Christopher Webber replies to me:

>>On the other hand, while I may listen enthralled to Placido Domingo, he
>>has about as much acting skill as a brick.
>
>Now if you'd said Pavarotti I'd understand that.  Domingo strikes me
>as an example of a singer who has used his intelligence (and doubtless
>countless video replays) to work hard at his stagecraft over the years,
>to the point where he cuts the acting mustard even under less than ideal
>circumstances - two day's rehearsal before a major Met revival, or
>whatever.

Actually, I chose Domingo because he's *not* the worst opera actor I've
ever seen or even terrible.  But compare his, say, Otello to one from a
third-rank regional theater.

>Opera acting is of course different from theatre acting (or the film
>acting Steve describes).  It's not so subtle, not so wide-ranging, not
>so precise.  Nor should it be.  Willard White is a perfectly good opera
>actor, though when Trevor Nunn took him as "Othello" with the Royal
>Shakespeare Company a few years ago, the difference in kind was
>embarrassing.  But opera acting does not need to be at that level to be
>perfectly acceptable in its own sphere.

I guess this is my point.  But, then again, I *have* seen opera
productions (and not necessarily from prestige companies) where the
acting not only didn't turn me off (like the Trovatore in Night at the
Opera), but actually served the drama - a terrific Tales of Hoffmann
from Czechoslovakia, an incredibly depressing Wozzeck from Hamburg,
a Menotti Medium in a community theater with piano only, and so on.
Sellars's televised production of Don Giovanni I thought tremendous.

What strikes me, however, is a lack of actor's training, basically since
these productions are so rare.  I agree that acting with the voice is
as necessary as acting with gesture and movement.  Do singers actually
get this training?  In my experience, so few act well with the voice
alone and even fewer seem to be able to sing and move at the same time.

>OK, I'm biased - Domingo got his stage training as a zarzuela performer,
>and was kind enough to do the Foreword for a recent book of mine - but
>none the less, I don't think Steve is being fair to his all-round
>achievement as a stage artist within his chosen sphere.

The first time I ever *heard* the term "zarzuela" was in connection with
Domingo.  The first time I ever saw a zaruela production was entirely
due to Domingo's clout (he conducted).  He introduced me to the genre.
I'm grateful.  I don't mean to pick on him.  I do think him an intelligent,
dramatic singer, with a fantastic voice and an eagerness to try something
new.  In my opinion, in terms of total musicianship and beauty of voice,
he's undoubtedly one of the great opera singers.  But, again, compare
him, as an actor, not with the brilliant Olivier or Ian Holm, but with
a capable actor like Bernard Lee.

>The point remains: our over-exposure to the subtler dramatic mediums
>has spoilt our pleasure in live theatre opera, and sent us in there
>with impossible (and undesirable) expectations of TV-realism.

I guess one of the things that bothers me is the lack of a style in opera
-- something which has conventions of meaning one can latch onto -- like
the Broadway stage or early Thirties American gangster movies or classical
French stage acting or Shakespearean acting at the RSC, none of which
can be called, properly speaking, realistic.  When a style is present
at all and not the result of letting things fall where they may, it
differs from other productions you've seen.  Apparently, unless you have
a strong stage director (and not always then, as the Chereau Ring
revealed), you have little hope of seeing singers capable of acting.  We
can probably count on our fingers (and maybe a toe or two) the number
of acting opera singers who go from production to production, regardless
of the director, and, like Bernard Lee, give a solid dramatic performance.

Steve Schwartz