Do you colelct music of singers/composers/instrumentalists/conductors who are 'politically" evil?
The Handelmaniac
CD and sang a fabulous "Winterreise?" What if Charles Manson had a
fabulous basso voice/ What if Eva Braun was a great soprano?(Well,we do
have Tiana Lemnitz)...
Some of us (ME) can separate the "art" from the 'person." I do it with
Wagner,don't I?
I once got HELL from a parent for taking her son to a Karajan
Walkure......I still say..no matter WHO records....I can make the
separation..I am not supposed to like the person..not that it wouldn't
be nicer to like the personality also....
Opinions??CH
ljo
Love,
The Teacher of the Year
Donald Grove
make me upset if I find out that someone I admire was a big Nazi, or
participated in the genocide of Tutsis in Rwanda, or whatever. But
that assumes that I hear them first, then find out about their
beliefs.
If I know beforehand what their beliefs are like, there is an ironic
fascination that hearing their beautiful singing takes on.
Wagner wrote his twisted ideas down. But given the general
anti-semitism of dominant European culture, would anyone be surprised
to discover that Mozart or Rossini were anti-semites, even though they
never wrote articles about it? England, France, Italy, Spain, Russia,
Germany. They all had openly anti-semitic government policies in the
19th century. I don't suppose the policies were viewed with contempt
by the majority of their citizens.
To me it matters whether someone is simply anti-semitic (for
instance), or whether they are actively supporting anti-semitic
policies. But it's also true that the distance of time makes it hard
to decide what it should mean, for instance, that a citizen of Rome in
the 19th century might have admired the forced conversion of Jews, but
also wrote great operas. It's not a matter of "I can't say because I
wasn't there." But it is a matter of "I am concerned about dealing
with how those things continue to happen NOW, rather than the
particulars of how they happened in the past." The most significant
use of history is to learn from it, not just judge from it. In other
words, enjoy Wagner, but resist racism in our day.
The bigotry of the DAR is decried, and Marian Anderson was so poised
in her calm defiance, singing at the Lincoln Memorial. But we don't
consider how many of the most beloved opera stars, American or
otherwise, and to this day, may actually be quite racist. What did
Lawrence Tibbett think of putting on blackface to sing The Emperor
Jones? How did Rosa Ponselle feel about the abolition of Jim Crow
(more than 20 years after her retirement)? She chose to live in
Baltimore, a Jim Crow city (like our nation's capitol), but her
opinion wasn't asked. Did she make any effort to cast black singers
or give equal seating to black ticket holders at the Baltimore Opera,
which she promoted?
What about abortion rights? Where do today's conductors stand on
those issues? Opera News doesn't say. Was Verdi a homophobe? It's
likely. What should I think about that?
It becomes a tricky question. Should one investigate the political
beliefs of artists? We take a lot for granted to assume that anyone
who is artistically gifted must have admirable political beliefs. I
would like to think they do, but I know better. But I also won't deny
that my own internal conflicts about listening to Wagner (or Strauss,
for that matter) do not change my appreciation for beautiful music or
singing.
On 19 Jul 2006 00:09:01 -0700, "The Handelmaniac"
The Handelmaniac
What does that stupid remark mean??Do you see why people here think you
are a jerk..and why you and others are responsible for ruining an
otherwise nice forum..???or do you care???
The Handelmaniac
Donald..You write SO BEAUTIFULLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CH
Ortrud Jones
-Ortrud Jones
The Handelmaniac wrote:
>What if Osama Bin Laden came out with a
> CD and sang a fabulous "Winterreise?" What if Charles Manson had a
> fabulous basso voice/ What if Eva Braun was a great soprano?
.
ljo
"The Handelmaniac" <vissida...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1153328276.3...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I just got carried away feeling that poor mother's anguish.
The Handelmaniac
ljo wrote:
> ">
That mother (a hypocrtical bastard who ruined her son's life) who is
Jewish..once told me that Hitler at least removed the surplus
population..i could not beleive my EARS..Imagine..she was a sick
bastard...ch
>
REG
outside...:)
A couple of tangentially related thought on the racism issue
1 - You mention Ponselle. On one of the old OASI boxes of her collected
recordings, there was a side titled "The Man in the Moon Is a Coon."
Somehow, that hasn't yet made it to cd reissue.
2 - I love reading about Miss Anderson....one of the greatest voices of the
century, a phenomonal human being, and a very special interpreter, not
dramatic but moving in a different way. In any event, she sings one of the
great song recordings known to me "Old Kentucky Home". I am not sure it's
ever been put on cd, but the singing is of pure golden age standard. And of
course, she sings "Oh, Darkies...."
I think it's all very complicated. For me, it doesn't much, if at all,
matter what composers think in terms of bigotry; the work is always
independent of the composer. In terms of language, what should we do if
someone is singing "Kentucky Home", a beautiful song???? Not sing it? Change
the lyrics? ("Oh, darlin'" will fit just as well, but do we really have a
moral right to change someone's work because it doesn't meet our standards?)
Sing it as written?
I think that sometimes, the personality/allegiance of the performer is
something that effects me, but not very often. Sometimes it bothers me about
what 'doesn't effect me - for example, I love the Raucheisen boxed set of
German lieder from the war years, and yet when you listen to it (or to
Furtwangler perfomances), how can you not think of those who were being
persecuted or worse, while "German Art" was being glorified??
No answers, just some questions.
"Donald Grove" <donal...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:g7jsb2ds9b8gnju9h...@4ax.com...
Donald Grove
Easily comparable to all those various "gypsy" songs and gypsy music.
I don't know where the lyrics to Dvorak's Gypsy Songs come from, for
instance. Were they actually taken from songs of the Roma people and
then translated into Czech? Or are they a product of how the dominant
culture of that era chooses to romanticize the Roma (while they also
romantically ignore all the segregation of the Roma that has been a
standard policy in Europe for centuries).
Years ago I saw a movie "Latcho Drom" which figured Roma from India to
Egypt to Rumania to Spain, all performing their music and songs. It
was theatrical and romanticizing in it's own way, but it was
fascinating to see how many different ways the people live and
preserve their cultural identity. It was also quite chilling to hear
the old Roma sing about the way Ceaucescu slaughtered Roma in Rumania.
Something that really never got a lot of press in "the West".
And "gypsies" abound in opera, complete with all the stereotypes and
baggage. Playing "gypsies" is part of the bread and butter of opera
singers. Never mind the repeated attempts of the cultures that
produced the operas to exterminate them.
Racism is a fact of our lives. Our choice is in how we respond to it,
in ourselves or others.
dsg
alanwa...@aol.com
Donald Grove wrote:
> Good point about Old Kentucky Home.
>
> Easily comparable to all those various "gypsy" songs and gypsy music.
> I don't know where the lyrics to Dvorak's Gypsy Songs come from, for
> instance. Were they actually taken from songs of the Roma people and
> then translated into Czech? Or are they a product of how the dominant
> culture of that era chooses to romanticize the Roma (while they also
> romantically ignore all the segregation of the Roma that has been a
> standard policy in Europe for centuries).
Most of the "gypsy" settings by Dvorak use the poems of Adolf Heyduk,
a Czech of some fame. These were of course in German as that was the
ruling Czech language of the time.
Similar settings by Janacek tend to use traditional words and
traditional tunes.
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
david...@aol.com
Donald Grove wrote:
> Wagner wrote his twisted ideas down. But given the general
> anti-semitism of dominant European culture, would anyone be surprised
> to discover that Mozart or Rossini were anti-semites, even though they
> never wrote articles about it? England, France, Italy, Spain, Russia,
> Germany. They all had openly anti-semitic government policies in the
> 19th century. I don't suppose the policies were viewed with contempt
> by the majority of their citizens.
This is the usual slander by innuendo characteristic of political
correctness. You don't know that Mozart and Rossini were anti-semites,
but they can be smeared nonetheless.
> What about abortion rights? Where do today's conductors stand on
> those issues? Opera News doesn't say. Was Verdi a homophobe? It's
> likely. What should I think about that?
More politically correct slander by innuendo in the absence of all
facts.
-david gable
Donald Grove
never knew about the german.
It was talking about Rosa Ponselle that made me think of them, because
her rendition of "Songs my mother taught me" is very beautiful, with
hauntingly floated pianissimi.
On 20 Jul 2006 07:13:38 -0700, "alanwa...@aol.com"
david...@aol.com
Donald Grove espoused the reflexive politically correct viewpoint:
> Easily comparable to all those various "gypsy" songs and gypsy music.
> I don't know where the lyrics to Dvorak's Gypsy Songs come from, for
> instance. Were they actually taken from songs of the Roma people and
> then translated into Czech? Or are they a product of how the dominant
> culture of that era chooses to romanticize the Roma
So what if they are a product of "the dominant culture"? So what if
they are a romanticized portrait? That does not necessarily make them
evil a priori.
> (while they also
> romantically ignore all the segregation of the Roma that has been a
> standard policy in Europe for centuries).
This is also nonsense. Read what Harnoncourt writes about Johann
Strauss's Gypsy Baron.
> And "gypsies" abound in opera, complete with all the stereotypes and
> baggage. Playing "gypsies" is part of the bread and butter of opera
> singers. Never mind the repeated attempts of the cultures that
> produced the operas to exterminate them.
This is more twisted but politically correct nonsense with its quota of
half truth. There is nothing inherently evil about playing Carmen or
Azucena or in writing the stories in which they appear. Stereotype is
inescapable in the theatre and especially in opera in part because not
all theatre is produced by great genius's, and opera librettos are
greater simplifications, even than are found in the legitimate theatre.
Colorful portraits of gypsies are simplifications in the same sense
that stories of unrequited love or of love opposed by the parents or
revenge plots in operas are simplifications. Azucena is no more of a
destructive steretype than Ernani, the outlaw who is actually a
disenfranchized nobleman, etc. They are both "types." In any case, in
Trovatore the old gypsy woman is not only sympathetically portrayed.
The opposition of the freedom-loving gypsies to the autocratic count is
evident enough, and the musical representation of the imprisoned
gypsy's homesickness spoke as a metaphor to the emotions of a public
whose native land was occupied by an Austrian army. So much for
vicious anti-gypsy racism.
-david gable
Donald Grove
I do not feel that my point was as you understood it though. I raised
the question of Mozart and Rossini precisely because their music IS
excellent, and we really DON'T know anything about their politics or
prejudices, and that it isn't worth worrying about simply in order to
enjoy their music. As I said, there are many things we don't know
about lots of people, and I don't think it's worth investigating. To
me the lessons of history are self evident, and that we need to
address racism in our own time, rather than fret listening to music of
this or that composer.
On the other hand, I could take your characterization of "slander" as
meaning that no one could possibly be an anti-semite unless they write
pamphlets and articles about it, like Wagner. The history of Western
Europe in the 19th and 20th century seems to indicate quite the
opposite. I suppose it's possible that it was only certain leaders,
though, and everyone else was not Anti-Semitic. I don't think that's
what you meant, though.
Nor do I think that Wagner was necessarily instrumental in fomenting
anti-semitism. It seems to have thrived without him for many
centuries.
I will use this post to respond to your other post as well. In my
comments about gypsy music, my point is the same. I don't question
the music, or that it is enjoyable or beautiful. But I recognize
that, just as with Coon shows and blackface in the US, that a whole
entertainment industry has revolved around a theatrical version of
real people. While this does not necessarily degrade the music, it is
still reflective of a power relationship. We know nothing of how Roma
people portray us, and practically nothing about Roma people
generally, except as we have invented them in our theaters.
In the meantime, just as the society which produced coon shows also
produced lynchings and rape of those they portrayed, the societies
which produced theatrical gypsies have routinely marginalized them,
when not flat out massacring them.
I don't want or need censorship. I think the best opinions are shaped
by broad exposure to the world and it's ideas, even ideas I don't
like, or art I don't like. Narrow exposure leads to pettiness. But
that doesn't mean I close my mind to my experiences, or my awareness
of the brutality against black people by the same cultures that
produced coon shows and "bohemian entertainments".
As for "More politically correct slander by innuendo in the absence of
all facts" I refer you to my point above. I can't spend any energy
worrying about whether someone is a homophobe, unless it is in my time
and space.
As for political correctness, I would assume that the politically
correct stance would be to say "Truly caring people can always tell
whether someone is a racist or not just by listening to their music."
Instead, I say that I prefer to address racism as I see it around me
in the present, and continue to enjoy Wagner, and (some) "gypsy"
music. I never really cared for "My Old Kentucky Home".
I think I know you. Weren't you a grad student at U of Illinois in
1978?
On 20 Jul 2006 07:52:12 -0700, "david...@aol.com"
alanwa...@aol.com
Sorry to disappoint everyone, as I think I may, but I don't give a shit
whether the composer is semetic or anti-semetic, used Niggers or Spades
or Golligwogs even or was Stalin or Hitler Believes In/Dislikes
Abortion, is Homophonic, Gay, Lesbian, Tri-Sexual, Bi-Sexual or a Lady
Girl.
Down in the dark with the 15 watt light bulb my only concern is whether
or not I play the part reasonably well.
Who wrote it is of absolutely no interest to me, what the "message"
is/was is of no interest either...just whether I can play it reasonably
well or not as written in the part is the ONLY thing that concerns me.
And then you lot can discuss what it all means. However, that is not
my concern.
Not at all. I am concerned ONLY with getting through a particular
performance. Nothing else, whatsoever.
david...@aol.com
Donald Grove wrote:
> I do not feel that my point was as you understood it though. I raised
> the question of Mozart and Rossini precisely because their music IS
> excellent, and we really DON'T know anything about their politics or
> prejudices, and that it isn't worth worrying about simply in order to
> enjoy their music.
I agree, but that's not quite what you said. You suggested that they
probably were anti-Semites, presumably according to the theory that
"European culture" IS anti-Semitic. But it is and it isn't, and it's
absurd to use that sort of reasoning in the absence of any evidence,
although the politically correct routinely do so.
> just as the society which produced coon shows also
> produced lynchings and rape of those they portrayed, the societies
> which produced theatrical gypsies have routinely marginalized them,
> when not flat out massacring them.
Once again, a monolithic abstraction called "society" or "the culture"
is guilty, and, therefore, everything within the society is guilty.
This is standard politically correct "reasoning," especially when the
target is the West or the targets are Westerners. The society that
lynched African-Americans is also the society that produced the
abolitionist movement. By using similar reasoning, I could conclude
from this that African-Americans have never suffered because of racism.
Then there's the word, "marginalize," a great favorite among the
politically correct, especially in the academy. Did Europeans (every
single one of them, of course) "marginalize" the gypsies, or did the
gypsies stem from an old nomadic culture quite unlike Western European
culture, which made them ill suited to integration within a modernizing
urban culture? What, specifically, should the proper reaction have
been? Depending on the culture, those paranoids who always fear the
N---- in the wood pile may have blamed the gypsy, the African-American,
or the Jew. But what about those within the same culture who didn't?
You cannot paint Verdi with the tar brush of racism or "marginalizing"
simply because he was so interested in the character of the old gypsy
woman that he wrote an opera about her, an opera in which there is an
implicit political identification WITH the gypsies. If Verdi is guilty
in the case of Trovatore, then we must come to the same conclusion in
the case of Rigoletto, Verdi's unconscionable attack on the physically
deformed.
-david gable
and...@comcast.net
news:1153435433.9...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> I am concerned ONLY with getting through a particular performance.
Nothing > else, whatsoever.
>
> Kind regards,
> Alan M. Watkins
>
You should have mentioned it ( in passing.)
St. André ~ Juif
Donald Grove
generalizing in quite the way you seem to think, but it doesn't matter
that much.
My point is still that I prefer to apply my understanding of those
problems to current issues rather than the past. I am conjecturing
for the sake of putting it out there that Verdi or whoever is a
racist, and offering examples of why I could worry about it if I
cared. One can worry about lots of things if one wishes, because the
history shows it to be the case that people are very tolerant of all
kinds of outrages inflicted on others.
I hesitated at using the word "marginalized", because I know that it
is ambiguous, but I tossed it out because I wanted to finish my
response and get back to my work. It's the problem of these kinds of
postings. Intriguing discussions, often read and responded to on the
fly. But I don't think it was just that the Roma "didn't know how to
fit in." As you seem to say, there are two sides to most questions. I
see that there was also resistance to permitting Roma to fit in.
>The society that
>lynched African-Americans is also the society that produced the
>abolitionist movement. By using similar reasoning, I could conclude
>from this that African-Americans have never suffered because of racism.
I am not quite sure how to respond to that. You are right about the
Coon show culture also producing the abolitionists. But those
abolitionists also were only a political force in the period before
the Civil War. After the Civil War, whatever the abolitionists
believed before, Black people were left with lynching, Jim Crow, no
rights of citizenship, more rape, AND coon shows, one even featuring
Judy Garland. The cause of Abolition was mooted at Appomattox. The
end of Jim Crow was a hundred years later. It isn't as though history
were always ambiguous.
But just to keep with the direction of the debate, I DO think that
much of what was done in coon shows was more reflective of a white
cultural fantasy than it was of a black reality. Some would argue
that this cultural fantasy was constructed, in part, to support a
white version of blackness that wasn't about white economic and social
dominance. I can't guess whether you would agree or not.
But let's take it in another direction, for the sake of this being an
opera list. Let me be devil's advocate. I am amazed at how frequently
productions of Madame Butterfly strive for some new or more
"authentic" quality of "Japanese-ness". I think it would be quite
interesting to see a production of Madame Butterfly set in New York or
perhaps Tuscany(?), since those were the two places where the play,
then the opera originated. (Not sure where the librettists were from,
but wasn't Puccini a Tuscan?) Japan, for all it's reality, is not
necessarily a real place in Madame Butterfly. In Madame Butterfly,
"Japan" is a set of conventions that we accept, so that we can take in
the story, including some improvisations on "common knowledge" about
Japan, like Geishas, Bonzes and ritual suicide. Of course, this is
not the case for people who have any real experience of Japan when
they see the opera, but they may or may not view the opera's "Japan"
as "real" anyway. That doesn't make the opera bad, but I would argue
that the opera is more about Western ideas than anything Japanese.
(And you probably know where all this comes from... Applying this
analysis to Madame Butterfly is mine in this discussion, but the
analysis is not. Oh Professor Said, you are sorely missed.)
You are right that terms society and culture can lay "blame" too
broadly. But in the same way that "political correctness", as you
imply, can misdirect or dull the precision of a statement, so can
demanding that all the terms be agreed on before a statement can be
made.
On 20 Jul 2006 15:45:42 -0700, "david...@aol.com"
<david...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Donald Grove wrote:
>
>> I do not feel that my point was as you understood it though. I raised
>> the question of Mozart and Rossini precisely because their music IS
>> excellent, and we really DON'T know anything about their politics or
>> prejudices, and that it isn't worth worrying about simply in order to
>> enjoy their music.
>
>I agree, but that's not quite what you said. You suggested that they
>probably were anti-Semites, presumably according to the theory that
>"European culture" IS anti-Semitic. But it is and it isn't, and it's
>absurd to use that sort of reasoning in the absence of any evidence,
>although the politically correct routinely do so.
>
>> just as the society which produced coon shows also
>> produced lynchings and rape of those they portrayed, the societies
>> which produced theatrical gypsies have routinely marginalized them,
>> when not flat out massacring them.
>
>Once again, a monolithic abstraction called "society" or "the culture"
>is guilty, and, therefore, everything within the society is guilty.
>This is standard politically correct "reasoning," especially when the
>target is the West or the targets are Westerners.
>
david...@aol.com
Donald Grove wrote:
> I think we agree more than is showing. I still don't think I was
> generalizing in quite the way you seem to think
I'm not entirely sure: at least you aren't a troll!
> I am conjecturing
> for the sake of putting it out there that Verdi or whoever is a
> racist, and offering examples of why I could worry about it if I
> cared.
You could speculate that he was an alien come to take over the planet
on the same amount of evidence. As far as I can see, the only evidence
you have is that Verdi was a 19th-century European. That's enough
evidence for many on the politically correct academic left.
> I hesitated at using the word "marginalized", because I know that it
> is ambiguous, but I tossed it out because I wanted to finish my
> response and get back to my work. It's the problem of these kinds of
> postings. Intriguing discussions, often read and responded to on the
> fly. But I don't think it was just that the Roma "didn't know how to
> fit in." As you seem to say, there are two sides to most questions. I
> see that there was also resistance to permitting Roma to fit in.
Yes, and that's perfectly natural, just as the Roma did not want to fit
in, did not want to change their nomadic life, etc. You'll never prove
to me that the Roma were LESS clannish than the average urban
middle-class European.
> But just to keep with the direction of the debate, I DO think that
> much of what was done in coon shows was more reflective of a white
> cultural fantasy than it was of a black reality.
No doubt. That doesn't mean that the villain is some massive, all
damning, abstraction like "the culture" or "the society," by which you
mean everybody alive and every idea originating in the United States
over a period of a couple of centuries.
> Some would argue
> that this cultural fantasy [coon shows] was constructed, in part, to support a
> white version of blackness that wasn't about white economic and social
> dominance. I can't guess whether you would agree or not.
I agree that presenting coon shows is in some very real sense, wrong.
But the way the politically correct argument is worded, coon shows
were part of a conscious plan to make sure the money available within
the economy stayed in white hands. I believe this to be utter
nonsense.
> But let's take it in another direction, for the sake of this being
an
> opera list. Let me be devil's advocate. I am amazed at how frequently
> productions of Madame Butterfly strive for some new or more
> "authentic" quality of "Japanese-ness".
The Japanese-ness of Butterfly is as genuine as the
disenfranchised-outlaw-ness of Ernani or the heroism of Cavaradossi or
the Napoleonic period-ness of the opera Tosca. Political correctness
singles out the unique case that seems to prove its point completely
ignoring the general case that often explains it better.
I also reject the idea now common, and indeed "dominant," in the opera
world that the goal of opera production is to expose the wrongs of the
"dominant ruling class," to expose the hidden racism in the operas
staged, etc. etc. etc.
-david gable
The Handelmaniac
>
Look....I just bought all the Bach Harpsichord Concerti (98 cd''s..slow
tempi) on the Stronzo Label..as played by guess who...so you see.i can
separate the person from the art...CH
Mark
How is that? There are fewer than 12 of them counting the concerti for
2, 3 and 4 harpsichords. Oh, it was a joke. Nevermind.
The Handelmaniac
Yes..of course I know tha man wasn't THAT boring.....
Silverfin
david...@aol.com wrote:
> Donald Grove wrote:
... lots of good stufff.
Just thought I'd say that you are both making some very
interesting points, and I've been following your debate.
It's not a topic where I feel I know enough about the background
to contribute. However, on a purely personal level, I have to
say I cannot stop myself cringing when I hear songs written/sung
in some kind of faux negro patois, even though I can
intellectualise it as being a product of its time. And a while
back on TV I saw some snippets of the Black & White Minstrel
Show which horrified me - I can't imagine how anyone with half a
brain could have thought something like that was a good idea,
and so recently too.
Silverfin
Donald Grove
in a contemporary context (circa 1999, Fox TV). It is brilliant and
takes the term "irony" in directions I never thought possible. Worth
a look.
dsg
On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 10:43:24 GMT, Silverfin <silve...@gmail.com>
wrote:
david...@aol.com
"Sorry to disappoint everyone, as I think I may, but I don't give a
shit
whether the composer is semetic or anti-semetic, used [censored] or
[censored]
or Golligwogs even or was Stalin or Hitler Believes In/Dislikes
Abortion, is Homophonic, Gay, Lesbian, Tri-Sexual, Bi-Sexual or a Lady
Girl."
Watkins,
I thought there would be a chorus of outrage when you posted this;
there should have been. This is really and truly offensive. At least
it gave you the opportunity to disguise your racism as tolerance, or
some of it anyway. You must have loved typing out the N-word, not that
your, shall we distaste, extends to only a single ethnicity.
-david gable
david...@aol.com
For:
"not that your, shall we distaste, extends . . ."
read:
"not that your, shall we say distaste, extends. . ."
-david gable
Donald Grove
>disenfranchised-outlaw-ness of Ernani or the heroism of Cavaradossi or
>the Napoleonic period-ness of the opera Tosca. Political correctness
>singles out the unique case that seems to prove its point completely
>ignoring the general case that often explains it better.
This discussion is extremely engaging, if difficult. I appreciate
your willingness to take on what I say. And I am so frustrated
because I don't have the time in the next few days to give this
statement the response it deserves (and I mean that in the sense that
it is quite a good remark, not one that deserves censure).
I will say that it is part the whole idea of "realism" in opera or
theater was a new concept for the mid-nineteenth century, but one
which we in the twentieth take for granted. But both Tosca and Madame
Butterfly were composed in the popular heat of verismo, and for their
time, claimed to meet a certain standard of realism, so your answer is
very well chosen. But unlike the veristo stage movement, which
claimed, like most "realism" movements, that the theater SHOULD
portray things according to their standard, I do not believe that the
theater SHOULD do anything. My position is that regardless of whether
it should or shouldn't, it certain DOES. It sounds like you are
saying that what is portrayed is too interconnected to the place and
time of it's writing to to "isolate" elements of the portrayal for
special analysis. Is that what you mean? It's a fair idea, even if I
don't agree.
(I don't know how to make italics for this list, or how to give the
proper clarity to my sentences without using those caps. No intention
to SCREAM here.)
I do database programming for public health programs in NYC, and I
have been in the middle of a very lucrative, but very tedious project.
This list and this discussion have really helped me keep my head from
getting foggy with bytes and if/then functions. I will get back to
this when I am stuck in front of my computer again!
On 20 Jul 2006 20:22:30 -0700, "david...@aol.com"