Paul Potts and a great introduction to opera

[jordanz]

Wow - I just found this:

La Stupenda and Pav together. I have a bunch of albums of them together. Notice, that they aren't using microphones (other than whatever the film crew has). In real opera, the singer must fill the room with their voice alone - no amplification.

[galtgulch]

Barbara,

Thank you so much for the wonderful links or rather the links to the wonderful singers.

I will be listening to opera CDs on my way to and from work from now on. i have an hour commute each way at the moment and my Prius has the six CD changer with pretty good sound for a pretty quiet automobile with the windows closed.

But the real reason I chose to reply was to enlighten you, and others if such there be, who might not yet know about the wonders of, wait for it....

www.tinyurl.com

All you do is bookmark that site (www.tinyurl.com) then whenever you encounter a seemingly endless, or at least a lenghty link or webaddress or url just copy it and paste it on the www.tinyurl.com site which will then reduce it to a more manageable length.

Your preposterously long url link vhttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1110399738793405198&q=mario+lanza+nessun+dorma&total=2&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0 is reduced :

http://tinyurl.com/2lpvgb

Thats funny, it always worked before but it doesn't seem to work this time. How embarrassing.

Never mind!

And the beauty of it is that it gets you to the same place! At least it does most of the time when it works.

No need to thank me. I am not nearly as computer savvy as this tidbit of know how might suggest. You really should try it.

I was moved more by Paul Pott than I was by Pavarotti although the latter was certainly more impressive. Each of us has his or her own place although you will never find me up on a stage singing anything at all, except in the shower or singing along in the car. Sometimes I do impress myself I must admit.

galtgulch

Edited June 26, 2007 by galtgulch

[James Shay]

I must say that I don't think Potts has a beautiful voice, nor that he is well above average.

Barbara,

Heh.

You haven's heard much average. Try sitting in an orchestra for a decade and a half in Brazil.

This guy was perfectly in tune and that's already a blessing in itself. I didn't hear anything ugly at all in his timbre, either, and the evenness over the break (going from high to low notes) was very steady. Potts does not have an exceptional timbre, but his is definitely not bad. I stand by the well over average evaluation.

I tried to convey something else in this review, though, and maybe it did not come off.

People will look at this performance and think that Potts is much better than he probably is (which is already very good to my ear). What they will see is a pop TV production at its finest. Everything jelled and clicked.

I agree that the video itself is powerful. It borrows what I think is one of the most moving means of artistic expression, which is for a creator to show observers within his art reacting emotionally to art. Salieri's reactions to Mozart's work in the film Amadeus are very moving, especially given his very destructive envy for Mozart, as are Betty and Laura's reactions to the Club Silencio performance of the song "Crying" in the film Mulholland Drive. It's a very effective artistic tool.

This is not an experience for opera lovers. It is an experience for people who don't like classical music, or at least don't normally listen to it. Try to imagine someone whose only musical diet is background music on TV and movies, MTV clips, and whose favorite musical performances come from "The Rocky Horror Show." The Potts clip is a wonderful introduction to opera for them.

It appears that Objectivists have generally rated Potts' performance as poor to above average — with pompous Pigero, star of the world-renowned Wellington Operatic Society's production of South Pacific, chiming in with his typical "weasel-piss." Well, actually, SOLOPsists first rated Potts as amazing and refreshing until Pigero talked them out of their joy. (Little Daniel Poindexter Walden, the kid who started the "THIS is what it's all about!!" thread on SOLOP, has been talked into not just recognizing that Potts is not great, but into mimicking Pigero's contempt for Potts and for the audience who applauded him. Walden is quickly learning the SOLOP notion of "total passion for the total height," which, in essence, means that, virtue-wise, a SOLOPsist's choices as a consumer trump a non-SOLOPsist's productivity: that when one is resentful that one is incapable of rising to the level of productive artistry of a Potts, one demonstrates one's SOLOPsist virtue and superiority by being disdainful of others' enjoyment of an imperfect performance.)

Anyway, I keep thinking "What if Potts were an Objectivist? How would he have been received?"

Peter Cresswell is a mediocre to above average architect. His work can be somewhat good, but it's nowhere near being great. He borrows from Frank Lloyd Wright and others without really grasping the artistry of their work — their expressive senses of proportion, color, texture, etc. In his hands, their innovations (which were innovations decades ago) can come across as gimmickry, or even parody (imitation, though sincere, is not necessarily flattering). Yet where is the heroically honest criticism of his work from the likes of pompous Pigero and other Objectivists who buy into the "total passion for the total height" consumer aesthetic? If Potts were an Objectivist, I think SOLOPsists would either be politely remaining silent, congratulating him for a fine effort, or praising him way beyond what his work deserves, just as they do with Cresswell's work.

Pigero is an amateur singer. My guess is that he's not as good as Potts, and that he knows it (if he thought he was good enough to be judged as mediocre, I think he'd be shoving samples of his performances in everyone's faces in the same way that he promotes his mediocre radio work and congratulates himself for it). So, the question is, when people attend Pigero's performances, in the unlikely event that they would applaud him in the way that the Potts video shows the audience applauding Potts, would Pigero scold them for settling for his "weasel-piss" performances?

J

Peter Cresswell is in this thread to demonstrate that the "morally right" people get praise on SOLO beyond what is deserved, right? I don't read SOLO. Two notes:

1. He's better than a "mediocre" architect, as you describe him. From the vantage point of 36 years of practice I know mediocre, and it's not him. If what he does is mediocre, then most constructed buildings are truly awful. I do think he needs to get more work built, so that he can show us what he really can do. As Wright said, it's very hard to be a good architect." And many artists in their early work (actually, I don't know how long Cresswell has practiced, but he seems young - Philip Johnson said "life begins for an architect at 40,"), and some throughout their entire careers, borrow heavily and intelligently without squelching their own voices. For proof of this, look at Richard Meier's ouvre. And I do think Cresswell is doing intelligent borrowing - look at his plans. I think calling him "mediocre" is just a snarky and perhaps slightly malicious comment from someone in the Peanut Gallery who doesn't really know in any kind of detail what qualifies as bad, mediocre, good and great architecture, and what it takes to get it built.

2. Many objectivists seem to be in love with Wright, Goff, and others of the "Organic School, and don't have much room for anything else." There is, however, nothing inherently more "heroic', so to speak - if that's what you're looking for - in their work than in the work of any other architects. Because of Rand's association with Wright and the similarities between what Roark and and Wright said ( and some of Roark's dialogue is almost verbatim out of Louis Sullivan's "Kindergarten Chats") there is a misguided and unfortunate love for the Organic School, at the expense of every other sort of architecture, among many admirers of Rand.

At any rate, when people gas on and on with profound judgments (great, good, mediocre, etc.) about that which they really seen to know little, it gets under my skin.

Jim Shay

[Jonathan]

1. He's better than a "mediocre" architect, as you describe him.

I didn't describe him as "mediocre." I said that he was "mediocre to above average," "somewhat good," but "nowhere near being great." In the next post I said that I had previously mentioned that he was "good but not great."

I think that some of his work is mediocre, some of it is good, and none of it is great. For the most part, you seem to agree.

The point of my comments was to apply Lindsay Perigo's (SOLOP's owner) notion of "total passion for the total height" to the work of one of his Objectivist pals. Perigo believes that heroic Objectivist "ecstasist" art consumers should refuse to settle for anything but the ultimate in art, as defined by Perigo. Talent contest entrant Paul Potts is not Mario Lanza, and therefore deserves to be pissed on instead of congratulated or encouraged for his efforts. He is to be held in contempt, as is the audience who cheered him, revealing their miserable tastes, horrid senses of life, and their general inferiority as subhumans.

At any rate, when people gas on and on with profound judgments (great, good, mediocre, etc.) about that which they really seen to know little, it gets under my skin.

I can identify with that. A windbag gassing on is pretty much what drove me to comment on applying the windbag's standards to his pal's work.

J

[James Shay]

1. He's better than a "mediocre" architect, as you describe him.

I didn't describe him as "mediocre." I said that he was "mediocre to above average," "somewhat good," but "nowhere near being great." In the next post I said that I had previously mentioned that he was "good but not great."

I think that some of his work is mediocre, some of it is good, and none of it is great. For the most part, you seem to agree.

The point of my comments was to apply Lindsay Perigo's (SOLOP's owner) notion of "total passion for the total height" to the work of one of his Objectivist pals. Perigo believes that heroic Objectivist "ecstasist" art consumers should refuse to settle for anything but the ultimate in art, as defined by Perigo. Talent contest entrant Paul Potts is not Mario Lanza, and therefore deserves to be pissed on instead of congratulated or encouraged for his efforts. He is to be held in contempt, as is the audience who cheered him, revealing their miserable tastes, horrid senses of life, and their general inferiority as subhumans.

At any rate, when people gas on and on with profound judgments (great, good, mediocre, etc.) about that which they really seen to know little, it gets under my skin.

I can identify with that. A windbag gassing on is pretty much what drove me to comment on applying the windbag's standards to his pal's work.

Bizarre! Do all opera singers who are not as talented as Mario Lanza deserve "to be pissed on"?

And the poor audience - "miserable tastes, horrid senses of life," etc. Where do you get these thoughts? I've liked some of what you've written from time to time about art, but this is really strange. Am I missing something contextual?

J

[Jonathan]

Bizarre! Do all opera singers who are not as talented as Mario Lanza deserve "to be pissed on"?

Almost everyone other than Lanza, Rand and a few others deserves to be pissed on, but only if one has adopted Lindsay Perigo's idea of "total passion for the total height," or similar Objectivist mindsets.

And the poor audience - "miserable tastes, horrid senses of life," etc. Where do you get these thoughts?

From Perigo and other prominent online Objectivists. The idea of morally judging people, and even entire cultures, based on the art that they like is still alive in some Objectivist circles.

I've liked some of what you've written from time to time about art, but this is really strange. Am I missing something contextual?

Yes, apparently you're missing the context. Sorry if I haven't been clear. The views that you think are bizarre are not mine. They are the essence of the Perigo/SOLOP notion of "total passion for the total height," and they reflect an attitude that is not uncommon among Ayn Rand's fans.

Thanks for saying that you've like some of what I've written. The feeling is mutual.

J

[James Shay]

Bizarre! Do all opera singers who are not as talented as Mario Lanza deserve "to be pissed on"?

Almost everyone other than Lanza, Rand and a few others deserves to be pissed on, but only if one has adopted Lindsay Perigo's idea of "total passion for the total height," or similar Objectivist mindsets.

And the poor audience - "miserable tastes, horrid senses of life," etc. Where do you get these thoughts?

From Perigo and other prominent online Objectivists. The idea of morally judging people, and even entire cultures, based on the art that they like is still alive in some Objectivist circles.

I've liked some of what you've written from time to time about art, but this is really strange. Am I missing something contextual?

Yes, apparently you're missing the context. Sorry if I haven't been clear. The views that you think are bizarre are not mine. They are the essence of the Perigo/SOLOP notion of "total passion for the total height," and they reflect an attitude that is not uncommon among Ayn Rand's fans.

Thanks for saying that you've like some of what I've written. The feeling is mutual.

J

Thank you for the clarification. It was, indeed, hard to imagine you writing those thoughts. They truly are indicative of many objectivists' beliefs. Perhaps I should have read further back in the thread. Anyway, thanks again. Jim

[DonOttavio]

I am an opera singer (A tenor, though not of the dramatic quality: My fach is qualified as Leggiero) myself and I found this performance rather charming. It is true that Paul's rendition was not top of the line, but I found it quite adequate for his training and his rendition was both sincere and very musical, and it is the communication that is such an important part of operatic performance. Many times we have seen singers with perfect techniques or instruments singing without any dramatic communication, while others with not-as-beautiful instruments and imperfect techniques such as Maria Callas have given us rousing performances (while many dispute the beauty of her voice, nobody disputes the power of her dramatic choices and interpretation).

Paul did a lovely job and should be proud of it, and I was glad that the public was so very receptive to it. In my experience I have discovered that although there is a group of people who hate opera viscerally, there is a large part of the public who is prone to appreciating good performances (some of them don't even know it until they come upon one and are moved).

My favorite rendition of Nessun Dorma, incidentally, is Alfredo Kraus'-- he never recorded the role, as it was outside his fach as a lirico-spinto, but he did record the aria. And as always, interpretation and technique are flawless.

Don Ottavio

-------------

Dalla sua pace....

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Don Ottavio,

Let me extend a very warm welcome to OL. I hope you enjoy our small but special community.

Michael

[galtgulch]

Michael, There have been over 8 million hits on YouTube.com to the Paul Potts semifinal performance of Nessun Dorma so far. I must admit that I account for several of those myself.

I have listened to other versions of Nessun Dorma by the professionals recommended here by others. In my search of youtube I found Jussi Bjorling too and I am surprised that no one else suggested him. There are several listed on the youtube site and they seem to span his career.

I enjoy the Paul Potts rendition for a variety of reasons although the professional opera singers have more powerful voices. In one version of the Jussi Bjorling the tempo was purposely slowed to enable Bjorling to show off his voice and it is quite impressive to a neophyte like me.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=tWQ-0QLCWwE&amp...ted&search=

Bocelli is good too as is Placido Domingo. Sarah Brightman sings Nessun Dorma too and all of this is easily found on YouTube.com. Thanks for starting this thread.

galtgulch

[Robert Jones]

I watched this and thought that he was pretty good.

But, I'm still pissed off at Paul Potts for killing a million Cambodians.

;)

Edited August 10, 2007 by Robert Jones

[Chris Grieb]

Robert; The ten million Cambodians was POL Pot.

[Robert Jones]

Robert; The ten million Cambodians was POL Pot.

That's why they got the winking smileys!

[galtgulch]

I am very glad that you started this thread Michael. I listen to one or another opera singers I have discovered through the links others here have suggested. Paul Potts has become quite a sensation and just tonight there were over 16 million hits on youtube.com for his semi final version of Nessun Dorma. Naturally it is probably just the same one million like myself who listen to him again and again.

I wish Ron Paul could get as much attention. Almost made it with his fund raising 4.2 m in one day.

galt

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I wish Ron Paul could get as much attention.

GG,

Well, he could take up singing opera.

Michael

[Dragonfly]

Well, he could take up singing opera.

With Perigo as conductor?

[sbeaulieu]

I saw this video, and sat stunned! I imagine it's been a couple months now since seeing it last, but Paul Potts left an impression...a good one!

For someone with such a humble background, he simply nuked the crowd with his coming-out performance. The audience was rapt, me included. And I'd be willing to say that the road ahead of him will certainly nurture his talent to become one of the greats. I look forward to tracking his successes.

~ Shane