Michelle,
Just a couple of thoughts on your post...
>I'm not homophobic, I just can't stand the thought of dragging up as
it were and pretending to be a man personally. Likewise, it leaves me
cold watching men pretend to be women, be it Les Girls, or Baroque
repertoire being performed by the voices it was actually written for,
that is to say, men singing the womens roles. Not only do I find it
boring, it discomforts me. My hang up.
Actually most of the repertoire that I sing in opera houses and
concert venues around the world were written for a man and the
characters are men. I have only once in 20 year career sang a role
that was a pants role and that was because no mezzo at the time would
attempt it as the range was so wide. Blessed with three octave, I
saw no problem. In most major venues, today, no man would ever be
allowed to sing a woman's role (i.e., appear as a woman). It just is
not done. As for CTs singing castrati roles, I see no problem in
that as castrati, while castrated, were still men. It was only in
Rome that the castrati appeared in female parts and that was only
because the Pope had decreed that it was "unseemly" for women to
appear on the stage. Again, it would not happen in any major opera
house today.
>I won't go to see The Messiah performed by a counter tenor, it
really doesn't float my boat. (But then again neither do Tenors who
sound like they have their testicles in a vice either.)
That is unfortunate because Handel wrote two of the arias
specifically for countertenor and two for contralto. The original
names of these two singers escapes me but I can look it up for you if
you like. "But who may abide" and "Thou art gone up on high" were
for countertenor with "O thou that tellest" and "He was despised"
given to the contralto. I must insert that the original contralto
was known for her use of "chest register" and the fact that she was a
theater singer and not trained for the operatic stage. It brings up
all sorts of images of a Ethel Merman type voice singing those
arias! I would have loved to have been there...
> Another (major) reason for my dislike of counter tenors is
my "feminist hostility" as it were, towards men taking away roles
from women who can do it as well if not better, just for the novelty
of phenomenon. I am a product of the women's movement of the 1970's
after all. And I live in a country where women have had to/still
occassionally have to fight tooth and nail to get recognition, let
alone equal <fill in the blank> but that's another topic all together.
Again, I must state that many of the trouser roles were not written
for women. It was not until the middle of the classical era that the
castrato began to fall out of favor. Many of the pants roles that
soon followed were written because musical fashion of the time
dictacted that the heroic roles were treble voices. Rossini started
reversing this trend in his later operas and Bellini and Donizetti
finished the process. French operas, even in the Baroque era, did
not use castrati and relied on a high leggiero tenor sometimes called
a "haute contre." So, countertenors actually are not taking anything
away...it is more like reclaiming lost territory.
> So ..... getting to the heart of the topic the title sets up ...
what I am curious about is what is the motivation to sing/to express
yourself through song, when the repertoire being sung is largely
contrary to your sexuality and/or life experiences? Why express
yourself in this way especially if your inclination from birth is not
to androgeny or misassigned gender? (For a counter tenor, isn't the
repertoire even more overwhelmingly contrary than a mezzos?)
Here I must again say that in a 20 year career, I have never sung a
piece, oratorio or opera, that did not resonate somewhere in my
soul. From the Matthew Passion arias, the Vivaldi solo cantatas (as
well as many other Baroque solo cantatas), songs by Bellini,
Donizetti, Schubert, Brahms, Mozart, Beethoven as well as later music
by Elgar, Donaudy, Copeland, Bernstein have all had great meaning for
me as a singer and a countertenor.
>Is it that for the vast majority of the repertoire a counter tenor
is just acting, i.e. expressing feelings that are second hand rather
than expressing something/anything fundamental to themselves, their
souls, their life experiences?
> Or am I so far off track it's not funny? I am of course making the
presumption that the majority of a countertenor's repertoire is
indeed Baroque music and music written for Castrati and contralto
voices and liturgical music.
I feel that you need to reexamine the repertoire. I repeat that
music written for the castrati were about men and were to be sung by
men, even if they were maimed. Liturgical music can be sung by
either now days regardless of whom it was written for. It is more
important that one communicates and shares the gift given.
>I don't know how a countertenor sings romantic repertoire unless you
just transpose it up and what's the point in that? Goodness knows we
females cop enough stick over transposing classical, especially the
romantic repertoire to suit our voices, but that is a debate for
another thread also.
It is a common mistake to think that nothing should be transposed.
Transposing music was the norm in all vocal music until after WWII.
The singer when hired by management would tell them what key they
sang what aria/song in. In song repertoire, it was expected of all
accompanists to be able to transpose at sight at the whim of the
singer. Those transpositions could also be made because of the
condition of the instruments used (i.e., bad or good).
Transpositions were also made in opera when a different voice type
took over a role mid-run.
> So where does motivation, self expression and selflessness merge?
Or is it perhaps just that I sadly miss what everyone else hears, ie
the sheer beauty of the voice type and the fact that that beauty can
transcend all other considerations? I feel somehow disadvantaged that
I can't appreciate countertenors, especially as it's more than
obvious from those on the list how hard they work to attain their
art, and how much they contribute to it and how much everyone also
enjoys them.
> I just thought it an interesting part of the motivation discussion
given their repertoire choices and limitations. Maybe it's just my
ignorance. I know as a soprano/mezzo-soprano when I perform I have a
very broad range of repertoire choices to motivate me. I can be
acting a role, expressing poetry from a first hand experience point
of view, or second hand, being a conduit for God, etc etc etc. and
therefore I get to choose the whys and wherefores of performing with
much consideration and great thought and care. I don't recognise this
as being as complex for a countertenor. Where are/what are the roles
and the poetry etc that, an especially heterosexual, countertenor
gets to express himself first hand in?
I assure you Michelle that countertenors approach the music they have
chosen to sing just as you do. If you want an example of roles and
rep, please look at my website. ( www.mralto.com ) Each choice (and
I have performed every single one of these pieces) was made "on
purpose."
>How much does this impact on the motivation to sustain a career in
singing that actually reaches out and impacts the audience at a
fundamental emotional level or is the point of the countertenor voice
only primarily to express the beauty inherent in the sound? And if
all you are using, as a singer, is your instrument to express
yourself, are you shortchanging the expectation an audience has a
right to expect from a singer? In other words, why sing when any
other instrument could give just as satisfying performance? If you're
not going to go the extra mile and use what is unique to singers, the
manipulation of text to elicit response, why sing at all, why not
just play it on the cello or clarinet etc? Surely singing by it's
very nature (and we as singers) has to offer more than just pure
beauty of sound to its intended audience?
I am sure that I will not be able to convice you of this but it is
possible for a countertenor singing any rep to impact an audience on
a fundamental level using all of the vocal "tricks" that one can use
to express the text. It is no different from when you sing. But you
must also remember when Rossini was asked what was needed to become a
successful opera singer, he replied "Voce, Voce, Voce."
Sincerely,
Mark Crayton
|
