Le Nozze di Figaro is fantastic, but highly confusing with everyone betraying each other, then everyone getting together again, then people switching roles, and heck, there was even a part where a woman wants to marry a man and then she finds out that he’s her son! I do have to agree that the opera was more than enjoyable despite the confusion.
After the opera, I came to a conclusion: We, the majority that haven’t been to an opera until then, did not get the full experience or appreciate the opera to its potential.
The opera has so many aspects of art, the set itself, the acting, the singing, the music and even the timing of lights and other stage props. I doubt that many of us noticed every single aspect at every single moment during the opera.
I know I didn’t. My friends say that I have something called art-ism. My friends joke around saying that its like autism, but with art rather than emotions. I agree with my friends, I know nothing of art. During the opera I was so focused on the storyline that I forgot to appreciate how concise the music was, how beautiful the set is, and how well the actors sang.
Then again, how could I know how well the music was, and how well the actors sang?
This was the first experience of an opera for me and I have no idea what does good music or good singing sounds like.
To a common man, student in our case, we have a general definition for good and bad sounding music.
To a person who is trained or professionally knows music, acting and singing, the definition of good and bad has sub-levels and different categories.
Under that logic, even if an actor sung an octave lower, the common man would not notice at all, but the professional would.
Thus, I feel like all of us, those who had their first experience with opera or know nothing related to singing, acting, and art itself, just couldn’t experience and appreciate the opera to its fullest.
I completely agree. There are so many different factors that contribute to this one art, the opera. And each person in the audience will pay attention and focus on different aspects of the opera because different things interest all of us. For me, I enjoyed the music played by the orchestra the most and that was the aspect that I focused on for the majority of the opera. It’s especially difficult to be able to appreciate every aspect of it however, mostly due to how far away we actually were from the performance itself. But, it was nonetheless enjoyable.
“We, the majority that haven’t been to an opera until then, did not get the full experience or appreciate the opera to its potential.”
at the same time, I’m thinking of slightly-morphed Cartesian way of looking at it, in which we do not perceive anything to its fullest potential. I know I’m guilty of the same crime, walking down Kissena Blvd, without appreciating the great architecture of the Dunkin Donuts.
The question that your post inspired me is: did the authors expect the audiences to know? Did Mozart want the audiences to notice the trills and the contrapuntal puns? Did he intend to tell us something through those expressions? What is the purpose of the opera, and who are the intended audiences (this we should be able to answer)? Why would audiences want to come and watch this show, paying money and getting home after mid-night?
Most importantly: is there such a way to enjoy art to its fullest?