Mats Norrman writes:
>I agree that Mime is a comic figure, and this part (Akt II of "Siegfried")
>is one of the parts I most appreciate for its humor. I used to say that
>there are much humor in Wagners works - and I really don't mean just
>"Meistersinger"! I will launch an exkurs on this if anyone is interested!
>
>So far I agree with Webber, but where he claims the Ring to be "great
>pantomime" (funny pun Mr. Webber!), I go with Mr. Akima!
Just to clarify, I was referring specifically to this moment in The Ring,
and couldn't resist the awful pun. Of course I would never describe the
whole 15 hours or so of the work in those terms. I only wanted to assert
the fine and varied theatricality of the cycle, and in particular Wagner's
very individual and underrated sense of humour, which Mats Norrman clearly
relishes too.
Personally I find "The Mastersingers" to be the least funny of his works
with the exception of "Parsifal" - which only goes to show that Comedy need
not be synonymous with Humour.
Similarly, Shakespeare's tragedies contain nearly as much humour as the
comedies - and of a broader kind. If we're looking at a parallel with
Wagner, I think Shakespeare's histories (probably his most distinctive
achievement) offer a closer model than either: though unlike Wagner, he
wasn't interested in following Greek models.
>So the question of how much Schopenhauer influenced Wagner is not so easy
>to tell! Wagner apparently mixed thoughts from Schopenhauer, with those of
>Bakunin, Proudhon, Feuerbach, and other contemporary philosophers, melting
>everything in a pot to something that was his very own.
Mats Norrman's qualifications are well made. As he points out, Wagner was
a clever philosophical bee, confusedly sucking nectar from all sorts of
sources and turning it to his own, very practical and theatrical honey.
Christopher Webber, Blackheath, London, UK.
http://www.nashwan.demon.co.uk/zarzuela.htm
"ZARZUELA!"
|