Sills and Norma
Shahrdad
I recently moved, and during the packing and unpacking, I came across the
Sills/Verrettl Norma recording. Angel released it on cassette in the
eighties. I've been listening to it in the car, and it is truly awful.
Poor Sills tries hard, but the part of Norma is so far beyond her abilities.
Her voice is much too small and the color and weight of the voice are
absolutely wrong for the music. She sounds as if she should be singing
Clotilde instead. She is dramatic, but she ends up singing forte most of
the time, and in several instances she transposes parts of the recitatives
up an octave, I suppose to bring them into a stronger part of her voice.
What's worse, is that there is no sense of authority to her impersonation.
After all, Norma was revered and looked up to by her people. After hearing
this, I can understand why Sills and Sara Caldwell had to come up with a
gimmick to show why the Druids looked up to Norma. They made her an albino
with a shock of white hair. Imagine, an albino Norma!! I suppose this was
suppose to substitute for the lack of vocal and dramatic authority in the
part.
Listening to this, I can understand why Bing didn't feel he needed Sills'
services at the met. After all, he already had Sutherland who could sing
the same music with a much bigger and more important instrument and more
amazing technique. And he also had Caballe. Sills was far superior as an
actress and interpreter, but she was certainly hampered by her small, light
voice.
Verrett is an excellent Adalgisa, and she alone has the sense of authority
and dignity that Norma should have. She and Sills should have switched the
roles. Di Giuseppe is pretty bad as Pollione. He supposedly had an awesome
upper extension, but his voice is very light and small, and he has
absolutely no command of the fiorature. The conductor manages the piece as
if were written by Verdi.
I wonder if this album will ever come out on CD. It's not a good recording,
but it's certainly amusing!
S.
Skip
I think you have this confused, it was Beverly Sill who did not
need the Met, and she proved it.
Norma was not a great choice for her, but many singers make bad
choices.
But as far as the statment below, nothing could be further from
the truth.
PANPERSON
Neither Sills nor Sutherland were great Normas. Why either one of them
chose to sing the role is beyond me.
Enzo62
Panperson wrote:
>Neither Sills nor Sutherland were great Normas. Why either one of them
>chose to sing the role is beyond me.
You know, it's a little bit like trying to understand why some folks climb the
proverbial mountain: it's simply there. Both Sills and Sutherland specialized
in operas of the bel canto school. Since a success as Norma represents the
pinnacle of accomplishment in that repertoire, it is entirely understandable
that both divas would wish to undertake the role.
We can agree or disagree about the degree of "greatness" Sills or Sutherland
achieved as Norma. But their training, specialization and personal fulfillment
in performing bel canto operas pointed them in the direction of this role.
Nothing terribly puzzling about it.
Enzo Bordello
Ed Rosen
I remember driving up to Boston in June of 1970 for Sills' first Norma
ever.
It was an incredibly hot day, and the theater was very warm. Sills did
a wonderful job, I remember thinking at the time.
No- hers was not what some refer to as a Norma voice- but what is a
Norma voice.
If I had to choose between Sills and Sutherland in this role, I would
choose Sills. The acting was very moving, and one could understand the
words.
The opera was done complete, and Sills did a lot of ornamentation,
which I always liked. She and Beverly Wolf, the Adalgisa, made
something special of the Norma-Adalgisa scenes.
And Sills was shattering in the final act- singing up a storm, singing
with chest voice that probably wasn't good for her, and very exciting.
When a singer who gives approaches a role for the first time, he or she
must commit to the demands of the role, not hold back to save ones
voice. And Sills was absolutely committed. She held back nothing, and
this is one of the hallmarks of a great singer- a singer that "gives."
Best,
Ed
HLF FOOTZ
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Sills and Norma
>From: "Shahrdad" <Shah...@msn.com>
>Date: Sun, May 31, 1998 08:25 EDT
>Message-id: <6kri8k$7td$1...@news.stlnet.com>
>
>I recently moved, and during the packing and unpacking, I came across the
>Sills/Verrettl Norma recording. Angel released it on cassette in the
>eighties. I've been listening to it in the car, and it is truly awful.
You are quite right. It is awful. You neglect to mention that the atrocious
conducting of this performance was done by that bel canto wizard James Levine.
MASAGEkid2
>But their training, specialization and personal fulfillment<BR>
>in performing bel canto operas pointed them in the direction of this role.
>Nothing terribly puzzling about it.<BR>
Yes - but a good singer should know when it is NOT right for them - and Norma
is bel canto, yes - but not the typical bel canto music. It is much more suited
for a dramatic soprano with a flexable voice.
Shahrdad
Ed Rosen wrote in message <6ksolp$b...@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>...
>And Sills was absolutely committed. She held back nothing, and
>this is one of the hallmarks of a great singer- a singer that "gives."
Agreed. Her committment was never in doubt, and she was a giving singer.
But she was at her best when she was "giving" what she had, not what she
didn't have. She was incomparable as Baby Doe, as Manon, and as Cleopatra.
These roles suited her bright, small instrument to a T. However, when you
get to the Tudor Queens and to Norma, no amount of committment or "giving"
or acting can substitude for the true vocal entitlement to the part. There
simply was never any nobility in her voice or vocal style. No matter how
much she made herself look like Bette Davis or an Albino, she never sounded
like a Queen or a High Priestes.
And as to what is a Norma Voice, we can get an idea by reading about the
woman for whom the part was written, namely Pasta. By all accounts, hers
was a natural Mezzo voice which had somehow found its way to the high C and
beyond. The critics write about its power, its veiled middle ragister, its
gutteral lower tones, and its bright top. And they also speak of her way
with the music, how she could make a single sigh express every emotion.
Sounds an awful lot like Callas, doesn't it?
For all of Callas' or Sutherland's imperfections, what they alwasy did have
were voices which were naturally suited to this heavier bel canto repretoir.
They had the natural entitlement which Sills, for all her "giving," just
didn't.
S.
Enzo62
Shahrdad wrote:
>And as to what is a Norma Voice, we can get an idea by reading about the
>woman for whom the part was written, namely Pasta. By all accounts, hers
>was a natural Mezzo voice which had somehow found its way to the high C and
>beyond. The critics write about its power, its veiled middle ragister, its
>gutteral lower tones, and its bright top. And they also speak of her way
>with the music, how she could make a single sigh express every emotion.
The critics also wrote that Pasta's intonation became increasingly more
problematic as her career advanced. By the time she undertook Norma, her
inability to sing in tune was notorious. When Pasta sang Norma in London, one
reviewer noted: "It would not be exaggerated to say that not a single phrase
of the entire opera was sung on the correct pitch . . . it required her power
as an actress to save her from disaster."
This scenario doesn't seem terribly different than Sills or any other soprano
lacking "natural entitlement" who decides to tackle Norma. The role obviously
requires more than either endowment or technical ability. It requires a
majestic and noble actress with great interpretative powers.
Studying Pasta's abililties is certainly one way of determining what the
ingredients are for a successful Norma. But to suggest that any singer who
doesn't fit her mold is somehow disqualified from performing the role is
absurd. Even in Pasta's age, such diverse talents as Maria Malibran, Pauline
Viardot, Giuditta Pasta and Jenny Lind included Norma in their repertoire.
If you don't care for Sills' Norma, fine. But framing subjective arguments in
terms of historical accuracy simply won't cut much ice with me.
Enzo Bordello
Enzo62
I wrote:
>Even in Pasta's age, such diverse talents as Maria Malibran, Pauline
>Viardot, Giuditta Pasta and Jenny Lind included Norma in their repertoire.
Ooops! I meant Giulia Grisi, not Giuditta Pasta.
Enzo Bordello
Matthew B. Tepper
Just for that, you have to eat some greasy pasta.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/index.htm
My main music page --- http://www.deltanet.com/~ducky/berlioz.htm
And my science fiction club's home page --- http://www.lasfs.org/
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GMU/CS d+ s+:+ a44 C+ U !P !L !E W++ N++ !O K- w+(++)$ !O M- !V PS+(++)
PE- Y+ PGP- t(+) 5+++ X-- R- tv+ b+++ DI+++ !D G e+++ h(+) r>++ y+>++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Skip
I don't know which Beverly Sills people here are listening to. I
worked at City Opera from 1971 - 1975 and I can tell you yes, her
voice was bright, but Small, not at all. When you talk small
instrument, you would name singers such as Pons, Battle and that
ilk (I call them Neck-Whistlers) but Beverly's voice was quite
sizable. Her recordings and studio tricks do no represent the
true sound that Beverly Produced in the house. Her Norma "LIVE"
was quite good, not to mention her in Roberto Devereux, a role
Callas herself would not even touch. I really wonder about the
people who make these comments about Sills, did you ever really
here her live,(in the house) and if you think her voice as you say
small, what would you call the singers above mosquitoes?
Skip
Enzo62 wrote:
I agree with you here 100% Enzo.
And I also wonder if Pons was the first one to do Norma, would we
now say that the voices doing Norma today are too large for the
role?
Duh?
can...@webtv.net
I have the tape of the Boston "Norma" - the sound is dreadful and
difficult to enjoy - however, there is very enthusiastic applause from
the audience. I remember several good reports from friends who went up
to Boston to hear her. Perhaps another conductor might have helped the
studio effort,
Shahrdad
can...@webtv.net wrote in message
<6l20th$6s4$1...@newsd-143.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
Unfortunately by that point the audience didn't come to applaud Sills'
singing, but Sills' success, as Peter Davis said. I just wonder why she
never dared perform this role at her beloved NYC Opera. I think she could
have sung Gioconda or Isolde, and she would have been rapturously received
by the audience.
Enzo62
Shahrdad wrote regarding the Boston Norma with Sills:
>Unfortunately by that point the audience didn't come to applaud Sills'
>singing, but Sills' success, as Peter Davis said.
Were you present at any of those Boston performances? Did you conduct a formal
survey of the audiences who attended? So far, your dismissive attitude toward
Sills is the product of bias, not fact.
> I just wonder why she
>never dared perform this role at her beloved NYC Opera.
Dared? Would her decision to do so have violated some precept? Are we
discussing the performance of a Bellini heroine or burning a flag onstage?
There are several possible reasons why Sills never "dared" a Norma at City
Opera. To start with, she was not yet managing the company and all decisions
regarding repertoire and casting were still being made by Julius Rudel. Sills
very often approached Rudel with ideas for projects that interested her,
including the Donizetti queens, Lucrezia Borgia, I Puritani, etc. Meanwhile,
across the Lincoln Center plaza, Bing and Chapin were presenting Joan
Sutherland and Montserrat Caballe as Norma to Met audiences. Rudel may not
have wished to compete with Bing by offering a rival production of his own. Or
perhaps other bel canto works held more appeal for Sills. Who knows? But the
suggestion that Sills avoided a New York Norma out of cowardice or fear is not
consistent with either her artistic integrity or personality.
>I think she could
>have sung Gioconda or Isolde, and she would have been rapturously received
>by the audience.
Yes, those New York City Opera audiences were really a bunch of fools, weren't
they? Their ranks included Harold C. Schonberg, Andrew Porter, Winthrop
Sargeant and other idiots who admired the artistry of Sills. What a scenario:
driven by blind idolatry, the Sills fanatics of New York begged their goddess
to undertake Gioconda or Isolde. Fortunately, Sills had the good sense to
avoid such ridiculous casting suggestions. Give me a break.
Shahrdad, these attempts to discredit Sills and her admirers are a waste of
time. Just admit you don't like her and move on.
Enzo Bordello
Skip
Again Enzo you are 100% correct. Beverly Sills doesn't need us to
defend her, her career and talent does this alone.
Shahrdad
Enzo62 wrote in message <199806031305...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>Shahrdad, these attempts to discredit Sills and her admirers are a waste
of
>time. Just admit you don't like her and move on.
To the contrary, I was a devoted Sills fan, though I discovered her in
college in the early eighties, after she had retired. I remember scouring
all the record stores for her records and was very happy when I found those
wonderful Westminster sets. At that time, Sills struck me as a wonderful
vocalist and very dramatic at the same time. I used to listen to her all
the time, along with Callas, Sutherland, Caballe, among others.
Somehow, from the mid eighties, I stopped listening to her, though I bought
all the recordings when they came out on EMI cassettes. For some reason,
after all these years, Sills just doesn't strike me as being as good as I
had thought back then. I continue to be amazed at Callas' musical and
dramatic genius and the beautiful depth of her singing, and I never cease to
wonder at Sutherland's amazing vocalism. But Sills' stature as a singer has
continued to diminish in my mind and heart. And I doubt I'm alone in this.
Even watching the video of her as Queen Elizabeth doesn't peak my interest
like I thought it would when I bought it.
I certainly am not trying to discredit either Sills or her fans, but it
seems that as the magic of her wonderful personality and celebrity continues
to fade in memory, so does her stature as an artist. It just seems that
posterity has not been as kind to her as I would have thought fifteen years
ago.
I just hope that someone releases The Ballad of Baby Doe on CD, so we can
all again hear how magical Sills was in her prime when she did roles that
lay within the scope and weight of her instrument. She WAS Baby Doe, and I
doubt she will ever be equaled.
S.
Luis Angel Catoni
Shahrdad wrote:
> And as to what is a Norma Voice, we can get an idea by reading about the
> woman for whom the part was written, namely Pasta. By all accounts, hers
> was a natural Mezzo voice which had somehow found its way to the high C and
> beyond.
Pasta also sang the premiere of Sonnambula. It is us in modern time who make so
many classifications and specializations because the repertory has grown into so
much variety through history. At the times they were prime donne. Period. And at
the time they sang all the repertoire. The concept of soprano assolutto, though
limited to the repertoire sung at the time, comes to mind.
--
HAPPY LISTENING / FELIZ ESCUCHA / FELICE ASCOLTO / FELIZ ASCOLTAR!!!
Luis Angel Catoni
barb...@bellsouth.net
Ho da fare un dramma buffo e non trovo l'argomento.
Luis Angel Catoni
Enzo62 wrote:
> Shahrdad wrote regarding the Boston Norma with Sills:
>
> > I just wonder why she
> >never dared perform this role at her beloved NYC Opera.
>
> Dared? Would her decision to do so have violated some precept?...
>
> >I think she could
> >have sung Gioconda or Isolde, and she would have been rapturously received
> >by the audience.
>
> Yes, those New York City Opera audiences were really a bunch of fools, weren't
> they? .....
>
> Shahrdad, these attempts to discredit Sills and her admirers are a waste of
> time. Just admit you don't like her and move on.
This reminds me of the time Montserrat Caballe sang Anna Bolena in Barcelona, after
cancelling two prevuious productios of the work there (guys, believe it, her
cancellations were fully justified, one was for a c-section for her daughter, the
other for very major surgery). She had been singing there for twenty years and was
the idol of the public. But she was not in good form and well underehearsed. The
reception was no more than lukewarm.
Luis Angel Catoni
HLF FOOTZ wrote:
I came across the
> >Sills/Verrettl Norma recording. Angel released it on cassette in the
> >eighties. I've been listening to it in the car, and it is truly awful.
>
> You are quite right. It is awful. You neglect to mention that the atrocious
> conducting of this performance was done by that bel canto wizard James Levine.
The same guy who has consistently massacred Rossini at the Met.
Michael E. Miller/Robert E. Seletsky
Just a reminder about Sills' own attitude toward the role of Norma: she
said Norma "made her giggle". Perhaps it wasn't really quite the right
role for her.
R. Seletsky
PANPERSON
Ah ha! Callas
DAVID MY COFFEE MUG SAYS: HOLD ME, I AM A FERMATA IT MAKES MY DAY
PANPERSON
I must disagree. Reading the score you must realize that it was not written
for a light voice. It was written for a heavy flexible voice. The
orchestration alone requires something more than Sills or Pons.
PANPERSON
So let me think back. I heard Sills in New York City in Hoffman, Doe,
Trittico. Her voice could be heard from anywhere in the theatre (I sat kind
of in the back in the orchestra). If her voice was small (and that is
possible) it projected quite well and that would make up for the other.
I'll tell you what I really found distasteful. During a television
performance of The Saint of Bleeker Street she came out as part of the chorus.
When the audience saw her they went crazy. I don't think that it was
necessary at that point for her to be on stage and upstage the entire
production. I guess I don't have that kind of an ego. But I love her just
the same and think that the lighter stuff was exceptional. Her Willow song
from from Baby Doe is magnificent! Her Mozart and Handel weren't bad either.