From time to time, one reads articles in online newspapers that are written by people who don't have a clue about the subject they are covering. Or are merely paraphrasing a Press Release without engaging brain. Or haven't actually been to the event they are supposedly reporting. Or they assume that their readership is so stupid that they patronise them.
And then you get articles that cause one to stare with bulging eyes at the screen, exclaiming "WTF?"
So far so good(ish). An overlong and far-from-snappy headline; the first half is accurate, the third quarter is an opinion. The final quarter is inaccurate - yes, it's hardly a warhorse, but the plethora of live recordings that abound and three different productions in three different countries just in Spring 2008 contradict the fact. But I wouldn't wish to split hairs on 'rarely performed'.
Then we get to the "substance" of the piece, which is unbelievably stupid.
if you are a giggler or not immersed to the point of humorlessness in the traditions, quirky and otherwise, of opera, be strongly advised to avoid alcoholic beverages before seeing the WNO's production of George Frideric Handel's Tamerlano --at least until one of the two intermissions, that is. Don't get me wrong -- this is a most wonderful and well done opera, a fine example of Handel's baroque splendor. It's just that it has the teeniest of little surprises in it and if the defenses are down... well, let's just nip in the bud right here, shall we? The surprise and delight, I will add, of this opera is the fascinating phenomenon of the countertenor.
Oh my god! A counter-tenor!!! A completely unheard of freak from outer-space!!! ROFLMAO!! LOLCATZ!!
Who on earth is this ridiculous article aimed at? I will willingly concede that any production is likely to attract a proportion of newbs, some of whom might be entirely unfamiliar with trained voices. But this writer seems to think that the bulk of the audience who have bought tickets for a Handel opera have not only never heard a counter-tenor live, they have also never heard a counter-tenor on record, nor have they any prior knowledge of counter-tenors whatsoever. And, furthermore, they are probbaly going to pee themselves just a little. Absolutely unbelievable.
I have expressed before that I am not keen on counter-tenors singing roles written for castrati, preferring on the whole to hear the full-bodied sound of a mezzo-soprano or a rich contralto. But mine is a minority view, I think; many Baroque-lovers feel that a counter-tenor is closer to the correct sound. On the whole, I dislike the lack of variety of colouring and volume that is characteristic of counter-tenors.
This writer refers to the c-t being an 'ancient' voice, which, actually, isn't inaccurate, but in opera, it is really a phenomenom of the late 20th century. And I don't imagine she actually intended to be so accurate - she probably thinks 'counter-tenor' and 'castrato' are interchangeable terms. She fails to mention that the essence of a counter-tenor is that they sing in falsetto. (Castrati's voices never broke, because of the pre-pubescent castration). This is pretty common, to the point of being unremarkable, in pop music.
Such dumbed-down avoidance might be forgiveable in an article aimed at the under-tens, but this appears in an LGBT publication. I would have thought the target demograph for such a publication is hardly likely to get an attack of puritanical vapours from a factual statement about castrati. Considering that David Daniels is one of the very few out gay male opera singers, a parenthetical mention of this would not be out-of-place. Or indeed some mention that many people assume incorrectly that all counter-tenors are gay, or maybe some research to support or refute my theory that counter-tenor fans are disproportionately gay. Maybe, some mention that many roles taken by counter-tenors are alternatively cast with mezzos (or contraltos) so, in this production, there is a gorgeous love duet between Patricia Bardon and Sarah Coburn, which would create a frisson of some interest, I would imagine, to some of the LGBT community.
I have to say a considerable amount of what I have read concerning this production just comes over as ... provincial. But how can it be...provincial...when it's occurring in the political capital of the world's sole superpower. In the rehearsal journal, some reader opines that New York City Opera is responsible for giving baroque opera exposure, a view supported by the self-aggrandising piece on NYCO's website. And the various p/reviews which have asserted without qualification that David Daniels is the best c-t in the world, a difficult claim to sustain unequivocally in a world that contains Andreas Scholl (and others, too.)
The article closes with 'brace yourself for the bearded lady', presumably a euphemism for 'clench your pelvic floor muscles, especially if you ignored all advice and partook of a small sweet sherry beforehand'. I prefer not to ponder the possible inundation that might result from this rather silly writer being subject to Landi's Sant'Alessio, with no fewer than eight counter-tenors...
There does seem to be some dispute whether the Handel revival started in the 1920s, the 1960s or 1985, but even if it's the last, that's over two decades ago. Long enough for people to absorb the characteristics, I think.
