What is the difference between a rock musical and a rock opera?
I think a Rock Opera would consist of the show being mostly sung (like next to normal and american idiot) and a rock musical would just be a musical with rock songs
Well, what's the difference between a musical and an opera? I think you can do this.
Stand-by Joined: 12/22/10
chewy - I think n2n actually has been regarded several times (even by some of the cast) as a rock opera. I guess it's hard to tell if they are just joking around a bit, but the show is almost totally sung through...the book is minimal. So in the sense that there is a bit of spoken dialogue, it's not. But in the sense that the scenes are completely structured around the song and there are upwards of 30 songs, i think it could reasonably fall in the rock opera category.
I own the script of N2N, and after reading it over many times, while it is a rock musical, it is nowhere near a rock opera, regardless of the amount of songs it has.
AMERICAN IDIOT, on the other hand, would ebb toward rock opera, since rock operas need not necessarily be completely sung through and may have minimal dialogue (or monologues in this case).
Stand-by Joined: 12/22/10
I don't know, I still feel like it's more than a traditional "musical" where there is a definite delineation between scene and song. When I think of traditional musicals, I think Scene. Song. Scene. Song. etc... While each scene is always setting up the next song and the songs are still driving the plot forward, a traditional musical is a blend of scene and song, not completely dependent upon the songs. I would venture to say it's more like 40% scene, 60% song.
In n2n, however, I would argue that it's about 10% scene, 90% song. I think it could be safely said that the songs are telling most of the story. Also, without the dialogue, I think you get almost entirely the same story with very few holes. I don't think the same can necessarily be said for something that is classified as a musical, not an opera.
I wonder about American Idiot being an opera, because operas, to me, still have a story line. I never found a real story line in American Idiot. It seemed to me like a little more than a jukebox musical. There is a definite sense that the songs all fit together in some way, but I don't know that stringing a bunch of songs together in the way that they did means you're telling one focused story. I think that's due to the fact that, contrasted with n2n for example, the songs weren't written with one coherent story in mind. Which is fine - I think the show still accomplishes something interesting. It's got a very ethereal, universal, apply-your-own-meaning feel. But do I feel like I'm watching one coherent story with plot points when I watch it? Eh, probably not. Do I feel like it could be called an opera for that reason? Again, probably not. Not sure exactly what to call it, though...
^ Would "mush" be appropriate?
I do think that Next To Normal is a rock opera rather then just a rock musical. While there are particular plot points that are mentioned in the book that aren't mentioned in the songs or recordings of the music, you can still follow the story with just the music alone. And, while it may have traditional scenes, they are all woven through song and none of them can stand alone on their own without the music. I think, that because the music is the way that this story is told, and a key concept to this show, then it is a rock opera.
American Idiot is a rock opera. The concept album which it is based on does have a story and is a story told through music. Yes, the show added a couple of songs that weren't part of said album. But, just because the story isn't clear to you, doesn't mean that there isn't one.
Videos