Was Lanza an Opera Singer?

[Derek McGovern]

Please note: This is a reconfigured version of the posts that originally appeared here, and represents 

(hopefully!) the final attempt to solve the technical problems that have plagued this thread :) 

Derek McGovern
Jul 28, 2011

I had a feeling when I started the Henry Fogel radio programme thread the other day that the link I'd contained in my 

post to various Fogel comments on another Google forum would warm the cockles of a certain Lanza biographer's 

heart. The comments that I was thinking of in particular were these:

“My only point was that in comparing Lanza to real opera singers (Domingo or others), one had to remember that we 

have no idea of how Mario Lanza would have fared as a real opera singer. Another poster referred to his Otello duet 

with Albanese (the 3rd Act scene, from the movie "Serenade", in fact), and I love that recording. However, we do not 

know if Lanza could have even mastered the entire role of Otello, nor do we know if his voice had the carrying power 

to sing that opera with a real orchestra in a real opera house. Learning operatic arias and performing them is much, 

much easier than learning entire operatic roles --generally the most rhythmically complex music, the difficult ensemble 

moments, are the hard parts to learn -- and it is the discipline, or the will, to do that that Lanza lacked.

“It is unfair to singers who mastered that learning process to compare them as total artists with someone who sang 

the big tunes in movies and an occasional recital. That is not to take away from the glory of Lanza's voice, musical 

style, or emotional commitment. I understand that the original poster started out saying that Lanza's voice gave him 

goosebumps and Domingo's did not. Fair enough -- Lanza certainly had one of the great goosebump-producing sounds 

of any tenor in his era. But one cannot, I feel, take the comparison any farther because the two practiced what are 

essentially different crafts.”---Henry Fogel, 1999.

Sure enough, Derek Mannering found these comments and duly posted them on the Rense forum, pleased as Punch, 

no doubt, that they echoed his "Mario Lanza was not an opera singer" mantra. Others added their endorsements as 

well, including David Weaver, who went on to provide additional reasons that Lanza could never be considered an 

opera singer: 

1. A traditional opera singer sings in an opera house: except for New Orleans, Mario Lanza did not.

2. A traditional opera singer records complete operas: Mario Lanza did not.

3. A traditional opera singer may sing other material, but what they concentrate on singing most is opera: Mario Lanza 

did not. Easily more than half of what he sang and recorded is non-operatic. 

Fascinating! Aside from the fact that complete recordings of operas have only been commonplace for a matter of 

decades (heck, Caruso never recorded one) -- thus making "traditional" a bit of a stretch :) -- I'd say that most opera 

singers don't make complete opera recordings. The economics don't allow it, for starters. And who's to say that in order 

to be classified as an opera singer, one has to sing mostly opera? James Dean is commonly referred to as a film star, 

despite the fact that he spent more time on the stage (and on TV) than he ever did in movies. Should we be more 

correctly referring to him as the Broadway actor James Dean? I don't think so. And as far as point #1 is concerned--- 

again, who's to say that the singing of opera has to take place in an opera house? Why should Lanza's two 

performances as Fenton be either dismissed or ignored by the Lanza-was-not-an-opera-singer brigade simply because 

a) they took place at Tanglewood rather than in a "traditional" opera house, and b) because they were unpaid 

appearances? What on earth does either fact have to do with what he was singing?

The music critics of the New York Times, Opera News, and the New York Herald-Tribune certainly thought they were 

attending a performance of an opera when they reported enthusiastically on Lanza's singing as Fenton. So did the 

audience of 800. "Student production" it may have been -- technically speaking -- but Tanglewood was never a glee 

show or some local operatic society's annual shindig. Those esteemed critics took the trouble of travelling to the 

Berkshire Music Festival at Tanglewood because they rightly regarded it as one of the most important annual 

musical events in the US. 

I would also like to know who gets to decide how many performances one has to give of opera in an actual opera 

house before the magical title of opera singer can be bestowed. Yes, we all know that Lanza only appeared in two

performances in a bona fide opera house, but I suspect that even if he had returned to sing Alfredo in 1949 with 

Eleanor Steber as originally scheduled, and then an operatic role every year after that (while under contract to MGM), 

the same people would still be saying that he was not an opera singer.

They're my thoughts for now (and I'd like to respond to Henry Fogel's comments at a later stage), but for now I'd love to 

know what some of our members' take is on this issue. (Remember: there is no party line here!)

Cheers
Derek
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Anita 
July 28, 2011 

I think that if any person who sings a song from opera in the way that it is supposed to be sung, actually sounds 

convincing and has a beautiful voice, no matter where that person is performing, he/she is an opera singer i.e he/she 

is singing opera. I have heard some so called opera singers in an opera house, who sounded atrocious and I would not 

like to call them opera singers---rather "caterwaulers"! 

Therefore no one will be able to convince me that Mario Lanza could not be an opera singer, as well as being a popular 

singer, crooner, singer of Neapolitan songs, light opera etc. He was "one of a kind" and I cannot understand why people 

can't just appreciate his art and stop trying to classify him. 

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Shawn 
Jul 29, 2011 

"Was Mario Lanza an opera singer" is a question I have wrestled with considerably both on my own account and in 

discussions (arguments?) with other people. Here are some of my thoughts (bear in mind I may be playing 'devils 

advocate' here to some degree for the purposes of debate ;) 


However, we do not know if Lanza could have even mastered the entire role of Otello, nor do we know if his voice had the 

carrying power to sing that opera with a real orchestra in a real opera house. We know his voice had carrying power, 

although I take his point. I'm not sure Otello would ever have been an ideal role for Lanza on stage, although I tend to 

think he would have fared much better than other non-dramatic tenors who attempted it like Di Stefano(!) and Pavarotti(!!) 

etc. I don't know that I would have been glad to see Lanza using that beautiful instrument in a role even Corelli and Tucker 

never attempted. A complete recording would be nice though- I'd love to hear a Lanza 'esultate' among other things. Jon 

Vickers I believe recorded the role with Serafin (very well I might add) before he ever performed it live. And you could make

a case that Domingo, the most successful Otello of recent memory (though not my favorite) didn't really have a true 

dramatic voice either, so who knows.


Learning operatic arias and performing them is much, much easier than learning entire operatic roles --generally the most 

rhythmically complex music, the difficult ensemble moments, are the hard parts to learn -- and it is the discipline, or the will, 

to do that that Lanza lacked. It is unfair to singers who mastered that learning process to compare them as total artists 

with someone who sang the big tunes in movies and an occasional recital.

I actually found myself agreeing almost entirely with that. I can understand why fans of singers who sang difficult roles 

live in opera houses for decades take issue when Mario is declared "BETTER! THE BEST" as is often the case on 

online forums especially. Very recently someone discussing this very issue tried to draw a comparison with Mozart and 

Haydn- to him Lanza was Mozart and Haydn is those other tenors who had better careers but less talent. 

The problem is that with Mozart and Haydn we have roughly similar outputs to compare and both can be considered to 

have reached something like their full potential (Mozart even with his premature death had a large output) but with 

Lanza that really isn't the case. To take the analogy further it is almost as if we have only Mozarts Jupiter symphony, 

one of his operas, and say, Eine Kleine Nachtmusik to put up against the entire compositional catalog of Haydn- you 

might do so, and conclude that Mozart had more talent, but would it be fair in such a case to declare him the overall

better composer? 

To be honest I'm really not sure, but in discussions with such people I try harder now to respect those artistic borders 

that the so-called "real" opera singers dwelt inside but which Lanza admittedly never quite got across. 

That is not to take away from the glory of Lanza's voice, musical style, or emotional commitment. I understand that 

the original poster started out saying that Lanza's voice gave him goosebumps and Domingo's did not. Fair enough -- 

Lanza certainly had one of the great goosebump-producing sounds of any tenor in his era. 

Agreed again, actually.

Now for some of your responses Derek =P

I'd say that most opera singers don't make complete opera recordings.

True, the majority do not, but Lanza was a truly exceptional operatic voice and you would certainly have expected him 

to have done so had he been a (cough) "real" opera singer. 

And who's to say that in order to be classified as an opera singer, one has to sing mostly opera? James Dean is 

commonly referred to as a film star, despite the fact that he spent more time on the stage (and on TV) than he ever did 

in movies. Should we be more correctly referring to him as the Broadway actor James Dean? I don't think so.

Interesting point, but Dean I suppose is referred to as a 'film star' because it was the greatest means by which his 

notoriety was gained. Was Lanza's greatest notoriety gained by his singing of opera? In terms of the public at large, 

probably not.

And as far as point #1 is concerned -- again, who's to say that the singing of opera has to take place in an opera house? 

Why should Lanza's two performances as Fenton be either dismissed or ignored by the Lanza-was-not-an-opera-singer 

brigade simply because a) they took place at Tanglewood rather than in a "traditional" opera house, and b) because 

they were unpaid appearances? 

Agreed. 

I would also like to know who gets to decide how many performances one has to give of opera in an actual opera 

house before the magical title of opera singer can be bestowed. Yes, we all know that Lanza only appeared in two 

performances in a bona fide opera house, but I suspect that even if he had returned to sing Alfredo in 1949 with Eleanor

Steber as originally scheduled, and then an operatic role every year after that (while under contract to MGM), the same 

people would still be saying that he was not an opera singer.

I don't disagree (although I think, had he continued to return to sing operatic roles it actually would have at least 

contributed to some consensus on what kind of singer Lanza actually was.) 

But as a point of interest, I would like to state this question in reverse- under what circumstances would you 

consider someone with an operatic voice to not be an opera singer? What, indeed, is "enough" for one to have that

title? Simply singing in an opera house or performing a complete role at least once? Recording a certain number of 

arias? I'm curious. :)

This leads me to a point made by Anita:

I think that if any person who sings a song from opera in the way that it is supposed to be sung, actually sounds 

convincing and has a beautiful voice, no matter where that person is performing, he/she is an opera singer i.e he/she is 

singing opera. In a way I'm all for the "stop trying to put singers in a box, just enjoy" type of approach. However if 

'sounds convincing and has a beautiful voice' is the only necessary criteria for being called an 'opera singer,' 

then what is to prevent Jackie Evancho, Deanna Durbin, and (gasp!) Andrea Bocelli, Paul Potts, even 

newcomer Lys Agnes and the like from being considered "opera singers?" Because frankly, many people (sadly) 

can't tell the difference just by listening- as is evidenced by their comments! They don't realize what is involved in 

"real" performing of opera and assume that anyone who sings opera with an operatic sound, regardless of venue or 

experience, is on the same plane as "real" opera singers and can be compared as such.

Now, I am by no means placing Lanza in the same category as those singers(!!) because, well, he just had a more 

outstanding voice and unlike them, I think we have more than enough evidence to state with certainty that he could 

have had a wonderful operatic career had he chosen/been able to do so. But it demonstrates the need for some 

method of categorization.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

JimT 
Jul 29, 2011 


The name of this Forum is Mario Lanza, Tenor. To me it is as simple as that: MARIO LANZA, Tenor. Enjoy him as 

you wish. (And discuss him as we wish)

_______________________________________________________________________________________

leeann 
Jul 29, 2011 


Shawn wrote, "...it demonstrates the need for some method of categorization." And the methodology, of 

course, is the dilemma: innate talent versus training versus how-I-earn-my-living versus the perceptions of 
others versus level of competence...and more that people have brought up. 


And then there are parts of speech and how we interpret them: "He is an opera singer." is likely interpreted 

differently from "He is an operatic singer." or even, "He's a singer of opera." and "He sings operatically." and 

that can be interpolated into the criteria of a variety of professions. 

I'm looking forward to reading how the experienced tenors on this forum think about this. 

It does seem that there might be another subtext to this discussion, though: cultural values. NOT classifying 

Lanza as an opera singer then seems to carry the need for justification, the equivalent of..."but his music was 
amazing ANYWAY." And in a way, that seems like a throwback to the 1940s and 1950s when classical music, 

art, and literature, performed in certain venues in specific ways, for example, defined the standards and established 

narrow criteria of excellence. 

I don't think we think that way in the 21st century. I think boundaries are more porous and, in part, that's led to a 

critical re-evaluation of Lanza's influence, not just on individual singers whom he inspired, but to his role in the world

of music as well. 

And yet, to say Lanza was not an opera singer appallingly seems to place him among tenors like Potts and Bocelli 

(however they might be classified), and it is singers such as the two of them around the globe who advertise concerts

 full of songs Lanza sang. They do him no favors; they help themselves tremendously.

We might not be having this discussion if Lanza hadn't been so multi-faceted. And certainly this man 

who rose to number one on both classical and pop charts simultaneously, who did confound the critics of his 
day, who is still grouped historically with both opera greats and "crooners" has always defied classification. 

And no matter how categories are defined and redefined, I suspect he'll never fit into just one. 


I agree with Jim Thompson, though. Mario Lanza, Tenor seems to me the highest accolade. It doesn't need 

embellishment. Best, Lee Ann

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Armando 
Jul 29, 2011 

I find the never-ending debate as to whether Lanza should or should not be termed an opera singer rather ridiculous.

An opera singer is one who has been trained expressively for that particular form of singing and who, having acquired 

the appropriate technique, is able to interpret and sing music of an operatic nature successfully, be it in concert or in 

entire performances.

Ah, but Lanza sang only in two student performances and two professional ones-echo the “Lanza was not an opera 

singer” brigade.” So? Is Bocelli, who cannot be heard beyond the third row to be regarded as more of an opera singer 

than Lanza simply because he sang a few opera performances and recorded a number of complete operas? 

Is John Mc Cormack, who sang primarily in concerts, to be called a concert singer as opposed to an opera singer?

Henry Fogel stated that “Learning operatic arias and performing them is much, much easier than learning entire operatic roles.”

I agree that learning single operatic arias is easier than mastering a complete role, but I disagree that performing them

is much, much easier. As Domingo stated and, I’m paraphrasing: It’s much more difficult to sing an aria outside of the 

context of a complete opera. To capture the mood, the character of the part in a single isolated instance is extremely 

difficult. 

I also disagree with Fogel’s statement that, “It is unfair to singers who mastered that learning process to compare them 

as total artists with someone who sang the big tunes in movies and an occasional recital.”

Lanza sang in more than 150 concerts (hardly an occasional recital!) and had he lived he would most probably have 

recorded a number of complete operas that RCA had planned.

Finally, Lets not confuse quantity with quality. Who cares if a singer has performed a thousand times in countless 

operas! Was he or she any good? 

I’m reminded of the old joke of the tenor in Trovatore who receives a tremendous ovation and repeated requests for an 

encore after singing Di Quella Pira. He sings the aria again and the same thing happens, the theatre explodes and 

another encore requested. He sings it a third time and, again, he is asked to repeat it. Totally exhausted, he pleads 

with the audience to let him continue with the rest of the opera.

A single voice from the audience is heard. “You will sing it until you get it right!”

_______________________________________________________________________________________


Derek McGovern 
Jul 29, 2011 

Thanks for the responses so far, everyone. 

For what it's worth, I do regard Lanza as an opera singer. It's immaterial to me that he only appeared in one role 

professionally, or that he later became a film star. When the man sang Pinkerton in New Orleans he was an opera 

singer. To me, it really is as simple as that. 

I have plenty more to say on the subject, but a classroom of students awaits!

Cheers
Derek

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Shawn 
Jul 29, 2011 


"An opera singer is one who has been trained expressively for that particular form of singing and who, having acquired 

the appropriate technique, is able to interpret and sing music of an operatic nature successfully, be it in concert or in 

entire performances."

I think that's actually a very good working definition and it is on that basis that I do consider Lanza an opera singer. 

There are those however that would prefer to draw distinctions between "operatic" singer, "singer of opera," and "opera 

singer." To some degree and in certain contexts I understand where they're coming from. But it doesn't effect my 

enjoyment of Lanza's singing one bit to know that his live singing career was comparatively unfulfilled.

The Trovatore joke is quite funny, thanks for sharing. 

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Michael McAdam 
July 29, 2011 

Armando: very sage post from a man who cuts to the chase and knows whereof he speaks.
When I first heard Lanza sing an operatic piece I had up to then, only heard some of his U.K. pop hits played by my 

mum. The operatic piece was Vesti La Giubba. Even though I had heard the aria by my dad's endless playing of 

Björling LP's, Lanza's version was so earthy, up-front and visceral, I was blown away. He sounded like he knew 

what he was doing! I don't think Bocelli and his ilk would blow anyone away?!

As I've learned in the ensuing years, Lanza was trained operatically (and concentrated on that in most of his record 

demos, concert pieces etc.) plus he then made his operatic debut in New Orleans, he was a fresh-out-of-the-gate 

and "ready to rock & roll" Opera Singer....period! That's the same basic start all the Domingos, Pavarottis et al had, 

correct? Ergo, Lanza was an opera singer!

_______________________________________________________________________________________

leeann 
July 29, 2011 

Reading now in the light of day.

It kind of seems that detailed analysis of whether Lanza was or wasn't an opera singer is maybe just an exercise in 

pseudo-intellectualism. And perhaps, sometimes it tends to shed more light on the person talking than it does on 

Mario Lanza's music. 

Based on the clear, concise definitions of experts here, Lanza was an opera singer, and he brought the skills, training, 

innate talent of an opera singer to a variety of genres. Doesn't seem to be much question, really.

And it's just fine if Bocelli and Potts are called opera singers, too--but those who know will also add the qualification, 

"...but not very good ones." 

I'm interested in Fogel's comment--especially since he clearly appreciates Lanza, that Domingo [or substitute any other 

similar singer's name] and Lanza "practiced what are essentially different crafts." I wonder if that's essentially rephrasing 

the argument that Lanza can't be considered an opera singer, or whether it's a nuance on the idea of the application of 

different techniques to--well, maybe concert singing versus entire operas. Best, Lee Ann

_______________________________________________________________________________________


Shawn 
July 29, 2011 

Leeann: 

And it's just fine if Bocelli and Potts are called opera singers, too--but those who know will also add the qualification, "

...but not very good ones." 

Something in my gut strongly rebels against including Potts and Bocelli in the same company as Lanza, Wunderlich, 

Di Stefano, Caruso, et al.... but other than that I agree with your post. 

_______________________________________________________________________________________

gary from NS 

July 30, 2011


Lanza is indeed an opera singer. He was a most dazzling, and glorious tenor to ever come across my ears.


He was a wonderful pop singer,and crossover artist.

I cannot really put a single label on him, and prefer to say he was/is the greatest tenor I have ever heard.

Certainly he had training as an opera singer and he appeared in operas,as well as movies,and concerts.

I don't need to label him...I simply need to HEAR him.

Cheers
Gary

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Derek McGovern 
July 30, 2011 


I share Shawn's enthusiasm for Armando's definition of an opera singer, and would happily apply it to Lanza. 

What I was going to say earlier was that, in Lanza's case, there was never any question in the 1940s that his vocal 

training and inclinations were entirely in one direction: an operatic career. That he became sidetracked from it during 

the last decade of his life doesn't negate the fact that he sang in opera, continued to studyopera, learned seven roles, 

worked with vocal coaches (Spadoni in the US and Zauli and Bizzelli in Rome) on the operatic music that he was 

recording, and that he continued to sing opera (mainly in films, yes -- but so what? The operatic singing we hear in 

Serenade and For the First Time was not compromised by the fact that it was recorded for films).

It's also worth noting conductor Peter Herman Adler's comments: "I saw [Lanza] for the last time [in the summer of 

1959] while I was conducting at the Rome Opera. . . . He was working two hours a day with an operatic coach and 

intended to go back to opera, his only true love." 


Note that Adler writes "go back to opera," not "go into opera." This indicates that Adler too saw Lanza as an opera 

singer, albeit one who had strayed from his roots. (Lanza also saw himself as an opera singer -- as he made clear 

on the Christopher programme.) 


Of course we can't compare Lanza's operatic career with those of opera singers who dedicated their entire careers to 

performing the art. What we can legitimately compare, though, is Lanza's recordings of various arias and duets with 

those of any other singer. It's irrelevant whether Lanza sang the role in question on stage -- just as it's equally 

irrelevant whether the singer we're comparing him with performed it. That's why I get frustrated with people who drag 

out Lanza's limited stage career in an attempt to undermine the worth of his operatic recordings. 


Cheers
Derek

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Shawn 
July 30, 2011 

What I was going to say earlier was that, in Lanza's case, there was never any question in the 1940s that his vocal 

training and inclinations were entirely in one direction: an operatic career.

Exactly, and that's another good point of clarification. I think we can easily exclude, say, Michael Bolton and many 

other "singers of [some] opera" like Potts and Evancho on this basis alone (as well as Armando's definition) - their 

careers were never even pointed in the direction of a legitimate opera career. 

Have fun trying to convince their fans though. ;)

_______________________________________________________________________________________


leeann 
July 30, 2011 

I totally agree with you, actually, Shawn. I was striving for even-handedness, but it just didn't work. :-). Lee Ann

_______________________________________________________________________________________

 

Armando 

July 30, 2011

On the subject of who can be called an opera singer, Derek Mannering wrote on Rense’s Forum, “I have to take 

issue with Fred’s belief that Dmitri Hvorostovsky insulted Bocelli in such a crass and unprofessional manner. I find 

it impossible to believe an artist of Hvorostovsky’s stature would say something so demeaning and condescending 

about a singer who brings pleasure to countless millions throughout the world.”

Mannering was commenting on Hvorostovsky’s statement that,

"Calling Bocelli an opera singer is like calling chewing gum a fine cuisine!!"

Try believing this, then.

Among the current crop of wonderful bass baritones, none is more sought-after than Thomas Quasthoff. But that's not 

all that makes him unique - he is also a thalidomide victim with wickedly outspoken views on art and disability.

"Andrea Bocelli is not an opera singer," he proclaims, "and I cannot understand why Pavarotti should have called him 

'my successor'. What is that? Where are we living? Where is the quality? Why are big conductors making records with

 this guy? I am a teacher, and I know how hard it is to learn classical singing. He is not a classical artist."

Norman Lebrecht , October 18, 2000

On October 29, 1999, tenor Andrea Bocelli made his North American operatic debut in Jules Massenet's Werther at 

the Michigan Opera Theater.. According to published reports, many fans left disappointed. The reviews were not very 

encouraging. Bocelli's voice, they said, did not project over the orchestra.

La Scena Musicale, November 12, 1999

The critic’s duty is to report that Mr. Bocelli is not a very good singer. The tone is rasping, thin and, in general, poorly 

supported. Even the most modest upward movement thins it even more, signaling what appears to be the onset of 

strangulation.

Bernard Holland, The New York Times, September 8, 2006

Andrea Bocelli lacks almost everything needed for the role (Cavaradossi in Tosca). At best his performance is roughly 

handled. At worst it is simply embarrassing.

George Hall, BBC Music Magazine, July, 2003

Bocelli’s catalogue of failings is longer (then Veronica Villarroel) under pressure the singer stirs up a storm of ugly 

aspirates.

Christopher Cook Reviewing Il Trovatore in BBC Music Magazine, August, 2004

There are countless comments and reviews along these lines; however, it’s a known fact (perhaps not by Mr. 

Mannering and his staunch supporters) that Bocelli is considered something of a joke in operatic circles.

This long preamble is merely a repeated plea to Mr.Mannering to refrain from commenting on something that he 

knows nothing about.

His quoting Lanza’s daughter in order to back up his argument that Lanza cannot be called an opera singer is simply 

laughable. 

As Ellisa "sensibly" pointed out, he says, “If my father wanted to sing opera badly enough, he would have done so.”

What on earth would someone who when interviewed states, “My father was discovered while singing at parties” know?

Precious little, I’d say! 

Ever heard of Koussevitsky, Arthur Judson, William Judd, Enrico Rosati?

Mannering goes on to say that,

“Fans who continue to fantasize over Mario as Rodolfo, Otello, Canio, etc. conveniently overlook an even greater truth: 

if Lanza wanted to sing opera that badly (and the evidence clearly suggests otherwise), then why didn’t he do it? Why 

was there *always* some excuse for him to stay away from the classical stage, *always* someone else to blame for 

his indifference?”

I suggest that he might have found the answers to those questions had he bothered to carry out extensive research 

and in depth interviews with those whose knowledge on the subject is somewhat more extensive than either Ellisa 

Lanza or that renowned spinner of tall tales, Terry Robinson.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Derek McGovern 

July 31, 2011

Ciao Armando: Hvorostovsky (who's never been one to mince words) did indeed make that comment about Bocelli -- 

though the context wasn't quite as Fred remembered it. Hvorostovsky was actually responding to the notion that 

Bocelli was "the most famous opera singer in America": 


"[Hvorostovsky]'s no snob . . . and says he admires the Three Tenors. Nevertheless, he's distressed that the most 

famous opera singer in America is Andrea Bocelli. 'That's like saying the best cuisine in the world is chewing gum.'" 

From an interview in The Telegraph of 9 April 2002.)


Getting back to Lanza (whom, happily, Hvorostovsky does admire!), I'm very surprised that Derek Mannering is now 

citing Ellisa's opinion as part of his case against what he suggests are deluded fantasists. (Forget that Mario Lanza 

himself was a self-described opera singer!) Everything that Ellisa has said on the issue of Lanza and opera suggests 

to me that she is not overly familiar with the details of his pre-Hollywood career (his operatic training and performances, 

his extensive touring, the extraordinary reviews he almost consistently received), nor does she appear to realize the 

extent to which his unfulfilled operatic ambitions in the 1950s were tearing him apart. The man whom Richard Tucker

 and his wife spent hours with in January 1958 was, as Sara Tucker recalled, missing "something important, 

something very basic . . . from his life." And it wasn't money or a loving family either, as she pointed out. 

It doesn't take a genius to deduce that the fundamental thing that was missing from his life was his "only true love": 

opera.

As well as downplaying Lanza's desire for an operatic career, Ellisa has also asserted on a number of occasions that 

if her father had not achieved success in movies, he would not be remembered today. I find that an extraordinary 

statement. As I wrote a couple of years back, 1950s operatic stars such as Bjoerling, Di Stefano, Tebaldi, et al are 

still remembered -- indeed, revered. They're not forgotten names in a dusty history book. They may not be 

household names the way Lanza still is (to a certain extent), but they have legions of admirers.

In any event, I'm convinced that if Lanza had never gone to Hollywood -- but gone to, say, the Met and La Scala 

instead -- that the general public would have at least been aware of his talent. It was too great a voice not to catch 

the public's attention. As Claudia Cassidy once observed, Lanza was able to appeal to people who wouldn't 

ordinarily be interested in opera. Look at his pre-Hollywood success: 55,000 people one night and 76,000 the next 

at his joint concerts with Yeend at Chicago's Grant Park in 1947. Those are incredible figures, and I think we can 

safely assume that the people who roared their approval on those two nights did not quickly forget him. 


Cheers
Derek

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Armando 

July 31, 2011

Hi Derek: My whole point is that the fact that one is Mario Lanza’s son or daughter is completely meaningless unless 

the person in question is able to discuss the various aspects of their father’s life and career with a reasonable amount 

of knowledge.

Damon Lanza, for example, was a pleasant, decent fellow, but what did he know about his father? Apart from a few 

childhood memories (he was not yet seven when Lanza died) hardly anything concerning his career.

Now it seems to me that it’s all very well to bask in the glory of a famous parent’s name, but if one hasn’t made the 

effort to acquire some knowledge and knows next to nothing about it’s subject, then it’s a pretty hollow glory. 

Sons and daughters who are shining examples of their father’s legacy abound. From Caruso’s, McCormack’s and 

Schipa’s sons to Sinatra’s daughters, these are true ambassadors to be admired for the amount of work and research 

carried out in representing their famous parent.I’m afraid that a life spent repeating “He sang Guardian Angels to us at 

bedtime” is not enough! 

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Derek McGovern 

Sep 4, 2011 

This evening Steff very kindly sent me an article from the Ottawa Citizen of 12 November 1946. The article, which 

appeared shortly before Lanza sang in concert with the Ottawa Philharmonic Orchestra, makes very interesting 

reading. For one thing, it leaves no doubt that the man at that point in his life was firmly focused on a career in opera, 

and that he was serious about his art and vocal studies---as others, such as Herbert Grossman, who worked with 

him 18 months later, have noted. Here are a few extracts (and we'll be putting the whole article up on our main 

site in due course):


"[Lanza] has already turned down offers to appear in movies and on Broadway because he knows that his field is 

operatic singing, and he is not allowing anything to divert him from that career. . . .

"Lanza's program is built around his vocal studies. He limits his concert engagements to one a week [remember that 

the Bel Canto Trio tour didn't start until the following year], and he is quite firm on the point that he is not going to try 

for the Metropolitan Opera until he feels that he is thoroughly prepared. He doesn't want to give the critics the chance 

to say 'Lanza has a good voice. But...'.

"He realizes that his voice is not fully developed yet, and he is careful to sing only those arias which he can do without

 forcing. For that reason, the Pagliacciaria, Vesti la Giubba 'On With the Play', widely publicized as his 'lucky aria', is 

not his favorite, because it is so dramatic. His present favorite is the romantic Che Gelida Manina, from La Boheme. 

Both these arias will be on tonight's program.

"Professor Enrico Rosatti [sic], who taught the famous tenor Gigli, and such young stars as James Melton, is now 

Lanza's teacher. 'He's a real tyrant of the old Italian school---everything I do is wrong!' Lanza described him, 'but I've 

made great strides under him in just five months.'"

This is not the talk of a pop singer, for all the efforts of some to pigeonhole him in that genre. Interesting that it states 

that Lanza has already turned down movie offers!!

The concert, in any event, was rapturously received by the audience, conductor (Dr. Allard de Ridder) and the local 

agent of Columbia Concerts (see the section "Musical Memorabilia" in our Lanza scrapbook for his memorable letter), 

with Lanza even forced to repeat one of his encores ("Mattinata"). Oh to have heard him singing Che Gelida Manina 

(which he performed without transposition) in concert....

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Joe 

Sep 5, 2011

My take on this is a little different: Certainly, Mario was an opera singer and essentially initiated his career as a 

young man by professionally performing in a legitimate opera. However, after his initial professional debut, he went 

on in other venues to do what no other tenor, before or after, was able to accomplish: he brought opera to the world 

and created thousands of new fans! For this reason, one can argue Mario was the greatest opera star of them all!

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Derek McGovern 

Sep 5, 2011

Hi Joe: Your post reminded me of compere Dickie Henderson's introduction of Lanza on Sunday Night at the London 

Palladium as "a star of many opera stages" :) But while calling Lanza an "opera star" may induce apoplexy in a 

certain Lanza biographer, and might cause some opera-loving snobs to choke on their muesli, I agree that his 

achievement was an incredible one. He actually made people who would normally run a mile from an opera 

interested in---and, in many cases, passionate about---the art form. That's one heck of an accomplishment.

There's a magnificent article on this very subject by Florence King of the National Review (10/23/95). Here is 

my favourite part (and if anyone knows how I can contact Ms. King to thank her personally, I'd love to hear from them):

"Lanza hit me like whiskey hits . . . well, you know. I saw The Great Caruso over and over. My favorite part was the 

Rigoletto aria whose first line sounded like 'the doughnut is moppylay.' Wanting to know what it meant but having no 

one to ask, I got The Victor Book of Operas from the library and learned that it was 'La Donna e Mobile': woman is fickle.

"In this way I pieced out the name of every aria and ensemble piece in the movie, and learned the plots of all the operas. 

I spent my modest allowance on Lanza's records (among the last 78 rpms), but soon the tenor arias were not enough; 

I wanted to hear whole operas. . . .

"All the other girls had crushes on Lanza too, so everybody was into opera. We sang the easy-to-carry 'M'appari' from 

Martha in the gym locker room, and even tried the famous tour de force from Pagliacci, laughing and sobbing so 

maniacally that the teacher came running in to see what was wrong.

"Arturo Toscanini called Mario Lanza 'the greatest voice of the twentieth century,' but he was much more. Those 

presently engaged in a Diogenean search for heroes should stop and reflect that Lanza was the only person in the 

history of the world to succeed in elevating teenage musical tastes. [my bold] He did it, moreover, without creating 

snobs. Although my generation were products of a decade notorious for status seeking, having a crush on an opera 

singer pointed us toward the higher goal of self-improvement. Inspired by girlish passion, we earned our status the 

old-fashioned way: we "bettered" ourselves.

"Today I am a fair connoisseur of opera, knowing what to listen for in important spots, such as the end of 'Di Quella 

Pira,' and, after sufficient martinis, able to sing "Alerte!" from Faust -- quite a feat, since it's a trio. I've come a long 

way from 'We'll crown Bill the Kaiser with a bottle of Budweiser,' and I owe it all to Mario Lanza."

Brilliant!!!

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Michael McAdam 

Sep 5, 2011


The lady couldn't have echoed my sentiments (and a few others here) in a more candid, right-on-the-money manner. 

Brilliant indeed! She sounds like my Auntie Nell (in England) with her down-to-earth recollections. How many Lanza 

fans who may have later become nouveau opera 'snobs' would dare to admit that Lanza 'the movie singer' steered 

them onto their latter-life path of music appreciation?

Mike

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Gary from NS 

Sep 5, 2011

Hi Derek and all,

A wonderful post, and having read on somewhat, I have found another interesting author.(thanks Dr. D.) Florence King

strikes me as a real talent, with a sharp wit, and I shall try to kind some of her writings.
Again, Mario keeps giving us not just himself and his talent, but once again, opens a door to other interesting person.

Cheers
Gary

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Derek McGovern 

Sep 5, 2011

Hi Gary and Mike: Glad you enjoyed those extracts from Florence King. It came from her column in the National 

Review---"The Misanthrope's Corner"---and the Mario article is included in this collection of her essays. 

You can read some of her other essays online here. 

Thanks, by the way, to those members who suggested how I might get in contact with her. I'd love to get her 

permission to post her entire article on our main site.

Yes, Gary, it's amazing how a love of Lanza can open so many new doors. The fact that the man was involved in so 

many fields---recordings, films, concerts, opera, etc---has a lot to do with that, I feel. 

Cheers
Derek

_______________________________________________________________________________________


JOE 
Sep 15, 2011

Isn't one of the KEY attributes of an opera singer his/her ability to project their voice even to the back of the 

auditorium? Most of the "wannabees" talked about today as opera singers are only "microphone singers"e.g. 

Potts, Bocelli etc. I think Armando hits the nail on the head when he talks about some of these performers 

hardly being able to be heard in the third row. Some of these "performers" today look like they are trying to 

eat the microphone. We all know how Mario not only didn't need such help, he insisted on NOT using mikes. 

He simply didn't need or want them! To me, this is a key attribute differentiating an opera singer from a 

"performer". I am certain that some of Mario's friends and asociates like the powerfully voiced Richard Tucker 

would scoff at the notion that Lanza could not be termed an operatic singer. I wonder how any such associates 

would answer this question...are any of them still alive?.....Joe

_______________________________________________________________________________________


Derek McGovern
Sep 16, 2011

Hi Joe: Certainly, there are opera singers who are still alive who can answer this question. Take Marilyn Horne, for 

example: 

"That sound! Man, [Lanza] was the real thing. He would have been a spinto tenor. He was a spinto tenor."

Don't forget that there are additional quotes from many other opera singers who sang with Lanza or heard him in 

person here: 

http://www.mariolanzatenor.com/quotes-from-opera-singers.html

And there's also this article, which I wrote to refute all the "small voice"-type nonsense:

http://www.mariolanzatenor.com/myths-about-the-artist.html

Cheers
Derek

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Tony Partington 
Sep 17, 2011

Hello Folks: Fascinating reading this thread and the posts. I found Armando's comments about Mario's daughter 

Ellisa quite interesting and, as is Armando's most admirable style, he cut right to the chase. Indeed, he makes some 

very, very good points about truly carrying on the legacy of a magnificently talented and famous parent. It is a weighty 

responsibility and, as Armando points out, there is a great deal of difference between having a mere superficial 

knowledge of one's parent's career, academic and/or schooling history and finally, and perhaps most important 

(especially in the case of Mario Lanza), their professional aspirations and having a thorough knowledge of all these 

respective facets. When I had the pleasure of meeting Ellisa approximately twenty five years ago, she and her 

husband were quite interested in the fact that I had worked with Constantine Callinicos and we talked, for some 

time actually, about all the things that Constantine had shared with me about her father. Did she focus on his work 

musically, his work as a classical singer, his repertoire and the lesser known operatic works that Constantine had 

found, with the help of the Broude Brothers Music House, for Mario to work on during what Constantine referred to 

me as "the lost years" (that time after THE STUDENT PRINCE that Lanza withdrew and was forced into inactivity)? 

No, not specifically or in depth. Rather, I got the impression that talking with someone who had worked with 

Constantine Callinicos was somehow, for her, a connection with her father. I may be way off base on this but this 

was my distinct impression at the time. This takes nothing away from the charm that both Ellisa and Bobby 

projected or the pleasure I had in speaking with them.

From a completely different perspective now, I cannot help but think of the interview Mario did with Jinx Falkenburg. 

I don't think I have to tell anyone on this forum about this interview. For the record however I feel it critically important, 

most especially considering the subject of this thread, to point out that in that interview - done early on in Lanza's 

career - he paints a very clear picture of himself professionally and that picture is of an opera singer. He goes into 

detail discussing how he see himself debuting at the Metropolitan Opera in Puccini's LA BOHEME and then further 

brings his vision into focus by describing the very singers he envisages in the cast - not the least of these, by the 

way, is Licia Albanese as Mimi. My point in bringing up this interview - and also, I should add, the interview he did 

almost a decade later with Ed Sullivan in which he mentioned a pending debut at La Scala - my point is that all of 

this does not sound to me like a man whose ultimate professional musical aspirations lay somewhere other than 

the opera stage.

Mario Lanza's life and career was unconventional, I think we could probably all agree on that. To say though that his 

paramount desire professionally, especially as he matured as a singer and artist, was not in opera, the live opera 

stage and the still to be realized concept of filming complete operas, etc. is, I think, a great misjudgement of the 

man and a minimalization of the artist.

Ciao ~ Tony


_______________________________________________________________________________________

JOE 
Sep 17, 2011 

You make some great points, Tony! If you were a lawyer, I'd have you represent me any day!.....Joe

_______________________________________________________________________________________


Michael McAdam 
Sep 17 

Tony: one of your best posts ever. Great reading and right on the money.
When I have time over the weekend, I'd like to add something to this thread but in the meantime, many of you are 

bringing up some great points (isn't it a shame though that we have to offer proof to some of the Lanza "experts" out 

there who don't buy Mario as an Opera singer!!)
M.

[Derek McGovern]

I was just re-reading Lanza's 1943 letter to his friend Maria Margelli, and was struck by these two paragraphs (which I think are relevant to this thread):

Gee, how I miss those happy days back in New York. How well I remember those nights when I used to get on the 7th avenue bus and go right down to the Metropolitan Opera House and see all the operas I love.

There are many nights I spend out here just lying on my bed reliving the many beautiful and touching scenes from 'La Boheme'. I sing all the arias to myself and as I do this I am for the time being away from this boring army life and back to grand opera where I really belong. [my italics]

[Steff]

Is there any truth in this story?

[gary from NS]

Hi Derek, and all..

"back to grand opera where I really belong."  These words express Mario's truest feelings in my opinion.
From his earliest days when he began learning a number of arias,I believe it was always in his mind he would one day become a great opera singer.

Cheers
Gary

[Derek McGovern]

Hi Steff: I've never heard that intriguing story before, but it certainly rings true. We know that Spaeth (of the journal Theatre Arts) was very impressed with Mario's singing in The Great Caruso, and of course MGM's John Green had the highest opinion of his talent. It makes sense that these two men---realizing the true extent of Lanza's potential---would have wanted to work on an operatic film project with him.

Blast that Schary!! This is the same man who opposed The Great Caruso on the grounds of its supposed lack of commercial appeal (and who had previously predicted that The Toast of New Orleans would fail at the box office). But if anyone could have made this project succeed, it would have been Lanza. After all, he was then at the peak of his popularity, and The Great Caruso had whetted the public's appetite for opera.

While Wagner certainly wouldn't have been my first choice for a filmed opera (I would have gone with La Boheme)---and I don't like the idea of tampering with such a major work---artistically, at least, "Prize Song" would have been infinitely preferable to Because You're Mine!

Thanks for this find, Steff.

Cheers
Derek   

[Derek McGovern]

Hi Gary: While I basically agree with you, I'm convinced that the sadness that Richard Tucker and his wife, Sara, detected in Mario (and also Sarita Montiel more than two years earlier) was due to the increasing doubt in his mind that he actually would fulfill his dream. At almost 37, he knew that time was running out. Of course, he tried to convince reporters that he had all the time in the world by constantly fibbing about his age (33 in 1957, and still 33 in 1959!), but inside he must have been keenly aware that within a decade or so his best vocal years would be behind him.

The best scenario for him, I think, would have been to return to opera on an occasional basis, beginning with that planned Pagliacci in late 1960, and then further one-off appearances in 1961. If all went well---and, of course, his health would have been the big question---he could then have considered more regular operatic appearances. But at the same time, he would have needed to be performing regularly again in concert/recital to maintain his confidence. Stepping out onto the Rome Opera Stage in December 1960 to sing Canio without having performed live for two and a half years would have been far too terrifying a prospect!

Cheers
Derek

[Derek McGovern]

I recently came across a fascinating article by Dr. Sigmund Spaeth (1885-1965), the Philadelphian-born musicologist, writer and broadcaster. It starts out as a review of For The First Time---Spaeth doesn't think much of the film, but praises Lanza for doing "some of the best singing of his career" in it---and then turns into an anecdote about a tantalizing what-might-have-been. 

Spaeth reveals that after the success of The Great Caruso, MGM Musical Director John Green tried to persuade Studio Head Dore Schary to give the green light to an extraordinary project: "Prize Song," a musical comedy film adaptation of Wagner's Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg starring Mario Lanza. Schary's pathetic response? The music is too unfamiliar, and the public will never buy the story!        

It's heartbreaking to read such things, particularly since Schary's not only disregarded Green's plea that the studio utilize Lanza's "almost unlimited possibilities," but shoved the tenor into the lightweight Because You're Mine instead. 

Just imagine for a moment how differently things might have turned out had Lanza been given a worthy follow-up to The Great Caruso! At the very least, he would have felt that he wasn't shortchanging his talent in lowbrow vehicles, and the benefit to his self-esteem would have been incalculable.

Cheers,

Derek

P.S. If this story seems familiar, it's because back in 2011 Steff posted a later article about "Prize Song" on this same thread. That particular article was written several years after Lanza's death, and Steff had wondered whether it was indeed true. But what's significant about this current article is that Lanza was still alive when it was published. I'm sure it is accurate---and I wonder if Lanza himself ever read it (and wept)?