Macaulay Seminar One at Brooklyn College

So a couple of weeks ago I went to see the opera Tosca at the Met and forgot to post about. So here goes…

The opera was amazing. It had everything that a good opera, in my opinion needs, namely, great music, great arias, a great story, and fantastic singing. The opera was written by Giacomo Puccini and is set in Rome against the background of the Napoleonic wars. Before going to see it, I read up a  bit about it and was interested to find that this opera is a prime example of the verismo, or “realistic” style of opera, greatly propagated and advanced by Puccini and present in his other works. Verismo departs from the classical opera stories of gods and heroes and deals more intimately with ordinary people who often find themselves in extraordinary situations. Ultimately this form of opera is at times, easier to connect to, as it deals with common themes that we as humans constantly are involved in and deal with. It is truly amazing to watch a skillful opera composer, such as Puccini, weave an amazing story out of simple characters, people who could have been you or me ( I would also like to make clear that I enjoy classical opera very much also, despite their more fantastical elements, and just as their is a time to hear the story of the factory girl or the painter, so too is their a time to hear the story of the demigod.)

Tosca, I feel, is best described as raw in emotion. It was as though Puccini took all the romanticized emotions that a person could feel, namely, love, hatred, patriotism, rebelliousness, piety, sacrilege, and stripped them down to their most essential state, husking the outer shells built up by years of censorship, of correctness, as one might husk an ear of corn, and presented to us, the audience, these emotions, unmolested and unedited. Truly, one can say that Puccini did not create anything in this opera, but rather removed all the unnecessary elements, all the reins and bridles that held back these feelings, and gave them to us in the form of Tosca. Likewise I was interested to see Puccini introduce themes of suicide and torture, that give the opera a darker tone in contrast with the more lighthearted, almost comedic, atmosphere of the first act.

Dealing with Met production of the opera, as I mentioned, the singing was amazing. The sets were well constructed. The orchestra was perfect. Truly, this was a very successful production, if ever I saw one, and while watching Tosca you never feel the time go by. Rather it flies by and you hardly notice, so enchanting was this Puccini classic. I definitely recommend it to everyone while it is still playing at the Met.

In the case of “Mohammed’s Radio,” my reception of the play on paper differed greatly between having read and seen a staged reading of the play. Whether this be a consequence of the skill of the actors, or simply giving a human face and voice to black ink on white paper, the play shook me deeper and more profoundly than have many other plays. Even though stage acting was not involved, it was made clear very quickly that the actors where wholly invested in their characters. In a way that I have never thought I would experience a reading of a play, I felt invested in the play, so much so that my blood boiled when a “punch” or “bottle” was thrown; my mind raced to overcome challenges faced by the characters, even though I had never had to answer the call to defend a faith to which I have willingly handed my heart and mind.

In the case of Kelly, my opinion that her faith was true holds. The question of whether people act for the wrong reasons is most difficult to answer in a religious context. Faith, in many cases, is no joking matter, and neither are the circumstances that drove Kelly to covert to Islam. I do believe that she chose to covert willingly, but that her circumstances would ultimately decide how much of that faith she would retain. In addition, getting to hear the playwright’s own take was helpful in answering questions that may not have been satisfied until completing a second or even third reading of the script.

I am a far more visual learner, which may be the reason why seeing and hearing the play read out loud by the actors both forced me to interact with issues that – for most westerners – have been kept behind a television screen. The reading only further intrenched the ideas that I had about the nature of each character in my mind, especially in the case of Kelly. Reading the script birthed these feelings and thoughts in me, but experiencing the staged reading meant that these sentiments of mine now had a time and place to exert themselves.

Fantastic play. Invested actors. A devoted director. The stage was set, and so “play” was pressed.

When I first read through the play, I have to admit I thought parts of it were a bit cliche and unrealistic. I thought that many parts of it wouldn’t translate well into a performance, but I was pleasantly surprised. I thought the actors were pretty good. I especially enjoyed the girl who played Kelly. I thought she was really powerful and grabbed everyone’s attention when she spoke. The play definitely did a good job of touching on feminism in a kind of unconventional way–by dealing with Islamophobia, women’s rights in religion, and the normal expectations held of females in small-town settings. Although set in a small neighborhood, it dealt with world-wide issues that I think are really important to address, which the play did a good job of addressing.

I enjoyed the reading much more than I originally thought I would. I mean, how entertaining is it to see a bunch of people just sit there and read the play? Well, I was wrong. Most of the actors brought depth and personality to the characters of the play, depth that is lost when you read the play yourself. The woman who played Alice was phenomenal. She brought the frustration, confusion, and helplessness of Alice’s situation to life, even going as far as to cry during the final scene, which was very powerful. I also loved who played Terry; his voice boomed and echoed with the pervasive bigotry of Gerritsen beach. He commanded the stage. Little Joe, Allie, and Joe were excellent as well. Who I didn’t like so much, though, was Kelly. Granted each actor brought their own interpretation to the characters they played, I didn’t care for Kelly’s character in this reading. She came off as purely recalcitrant, obnoxious, and rude, all seemingly unjustified. She is standoffish from the start. I didn’t imagine Kelly would be this way; I felt Kelly would be more serene, spiritual, and passionate. Overall though, this reading showed how powerful and moving Mohammed’s Radio can be, when performed. I hope to see it staged soon, preferably at Brooklyn! Something else I really liked was the Q&A at the end, where the playwright answered all of our burning questions. I loved how he provided insight into the making of the play and what he intended to mean with each character. This added even another layer of depth. I feel that Mohammed’s Radio is going to be an excellent show.