I don’t know what’s going on here. I don’t know why there’s
a mix of clothed and naked people. But it does conform to an often-seen
approach to nudity in opera—that is, the singers are clothed, and it’s
non-singing extras or dancers who are naked.
Gounod’s Faust (I don’t know the production info. Anyone?):
Another not-unpopular choice—one
or two naked people, again, not singing, surrounded by clothed principals and
clothed chorus.
So, while working on yesterday’s "naked opera" blog, I discovered a new (to me) acronym: NOS. It stands for “Nude On Stage”.
There are fans, lists, web threads. Here’s one: nakedonstage.forumfree.it. However, sometimes these threads devolve into movies with some nude scene or set in a strip club.
I’m a fan of nudity, and a fan of live stage performance—music, theatre, dance—so I’m certainly a fan of the idea of on stage nudity. Haven’t seen any nude opera performances, that I recall. But I have seen some onstage nudity...that didn’t involve a pole. I mean, I’ve seen that too.
I saw a production of God’s Country (at least, I think it wasGod’s Country, by Steven Dietz) in which there was, at the end of act 1, an unnecessary, super-brief, topless girl. I don’t think it had anything to do with the play or the scene. And if you weren’t looking at the right part of the stage for those couple of seconds, you’d never know it happened.
I saw a production of Bent by Martin Sherman. The script indicates there’s a naked guy in one scene, but this production had another naked guy in another scene. But in the context, it made sense. Great play, by the way, if you don’t know it. There’s also a movie version which is good. But I think I prefer the play. It’s more gutsy, visceral.
I’ve seen Equus, which has some nudity. Also a really cool play, and there’s a movie of it too. (By the way, a recent-ish production stared Daniel Radcliffe, of Harry Potter movie fame. Yes, he was naked. And yes, apparently you could totally see his “wand”.)
Anyway...
I’ve seen a couple of dance pieces that had nudity. One of them was at a dance festival, and the point of the “nudity” seemed to be something like, “ha-ha, we’re naked ladies back here, way upstage, but you’ll never know for sure, as we slowly inch across stage seated, and facing upstage. But, oh yeah, we’re naked. Heh-heh.” It was just a short part of medium-length piece, and seemed to me kinda pointless, really. The other piece was a longer work about the 7 Deadly Sins, and had some bits of nudity here and there, as well as a more extended solo and duet.
So... Sometimes onstage nudity is pertinent to the work—the play or dance or whatever. And sometimes it’s not; it’s more “hey, let’s have some nudity here”.
Now, I’m all for nudity, whether it’s making a point or if it’s more recreational in nature. But, I think onstage nudity in some works can be...inappropriate. That’s not a word I like much, when it comes to life—people interacting with each other and that sort of thing. But, I feel strongly that in an artistic work there can be choices that are not appropriate for that piece. Now, if the point of the piece is to shock, then great, shock away. But to insert something for shock value, or for your own personal/political/social/etc. agenda that doesn’t pertain to the work is inappropriate. That’s not to say one can’t find new and different ways to present some existing work. But don’t superimpose some idea or element that doesn’t make sense and can’t be justified by what’s already in the work—in the script or score or whatever.
As a professional singer friend of mine put it:
“...throwing naked bodies onstage just to have naked bodies and shock the audience is disgusting. There's a fine line between tastefully done and just doing it because you want to do it. It's like baking a cake. Do you take your time? Measure the ingredients, mix them well and then decorate it beautifully? Or do you just throw all of the shit into the oven and hope a beautiful cake comes out? There has to be thought and meaning into why there is a naked body onstage.”
Rosemary Joshua and chorus in "Endless Please, Endless Love" from Semele by Händel.
English National Opera, London, 1997
I really like this. It’s fun.
There’s another video of this aria with Cecilia Bartoli in what appears to be the same or very similar staging, but to me she seems less playful, less fun throughout. And her exit is more modest. So, boo! on all counts.
But in researching the topic of nudity in opera, I came upon this video.
I’m not sure if this counts as onstage nudity or if it’s a wardrobe malfunction, but considering the dress (which is kinda awesome) it’s either the former or the later just waiting to happen.
Catherine Naglestad “Ah, mio cor”
An issue I have with this particular video is that, given the explicit sexiness of that black dress, I don’t really buy the fact that the “boy” is a boy.
Yeah, pants roles (female singers playing young male characters) are a traditional operatic convention. But I often have difficulty turning off the part of my brain that says “that’s a woman”. And in this case, it’s even worse. I think the fact of seeing breasts onstage makes me all the more aware of the breasts on that “boy”.
Another point about this video: I’m not sure how I feel about the contemporary look and feel of an older opera, one which has the sound and feel of an older opera. Maybe it’s just the harpsichord, but for whatever reason, the visual doesn’t match the aural. I don’t mind a director’s changing the setting, nor doing a sort of minimal set, etc production, nor even something more surreal and eclectic—if it works. I suppose even changing the time period would be okay in some cases. But if it sounds old, putting it in a modern-looking and modern-feeling setting seems odd to me.
I don’t seem to have any problem with taking it in the opposite direction: for example the musical Les Miserables is set in revolutionary France in the early 1800s, yet the music is contemporary pop-ish musical theatre. I’m fine with that. And of course, I’ve seen productions and movies of Shakespeare plays that put the action in a more contemporary setting. Some were effective, some weren’t. There’s a great film of Richard III set in 1930s England. I think it works quite well.
So what’s the difference? I don’t know.
Anyway...my original point was: here’s an opera production that fits what a friend of mine was talking about when she said “More graphic nudity, sex, violence is definitely a trend in opera. I think it's trying to appeal to our dulled senses.”
If you’re interested, here’s my first naked opera entry:
This performance got me kinda curious, as it’s actually not horrible, and I started looking for other Salome’s dances. From the videos I found, when there’s actual nudity it’s usually for just the final second, before Salome collapses and some people rush around her and cover her with a cloak or something. I can’t seem to find many of those videos online now. Maybe someone felt embarrassed by the bad choreography and had them removed.
Anyway, in the story this dance is supposed to be a seduction, part of a deal between Salome and her step-father, Herod.
(Hey kids, it’s bible-story time! Yay! ...seriously, the story comes from Mark, chapter 6)
He says if she dances for him, he’ll give her whatever she asks. Then she does this sexy dance and asks for the head of John the Baptist, who they have in the dungeon.
A major problem with the “Dance of the 7 Veils” is that it’s a lengthy (usually) solo dance for an opera singer. “Traditionally” opera has had a lot of stand-there-and-sing-and-look-dramatic type of performers. And I think it’s still often the case that opera singers aren’t necessarily great movers. There’s just not much emphasis on movement in their training, certainly less than in the training that actors, especially musical theatre actors, get.
So the “7 Veils” Dance often ends up being Salome running around a lot and acting “sensual” &/or distraught, taking off a “veil” or two, then more running and sensual/distraught-ess...maybe some slow “seductive” moves? Well, the full dance is about 9 minutes long. What the hell do you do with an opera singer for that long?
Tiziana Sojat as Salome (not sure where or when)
Sometimes it’s hard to tell if you just have boring choreography, or a really bad “dancer” doing what might otherwise be decent choreography. Or maybe you just have a non-dancer doing bad choreography invented by a non-choreographer.
So, if you have a soprano who doesn’t really move well, and who isn’t okay with taking her clothes off, you’ve got a problem. Back in the day, a lot of your big sopranos were exactly that: big sopranos. And as a friend of mine said, “Who wants to see Joan Sutherland naked?”
Well, this ain’t Dame Sutherland, but I suppose it’s pretty much the same:
Montserrat Caballe as Salome, Teatro de la Zarzuela de Madrid, 1979
Supposedly, in the original production, the soprano Marie Wittich (pictured here:)
wouldn’t do the dance, so it was done by a dancer. That might actually be a preferable situation for many productions. Recently there’s been more of a sexification of opera, and you’re seeing a lot more attractive “big” singers these days. (I’ll write more on that soon.) So, of course, if you have a singer who can handle the music and can move well and isn’t shy about taking her clothes off in front of an audience, then, by all means, go for it.
Catherine Malfitano as Salome, Berlin, 1990 (with Horst Hiestermann as Herodes)
.jpg)
.jpg)
