In opera, does size matter?
A production of Aida at the Royal Albert Hall reignites a controversial debate
I like to think I’m not sizeist. As far as I’m concerned, what people weigh is up to them. But when it comes to opera? I’m beginning to think I might be.
At Raymond Gubbay’s Aida in the round at the Royal Albert Hall last weekend – a fabulously staged theatrical experience complete with pyramids, tombs, sphinxes and archeological remains – several of the soloists and chorus members looked to me as if they were distinctly out of shape. Their singing, however, was faultless (as was the playing of the RPO). So did it matter?
Well, in a word, yes. When a singer fails to look the part, our ability to transcend the confines of the concert hall or opera house and enter the realms of our own, and the composer’s and director’s, imagination can become hindered. In this case, my two main niggles were straining costumes and, at times, clumsy, verging-on-comical movement around the stage. The result was that my focus started drifting away from the narrative and the music as my belief in the characters began to flounder.
There’s an important point to make here. Larger singers can, and frequently do, convince in their acting abilities and therefore in their roles. The director takes into account how they look and move, and works with them to draw the best out of them. If a singer isn’t automatically a match for a role visually and physically, their movement, demeanour, make-up and costume can still create an illusion. (This works the other way, too, with slim singers who are playing physically larger characters – and again, if they are not given the right direction, the effect can be far from realistic.) And even if a singer does seem physically perfect for a role, any shortcomings in the acting department can still be disastrous. But, in the case of Aida, I felt that singers were not given the right direction to overcome any physical limitations imposed by their size. Similarly, I didn’t feel that the wardrobe department created outfits that flattered as much as they could have. Acting ability has always varied among singers but, again, with the right direction and coaching, any shortcomings should be able to be overcome. Here I didn't think they were.
It used to be the case that opera singers could look how they liked – it was their voices that counted. But the tide has been turning in recent years with the physicality of such opera singers as Natalie Dessay, for whom belting out top Cs while ironing and peeling potatoes is effortless (it helps that she’s a consummate actress – in fact, acting was her initial career choice). Her role in Laurent Pelly’s La fille du régiment at the Royal Opera House changed the way I, and many others, viewed opera singers. As she once told me in an interview, it’s no longer acceptable to just ‘park and bark’.
Other singers seem to be embracing this notion, too. I recall a lithe Kate Royal practising yoga in a bikini as she sang her opening aria in ENO’s The Coronation of Poppea. And my breath was fairly taken away during Nicholas Hytner’s perfectly cast Così fan tutte at Glyndebourne, in which Miah Persson, Anke Vondung, Topi Lehtipuu and Luca Pisaroni looked, and sounded, exquisite. Their acting and movement were so convincing that I almost wouldn’t have minded if there hadn’t been any singing at all. As The Independent wrote at the time, ‘The simmering sexual attraction on which the plot depends is entirely believable.’
And I suppose that’s my point. We all know that, on the whole, opera plots can be far-fetched, and at times, frankly ridiculous, but if we are to throw ourselves wholeheartedly into the experience, the singers involved need to convince us that they believe they are who they say they are. Sarah Connolly in ENO’s recent Der Rosenkavalier, for example, had great fun in her role as Octavian – and at the same time never left us in any doubt that she was a young, besotted male adolescent (albeit with a penchant for cross-dressing).
Back in 2003, Deborah Voigt hit the headlines when she was sacked by Covent Garden for being too fat. That summer, she had gastric bypass surgery; today, she’s some 15 stone lighter and has been welcomed back to the Royal Opera House. Is she bitter about the experience? From interviews she’s given, it seems not. Her health and mobility have improved and, as she herself has said, ‘I'm not sure I would have wanted to see me, 150lbs heavier, singing Salome. I think opera houses have to compete for entertainment dollars just like anyone else…I would like to believe that the most important thing in opera is the voice. But at the same time it's a business.’
Some opera lovers have argued that Voigt’s decision to slim down was wrong. With the quality and timbre of the voice being so dependent on the physical support of the stomach and diaphragm, there is a danger that a slimmer body equals a slimmer voice. And in recent years, some critics have spoken of Voigt’s voice becoming more hard-edged and less warm. Voigt herself is non-committal: ‘I don’t think the size of my voice has changed,’ she has said. ‘Maybe it’s a little brighter, more silvery than gold.’
Voigt has spoken out against the sexism inherent in all this – that women on stage are criticised more regularly for being overweight than men. But for this writer, it has nothing to do with being male or female. Yes, in opera, the voice is paramount and nothing must get in the way of that – certainly not surgery, unless it’s for health reasons as it was with Voigt. But the ability to convince the audience by embodying a role comes a close second. And if I’m not convinced, then I’d rather not bother. Go on, shoot me.
Sarah Kirkup is deputy editor of Gramophone. She plays flute and piano, and sings with her local church choir. Sarah is a fan of ballet and contemporary dance, and attends as many productions - particularly at Covent Garden - as she can.



Comments
I came to the opera house with a theatre/film backgroud and I must say that I always found it a place relatively and refreshingly free from the rigid standards of today's entertainment industry. This was the one place where size or any other appearance feature was not (hopefully) taken into account when it came to giving out roles to singers. Even age did not matter - and I must say I like this bit even better.
Why not only do I not care about the appearance of the singers on stage but actively promote the variety of human shapes, sizes and ages in the opera (and in the arts in general)? Because hiring only the best (or as you might say suitably) looking performers in my opinion hurts our ability to empathise with characters as they are, regardless of what they look like. And as opera relies so heavily on emotions being shared through music - we should not reserve these emotions only to the best-looking singers. Let the audience understand that an older, sizier man or woman goes through exactly the same emotional anguish or elation as their pin-up counterpart does. Let's pick the artist on the basis of their ability to transfer these emotions through singing and acting - not on the basis of looks.
I can subscribe myself to the very wise and so pertinent points of magdajot.
I do attach great importance to the singers as for their singing qualities rather than their looks. Joan Sutherland or Marilyn Horne looked a bit funny and "big" on the stage, but when they started singing, they transcend everything and brought us to the ultimate heights any Opera could lead us.
In the same vein, I enjoy the "Big" and "Pompous" productions, but the music matters most than anything else, at least to me. An inspired conductor with a magnificent orchestra and chorus can transform the whole thing. With some great voices too, you have the best out of it.
Parla
Dear Friends,
The supersizing problem does seem to be more severe in the 21st century -- I grew up in the Bing era at the Met, and singers had contractual stipulations regarding their health and fitness, just as legit actors still do today. But the culture at the Met seemed to change under Levine, who, as everybody knows, has now incurred major health consequences associated with obesity -- and this condition became increasingly tolerated at the NY house ... to the point, according to formerly overweight basso Paul Plishka, where he was widely ostracized for changing his health patterns and permanently slimming! Apparently, at this world-class theater, there was/is a state of affairs that's unhealthy on several levels.
Historically, there's NO correlation between obesity and voice quality. Looking at the great Bruennhildes of yesteryear, I find nobody who remotely resembles Jane Eaglen, Christine Brewer, or the younger Voigt-- Flagstad and Traubel were merely statuesque, Nilsson simply stocky, and Varnay downright petite. And America's leading Wagnerian mezzo, Stephanie Blythe, fills me with anxiety: she's nearly twice the size of every major Fricka I can recall: Veasey, Minton, Ludwig, Finnie, Klose, Thorborg, on and on into the past.
To me, this situation has gone beyond simple issues of "appropriate" looks for this or that role. In the U.S., as you know, obesity has risen alarmingly throughout the population. In some quarters it's regarded as a mental, emotional, and possibly even spiritual disease ... certainly it's a life-threatening one, and those in its grip deserve our concern, our support, and our encouragement as they work to get well again.
So I applaud Voigt for taking the courageous steps that she has. What's more, I find it ridiculously cruel and selfish of our so-called "voice experts" to expect Voigt NOT to change, to keep endangering her life simply to square with their arbitrary notions of operatic singing. Once again, the historical record flatly contradicts their opinions.
Sincerely,
F. P. Walter
Albuquerque, New Mexico
I sense a bit of confusion between seeing something and hearing something and often the two are very different. Also, from my experience I don't think you can make a rule for size and voice quality.
Two instances spring to mind. In 1986, I saw a production of Walkure at the Met. In Act 1, Siegmund was sung by Peter Hoffman and Sieglinde by Jeannine Altmeyer. Both were slim and lithe and the whole act oozed passion and sexuality. I saw the same production in 2000 with Placido Domingo and Debroah Voight (before she had the surgery). In spite of some spendid singing, the acting was statuesque and the whole thing came across as a bit like Darby and Joan.
My point is that seeing is very different from hearing. In both instances the singing was not the problem - both were very good. However, the singers size severely limited the acting in the 2000 performance, and enabled real passion in the 1986 performance - a big difference for me. If I had just heard the 2000 performance I would have liked it much better.
Sorry about my mispelling - aplogies to Deborah Voigt!
Size disparity is also an issue. One of the more ridiculous performances I saw involved Joan Sutherland and Alfredo Kraus in I Puritani.
The former was not an obese or fat woman but she was statuesque. Kraus is a smallish man, and the scenes involving them together verged on the ludicrous. But all I recall from the performance is the magnificence of the singing (Marilyn Horne was there too) in an opera which is far from being one of my favourites.
Paradoxically, excessive beauty can be another severe distraction. Some years ago a production of Rosenkavalier in New Zealand featured a young and unknown Swedish soprano as Sophie - one Miah Persson. I don't think I have ever seen a more perfectly beautiful woman, and it took all my concentration to listen to her singing. I eventually concluded that she sounded as good as she looked and that her career would go far - and I was 100% correct.
I had a seat in the front row. In the interval between Acts II and III a cellist from the orchestra leaned over the pit wall and asked if he could peruse my programme. He looked longingly at the photos of Ms Persson and as he handed back the programme said, "I'm a stand-in tonight for an indisposed colleague, and I didn't play in the rehearsals. Since I'm determined to marry that gorgeous soprano I'd better know her name."
This proves that not only the audience is subject to extra-curricula distractions.