Author Archives: Raymond Wang

Power of the Voice

Posted on by
Reply

Being the first time I attended an opera, The Barber of Seville was one to impress. IT was shown in the Metropolitan Opera on October 19, 2011. Coming with the impression that operas were boring; my opinion changed after watching the performance. Many aspects caught my attention. The orchestra was conducted by Maurizio Benini and was extremely good; they played very well and set the mood and atmosphere for many scenes. The props on the stage were also very interesting, especially the moveable doors. The singers also performed with gusto and grace. The main singers were Javier Camarena, Isabel Leonard, Peter Mettei, and Maurizio Muraro, Count Almaviva, Rosina, Figaro, and Bartholo respectively.

Maurizio Benini conducted the orchestra with charismatic feeling. The orchestra provided the “feel” of every scene. Therefore, a good orchestra is necessary for the enjoyment of the opera. In many scenes, especially where Figaro is cutting Barthalo’s hair, the music made the scene a light hearted and joyous occasion. Benini conducted this particular part with a lot of staccato beats that set an easygoing mood. The orchestra accompanied this scene very well with the happy music to give an overall sense of happiness.

The props can be considered one of the most important things in an opera. Michael Yeargen was the set designer who is credited with creating this amazing set. In this particular one, the props on stage could be moved around to accompany many scenes. The doors may have been one of the props that caught the most attention. They could be moved around to create different settings. Also, they were actual functioning doors, so the singers could interact with them. The doors are a very thoughtful addition to this particular opera. It created a changeable setting that could be adjusted for all the scenes.

The use of trees also caused a comedic response. The trees were used to conceal the singers even though they were clearly not completely concealed by the tree. However, the people not behind the tree were unable to see them even though they were clearly not hidden. This caused a little laughter among the audience. This type of prop added a positive feeling to the scene and kept the viewers more interested.

Another thing the orchestra has to do well in is the accompanying the voices of the singers. Both the music and the singing need to be synchronized in order for optimal enjoyment. There was a scene where Figaro, played by Peter Mettei, sang his part with my pauses. The orchestra highlighted these parts and put more emphasis by pausing the music as well. This makes his singing and overall atmosphere more powerful due to the synchronization.

The voices of the singers are also something that should be noted. The female lead sang by Isabel Leonard, had quite an astonishing performance. Being the only female voice in the opera, her voice had to be distinctive and powerful. She achieved this and definitely gave off the impression that her presence was known. Being the only female, she had to set herself apart from all the other singers. With her flamboyant performance, I appreciated her fantastic voice. Her voice was softer than the men but in a way just as dominating. You knew that her character, Rosina, was proud to be a woman among the other men. Overall, Leonard’s performance really helped the opera achieve its apex.

With many male roles, each male character had to distinguish himself from the others. Figaro, Mattei, can be seen as the funny character. When he is present, the scene usually involves him doing something humorous. Figaro’s acting also contributes greatly to how well he is received by the audience. Count Almaviva’s, Javier Camarena, performance is displayed through his acting. He shows how he loves Rosina in many ways throughout the opera. His performance is reinforced by his voice. He had a solo singing part where he had to hold a note for a long time. This distinguished him from everybody else. Bartholo, sang by Maurizio Muraro, has a dictating walk that shows he is in charge. His conquering presence distinguishes him from everybody else. I can tell with his deeper and prouder stride that Muraro’s character is very serious.

My overall experience with the The Barber of Seville was phenomenal. I greatly enjoyed this particular performance with the singing, set, and music. It changed my perspective of what an opera is. In the future, I will be more likely to attend one due to the positive results of this one. I think the collaborative effort of the orchestra and the singers created an ideal experience. I think that the props also contributed a great deal to the success and helped captivate the audience.

English! You Know It?

Posted on by
Reply

Ch’ing-lish by David Henry Hwang is a play based on the language barriers between cultures. The play is about a businessman who arrives in China in hopes of creating a deal with the minister. Throughout the entire play, Daniel Cavanaugh played by Gary Wilmes, has trouble understanding what everyone says to him. The play’s plot does not seem to be quite interesting as the main goal of the production is to entertain the audience with the translations. Since I understood the Chinese as well as the English, it made the experience a little different from the non-Mandarin speakers. I think the play displayed a fantastic use of the props and set. The lines that were “lost in translation” were quite noteworthy as well. Finally, the actors’ performance was the cherry on the cake.

The set was one of the biggest things that I was intrigued by. The set was constantly changing to accommodate every scene. I liked to watch as the set changed each time the lights dimmed. David Korins was the scenic designer for the play. I think that he did an outstanding job with how he presented each scene and how he transitioned into the next. The use of an elevator impressed me a lot since you would not expect an elevator to be on stage. Even more interesting was how the doors actually worked and it looked like an actual elevator. The spinning of the set also allowed many different locations. I also liked how some actors came in on the moving platforms instead of entering from the sides.

One of the funniest aspects of the play is the text that is “lost in translation.” Candace Chong was in charge of the translations that occur on a screen. The subtitles play a critical part in the humor of the player. Even though I speak Mandarin Chinese, I had a two-sided experience of the play. I can say that it was honestly much funnier understanding it from both sides since I understood many of the misinterpretations. During one part, Gary’s character was asked to pronounce “I love you.” However, in Mandarin Chinese, the way you pronounce a word greatly changes it’s meaning. He mispronounced it many times, which changed, it’s meaning into nonsense.

Since this play is centered on the language, it is extremely important that it is legitimate. Also, I commend the legitimacy of the play as well since many plays “fake” the subtitles to create the humor effect. However, this play was extremely accurate with the translations and didn’t use any of the “fake” subtitles. I can say that the play displayed the language barrier extremely well. Also, it was easily understandable to audience as well. David Henry Hwang, the playwright, definitely captured the amusing aspects of language translation.

Lastly, the actors did an incredibly well job for the play to be a success. Jennifer Lim and Gary Wilmes displayed an extraordinary performance. I have to admit, Jennifer Lim’s performance was quite impressive since she held a large and important role to the story as the minister’s assistant. Gary Wilmes also played his character extremely well as the traveling businessman. His cluelessness of the situation that went on without his knowledge and how he reacts to many of the things that happen truly show that he is immersed in his character. I also liked the performance of Larry Lei Zhang, Minister Cai, since he seemed like a typical authority figure. Last of all, I greatly praise Stephen Pucci, Peter Timms, since he had to be able to speak Mandarin Chinese. He spoke it extremely well with much less of an accent that most Americans that try the language. I’m not sure if he knew how to speak it before or had to learn it for this particular play, though nonetheless his performance with a foreign language is outstanding.

I greatly enjoyed Ch’ing-lish due to the great use of the stage, the legitimacy and hilarity of the language and the performance by the actors. These three things greatly emphasized this play and set it apart from some other plays that I have seen. It captured my attention and continued to interest me. I would much enjoy watching another play by David Henry Hwang.

Shots were fired…

Posted on by
Reply

Police say it was race related. All puns aside, racism is a serious issue in the U.S. In essence, racism will never be abolished and people will always hate a specific type of people based on their skin color or their origins. Racism has greatly died down but still exists today. Even though it will always be present, people still devise ways to combat it.

Racism is the most common among African American people. Most types of hate is directed towards them. However, racism occurs for every race, even Caucasians. Jokes are founded upon racism as well. The majority of the time, jokes that relate to stereotypical situations are funny. Even though some of these jokes may cross the line, it needs to be understood that they are jokes, whether they are true or not.

I have never taken much offense to racism. People associate my race with being good at mathematics. Honestly, thats more of a compliment than a derogatory assumption. Likewise, jokes are made about how Asians can have their last name “named” by throwing a coin into a jar. I take no offense to these jokes and I laugh along with them as well. The famous “squinty” eyes where asians have “squintier” eyes than normal people seems only to be a common misconception. As far as I can tell, Asian individuals can open their eyes just as wide.

Racism and stereotyping will always be present regardless of the race. However, it’s a good mindset to not always listen to the things people say about you. I think that race will never be completely gone from any type of society because it is only human nature to believe that oneself is superior.

(In case you haven’t gotten the initial joke, race in those terms refer to a running race rather than a person’s race. You would think that it would refer to gang activity however, pistols were fired to signal the start of a race).

High Up

Posted on by
1

Roberta Smith talks about a hanging piece of work at the Guggenheim in A Suspension of Willful Disbelief. The artist, Maurizio Cattelan used 128 pieces to create the work of art. Smith describes it as “a complicated” piece of art that hangs in a rotunda.

Roberta Smith believes that despite the initial awe of the work, it still doesn’t bring enough attention. She believes that the artist retiring is a good choice since he seems to be running out of innovative ideas. Smith also brings up Cattelan’s previous failures to produce art in time for an exhibit. She says that this piece protrudes too much at a time to the viewer. Despite all the negative comments, overall she felt that the piece of art was satisfactory.

I personally went to the Guggenheim museum before this exhibit. I would have enjoyed seeing it as it is a new way to display art. Also, the fact that it is suspended in mid air seems quite appealing to me. All these new and innovative types of art really catches my attention. One would expect art to be a painting on a wall. However, the 21st century has brought much more than that.

Upside Down

Posted on by
Reply

A unique type of museum viewing experience can be seen at the “Carsten Höller: Experience.” It involves the guests wearing goggles that flip their vision upside down. Karen Rosenberg talks about her experience at the museum in Where Visitors Take the Plunge, or Plunges. The weird thing is, you need to sign a waiver before going in.

She gives a slight background on the artist. She explains that there are certain requirements for the exhibit. You have to be a certain size and cannot have heart problems. She says her experience was quite unsettling not being used to seeing the forms of at that way. She begins to climb up the floors and even enters a spa like exhibit filled with Epson salt. The final exhibit was a slide down to the first floor. At first Rosenberg didn’t want to go on it. However, she was a reviewer and how could she review and art piece without experiencing it? She says that the exhibit was quite interesting and it provides an experience that some people look for.

I think this type of art is extremely fascinating. The thought of wearing the upside down goggles makes me think of all the crazy possibilities the museum can offer. The great thing about this is how art is changing in a different way. Nobody in the past would have thought of slides and a pool of water being considered art. However, I feel that these new kinds of art really defines what art is. Art is something that anybody can appreciate and this kind of art, especially ones where you can interact with, definitely take the pedestal for me. I would love to be able to interact with such modern types of art.

Operas and Plays

Posted on by
Reply

Operas and plays are in general quite different from each other. With the The Barber of Seville, the two have some differences despite having the same general plot and story line. There are only minor scene differences between the two versions. One major difference is that of the character Figaro. He seems to have “opposite” personalities in the play version and in the opera version. It turns out, Figaro plays a much larger role in the opera than in the play. Figaro also attracts much more attention that usual. The opera version even contains an extra scene just for Figaro. He is more important throughout the opera than in the play where he was just helping the plot. Figaro in the opera can even be said to be the spotlight of it with so much attention focused on him. Another big difference was the end with the marriage contract. In the opera, it was much more dramatic rather than just a threat.

Both versions were quite entertaining even with the differences. The play had its interesting points while the opera had its as well. It was fascinating to see two different versions of the same piece.