Sam Ramey and Assur

Assur remembers!

Most who heard him will agree that Sam Ramey made Assur “his own”. We asked him to share some memories of his journey with Assur. Pay special attention to the ending if you expect to take on the role and follow in his foot-steps ( check the heels on your boots) as you go on stage.

Many thanks to Sam for taking the time to do this! Viva Assur ( even though he’s a bad guy)

Q. Your historic performances of “Semiramide” at the Met were not your first outing with this role. Many remember your Carnegie Hall performance with Horne and Anderson. Apparently those were based on the not-yet-complete edition which had its debut at the Met. Were there major changes in your role as a result of this?

A. My first performances of “Semiramide” was the very famous (in Europe anyway) Pier Luigi Pizzi production which was first done at the Aix-en-Provence Festival in 1980 and remounted by the Paris Opera at the Theatre des Champs-Elysee a year later.  My role in this production was not complete—mainly because there were no orchestra parts for the missing sections of music. 

I remember when I was offered this role at the time, I knew Marilyn (Horne) had already agreed to do it so I asked her about the role of Assur.  I remember her saying, “Oh Sam!  That role is all black notes!”  I soon discovered that to be the case.  When we did the performance at Carnegie Hall the missing orchestra parts were found (or re-constructed) so my role was complete. The only difference in my role was the repeat of the cabaletta–the orchestra parts for that were there for Carnegie and later for the Met production.  My role was at last complete.

Q. In an interview with “The Opera Quarterly” in 1993 you responded to a question about staged vs. concert versions by saying “In general, I would say that one should try to keep the staging of Rossini’s operas at a visual minimum , so the people can put all of their attention on the highly ornamented music. The audience should be focused mostly on the singing.” This same thought ( or versions of it) have been expressed by other great singers. Do you still feel it is true this many years later?

A. I know that productions of an opera like “Semiramide” can look a bit like a concert performance in costume and make-up.  The reason for this (in my opinion) is that these operas are so difficult to sing that there is little the  singer can do on stage that won’t have an adverse effect on his,or her, vocal performance.  I think I would still feel that way today.

Q. “Semirmaide” is not really Assur’s story ( one could even say it is really Arsaace’s) but the opera certainly depends on a strong Assur. Is there something specific in Rossini’s music that demonstrates to you Assur’s importance ( to the story).

A. I think just the fact that Assur has major scenes with Semiramide and with Arsace and a very important “mad scene” towards the end of the opera demostrates the importance of Assur’s character.

Q. How did who you sang with affect your performances. Were you a different Assur for Anderson than for Cuberli?

A. I sang performances with several great Semiramides–Caballe, Anderson, Cuberli, and Gruberova. I don’t think having a different soprano had any effect on my performance. I was always concentrating on all those black notes.

Q Were you to be taking up the role of Assur today would you have a different spin on it?

A. I don’t think I would take on the role today but if I did I’m sure I would see the role in the same way.

Q. Who has the better mad scene? Assur or Attila?

A. Assur or Attila?  That is a difficult question.  They are both great mad scenes.  Maybe I would lean toward Assur’s simply because it comes toward the end of the opera–makes a greater impact on the audience.

Q. Does Assur have any redeeming qualities?

A. I don’t know if Assur has any redeeming qualities.  In the cavatina of the mad scene he seems to be asking for forgiveness but then changes his mind.

Q. Finally, do you have some specific memories of the preparation and the debut of this production at the Met in 1990?

A. I remember it being great fun putting this production together.  I had worked a lot with all the other singers and with Maestros Conlon and Copley, so we were like a musical family.  I do have one memory from a performance.  At the beginning of the mad scene I made my entrance walking down a staircase.  I was wearing boot with very high heels.  About half way down the stairs one of the heels caught on a step and came off the boot.  So I was forced to hobble around the stage without the heel for the rest of the scene.  Not fun–what with all those black notes!!

RossiniAmerica would like to thank Sam Ramey for sharing these memories. Sam Ramey is a member of the American Rossini Society and a member of the honorary board of the Friends of the Rossini Opera Festival.

Teatro Nuovo brings rare Rossini to Purchase, NY

The new bel canto festival at Purchase College, New York, will run from July 28th through August 5. Tickets are already on sale. Yes, you can go to Wildbad, Purchase, AND Pesaro! Read more here.

https://www.teatronuovo.org

Memories from the 1990 Met Semiramide cast: Chris Merritt

Q. Your appearance as Idreno at the Met was not the first time you had sung this role, from what we understand. Apparently you did it in Hamburg in 1985. Was that a concert version, or was it staged?

-Yes, the first time I sang Idreno was indeed at the Staatsoper Hamburg. It was also my debut at the Staatsoper. I was second-cast to Francisco Araiza. The other cast members were Monserrat Caballe, Marilyn Horne and Samuel Ramey in concert performances conducted by Henry Lewis. The next time I sang Idreno was, again, in concert performances of SEMIRAMIDE at the Royal Opera Covent Garden in London…the year was 1986 . My cast mates were June Anderson (I believe it was her Covent Garden debut), Marilyn Horne and Samuel Ramey. Again, conductor was Henry Lewis.

Q. Were there any major musical changes to the role between the time you did it in Hamburg and when you performed it at the Met?

-Actually, not really.  Each time I have performed in SEMIRAMIDE, it has been with the group of Rossini-family…this being the musicians, conductors, singers, directors, accademics…who always gave-and-give the utmost care and respect to the magnificent Rossini compisitions, insisting on performing the complete compositions.

Q. Idreno’s part is too often cut. The reason given is that what is left out is not central to the drama. Of course it’s understandable that there are time constraints on a theater, but perhaps it is sometimes the decision of a director rather than a conductor? Any thoughts on this.

Well, as it turns out, there was a kind of situation at the Met. After we had finished one of the full run-throughs, there was a meeting called for the cast with conductor and director, in Liszt Hall (I guess it is still called that?). Although it was thought to be a *notes* meeting, it turned out to be a concerned discussion by the conductor, James Conlon. His concern was that it would be necessary to make some cuts.  However, I don’t really remember that the subject of time-restraint was mentioned. At any rate, he ended his comments by asking if any of us would be willing to have their music altered. I had the destinct feeling that all eyes of the *powers-that-be* were glaring at me, waiting for me to offer one of my arias. When the silence became almost too much, just like one of the conquering heros she has so often portrayed in her legendary career, our dear Marilyn spoke up, saying that she would be very loathe to advise that ANYONE’S music be sacrificed…not to mention, Rossini’s!!! Nothing else was said. We performed the opera in complete form.

Q. Philip Gossett in his NYTimes article of 1990 proclaimed that the cast was made up of “four of the world’s greatest Rossini singers: Lella Cuberli Marilyn Horne, Chris Merritt and Samuel Ramey.” Did that praise from one of of the greatest Rossini experts of our generation cause extra pressure for your Met debut?

I’m sure it would have if I had known Philip had said that!!! However, I think I had just about the maximum pressure level possible. As you mentioned, it was my debut at the Met…a very long and hard fought-for occasion. The Met NEVER wanted me to perform there, at all. It was Marilyn Horne who demanded that I be included in the cast. And that brought about its own pressure. The original project was actually thought of for BIANCA E FALLIERO which we had performed in the now legendary production at the Rossini Opera Festival, a breathtakingly beautiful production by Pier Luigi Pizzi. Marilyn wanted to have the Met bring it to New York. Indeed, general manager Bruce Crawford came to one of our Pesaro performances in 1986. Marilyn was very excited about this project and, during one of our performances, she told me about Crawford coming and that it looked like that production would be going to the Met. Adding to this, she announced to me that I would be included!! I was thrilled and honored.

However, after much time and negotiation, BIANCA E FALLIERO turned into SEMIRAMIDE  To be completely honest, I have to admit that I was somewhat less enthusiastic about performing the role of Idreno as my Met debut.  I have never really cared for performing the role and I like the role of Contereno in BIANCA E FALLIERO much better. But, I had promised Marilyn to do this project with her and I was determined to honor that promise.

There are other twists and turns in the tale of this project…to many to be able to recount, here. Just let me say that, by the time of the premier of SEMIRAMIDE and considering all the chapters in this story…I felt pleanty of pressure.
   

Q. In Gossett’s book “Divas and Scholars” he discusses the fact that Idreno’s part was NOT cut for the Met performances. It made for a long opera, but people there didn’t seem to mind. Do you feel that opera goers were more accustomed to sitting still in those days than they are today?

I’m not sure. I mean…there are very long Wagner operas, Berlioz operas, Verdi operas, all of which are still being performed now as they always have been. 

Q. You had sung with Marilyn Horne at Carnegie Hall in Tancredi some years before. Had you sung with Sam Ramey before?

Actually, those performances of TANCREDI were in 1983 and marked my Carnegie Hall debut.  As it turns out, 1983 also marked my Paris Opera debut at the gorgeous Palais Garnier, performing the role of Amenofis in the french version of Rossini’s opera MOISE, conducted by George Pretre and directed by Luca Ronconi.  My colleagues were Shirley Verrett, Cecilia Gasdia, Jean-Philipe Lafont and…..SAMUEL RAMEY as Moise.  It was the first time we had sung together.

Q. Do you have some specific memories of those historic performances?

Many…but my most vivid memories are of how sumptuous and beautiful the production is. The sets, the costumes…so gorgeous…directed by our beloved John Copley, sets by John Conklin and costumes designed by Michael Stennet. Just stunning!
___________
Rossini America would like to thank Chris Merritt for sharing these memories with us. He is a member of the American Rossini Society as well as the honorary board of the Friends of the Rossini Opera Festival.

Cuts – “A reprehensible decision”

It always amazes lovers of Rossini’s operas that his works are often deemed too long. There are operas by Mozart and Wagner that are equally long. Often people are under the mistaken impression that due to the structure of Rossini’s operas it really doesn’t matter if they are “cut” here and there.

One of the greatest Rossini advocates of our time ( who was also a scholar and teacher) had this to say about “Semiramide”:

“The fascinating aspects of Rossini’s vocal music are brought together in
‘Semiramide’ better than in almost any other opera…..To cut the da capos, suppress Idreno’s arias and shorten the extended instrumental introductions, choral pieces ( including the one with the important solo part for Oroe) and splendid orchestrated recitatives– which happens too many times to count- is a reprehensible decision. Idreno’s arias have a marginal function in respect to the main action, but whoever believes that they were composed to please some singer has not understood the fundamental need to introduce moments of repose in the musical discourse to break the unsustainable tension created by the terrible confrontations between Semiramide, Arsace and Assur.”

Thus wrote Alberto Zedda in his book “Divagazioni Rossiniane”, recently translated into English by Charles Jernigan and appears as vol 8b of the Deutsche Rossini Gesellschaft’s publications.

Should you be fortunate enough to attend performances of “Semiramide”
at the Met this spring or to see the transmission in a movie theater, keep in mind that cuts might be inevitable because of the realities of the “opera business” today. But fear not, the complete “Semiramide” will soon appear in a recording made for Opera Rara.

Semiramide: an editorial discovery!

In case anyone thought that the lives of score editors were dull, this great story about the discovery of the “stage band score” for Semiramide should put that thought to rest. Many thanks to Patricia Brauner for sharing this memory and for providing the link to the beautiful photograph where it all took place.

Photo:Valeria Sant’Angeli.

Semiramide: an editorial discovery! Read More

Book Review : The Singing Turk

We are fortunate that a member of the American Rossini Society who recently reviewed this book by Larry Wolff agreed to share his review with us. It is a lengthy review but well worth reading. You may also read our interview with Professor Wolff in the interview section of the pull-down menu Forum Rossiniano.

The Singing Turk
by Larry Wolff
Stanford University Press, 2016
490 pages

Review by Charles Jernigan

Relations between European society (and the Western world in general) and the Ottoman East (and the Islamic world in general) has been a matter of great interest and often conflict since the era of the crusades, and of course it is a matter which has assumed great importance in our own time. Professor Wolff’s fascinating study takes on one corner of this monumental subject as it was reflected on the operatic stage from Lully’s incidental music for Molière’s comèdie-ballet Le bourgeois gentilhomme in 1670 to Stravinsky’s Rake’s Progress in 1951, but with particular emphasis on baroque opera and on Rossini’s incarnations of “the singing Turk” in La pietra del paragone, L’italiana in Algeri, Il turco in Italia, Maometto II and Le Siège de Corinthe. The first 226 pages of the book concern ‘turkishness’ in baroque opera and Mozart, concentrating on Handel’s Tamerlano and Mozart’s Die Entführung aus dem Serail, but with much interesting information and analysis of many other works including the “Turc genereux” segment of Rameau’s Les Indes Galantes, Vivaldi’s Bajazet, Mozart’s unfinished Zaide and works by Gluck, Haydn and others. About 130 pages are directly concerned with Rossini operas and the rest rapidly covers post-Rossini ‘Turkish’ operas by Bellini, Donizetti, Verdi et. al., and there is a short concluding summary.

At times the book’s definition of Turkishness in opera seems to suggest the broad Islamic world, as with operas which deal with the crusades like I lombardi or with Islamic Iberia like Donizetti’s Zoraide di Granata, but for the most part “Turkishness” is coincident with the Ottoman empire from the time of Suleiman the Magnificent’s siege of Vienna (1529) through the early nineteenth century. During this period the complex relations of European countries with the Ottoman world changed constantly and the European view of “Turks” varied from fascination to horror; there were alliances and wars, many of them dependent on inter-European conflicts or accords, for instance France’s alliance with the Ottomans because both opposed the Hapsburg empire.

The book categorizes the diverse ways the Ottoman Turk is treated in opera: as 1) a tragic figure (e.g. Bajazet in Tamerlano); 2) a comic figure (e.g. Mustaphà in L’italiana in Algeri); 3) a generous or forgiving one (e.g. Pasha Selim in Entführung); 4) a raging conqueror (e.g. Winter’s Maometto). As interest in the Ottoman world waned on the European stage, Rossini gave us additional types: the charming Turkish traveler on the ‘grand tour’ (Selim) and the complex and not unsympathetic warrior in love (Maometto II). There are also certain popular plot tropes which are repeated over and over again, particularly the beautiful European female held captive in an Ottoman harem who is rescued by her lover as we have in Entführing and, with a gender reversal, in L’italiana. This frequently repeated plot reflects the real experience of European captives at a time when piracy in the Mediterranean was a normal fact of life, with captives sold into slavery, ransomed or, in the rare case of the female captive, added to the harem.

We also frequently find Europeans disguising themselves or dressed as Turks, a trope which begins with Moliére/Lully, continues with several commedia dell’arte vaudevilles (plays interspersed with songs based on popular melodies) written for fairs in France, and which finds its most famous incarnations in Mozart’s Così fan tutte and several Rossini operas (La pietra del paragone, L’italiana in Algeri and Il turco in Italia). These and other popular plot devices are part and parcel of the “Turkish” operas from the very beginning of a Turkish presence on the European stage to Rossini and beyond.

Dr. Wolff is the Silver Professor of History and Director of the Center for European and Mediterranean Studies at New York University, and as he explains in the book’s Introduction, “This is not a musicological study but rather a study in cultural and intellectual history, exploring how ideas about the Ottoman empire and representations of Turkishness took operatic form” (5). Wolff attempts to place the operas he examines in the context of historical events of the time and place of the opera’s composition. Thus Mozart’s Entführung is seen in relation to the “enlightened absolutism” of Hapsburg Emperor Joseph II as well as within the zeitgeist of a Vienna getting ready to celebrate the hundredth anniversary of the decisive defeat of the Ottoman forces of Kara Mustafa by a coalition of Christian European countries in the last siege of Vienna in 1682. By the time of Mozart’s opera, the Viennese and Europe in general no longer worried about an Islamic invasion, and so the time was ripe for the “generous Turk” to reappear under the guise of Pasha Selim, a figure who, as Wolff rightly argues, is really the Emperor Joseph (whose patronage Mozart longed for) presented as a wise and forgiving Turkish despot. Wolff sees Osmin in some ways as a stand-in for the Archbishop of Salzburg whom Mozart wished to escape. In the case of this opera, Wolff’s analysis is multi-layered; he successfully theorizes that it fits the general currents of history at the time and references specific historical figures sub rosa as well as Mozart’s personal trials with the Archbishop.

In the case of Rossini’s “Turkish” operas, the ‘zeitgeist’ argument tries to peg the earlier works (La Pietra, Italiana, Turco) to Napoleonic Europe although Napoleon was suffering his decisive defeat in Russia around the time of the premiere of La pietra del paragone at La Scala. It is clearly more difficult to find close historical parallels in Napoleonic or post-Napoleon Italy for these comedies than it was for Entführung, but Wolff tries nonetheless, in the process rehearsing well known aspects of Rossini’s career such as his political ambivalence as both the composer of “Pensa alla patria” and of the cantata “La santa alleanza” for the conservative Metternich. I believe that Dr. Wolff is much more successful in showing how these operas’ plots and characters fit into long-standing traditions of turquerie. When Count Asdrubale appears as the apparently ‘Turkish’ creditor to test the true friendship of his guests (and especially Clarice), it is part of a long tradition which goes back to the very beginning of “Turkishness” on the musical stage. The buffo Mustafà is likewise part of a long tradition, and the “papatacci” scene, like the scene in Entführung when Osmin gets drunk with Pedrillo and sings of his lust, goes back to seventeenth century vaudevilles where Arlequin tempts Islamic overseers with forbidden wine. The ball in Turkish disguise which leads to the finale of Il turco in Italia is cut from the same cloth. Wolff is also quick to point out the innovations in the plots of both Italiana and Turco (which Romani based on a libretto by Caterino Mazzolà). In the former a woman rescues her captive amante, while Selim is no comic buffoon like Mustafà. Thus did Rossini and his librettists vary and enrich the time-worn plot devices. (I might add that the operatic stage was one place where women could be held in equal, or even more, esteem than men, and that both Isabella and Fiorilla are strong women.)

In Chapters 10 and 11 Dr. Wolff takes on the case of Maometto II and its Parisian reincarnation as Le Siège de Corinthe, both works with a great deal of historical resonance. Mehmed the Conqueror (Maometto II), who ruled the Ottoman empire from 1451 to1481, was of course a historical figure, and his conquest of Venetian Negroponte (today Chalkida in Greece) is historical fact. Even the romance and martyrdom of Anna Erisso has some historical claims to veracity, as it is “…loosely based on the most reputable French classical account of Mehmed’s reign by George Guillet de Saint-George…” (315). Wolff tries to place Maometto II in Napoleonic terms by suggesting that the ambivalence of his character—he is a conqueror but not a hypocrite (like Voltaire and Winter’s Maometto, who is after all the Prophet and not Mehmed the Conqueror). He wreaks destruction, but he is human; he loves; he is both warlike and tender in Rossini’s music. Wolff even briefly compares him to Rossini himself, a “conqueror” and a man in love (with Isabella Colbran, the original Anna). I am not so sure that Rossini had Napoleon in mind when he wrote Maometto II, but the opera does fit Wolff’s argument that the zeitgeist allowed the sympathetic portrayal of a conquering Turk. Wolff also examines the Venice version of the opera with its illogical lieto fine and changes to the character of Maometto.

Le Siège de Corinthe (1826) is a different story, fitting both zeitgeist arguments and specific references to events contemporary to the opera. Certainly the Parisian public was roused to the defense of “European” Greece and the cry to free it from Ottoman rule. Lord Byron had died as he prepared to take part in the battle for Missolonghi, which the Ottomans won after a long siege a few months before the opera’s premiere. The wildly popular Byron had stoked philhellenism in several poems including “Maid of Athens” and part of Don Juan, and Wolff points out that the title of Rossini’s opera almost surely came from “The Siege of Corinth,” a minor Byron poem of 1816. Wolff argues that Le Siège’s Mahomet becomes a philhellene too, and of course Rossini and his librettists add the character of Hiéros, a prophet who looks to future Greek freedom while recalling the glorious ancient past at Thermopylae and Marathon from the perspective of a siege which took place in the 1400’s. This time, Rossini was very intentionally tapping into the sentiment of his time and probably with a view to the specific event of Missolonghi.

Naturally, Wolff’s study relies for the most part on libretti, and in this sense his book is one of comparative literature, putting the written text in the context of its time, but although he is not a musicologist, he does not ignore the music. Indeed, one of the most interesting aspects of his book is his detailed analysis of specific operas including Italiana, Turco, Maometto and Le Siège. For all of these Rossini works (and many other operas) he explores in detail voice type and especially the use of “Turkish” Janissary music in the operas and in European music in general. Rossini, of course, makes extensive use of Janissary percussion including triangles, big bass drums, bells and so forth and weaves it with great skill into his scores. Indeed, for him, this percussion section is often referred to as the “banda turca.” Contemporaries sometimes complained of the ‘noisiness’ which such instruments brought to his music, but it is undeniable that some of the excitement and brio of his operas comes from the use of these ‘turkish’ instruments. In one of the most beguiling parts of the book, Wolff explains that the famous finale of Act 1 of L’italiana in Algeri is really a Janissary banda put in the mouthes of the singers when they imitate the sounds of “Turkish” percussion. Janissary music had been part of many “Turkish” operas before Rossini, but only his genius both used it and satirized it as the characters themselves become instruments of the band.

Although about a fourth of Dr. Wolff’s book relates directly to Rossini operas, the Rossini enthusiast will find much of interest in the other parts (there are references to Rossini throughout) which show how these Rossini operas fell into a long-standing tradition, but also how Rossini transformed the tradition and made it his own. I might add that although Prof. Wolff’s love of Rossini and great respect for his genius comes through on many pages, some of his most interesting insights involve little known operas of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Some—like Peter von Winter’s Maometto—have been seen onstage by Wildbad’s faithful opera-goers; others are completely unknown to me, at least, and are all the more fascinating for that reason. This is a scholarly book, with 53 pages of notes and almost 30 pages of index. It does not need to be read all at once, but it offers fascinating insights and a new lens for looking at familiar and not-so-familiar operas, and for those interested in Ottoman history and eighteenth century European history, it is a treasure-trove of information. In that sense, it offers us context which both enriches the opera enthusiast’s knowledge and is as up-to-date as today’s news.

What are they saying about Semiramide?

“In a revival long overdue, Gioachino Rossini’s Semiramide, his Babylonian tale of love, murder, and incest, will return to the Metropolitan Opera….” So wrote Philip Gossett in the New York Times in 1990. Although that revival came after almost 100 years, it does seem like quite a while has passed since the current Semiramide last appeared at the Met.

Those 1990 performances were phenomenal mostly because, as Gossett put it “ In the cast are four of the world’s greatest Rossini singers: Lella Cuberil, Marilyn Horne, Chris Merritt and Samuel Ramey. “
Indeed, these artists became so associeted with those roles that it is hard to imagine anyone else assuming them at the Met.
We are fortunate that some members of that historic cast will participate in a Q and A which we will post here in the near future. Stay tuned!!

Unfortunately the “Rossini Renaissance” that Professor Gossett mentioned in his article has not quite gone the way he suggested ( with Bianca e Falliero, Maometto II ,Il Viaggio a Reims, Ermione, La Gazza Ladra,) becoming more frequent in place of YET ANOTHER Barbiere. ) Opera Southwest is doing its best and many will remember the unexpected success of Otello at Loft Opera in Brooklyn last year.

So, American Rossini lovers have to be grateful to the Metropolitain Opera for mounting Semiramide yet again. If you cannot see it at the Met, there is an opportunity to see it in HD, something that was not possible for last year’s William Tell.

The image above appeared on the cover of the program book for Washington Concert Opera’s performance a few years ago of Semiramide, with Jessica Pratt in the title role. The painting hangs in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston.

The Friends of the Rossini Opera Festival celebrates its 10th birthday

And what better way than with appearances of Daniela Barcelona and Juan Diego Florez, two members of the Honorary Board at ROF 2018

Barcelona will be appearing in a performance of Petite Messe Solennelle which closes the Festival, and Florez in three performances of Ricciardo e Zoraide. It is not too late to join the Friends for the 2018 season and obtain the opportunity to order tickets before the general public.

Semiramide returns to the Metropolitan Opera

From February 19th to March 17th, the iconic John Copley production production first seen in 1990 will return to the Metropolitain Opera. On March 10th it will be seen in cinemas throughout the US. For foreign screenings check your local theater.

Tributes to Philip Gossett

The passing of Professor Philip Gossett, earlier this year, brought tributes and acclamation in the numerous obituaries that were published shortly after his death. The loss of Gossett is particularly profound for the American Rossini Society which he supported from the start and served as honorary president.

We invited some of the many scholars, artists, and students who worked with Professor Gossett over the years to share some of their memories. We have assembled them below, and will be adding more over time as contributions are submitted. Read More