The difference between opera and musical theatre — Page 2

Stephen Sondheim has often said that the only difference between musical theatre and opera is the building it is performed in. He thinks of himself as a musical theatre composer, but when opera houses choose to produce SWEENEY or A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC or CANDIDE, they become operas -- in part due to differences in casting (ie casting opera singers), but mainly due to the expectations of the audience (ie an "opera crowd" is going to have a set of expectations and reactions to a performance that are slightly different from a musical theatre one and will appreciate and evalaute various aspects of the performance differently). Similarly, when LA BOHEME, PORGY & BESS and Menotti's THE MEDIUM & THE TELEPHONE were done on Broadway, audiences experienced them and evaluated them as if they were musical theatre pieces (and I suppose that CONTACT was looked upon as a piece of musical theatre when it played at The Beaumont -- certainly the Tonys thought so -- and not as modern dance ballet of the sort you might see at the Joyce on any given evening).

While Sondheim's definition might be seen as simplistic to some, it frankly makes about as much sense as most of these other rather inadequate (and contradictory and incomplete) defintions which attempt to distinguish these overlapping genres from one another.

---

Heh, I wish I knew at the time of the discussion that Sondheim had said that; I'm often comparing some operas in class to parts of Sondheim musicals.

It seems when it comes down to it then, my teacher is right. (Place it is in the CD store/building it's performed in=same difference).

But thank you to those of you explaining the conductor vs. the director, that's something I find very interesting.

I actually went to my first ever opera tonight--La Traviata at the Met. What a different, wonderful experience! I couldn't believe that the chandeliers went up (is that actually why they do that in Phantom? B/c that would be a funny coincedence...), how the actors bowed between the acts, how the conductor got to bow with the cast on the stage (awesome!), the focus and reception the orchestra got, etc.

Maybe when it comes down to it, it's ultimately the production that decides whether a piece is a musical or opera, since that seems to be some of the differences--the fact that opera singers aren't miked and the larger orchestra, etc.

Please continue this discussion, it's quite fascinating.

(This isn't why I posted this) but for my final paper, I get to write about Bernstein's score for West Side Story (yaay), considering it to be an operatic score, but when I thought about it, I may just write about the score in general, since there may not be that much in a score that makes it operatic and not musical. Granted, there are certain aspects like motifs that were developed in opera that I can pinpoint, but still...

It's all very interesting. They're really not that different, but they can be treated as such different entities.

---

wickedrentq - congrats on your first opera!
How do you feel about them bowing in between acts? It always bothers me - I feel like it breaks the suspension of disbelief, but thats just my personal opinion.

As for belting - opera singers do not belt, at least in the classic sense of the word. The term belting comes out of musical theater. But opera singers do have to sing over really big orchestras over a long period of time, and sing at the maximum ends of their vocal range quite frequently.

---

No difference between Carousel and Turandot??? Where to begin...

Incidentally, operas that include dialogue - Carmen, the prime example although it is often done with sung recitatives not composed by Bizet - are a sub-category. Opera Comique in French. Singspiel in German. Dialogue with music behind to heighten it is "melodrama" the original meaning of the term.

---

>> No difference between Carousel and Turandot??? Where to begin...

Then please do. Hammerstein himself said he looked to composers like Puccini and Verdi for inspiration (at least he admits it, unlike ALW).

>> Question: THE GONDOLIERS. Opera or musical?

The purists would say neither, that works such as G&S are operettas. But Broadway ran wild with those (and still does, actually): KISMET, for example. DESERT SONG. STUDENT PRINCE. SHOWBOAT is considered an operetta by some, and one could easily make a case for NIGHT MUSIC as one -- and not because of the fact that it takes place in Europe around the turn of the last century.

And since we're discussing this, remember that some operas actually made their debuts on Broadway: PORGY AND BESS and THE MEDIUM.

---

"an opera doesn't rely on audience members being able to understand the text. Due to the very legitimate and resonant singing employed by opera singers, consonants are often indistinguishable, but it doesn't really effect a viewer's comprehension of the story"

Just something from earlier I wanted to respond to. Granted, that may be the case now, but it's amusing because as I learned in class, that wasn't at all the intention of the creators of opera in the 1600's. In fact, it was the opposite. An important motto to the earliest opera composers was "Prima la parole, poi la musica"--first the words, than the musical. They felt it was very important for the audience to understand the words. They didn't have too much "melisma"--multiple notes per syllable.

Just an interesting contrast between what opera became known for (not needing to understand the words) and its original intentions.

---

Difference?

I love musical theatre but HATE (and I strongly emphasize HATE) opera!

Difference? The singing style -- simply cannot tolerate 'opera-style' singing. That long loud boisterous singing style. Musical theatre is more standard 'realistic' singing.

Can NOT sit thru: Placido Domingo, Il Divo, most of Josh Groban, Luciano Pavarotti, Andrea Bocelli -- those voices grate me. Ugh!

Oh, and whatever Audra McDonald is trying to do vocally also grates me. That nasally conjested thing of hers. Oy!



YES!:


NO!:

Another difference; I love Musical Theatre. Opera, not so much.

And, I (try to) write Musical theatre. Opera, couldn't for the life of me.

---

Personal preference, I guess. Personally, I find Groban's style leans more towards MT than opera.

I don't think that the difference between opera is as clear-cut as others have said here. Opera is all about the music; the story is really secondary (and often hard to follow, even if you know what's going on) and the lyrics are usually nonsensical. Musical theatre is all about story. You need to know what's going on to care about the characters and what they are singing in musical theatre. Watching WEST SIDE STORY, you are aware that Tony and Maria's love is forbidden and that the Jets and Sharks are enemies. Try following the plot of SIMON BOCCANEGRA...

However, I think it's safe to say that without opera, musical theatre as we know it today would not exist.

---

"Opera is all about the music; the story is really secondary (and often hard to follow, even if you know what's going on) and the lyrics are usually nonsensical."

This statement is patently ridiculous.

So many misconceptions. Many people find the stories of operas hard to understand because they are often in a different language and the problems that they deal with are less mundane than in musical theater (although this is not always the case, of course), but operas usually deal with IDEAS rather than simply PEOPLE and PROBLEMS.

---

Well, I've studied opera for almost a decade and am familiar with most of the operas in the Western canon and I wholeheartedly stand by my statement. Most operas ARE about the music primarily. Lyrics don't matter as much. Pick a well-known aria, read the English translation of it, and get back to me. Besides, even if an opera is written in your native tongue or a language you understand, it's hard to tell what the singers are singing because of how high/low they are singing. Modern operas and operas written specifically in English have changed this some, but I would still say that opera is more concerned with telling its stories through music than through a formal sequence of events, like we're used to in musicals.

ETA: WRQ, my dancer friends often make an argument that WSS is as much of a dance piece as it is a musical. Hard to categorize!

---

Updated On: 3/17/07 at 02:01 PM

AC, reading an English translation of an opera or even an aria doesn't give anyone a fair representation of what is being said in actuality.

For a person who claims to have studied opera for a long time, Im surprised that you haven't read and understood Lorenzo da ponte's incredible librettos for three of Mozart's famous operas, Figaro, Cosi and Giovannni. Both Mozart and Da ponte are very concerned with what is being said as well as what is being sung and played by the orchestra.

I agree with the statement made by the person who said that that WSS almost doesn't need lyrics. Bernstein packs meaning into the music, something most musical theater composers don't do.

---