When I heard I was going to see an opera, I was so excited. I had never seen one before, and I had no idea what to expect, if anything. I had gone to see musicals on Broadway before, but this was totally different. This is an opera, the gaudy, spectacular all-singing performance of a lifetime. Whenever my friends heard that I was going to see Carmen, they said, “ I’m so jealous.” In my head I was say that I hop I like it. I really had no idea what to expect. I am a music major, so of course, I felt a pressure that I needed to like it. How could I not like it and call myself a music major? But, I put all those feelings and pre-conceived notions behind me and treated Carmen as a first performance for me.

Immediately when I walked inside the opera house, I knew I was in for a great performance. The staircases all had the most elegant red carpeting that I had ever seen, the type you see in the movies, and the chandeliers were breathtaking. I said to myself, “ Was this real?” However, that feeling went for a vacation after I actually sat up top in the “common people” section. Wow, I was far away; even with my glasses on, I couldn’t see very much. When the curtains finally opened, I couldn’t even who was singing. This minute thing took away from the amazing aspect of Carmen.

However, it’s always the little things that make the show. Being a musician myself, I keenly focused on the sound of the orchestral instruments in the accompaniment. I closed my eyes at some points because I could barely see the people on stage anyways, because the sounds of the flutes, clarinets, oboes, bassoons, trumpets, french horns, trombones, the strings, drums, and piano were all breathtakingly harmonious. They filled the house with their music. While my eyes were closed, it was also easier for me to listen more closely to the distinct sounds and gorgeous vibrato of the opera singers. All I was thinking while hearing the singers was, “ Oh man, I wish I could sing like that.” The point of an opera, I think, is more to listen to the music being created, either sung or played, so there’s no problem with focusing on these strongly. When one goes to see an opera, one that has incredibly famous and distinct music like Carmen, one should pay more attention to the music rather than the scenery, because after all the whole point of an opera is that it is only singing. However, the scenery is very important to the opera, especially the gaudy and glamorous factor that is so attached to the art of opera. There’s no denying when the curtains opened up and the astonishing walls of the towns began spinning into place that my heart skipped a beat. The details on the set designs were so crisp (yes I could actually see them pretty well spite the location of my seat). The sets were amazing and it would be unfair to the visually-focused people to neglect them because they do play a huge role in the show.

After I got over that I couldn’t basically see anything, the opera was a great story of love, heartbreak, and murder. I have to say, at the end of the night, I was not as happy that I had seen an opera as I thought I was going to be. The plot was extremely hard to follow as we were constantly asking our classmates who was that or what just happened? Part of that was due to the location of our seats because we couldn’t see who was singing. It is the small details associated with Opera, at least at the Metropolitan Opera House that make Opera in way an art form that is losing viewers that doesn’t attract or connect with a lot of people. I mean, who wants to sit in the same for three hours while basically being able to see nothing. No one; some of my classmates even said, “ Oh great, I have to sit there for 3 hours. I’m going to fall asleep. I’m going to be so bored.” These details don’t help. Maybe if we were a little closer and we could see the actors’ faces, we would be happier to go. It’s almost as if people have to have an urgent impulse to go see an opera to go and see it. Even if they have an impulse to go and see it, they usually can’t because it costs about $400 to get a good seat from which you can see. In this way, opera is losing its support and taste of the people. But on the same subject, I don’t think it’s dying either. In my opinion, opera can only be enjoyed at it’s highest potential by the rich. But, it’s for everyone and should be seen by everyone, but realistically that’s not possible.

All this said and done, I would be a little skeptical of going back unless the circumstances were altered in my favor. Opera is an art form that you have to experience at its maximum pleasure or get nothing valuable from the performance. It’s all or nothing. The plots are confusing and it’s hard to see the actors on stage. The only thing, at least, that stood out for me, is the music. Even with just that, still leaves me on kind of a sour note with opera. I would go back only because I want to listen to the music again or try to get a better experience from the opera.

Here is an example of the Hora with the Hava Nagila song:

What a sight to see, “A Sucker Emcee.” Craig ‘muMs’ Grant takes the audience on an emotional roller coaster full of his personal experiences and overwhelming circumstances and personal obstacles of growing up in the Bronx. It is amazing too see what only a microphone allows one to do, to connect with people and tell a story, with a little help from background lights and music. Despite the fact the ‘muMs’ struggled to become an emcee, he definitely fulfilled his lifelong dream in this captivating experience.

Personally, I had doubts about this performance, doubts that this way of expressing oneself was art. I thought it was just talking. How effective could talking just be? I associated anything with only talking with rap, the “music” of gangsters, of Lil Wayne, Drake, Chris Brown. I thought to myself whenever I heard rap music on the radio, how could anyone in his right mind like this type of music? Every other word is a derogatory term; I just couldn’t wrap my brain around the idea that this was music, an art form. Oh boy, was I wrong. MuMs’ put everything he had into this performance, He literally had to wipe the sweat off his face and drink water every five minutes. I could see hard work and a great deal of effort that went into this performance.

MuMs captured the true essence of hip-hop. Hip-hop started out as poetry, as young people wanting to express themselves. They wanted to do it just to do it. MuMs delivers a clear separation between real hip-hop and the glorified rap stars of this age of music. Since he emphasizes this difference, many more people will find a meaning in his performance if they know he is not on the same level as the degrading rappers who call them musicians.

MuMs’ whole life in a nutshell is put before the audience so that the audience can feel the hardships and struggles muMs endured in his life. He takes the audience through the life of a young Bronx boy just trying to find a meaning in his life. He is plagued by the loss of his father from diabetes when he is 19, and the heartbreak of his mother falling victim to Alzheimer’s disease and one day holding a knife up to him. MuMs delivers his performance with so much emotion. There are so many things that anyone can relate to in his life’s story, giving his performance a much more profound message that grabs peoples’ hearts. Anyone from any community can relate to muMs’ story, appealing to a wide variety of people, making the performance that much more powerful.

I had so many doubts going into the performance: whether a one man show was going to be entertaining and thought-provoking, whether this was going to be just another stereotypical rap performances which I despised, or whether I would be simply bored. The exact opposite occurred, and even at one point I started tearing because I found myself able to relate to an aspect of muMs’ life. My definition of art was significantly expanded after seeing this hard-hitting performance. I have total respect now for true hip-hop, the art of delivering a message, of expressing one’s feelings. We all have experiences in which we are skeptical in going somewhere. However, we end of loving the performance or the people we meet during the experience. This is one of those examples. I definitely did not see any sucker emcee.

When I think of uptown, wealthy New York, I think of the greedy, superficial people that prey upon everyone else in New York City and only care about money and drinking wine all day. They epitomize superficiality and dubiousness. They are often living a fake life, cringing at the thought or sight of anything they deem unworthy of their touch or thought. They brought this stereotype upon themselves.

Edwards’ Breakfast at Tiffany’s is the perfect example of this fake and superficial life. Lulu or Holly or whatever her name is lives in an elegant apartment, has a huge variety of clothes to choose from, and has extravagant parties where she invites everyone except the president of the U.S. She also can’t even call her own cat anything besides Cat. She is only interested in the superficial, material things, like diamonds. Tiffany’s is her go-to place because it’s filled with her favorite thing, diamonds. She wants to buy something from Tiffany’s even though she only has 10 dollars. This is one of themes of the movie. She is a wild thing, as Fred (Paul) calls her; she wants so many things that she obviously can’t have.

The more I watched the film, the more I realized that this is the life that most wealthy people live. They are overwhelmed with the influences of money and material things. While this is a stereotype, not everybody is this way. However, most of the wealthy class in New York City lives this same life. Nobody can be the queen of Brazil as Holly thought she could be. This film reminded me of Tennessee Williams’ Streetcar Named Desire. Blanche is fixated upon the paper lantern. The actual lantern is shielded from the outside by the paper covering. Blanche wants to be something she is clearly not and hide her true self from others. She is obsessed with the dresses, the jewelry, the fine food, and she hates when people act anything but elegant and put-together. Holly acts and lives in the same life.

Both of these women also have in common that they crack when the reality of their life hits them in the face. Holly couldn’t handle it and Blanche couldn’t handle it.

This accentuates the idea that the wealthy are nothing without their money, if they didn’t have the money, they would not be able to survive. I guess money really can’t buy love.

Artists have a tremendous influence on their viewers. They can manipulate points of view, show us things they want us to see and completely blind to things they don’t want us to see. One of the subjects that artists clearly manipulate to convey their message is class distinctions.

The different classes: poor, middle, upper, have extreme baggage associated with them. We, as observers, have many pre-conceived notions, stereotypes when we view people from any class. The poor are struggling to survive, especially in big cities, like New York. We always see the homeless people on the street, sleeping under some disgusting shelter, on some filthy sidewalk where people spit, dropped their cigarettes, and where maybe animals have peed. When we see those poor people struggling even though they’re extremely tired, we can’t help but feel sorry for them and want to help them. But why then don’t we help them even though they’re clearly in our sight?

The middle class is viewed as hard-working people that jobs from garbage men to stock brokers. They have to make a living day in and day out, but also then have to go back to their families. Most of us can relate to them, as we are middle class. The viewers usually like the middle class the most, because they aren’t greedy, deceptive, and have good morals usually, However, is that always the case?

Then, there is the conniving, superficial, greedy assholes, the upper, wealthy class. They are the suppressors of the middle and poor classes. You cannot say that you are a middle class person until you’ve had an experience when you’ve wanted to punch one of their kind in the face. I’ve heard of well-dressed people steal waiters’ tips off of tables. In Stone’s Wall Street, Gekko is seen as a clear upper class man, who has all the money in the world. And because of these stereotypes, we hate him.

While one mission of the artist is to show us these recurring themes, the bigger mission is to show us what happens behind the scenes, away from our eyes. Nothing is straightforward. Scorsese’s Taxi Driver enlightened the viewers to the true natures of some classes. The poor are not just the ones struggling to make it; they are also the ones involved in crime, drugs, and prostitution. Iris has to do something to cover her butt, so she gets involved with prostitution. Maybe even a bigger surprise to us is Travis’ behavior as a middle class man. He does have some good morals, as he wants to change the city, clean it up. Scorsese shows us the middle class is not pure either as Travis becomes a murderer, even though his true intentions are to better the live of people that need help, like Iris.

The plight of an art is dig for muck in the social classes, as the muckrakers did during the Progressive era. They expose the underlying motives and happenings in social classes that we, as the viewers, probably won’t expect. Therefore, a question is raised: are there really any genuine, distinct social classes?

Art is a very interesting and ambiguous subject. People have very strong opinions about art that can attack or praise art. But, art is not about the opinions of people about the art itself. The message of the art is the most important aspect, and I think that is the whole essence of art. Art delivers a message and creates tensions.

What is art? That is the question. It ranges from, in some cases 4 dots on a piece of paper to Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel. That includes a very wide range of pieces. Many people think art is just the pieces in the museum or galleries. However, art is not confined to one building. Art is everywhere around us. Our pre-conceived notions blind us, close us up to true art. When you walk by the street performer putting colors on canvas, or the homeless man playing guitar on the sidewalk, or the tourist taking a photo with his camera, stop and realize that that is art. Art has very few limitations.

Art has to create tension. We all think that tension is a bad thing, but clearly it is not, according to Martin Luther King Jr. In his Letter from Birmingham Jail, King explains the necessity of tension as it leads to progress. Tension is any struggle, and emotion, and feeling and art evokes theses tensions. They can be inspiration that starts an artistic movement, a visceral feeling that inclines you to change the world, or as simple as, “Wow that’s beautiful,” or,” Cool, that sounds amazing.” Art speaks to people in many different ways.

The Brooklyn Museum had many of examples of art: portraits, sculptures, masks, statues, furniture, many of the same things that we saw when we went to museums as little kids on school field trips. There were many things in the Museum that stood out to my group and me, either because they were awe-inspiring, simply beautiful, or in some cases we asked ourselves, “Is this art?” One piece in particular, Nick Cave’s Soundsuit, perplexed us. We didn’t know why in the world someone would make this, take the time to put all the twigs together, and what is the meaning of this piece of art? We asked so many questions at the museum, more than I thought humanly possible. That is the purpose, I think, of museums, is to get the individual to think about art, to open their minds up to different kinds of art. Places like the Brooklyn Museum and the traditional places where we can find art provide the foundation for exploring more art. They are great starting points for the journey into the world of art.