Saturday, March 14, 2009

What is the Difference Between a Musical and an Opera?

What's the difference between a musical and an opera? I've been asked this question a couple of times since I posted my essay on librettists, and since it seems to be such a confusing issue, I thought that I would answer the question, although I don't think we're going to come away with a black and white answer like I'd like to have. There's just too much grey in between the two genres, but I'll give it a try.

Broadway is fun, I'll give you that. When I go to a Broadway show, I can't help but think of the golden age of opera. Back in the 18th and 19th centuries, opera and stage productions were the only form of entertainment for the people, and music became vogue in the late 1600s, so people wanted to hear music more than see a stage play. Today's flocking to musicals by the masses is very similar to the flocking of the masses to operas.

But, we should not limit musicals to just Broadway. Broadway is the Major League of musicals. Just about anywhere you go in the country, you're bound to be within a hundred miles of a theatre where a musical is being performed. Branson, Missouri, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, Orlando, Florida, Los Angeles, California, Atlantic City, New Jersey, Las Vegas Nevada, etc., etc., all have major theatres designed and specified for the performance of musicals. Many of these cities are "tryouts" for a Broadway production, and even in New York, there are the Minor League theatres where musicals are performed. So to limit this genre to one street in New York is not really grasping the whole picture. They are very popular.

Opera was the same way. Almost every European city with a substantial population had an opera house. Vienna, Austria, was the Broadway of opera back then, but there were some very respectable Minor League opera houses in Venice, Florence, Rome, Salzburg, etc., where one could see a very high-level opera. It wasn't a "high-brow" activity as it has become today, unfortunately. For whatever reason, opera has been taken over by the wealthy, and the musical has replaced opera for the masses.

But is there really a difference between the two? Yes and no. You see, I told you there was a grey area. For example, here's the complication. Puccini wanted to take Ferenc Molnar's play "Liliom" and make it into an opera. Molnar objected. Many years later, Rodgers and Hammerstein were given permission to do just that, but instead of being called an opera, it was called a musical. The same text was used and the same strategy was integrated, but one would have been an opera while the other was called a musical. Confusing, eh?

Well, just to let you know, there are some minor areas where the two do differentiate. For instance, in an opera, music drives the drama, whereas in a musical, the text typically drives drama. In opera, music is the key element for emotions, narrative, etc. In a musical, the text plays such an important role in these functions. But, again, remember, I told you that this was not always the case. There are many operas where the libretto (text) was much more important than the music. In "Opera Seria," the text (arias, recitatives, and chorus) was what drove the opera, and the music followed the text. During the early 19th century, "Opera Buffa" became more popular, and that is where we saw music overshadowing the libretto. However, in the late 19th century, there was a movement by young librettist who wanted to return to a text-driven opera. They were partially successful in doing so, and I truly believe that they laid the ground for the modern musical.

Probably the major difference between the two is the acting and dancing component. You will rarely find the leads in an opera dancing and acting. They are there to sing, and to sing well. In a musical, mostly because of advances in technology (microphones, headsets, speakers), the singers are dancing and acting at the same time. Again, though, this isn't always true. And even some of Mozart's operas were very engaging for the leads.

Beyond that, about the only other difference that I can think of is that some musicals have spoken dialogue in them whereas operas rarely do. Again, there are examples of operas that do have spoken dialogue, and there are many musicals that do not, so this is not a clear-cut answer either.

So, where does this leave us? Nowhere, actually. We should take it as it is. Musicals, for the most part, are operas. Operas, for the most part, are musicals. I believe that this is more of a sociological question than anything. Looking at it from our time-frame, opera is highbrow and musicals are for the masses. That's a societal division that has been artificially set up. Because, if you look at it from the eyes of 18th and 19th century audiences, opera was for everyone. It was not a high-brow art. So, after all this discussion, perhaps that is what it all boils down to.

Either way, support the arts. Go see the local high school productions, donate to the arts for community organizations, and go see a musical. You'll enjoy every minute of your experience.

No comments: