Message Board digest
|
 |
|
The BBC Singer of the World in Cardiff 2003 message board is now closed.
Here's a digest of some of the messages - there wasn't room for all of them but it gives an idea of the subjects you got passionate about! The most recent posts are first. |
|
|
That's all folks! from Graeme Kay - HOST - 10 Jul 2003
Can I make a few valedictory remarks in response to the many posts and emails we've received - and thank you for displaying the passionate interest we know exists for Cardiff Singer, and which we are keen to serve and tap into through this website.
First the good news. At the official party after the Final, Menna Richards, controller of BBC Wales, stated quite categorically that the competition would not be leaving town and will be held in Cardiff in 2005. Jury chairman Anthony Freud confirmed this to me afterwards too.
Many people have criticised the name change and I do not believe anyone associated with the competition would disagree that the current solution is 'clunky'. And again, no-one objects to the fact that we all call the event 'Cardiff Singer' for short - they do it too!
I conducted an on-the-record but unbroadcast interview with a very senior executive at BBC Wales which has only remained unbroadcast because it hit the cutting-room floor (except editing is all digital these days!) From that, I can explain that the name change was to do with the international marketability of the competition in terms of broadcast rights and sales - as you can imagine, the acknowledged fact that the competition is superbly well run by Anna Williams and her team, carries a heavy price tag. The BBC is concerned always to make sure that best value is secured for and on behalf of licence-payers, and this does not preclude raising funds through commercial partnerships to secure the necessary investment in blue-chip events such as Cardiff Singer. So the emphatic message from the organisers is that the name change was all about securing the future of Cardiff Singer so that we can all go on enjoying it in the future.
Before everyone writes again to say, well how are licence-payers served by restricting the concert rounds to digital TV - this is a valid question and all of your emails on this thorny topic have as ever been noted and I believe, replied to. Part of the thinking on BBC Four is that there has been a surge in digital viewing since the introduction of Freeview. It's predicted that by the time of the next competition the vast majority of households will have access to BBC Four and there is no doubt that this platform allows for much more extended coverage of the competition than could ever be expected on terrestrial TV.
The separation of the Song Prize from the main competition has had, and will have, far-reaching consequences. I'm totally behind the organisers in believing that the separation is a good thing. BUT: entering to perform art song in the competition must be a positive decision on the part of the singer, taken from a position of strength. It is not something to be entered into lightly, to increase the chance of winning a prize, or because you might think the judges in the main competition will consider you are not a fully rounded artist if you don't. To be honest, a few of the competitors in the song prize were clearly not comfortable with the experience and may have been ill-advised to take part in it. I think there may be changes to the format in 2005 which should ensure that singers with the commitment and necessary experience in art song will be able to showcase their talents to best advantage.
Maria Paula Lino's post raises some very interesting questions. All I can say is that in my experience the same questions are asked after every Competition. What it boils down is this: are the judges rewarding achievement to date (or even just on Finals night), or are they putting down a marker for a future talent. Looking back over the previous winners, its seems clear that the answer is that the judges are looking to do both. Karita Mattila took time to become the great artist she is now; Bryn Terfel and Dmitri Hvorostovsky were raw, exciting talents, but they too took the Cardiff experience as a boost and went on to develop gradually into suprebly experienced, mature artists.
Finally, and this is a related point, Cardiff Singer perhaps need to do more to convince young singers that to be selected as one of 25 finalists out of nearly 1000 applications is a fantastic accolade. It also offers an opportunity to strut your stuff before the highest-powered international audition panel you will ever come across. Yes, there are risks in that, but I don't know of a competition yet where the jurors haven't been concerned really to help the singers, particularly once the formalities of competition are over. Cardiff Singer is about participation - it is not about 'Winner Takes All'.
See you in 2005!
Maria Paula Lino - 2 Jul 2003
it's too easy, while singing standards slip steadily, to get caught in polite formulas: 'singers all wonderful', 'decision so difficult'. Yet this competition, it's scope, prize, length and title, has tacitly set itself a different standard. The winner's supposed to be a major artist an undeniable talent, a winner that one shouldn't be able to find, say, in the discount section of international competitions.
It's then quite surprising to have heard young and unfinished singers as the incredibly talented Donovan who has allure, panache and will be - in five years, surely a serious artist; or the intriguing Phan, whose musicality's so distinctive; or Siheng Yi with her sauternes - timbre; or Ifrim, with a top unmatched. Yet these are surely unfinished, one wonders if the selection committee chose them as mere fillers, or whether they really believed these are first prize material.
By the time the final came the jury seemed to say: we are looking for mainstream consistency, singers that exude friendly niceness, technical lack of thorny problems. Safety above risk. It's not that I'd argue with this selection - this is so subjective, anyone's bound to come up with a different list of finalists. What's disturbing to me though, is the process of generification (if there is such a word) where artistry and individuality are sacrificed for discreet marketability. Erin Wall is just so: consistent, professional, her top's effortless platinum, she exudes majesty. But after the initial positive impression, I suspect this voice is - top excluded - rather homely, that her emotions are cool and generic. I wasn't pierced with angst from her 'no word from tom' nor tickled erotic by 'tell me I'm pretty'.
That's how Tania Kross was skipped over: a wonderful artist. Here everything is thought about, polished, presented with individual interpretation. She showed different characters,vigor,humour and nerve with Ottavia's monologue. Obscure? One notes nowadays ten Poppeas to, say, Thais performances. In today's reality of opera as compared to artificial competition situations, it's such artists as Kross that make an evening.
Another exception was countertenor Matthias Rexroth, a voice not factory made, mellifluent Ferrier darkness. He stood and quietly drew the audience to himself, had courage to sing pianissimo, wove ethereal mists of phrasing, articulation, shading. In a top heavy world he dolloped impressive bottom notes. For those interested in belcanto tricks, his seemingly endless legato phrases in Rossini were impressive.
Talking about bottom notes, Elena Manistina had some of the loveliest, an important voice. Speaking purely of timbres I would say she and Rexroth were two unique voices of the competition (unique: would I recognise this voice in an instant as belonging to that particular singer?). Manistina had technical ease, a stately imperiousness. One was called to attention, she didn't beg.
To return to the slipping standards: The winner, Tommi Hakala exudes such charm and friendliness that he's almost critique resistant. Indeed it's our job as audience to like one singer more than another, and it's the jury's hard job jury to set personal likes and dislikes aside, demand standards be high: the difference between a Michelin star or two, a soup that's cool, a sauce imperfect, trivia not discernable by the laypublic. So despite feeling guilty - is it not mentionable that Mr. Hakala has an 'L' lisp, that his languages and style are unidiomatic, that left naked in Wolfram his pitch and line were shaky, and that despite an easy and staggering top - he doesn't have the bite of a Verdi baritone? I'm not saying he isn't worthy of the first prize. Indeed, one could have given it to almost any of the singers, with one justification or another, most of them had at least one ingredient going very strong. Angela Marambio would have been my personal preference, for her honesty, guts, not singing repertoire that's too heavy for her. Then again perhaps Kross for spunk or the thrilling, charming Werba, or, or, or... Hand on heart - was there a performance which stunned one, left one speechless? Yes, this trivia above should concern jury members alone. But the jury was cautious, perhaps affected by odour of mothballs. Hopefully the next jury will have courage to look for finalists less safe, more interesting and feel free to decide a standard may not have been met, and not award a prize. This will ensure future integrity, so that this competition will become a head above others, as it should be.
Cardiff Singer of the World - Mary Turner - 1 Jul 2003
[1] TIMETABLE Last week was full of wonderful singing, but made heavy demands of the audience - by which I mean those people who did not want to miss out on the Lieder singing under the new regime. I had to drive about 30 miles in and back for the 1pm and 7.30pm sessions, so, taking into account the time to get parked (and saying nothing about NCP's charges!), I had to forget about doing anything else in either the mornings or afternoons. I thought there was a lot of merit in having separate Lieder recitals, but it made for a distinctly audience-unfriendly timetable. I don't know what the answer is - maybe a 4pm start for the Lieder?
[2] THE FUTURE I've been alarmed to hear on all sides that, now that the BBC has got control of Cardiff Singer, it does not have a long-term future in Cardiff. The idea of it being held anywhere other than Cardiff is totally unthinkable. It was Cardiff's project in the first place, Cardiff is central to its identity, and it belongs to Cardiff, not to the BBC. The competitors always appreciate the special atmosphere and warmth of their reception - and it must be so nice to be somewhere other than London! The BBC must think again about this.
So far: 3/10 Stephen Wilcox - 28 Jun 2003
1 mark for the handful of intelligent singers who know what they can sing, what is appropriate for their voice, and do it well.
0 marks out of 2 for the singers who have tried to add 15 years to their voice. It's painful to watch, and seriously career-shortening.
1 mark to the jury for getting the result in round 5 right.
0 marks out of 3 to the jury for rounds 2 and 3 (I haven't seen 1 or 4 properly yet). They seem to have favoured blandness and legato singing above everything else, which gets very dull very very quickly.
0 marks to the jury for the finalists (In some cases comment based on brief webcasts or short piece of video.) The following would have made for a more interesting final and I suspect will have more fulfilling careers: England, Wales, Holland, Norway.
1 mark to the BBC for broadcasting everything as live -- even if only on BBC4.
0 marks to the BBC for the lack of terrestrial coverage and the lack of any sort of coverage of the Song Prize at a sensible time of day.
Can you put a price on real talent - Edward McDermott, 24 Jun 2003
At this time of the year when tennis takes over, and the contestants earn more looking cool in clothes than playing the game, do you not think it is time to get real. Come on BBC you promote the Proms, which is great, but, to give prime time TV to the best singing contest in the world to BBC4 is really a joke. Come on get real. If you want to introduce classical music to everyone, then this is the perfect way to do it.
|
|
|
|
