss wrote for a soprano even though today we usually hear a high mezzo. But tranposed down an octave, most tenors would find it unreasonable high, not the actual range but the lie of the music or tessitura. A counter tenor would sing at score pitch and again the part would lay very high. Plus the orchestration is very thick and countertenors, with their lighter voices would tend to have difficulty cutting through a huge Strauss orchestra.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...