The Marriage of Figaro by Andrew
One of the more interesting pieces of theatre that we were honored to go to was the theatrical Opera buffa of The Marriage of Figaro. Compared to the other performances, this one was in a foreign language, Bulgarian, that was completely different from the other languages of symphonic music, percussive music, or even the English language that we have seen throughout other performances such as Aida or even Romeo and Juliet. Rather, I had to rely on my ability to read their movements on the stage and the translated sections during the major musical scenes. Also a major point to be made was that instead of just hearing what one might call “gibberish”, the band that played the music was an integral part in understanding of the scene and allowing for a better understanding of the context of the scenes.
First and foremost, the body language provided the most obvious signs of what the actors were portraying. Since, no doubt, most of us couldn’t understand the language being spoken we had to virtually rely upon these movements. Following normal theatrical performances, the actors had broad and bold movements that allowed us to be able to follow more clearly what was “going on during the scenes”. When angry or happy, sad or confused it was the body motions and facial expressions that allowed us to see that they were in fact pouting or plotting, in control or out of control. Without such broad body movement and overly emphasized facial expressions we would have been unable to glean much, it not anything from the performance.
One of the second big aids to decipher the scenes meaning, context, and overall atmosphere came from the superb symphonic music being played from the pit. It set the mood and allowed for reoccurring themes to be played with similar instruments for like characters. You could always tell when it was Figaro’s major part because the instruments would focus their attention on the supporting instruments for Figaro, and likewise for every major character. The music also offered a cushion to the headache that listening to something (such as a foreign language) can bring if you can’t understand or follow it. Instead of being confused or lightheaded, I was able to use the music as an extension to the singing to gain even more essential information.
The last point that allowed Figaro to be an enjoyable production was the subtitles and the reoccurrence of general vocal inflections during specific scenes. Instead of being dictated by the music, the actors seemed to be combined with the music to increase their inflection, allowing us as the audience to gain more from the performance. I thoroughly enjoyed this point as the music and actors were almost perfectly in sync in portraying the emotions through inflection and dynamics. The only point I found folly towards was the lack of subtitles throughout the entire production. They provided subtitles during major musical numbers, major plot points, and minor (but important) musical bits of smaller musical numbers. When parts of the audience laughed at a joke, it was no doubt because they understood what was being said (or at least had some understanding). Most of us that couldn’t speak the language were left to decipher the superb body language and at times musical accompaniment. I would think that Figaro would have been much more comical if I understood everything he said, but at the same time I was still able to come away with the story line, plot, and major events that were influence from The Barber of Seville.
As the last production for the On-Stage season Figaro was a great choice for many reasons. It showcased an incredible connection between musical numbers and vocal numbers, inflection and dynamics, physical motion and facial expression. Where it fell short came from the lack of understanding of the language and the inability to glean anything from the funnier points in the production as a result of the lack of subtitles that were provided during the less major points. It was a great choice for a World production though. It allowed us to see such an influenced story (I counted eight or nine different countries that influence the production and play) that had a fairly well known production and storyline. I can safely say that I would see The Barber of Seville if it came to the Iowa State Centers stages anytime soon and would try to understand a little more of the language prior to coming to the theatrical event.
First and foremost, the body language provided the most obvious signs of what the actors were portraying. Since, no doubt, most of us couldn’t understand the language being spoken we had to virtually rely upon these movements. Following normal theatrical performances, the actors had broad and bold movements that allowed us to be able to follow more clearly what was “going on during the scenes”. When angry or happy, sad or confused it was the body motions and facial expressions that allowed us to see that they were in fact pouting or plotting, in control or out of control. Without such broad body movement and overly emphasized facial expressions we would have been unable to glean much, it not anything from the performance.
One of the second big aids to decipher the scenes meaning, context, and overall atmosphere came from the superb symphonic music being played from the pit. It set the mood and allowed for reoccurring themes to be played with similar instruments for like characters. You could always tell when it was Figaro’s major part because the instruments would focus their attention on the supporting instruments for Figaro, and likewise for every major character. The music also offered a cushion to the headache that listening to something (such as a foreign language) can bring if you can’t understand or follow it. Instead of being confused or lightheaded, I was able to use the music as an extension to the singing to gain even more essential information.
The last point that allowed Figaro to be an enjoyable production was the subtitles and the reoccurrence of general vocal inflections during specific scenes. Instead of being dictated by the music, the actors seemed to be combined with the music to increase their inflection, allowing us as the audience to gain more from the performance. I thoroughly enjoyed this point as the music and actors were almost perfectly in sync in portraying the emotions through inflection and dynamics. The only point I found folly towards was the lack of subtitles throughout the entire production. They provided subtitles during major musical numbers, major plot points, and minor (but important) musical bits of smaller musical numbers. When parts of the audience laughed at a joke, it was no doubt because they understood what was being said (or at least had some understanding). Most of us that couldn’t speak the language were left to decipher the superb body language and at times musical accompaniment. I would think that Figaro would have been much more comical if I understood everything he said, but at the same time I was still able to come away with the story line, plot, and major events that were influence from The Barber of Seville.
As the last production for the On-Stage season Figaro was a great choice for many reasons. It showcased an incredible connection between musical numbers and vocal numbers, inflection and dynamics, physical motion and facial expression. Where it fell short came from the lack of understanding of the language and the inability to glean anything from the funnier points in the production as a result of the lack of subtitles that were provided during the less major points. It was a great choice for a World production though. It allowed us to see such an influenced story (I counted eight or nine different countries that influence the production and play) that had a fairly well known production and storyline. I can safely say that I would see The Barber of Seville if it came to the Iowa State Centers stages anytime soon and would try to understand a little more of the language prior to coming to the theatrical event.
posted by ISC On Stage @ 7:16 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home