Page 177 - Weiss, Jernej, ur. 2019. Vloga nacionalnih opernih gledališč v 20. in 21. stoletju - The Role of National Opera Houses in the 20th and 21st Centuries. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 3
P. 177
“spectacular” challenges of opera in the 21st century
been considered improbable two decades ago. Asteroid 62 (created in 2013)
or Nosferatu (in 2014) respectively borrow, in an innovative way, to the uni-
verse of science fiction and horror films. The public of these genres, previ-
ously considered recreational, was initially substantially composed of teen-
agers (or possibly children in the first case).
More generally, note that the opera, recently, childish or not, does not
hesitate to find librettos with effective, clearly narrative, even popular can-
vases. John Seabrook showed in 2000 that the worlds of marketing and cul-
ture were now comparable8. Because, as Nicolas Bourriaud summarized,
“in a postmodern world everything is worth it9”. Therefore, one can use a
popular libretto, which is well worth one (or more than) avant-garde nar-
ration. Moreover, in the era of globalization, it becomes increasingly diffi-
cult for the composers to be noticed. It is therefore necessary to compose
effective works, even „spectacular“. Now, the genre of opera is by definition
spectacular. For twenty years, therefore, we have been witnessing a dramat-
ic and lyrical revival, which corresponds to a renewal of the spectacle or, at
least, to its necessity. Guy Debord, who wrote La société du spectacle in 1967,
would not have been surprised by the phenomenon.
But to consider this return of the opera as a show, we must first de-
scribe the withdrawal, relative, of the opera genre, which preceded it, after
the World War II.
Defiance of Boulez, Messiaen and the contemporary avant-
‑gardes: the temporary withdrawal of the “show”
Boulez never composed any opera. According to him, the genre was prob-
lematic in itself, even obsolete. Berg, with Wozzeck (created in 1925) and
Lulu (unfinished in 1935), seemed to have pushed the genre to its modernist
(serial) paroxysm. Boulez could not imagine going past him. Was he afraid
of failing? And the avant-gardes of Darmstadt often followed this pessimis-
tic example. Berio and Cage did not compose any opera. Nono composed
three. But there was a political necessity, often associated with the opera
genre10, that of affirming, through the librettos, his militant communism.
8 See John Seabrook, Nobrow: the culture of marketing, the marketing of culture (New
York: Knopf, 2000), quoted by Hal Foster, Design & crime (Paris: Les prairies ordi-
naires, 2008), 20.
9 “Dans un monde postmoderne, tout se vaut.” Radicant: Pour une esthétique de la glo-
balisation (Paris: Denoël, 2009), 97.
10 David Chaillou gives a good example in Napoléon et l‘opéra: La politique sur la scène
(Paris: Fayard, 2004).
175
been considered improbable two decades ago. Asteroid 62 (created in 2013)
or Nosferatu (in 2014) respectively borrow, in an innovative way, to the uni-
verse of science fiction and horror films. The public of these genres, previ-
ously considered recreational, was initially substantially composed of teen-
agers (or possibly children in the first case).
More generally, note that the opera, recently, childish or not, does not
hesitate to find librettos with effective, clearly narrative, even popular can-
vases. John Seabrook showed in 2000 that the worlds of marketing and cul-
ture were now comparable8. Because, as Nicolas Bourriaud summarized,
“in a postmodern world everything is worth it9”. Therefore, one can use a
popular libretto, which is well worth one (or more than) avant-garde nar-
ration. Moreover, in the era of globalization, it becomes increasingly diffi-
cult for the composers to be noticed. It is therefore necessary to compose
effective works, even „spectacular“. Now, the genre of opera is by definition
spectacular. For twenty years, therefore, we have been witnessing a dramat-
ic and lyrical revival, which corresponds to a renewal of the spectacle or, at
least, to its necessity. Guy Debord, who wrote La société du spectacle in 1967,
would not have been surprised by the phenomenon.
But to consider this return of the opera as a show, we must first de-
scribe the withdrawal, relative, of the opera genre, which preceded it, after
the World War II.
Defiance of Boulez, Messiaen and the contemporary avant-
‑gardes: the temporary withdrawal of the “show”
Boulez never composed any opera. According to him, the genre was prob-
lematic in itself, even obsolete. Berg, with Wozzeck (created in 1925) and
Lulu (unfinished in 1935), seemed to have pushed the genre to its modernist
(serial) paroxysm. Boulez could not imagine going past him. Was he afraid
of failing? And the avant-gardes of Darmstadt often followed this pessimis-
tic example. Berio and Cage did not compose any opera. Nono composed
three. But there was a political necessity, often associated with the opera
genre10, that of affirming, through the librettos, his militant communism.
8 See John Seabrook, Nobrow: the culture of marketing, the marketing of culture (New
York: Knopf, 2000), quoted by Hal Foster, Design & crime (Paris: Les prairies ordi-
naires, 2008), 20.
9 “Dans un monde postmoderne, tout se vaut.” Radicant: Pour une esthétique de la glo-
balisation (Paris: Denoël, 2009), 97.
10 David Chaillou gives a good example in Napoléon et l‘opéra: La politique sur la scène
(Paris: Fayard, 2004).
175
