Nicholas
Reid reflects in essay form on general matters and ideas related to
literature, history, popular culture and the arts, or just life in general. You are free to agree
or disagree with him.
OPERA SURTITLES
For
the last week or so, I have been racking my brains trying to remember a witty
line by W.S.Gilbert (of Gilbert-and-Sullivan). I remember the meaning of the line, but I cannot recall
the actual words. Therefore
word-searches on line have been to no avail. Tant pis! I will simply have to give you the meaning as I dimly
recall it. In a brisk and witty song (sung by a chorus, of course), Gilbert
opined that when a chorus are (is?) all singing together, nobody can understand
a word they are singing.
You
may think you know what the ensemble is singing, but that is only because the
general context will convey to you the sense of sadness, happiness,
thoughtfulness and so on.
Of
course it needn’t be this way when individual singers are singing, so long as
their diction is clear – but even then, if the music is complex enough, the
meaning of the words may be lost in trills and lengthened vowels following a
melodic line and so on.
I
have this in mind because about fourteen years ago my wife and I attended an
opera at London’s English National Opera. Unlike Covent Garden, the English
National Opera insists on singing only in English – so any non-English-language
opera will be sung in an English-language translation. The opera we attended
was Cosi Fan Tutte. We knew the jolly
old warhorse pretty well already, and on the whole had no problem in followed
its general plot. Two blokes go into disguise to test whether their girlfriends
Dora and Lil (oh very well – Dorabella and Fiordiligi to you) will cheat on
them when they’re away. Easy-peasy plot and no probs seeing where it was going
in a general sense. BUT it was very hard to follow what the singers were
singing at any given moment because they were singing in English and there were
no surtitles. As we left, we concluded that we would have been happier had it
been sung in the original Italian, with English surtitles provided. Moment by
moment, we would have understood more.
To
the horror of those who thought that being sung in English would make operas
more accessible, our conclusion turned out to be the conclusion of a large part
of the English National Opera’s audience. Increasingly, audience members asked
why the ENO didn’t have surtitles like every other modern opera house.
Reluctantly, in 2015, the ENO gave in and now the English-language singing is
accompanied by English-language surtitles.
There
has been some rearguard grumbling about this. Rather sniffily, in an interview
with the Guardian in 2015, the ENO’s
director said that they would continue to have surtitles but that his aim was
to render them redundant by the clarity of the singers’ enunciation. (I would
have thought he’d already lost the battle on that one.) He foolishly went on to
opine that opera was more about music than about words, and that it was essentially
music rather than drama. My friends Hugo von Hoffmanstahl and Lorenzo da Ponte
vigorously disagreed with this idea, of course, arguing that if the drama is
unimportant then why have libretti at all? Why not just have the singers making
wordless musical noises if the music conveys all that opera offers? (Wagner
wanted to chip in at this point to note that opera should be “total” theatre –
music, drama and spectacle working together – but I cut him off before he
started one of his rants.) More obviously, if the ENO’s director really thinks the words are of secondary
importance, then why make such a fuss about singing them in English anyway.
After all, the words don’t matter, do they?
I
know that ideally, I would not be reading surtitles but listening and looking
all the while at what is going on on stage. But comprehension demands surtitles
I
have another reason for preferring surtitles over translations at the opera.
Kindly
remember that when the (French, German, Italian, Russian etc.) librettist wrote,
in his own language, the words to go with the music – or in rarer cases when
the composer wrote the music to go with the libretto – it was
those words with those sounds that were married to that music.
Mozart wrote for Italian or German words and their sounds. Bizet wrote for
French words and their sounds. Tchaikovsky wrote for Russian words and their
sounds. To present an opera in a translation of those words is to present only
a selection of the sounds that were intended to make up the opera. Indeed to
wed a different language to the music of the opera is to present a grave
distortion of what the opera is.
I
regard opera translations in the same way that I regard dubbed films. They are
not as good as subtitled films, which let us get the actors’ full performances
and not merely part of them. (And have you noticed, by the way, how the habit
of dubbng foreign-language films has basically died out?).
To
end where I began – in any ensemble piece in opera (try the quartet in Rigoletto), or in any chorus, many of
the words will be lost to listeners anyway. I know this, and I have not touched
on the fact that, sans surtitles, much of the text of an English-language opera
with be lost on an English-speaking audience. But please do not expect me to
hear some buffoon sing “Woman is fickle” when Verdi intends him to sing “La
donna e mobile”.
No comments:
Post a Comment