Director Patrick Bakman
-- and --
Soprano Gloria Capone
A Conversation with Bruce Duffie
Originally meant as a promotional segment for the Chicago
Opera Theater’s production of Susannah by Carlisle Floyd in February
of 1986, this conversation with Patrick Bakman and Gloria
Capone turned out to be a mutual admiration society between the director
and the soprano. They had been working together, and their respect
for one another showed in their responses, and in the ease with which they
interacted.
A portion of the chat aired on WNIB just prior to the opening performance,
and now it is my pleasure to present the entire encounter. Being
a trio of voices, rather that the usual back-and-forth between two, watch
carefully who is speaking. Sometimes it becomes a dialogue between
the two guests, and I was happy to just let those ideas flow naturally.
As usual, names which are links refer to my interviews elsewhere on my
website.
Here is what was said that afternoon . . . . .
Bruce Duffie: While we wait momentarily for
our soprano, let me ask you about Wagner. You’ve directed Die
Meistersinger, and The Flying Dutchman. Where did you
stage Die Meistersinger?
Patrick Bakman: That was for the Houston
Grand Opera.
BD: With Thomas Stewart?
Bakman: Yes, and Pat Wells. It was
a wonderful experience. I actually love Wagner very much, and
that one is the most accessible of all. It’s so human and so down
to earth.
BD: [To the soprano who has just arrived]
Let me first ask about singing Floyd’s Susannah.
This is a biblical story set into modern times. Does it work as
a modern drama?
Gloria Capone: Absolutely. It’s ever
a relevant subject... someone being persecuted unjustly, and that happens
every day in every little town.
BD: Is it an every-woman situation?
Capone: [Smiles] Well, every community.
It certainly doesn’t happen to every woman, thank God. [Laughs]
BD: Do you think by watching this opera,
it might cut down on the incidents of bad treatment and ill-will?
Capone: I doubt it, but it certainly makes
a very strong statement in that direction.
Bakman: It particularly shows how easy it
is for a community of very simple, basically warm, loving people to
be turned into vicious animals through jealousy of one person. That’s
what it really deals with, the snow-ball effect of hatred and jealousy.
Those qualities seem ever present in life. Bertolt Brecht
at one time spoke of man’s inhumanity to man. Out of all of the
animals, we’re the one that kills each other. None of the other
animals actually will kill each other of their own species. We’re
the ones that do it. I just happen to have seen the other evening
the Akira Kurosawa film called Ran, which I feel is so amazing.
It’s almost the same theme, about how much easier man seems to enjoy destroying
than loving. It’s much easier for him to seek out war than it is
to enjoy life.
BD: You’re mentioning film. Do the
ideas of cinematography enter into your stage direction at all?
Bakman: There may be something to that.
I tend to think about the scene-shifts almost as a cinemagraphic effect,
rather than leading in and out from one scene to another. For
example, the first scene is able to shift focus from one side of the
stage to another. It’s only in those terms what I consider it
of a film nature. There certainly is not the use of film in the
opera.
BD: Do you ever feel that you’re competing
against other kinds of media, such as film or video, or anything that
brings the performer closer to an audience? [Vis-à-vis
the biography shown at right, see my interviews with Frank Corsaro and Julius Rudel.]
Bakman: One really has to define very clearly
the difference between live theater and a movie. Theater today
is trying too much to bring what they can do in the films onto the live
stage, and that defeats the purpose. Some of the extravaganzas
have scenery moving all evening. Even the use of film within the
scenery defeats and minimizes the effect of that live person up there on
the stage performing. There have been attempts of using scrims, both
upstage and downstage, and putting the performers in the middle, and putting
projections to where leaves are larger than people. I disagree with
that because the human being then has been minimized, and almost becomes
insignificant. As a director in the live theater, one has to ask oneself
what can I do on the live stage that I can’t do in a movie or with a video.
It’s important that we answer that question, and put the focus back on the
live performer. Too much effort has been put on scenic effects and technology,
and has been taken away from the performer and his power.
BD: Do you enjoy doing live things as opposed
to film?
Capone: I’ve never done a film, and even though
I would be very interested to do some, there’s something about the audience
that’s very important for me as a performer.
BD: What do you expect of an audience that
comes to see Susannah?
Capone: That is a difficult question.
I would hope that they would just be able to just go with the story,
and let themselves be taken in by it whatever their reaction would be,
good or bad. I also would hope that it would be an honest reaction.
BD: Is the music of Carlisle Floyd that
he has written for this opera, good for your particular voice?
Capone: I think so. It’s very well-suited
for me.
BD: It makes it easy to sing, and is very
melodic?
Capone: It just happens to sit well in my
voice. It’s not that easy to sing. I remember the last time
I did the role it was much more of a challenge for me vocally than it is
now. But I think that’s partly because I wasn’t as in tune with
myself as woman, nor with the role as I am now.
BD: When you’re on stage, do you portray
a character or do you become a character?
Capone: [Thinks a moment] Even though
I’m portraying a character, I’m not one of these people who goes off
stage, and takes three days to stop being Susannah, that persecuted country
girl. However, when I’m on the stage, I am Susannah, but you have
to keep a certain reality in it because you’re singing, and there are
technical considerations. It’s not just a play. It’s an
opera, and you have to think about the singing. But the wonderful
thing about this now is that for me it’s become almost second nature,
which is the ideal. The two ideas
— portraying and becoming
— have come together, so that hopefully
you won’t see me standing up there thinking about singing the next high
note... which you see on a lot of people’s faces sometimes. [Both
laugh]
BD: Then where is the balance between music
and drama, and how do you balance the two when you’re on the stage?
Capone: It’s very tricky. If you want
work in this particular art form, the most important thing is to be
extremely secure technically about your singing. That way, if you
want to be an actress, which I do, then you can just go for it without
having problems. You need to know enough about what you’re doing
that you feel certain it’s going to be there again in the morning. You’re
not going to blow your wad, but you certainly have to be careful.
BD: [Asking the same question of the stage
director] Where, for you, is the balance between music and drama
in opera?
Bakman: They are one in the same, actually.
As a stage director, I find it’s important to establish an atmosphere,
and place the performers in an environment that they have to sing, as
opposed to speaking the lines. This is a major problem with a
lot of contemporary pieces. This idea also goes with regards
to a piece and its viability, whether it be an opera or a piece of drama
with music accompaniment. There should be such an emotional playing
that the singers and the audience should also expect that their emotional
intensity is at the level that they are now needing to sing in order to
really express what they are going through. They need to feel that
mere words could not possibly serve their purpose, and the purpose of
the story.
BD: [To the soprano] Do you also
feel strongly about this?
Capone: Oh, I think that’s right on it.
That’s the ideal.
Bakman: One has to set up that first moment. As
a director, I find the greatest challenge is when the first word is sung,
because you’ve got to set up such an atmosphere that something has to
happen, and the singing must be there. That person should sing, and
start the ball rolling, and not speak the lines. You have to create
an environment for that to take place.
BD: Are there times when a line must be
spoken in a very dramatic situation?
Bakman: Yes, there are certain times where the
emotions become contained, and there are some spoken lines in this
piece. But it catches the characters off balance, or they’re going
for another effect, or emotionally they have simply gone through such
a catharsis that when something is sung to them, it catches them so
by surprise that singing would be inappropriate. There is a very interesting
point towards the very end of the show, after a very cathartic scene of
Olin Blitch and Susannah. Susannah’s belief is that Blitch will
now tell the elders that she, in truth, has been dishonest all along,
and he now knows it after having seduced her. It’s really gut-rendering
for them both, and when she finally leaves, and he has to forgive her, she
is so drained that all she can say is, “Forgive???
I forgot what that word means.” She
needs to speak it rather than sing it, becomes it is such a contrast
after what she’s gone through. To sing that line would be anticlimactic.
Speaking makes one realize she’s so drained of emotion, that it catches
her by such surprise. Of all the things for someone to ask her
after what’s been done to her! It makes a very interesting emotional
statement about where the character is at that point.
* * *
* *
BD: You’re performing this in English, and
you know that the audience is going to understand every word. Do
you work harder at your diction when you’re performing in the language
that the audience understands?
Capone: Yes, sure. I always work hard
at my diction anyway, but certainly if you’re going to sing in English,
then it’s important to make it understood. This opera is written
in such a way that a lot of it is very understandable. Do you disagree
with that?
Bakman: No, no, I really do feel that way.
Capone: The language Floyd used is really
clear...
Bakman: ...and certainly the ideas are
clear, too. In no piece are you going to understand one hundred
per cent. Not even in a musical do you get every single lyric
the first time around. Television, and videos, and discs force
people to be more passive in their hearing, as opposed to really sitting
and being actively a part, and forcing yourself to listen. There
isn’t enough of that. We’ve become passive. We’ll go about
doing our work, and the television is on, or the radio is on, so sound
becomes almost ubiquitous. We have become surrounded by sound, but
we are not concentrating on that sound. So, when you go to that
live performance, you really have to force yourself to listen, and that
becomes a big challenge for a lot of people today. They aren’t aware
that they don’t really listen.
BD: This is part of what I was getting
at before about competing against radio and television and films.
Virgil Thomson said to me
that it creates a sort of lack of attention!
Bakman: Yes.
BD: As a singer, what can you do to grab
their attention, or is that something where you simply have to rely
on the music?
Capone: You have to. Hopefully the music
is written in such a way that you can point out certain words, but that’s
the most important thing. You’d obviously kill yourself if you
punched out every single word and phrase. You have to find the
words that are important, and that bring across the text and the story.
Bakman: Yes, this is something I believe,
and particularly with Gloria here... I’ve worked her into the ground.
[Much laughter] But she’s so receptive! For me, as a director,
the most important thing is that I never be seen on that stage.
Everything looks so much as if the performers have done it all by themselves.
But to do that, every second has to be thought out. Every second
has to have an idea behind it, and it all has to be discussed. Then,
if a performer is really with those ideas about whether the word is completely
understood, it’s a way to grab the attention of the audience. This
is because there is a certain concentration a performer has if they really
understand what they’re doing, and it’s that concentration which ultimately
gets to the subconscious of the audience, and makes them want to become
a part of that world. The more real the world is for the performers,
the more an audience will want to become a part of that world, because
they feel something really is going on there, and they want to get into
it. They want to really see it. A little bit of the problem
with opera is the feeling of wanting to get the hit songs out, and not
really worry at all of the validity. It’s as if what you say doesn’t
make any difference, whether it’s English, or Italian, or French.
I personally think all languages should be sung with the same intensity,
and the same concentration. Then, even if an audience doesn’t totally
understand French, or Italian, or German, if the performer really understands
what he’s singing, and is really focussing on that and not apologizing
to the audience, but really singing with commitment and concentration,
the audience will totally understand what is going on, on that stage.
They may not understand it literally, but they will understand, and they
will become involved in what is going on, on that stage. At that
point, the language is almost immaterial. It is the concentration,
it is the focus, and the dedication that the performers put into it all.
When I get a group of people who really care about that, it’s a field-day
for me, and I have to really watch it, because with this cast, and Gloria
in particular, I can exhaust them. I know they’re exhausted, but
we’ve been working a good deal for a total honesty, and for total commitment
to this piece.
BD: Has he worked you too hard?
Capone: No, no. Actually I like working
hard, and he’s just been the perfect cohort in that.
BD: Is there any possibility that the drama
can be over-analyzed?
Bakman: [Laughs] Yes.
Capone: I think so, too, especially this
one. It has been so over-analyzed. [Laughs]
Bakman: It really has. It’s a very
delicate tightrope you walk. It’s not so much the drama that can
be over-analyzed. It’s the symbolism, or
making it relevant. That’s when things become over-analyzed.
If you simply go to what exactly is happening now, you then need to ask
how the people will react to this second. I don’t think you can over-analyze
that process. You over-analyze if you try to do too much for the
audience, or make it too relevant. I’m very much against doing too
much updating, and too much underlining, and using too much symbolism even
in scenery. I basically believe in minimal scenery. Let the
audience fill it in, and don’t hit them over the
head with what is going on. From that standpoint
— the detail, the interaction
of people, or how they react off one another
— it is more important than to trying
to say, “This is now the big dramatic moment,”
or “If you didn’t get it the first time around,
we’ll restate it for you!”
BD: Do the different sized houses make a difference
in your vocal production, whether it’s a small
house or a big house?
Capone: Yes. You adjust automatically once
you get the feel of a house.
BD: How is the Athenaeum [where Susannah
will be played, shown below-right]?
Capone: It’s a very good house.
You get enough feedback without getting too much. It’s a good place.
BD: Does the scenery, or lack of scenery,
enter into this?
Capone: In this particular production,
so far we’ve been rehearsing in a room with no scenery, and it’s been
working just fine for me if we don’t have any. [Laughter all around]
It certainly would be lovely to have scenery, and I can’t wait to
get on the set.
Bakman: Right. You need the scenery, but
it’s a misnomer if one believes that once we have the scenery then it’s
all going to make sense. If it isn’t there in the mind’s eye of
the performer, it’s never going to happen. To rest on the idea that
the set is going to save the show, or make it all suddenly come together
is very poor, and a weak crutch for any performer. The elements
that make up a set become very important as to whether they absorb sound,
or help to project it.
Capone: For me, the most important thing
you have to worry about is how the set fills on the side, and the angle
of your singing. That determines whether or not the voice is going
to come out if you’re singing slightly off to the side, or whether you
have to cheat it out front more.
BD: Do you ever work with prompters?
Capone: I never have, no.
BD: Do you like not having one?
Capone: My husband has worked with a prompter, and
isn’t particularly crazy about it. It’s not part of our American
tradition. We’re used to learning the work, and knowing it, and
being prepared to do it in our sleep. [Laughs] That’s the
way we’re trained from college. The European tradition is something
else. Many of them work with a prompter, so one should be able
to do both if you want to have that kind of career.
BD: Is that the only real difference between
the American singer and the European singer?
Capone: [Laughs] No, no! It’s
individual. You can’t talk about the American and European ways.
Every singer is very different. We’re all unique beings. We
have an advantage here with our training, and they have an advantage with
their tradition.
Bakman: But we also have a tradition!
Sometimes I get a little annoyed at the idea of always wanting to compare
one with the other. We’re a young country, so we tend to suffer
a bit from an inferiority complex when it comes to the arts, or to civilization.
Opera more than anything has really suffered from this.
We’re different. Our background and our theatrical traditions are
all different from the European ways. We’ve grown up in a much
more romantic and robust sense of theater, which is exemplified by musical
comedy and music-theater. Very much the American tradition is the
ability to go from dialogue to song to dance, and having each performer
be able to master all three of those arts. It’s the American mentality,
and it’s a little bit romantic to have a devil-may-care
attitude as part of our make-up, part of our lifestyle. It isn’t
as contained as some of the Europeans who, through a series of years, can
rest a little bit more. The whole philosophy of many different
countries is different, and I don’t like to compare which is better.
I would like to see the Americans take their art form a little bit more
seriously, and just know that we do it differently. It’s
not that we do it better, or they do it better. Just accept that
fact, and take pride in the differences. That is one of the beauties
of the artform. Traveling and communication has made this attempt
to try to homogenize everything to where everybody is the same. Orchestras
are becoming the same, with the same sound almost everywhere. In
earlier years there used to be really distinct sounds between the Philadelphia
Orchestra, the New York Philharmonic, the Chicago Symphony, and the Vienna
Philharmonic. Suddenly some of those sounds are not so different.
Because the conductors are traveling so much, you almost know how the sound
is going to be before you go to a concert. The
same thing is happening in opera too much. It has to be this one mold,
this one stamp, and that homogenizing makes the universality of the art
less desirable.
* * *
* *
BD: Being a singer, are you good audience when
you’re sitting out there in the crowd?
Capone: I like to think so, but I’m very
critical. I’m a critical person anyway, so I’m critical as an
audience member.
BD: Can you go to an opera and just enjoy it?
Capone: Oh, very much so, particularly
when it’s a good work and well done.
BD: Would Susannah be a good first opera
for someone who is coming to the opera for the first time, or would it
be better to say come to Bohème or Traviata?
Capone: Any one of them would be a good first choice.
Bakman: I would think it would be. All
three that you mentioned are wonderful examples of very different genres
of opera, though I would vote for the Floyd because it’s contemporary.
I’m a believer in contemporary opera, so I would say if someone
wants to see what contemporary opera is all about, the Floyd is a wonderful
first contact with it.
Capone: Yes.
BD: Do you also find that with other Floyd
works?
Bakman: Yes, I do. Each one of his
pieces are very different. Of Mice and Men is another whole
different idea. Musically I don’t know whether the word ‘sophisticated’
is appropriate, but it’s a little bit more complex. Simply because
the emotional level of the characters and the story is more complex than
Susannah, his musical idiom readapted itself and worked for that
environment. It’s a deeper story. Bilby’s Doll is
another one which deals with witchcraft, and is quite different from The
Crucible [by Robert
Ward]. That takes on a whole other sensibility than Susannah.
BD: Have you sung other works by Floyd?
Capone: I’ve done Of Mice and Men.
BD: How was that different from Susannah
vocally or musically?
Capone: It’s a completely different role certainly,
and though there are some similarities between Curley’s Wife and Susannah,
they’re just completely different. I think Susannah is
one of the most powerful American operas around.
BD: Is contemporary opera dividing itself
into the performable and the not-performable?
Bakman: Hmmm... It depends on how
you would define ‘not-performable’.
BD: Let us say ‘approachable’
from an audience standpoint.
Capone: There are some things around that
are somewhat unapproachable.
Bakman: After hearing some of the disco music,
and the unrelenting pounding and some of the almost schizoid quality
of that music, a slog through a contemporary opera is mild compared to
a lot that is going on. [Laughs]
Capone: That’s right!
Bakman: I do find that when I just start
listening to it, it’s so repetitive. But then they criticize Handel
or Mozart for being repetitive! They move a story and a song much
further than the modern music of today. Some of that accompaniment,
with its grating electronic sound I find jarring. Not because of that,
but when some of the disco music is compared to some of the contemporary
music that I have heard, it is almost melodious. So in some respects,
maybe we’re a little farther behind with what is going on.
BD: With all of this going on, how do you decide
which roles you will sing and which roles you will not sing?
Capone: It’s a vocal choice, certainly.
It has to be based on what fits in with my vocal abilities, and what
I feel is right for me as a singer. There are lots of things that
are right for me to sing, but for some reason I have absolutely no interest
in doing them. I need someone like Patrick to make me realize that
they are interesting characters! [Laughs] I like to do operas
in which the woman is interesting to me as a character, but first of
all it has to be whether or not this is something that suits my voice.
BD: Have you done some operas in more than
one language?
Capone: Yes, La Bohème being one
of them. I’ve gone both back and forth
a few times.
BD: Does La Bohème work better
in English or Italian?
Capone: Oh, Italian. No question
about it. But you have to know exactly what every word means
to really make it work. This is what is so wonderful about
coaching something like that in Italy with one of these great old masters,
because they won’t let anything go by. They won’t let a single
little two-letter word escape your understanding. You have to know
everything, and it all has to have the right inflection. Only then
you can begin to do a role in a foreign language that is not your mother
tongue. But Bohème can also work very well in English.
There are a number of translations, and it’s important to choose the right
one.
BD: Is it different directing an opera
in a foreign language, or in English?
Bakman: It’s different, yes. At times
I’ve had two casts, one doing it in the original language, and another
doing it in English. I’m at the point now where I won’t do that,
because I literally have to totally re-gear myself, because I can’t do
the same staging in two different languages. The emphasis is different
and the thinking is very different. So there is a whole different
way in each language. Also, I don’t like doing it because you
have to go through two casts. This is not to say that I would ever
take two casts and make the same staging for them, because it would depend
on the personality and the rhythms of the people. The staging has
to be molded on them in that regard. But certainly, having to think
through and put yourself into yet another language is very difficult for
a director. I prefer working in the original language or English, but
I don’t want to do both simultaneously.
BD: Don’t you come with some preconceived
ideas about a piece?
Bakman: Oh, I do come with preconceived
ideas! Very much so. I have a very strong interpretive direction,
but it’s the detailing of that which is very different in each language.
The emphasis is going to be different in the little subtleties. Having
just done Manon, if you start thinking about the emphasis in French
versus a translation, it throws you into very different details that you
bring across. You can’t literally translate Manon word for
word from French into English, so you gear things to end a certain way,
as opposed to the English translations that I’ve read. I would prefer
to do one or the other, and I do like doing in the language of the country.
If you’re going to do in a foreign language, then you really have to
make sure you and your cast understand every moment what is happening.
For the record, I’m very much against the use of surtitles. To
me it is just ridiculous.
BD: [Surprised] Why???
Bakman: It’s a gimmick to try to bring
people in by trying to undercut the validity of the art form. Even
when I see a foreign film with the subtitles underneath, my eye is
taken away to read a bit and I miss what is happening on the screen, such
as relationships, or some particular touch. I find I generally have
to go back and see a piece twice.
BD: Is that necessarily bad?
Bakman: Well no, it’s not bad. I actually
enjoy doing that, but I doubt that many people will do that for an opera,
given the cost to go back. I’m not saying that people have to read
or do all this preparation before coming in. Unless you’ve got the
perfect seat in the house, which is almost at eye-level, your head is always
having to crane up to read them, and you’re really being taken away from
the action on stage. It’s not a literal translation because they
would be flopping on and off too quickly. So it becomes very careful
on what you choose to translate.
BD: Would the supertitles work better in
an opera that moves slower, say a Wagner opera, rather than in something
that has a lot of patter, like a Rossini work?
Bakman: I just don’t see the point of them. They
were used in my Manon in Seattle, and luckily there were many
people who told me they forgot they were there because they got so involved
in the stage action. I heard that said continuously, and I was
happy that I could distract them from looking up.
BD: They quit looking at the titles?
Bakman: Yes, they discovered there was a lot going
on on-stage, and that made me happy. I looked at those things,
and it bothered me that my focus of watching the performers and doing
the finishing touches for the performance was distracted because I was
watching the supertitles. I also had to correct them. They
were wrong. They were absolutely the wrong translation for what
was happening on stage. That’s what’s very bad about it. They
may be the literal translation, but the interesting thing in the language,
literally, is how you translate what really is going on so it includes
the subtext. We take it for granted in English that you can say,
“I hate you!” but it doesn’t mean literally that is what is happening.
But if you take it straight out of the French, yes, you would translate
it literally and it would mean that. But the action on stage may
not really be meaning that.
BD: What if someone is listening and understands
every word of French. Might they be translating it the same as
it winds up on the surtitles?
Bakman: I don’t think they would be translating
it the same way. The other thing that really bothers me about
these titles is that if you read the libretto, they’re not real. This
is a dangerous comment, but I do believe in librettos. I think
that the libretto existed to inspire the composer to write the music,
so they are works of art. But sometimes to simply read them, they
seem a little flat. It is the singing of those words that gives
embodiment, and takes almost a mundane quality out of just the word. If
you read this script of Susannah, some of it might seem a little
ridiculous. It might seem almost naïve, but suddenly singing
it takes the naïvety out and gives it shape.
BD: Is that the way to construct the libretto
— that it really couldn’t
stand on its own, but needs the music?
Bakman: I think so.
BD: Is that the way to construct the music
— that it needs the
libretto?
Bakman: The two do go hand-in-hand, they
really do. I often say to singers that where the word isn’t making
sense, it’s more or less the vocalise. And if you say to a singer
when you know the word, you need to express it. There are a few exceptions.
This isn’t exactly true for Puccini. He didn’t exactly follow
this, but the word did come before the music. Many other composers
were very concerned about the words, and exactly how they fit together
so that they inspired them to write the music. This includes the
subject matter, the content, and the exchange between the various people.
It is wrong to say that the libretto is insignificant, or that it
should take second seat to the music. There is a wedding between the
two, and that’s why some pieces that have been composed to a play don’t
work when too much of the play is kept, because sometimes the music then
becomes almost background music. Often the musicality of the writing
is stronger than the music itself. It’s why Shakespeare has best worked
when it’s been translated into Italian, and then into an opera. There’s
almost no Shakespeare other than the [Vittorio] Giannini opera The Taming
of the Shrew that has really worked. Even so, there are some rough
edges in that piece because the musicality of Shakespeare is so strong that
you just compose for that. The composer and Shakespeare sometimes
conflict. It’s a little bit similar to Tennessee Williams and composers.
They conflict because Tennessee is so strong with his musicality
that many pieces have worked better when they’ve been translated into another
language, and then composed.
* * *
* *
BD: How is it different to stage a contemporary
work as opposed to a standard repertoire opera?
Bakman: There is no difference. The piece
dictates what it needs. Each piece is different, so you don’t bring
any one thing into a piece. You find that it has to be its own way.
Hopefully I respond to the piece, and I feel that all my productions
are different. I would hate to think that having seen one of my pieces,
everyone now knows what they’re going to expect no matter what the piece
is. It’s important for a director to make sure he doesn’t repeat
himself.
BD: Has a director ever taken you in a
completely wrong direction, or led you off into some place that he
shouldn’t have?
Capone: There have been attempts to do that, but
I like to think I have pretty good instincts. Sometimes you have
to just go with it. No matter who is directing, you don’t want to
sabotage the show. Some directors do make mistakes, but Patrick
doesn’t make any mistakes! [Much laughter] Often directors will
get something in their heads which they want to come across, and it really
has nothing to do with the piece. It might be some psychological sub-plot
that’s just a lot of horse manure. Then you, as a singer, have to
stand naked on the stage with your career on the line, and do something
foolish. Luckily it doesn’t happen that often.
BD: Do you feel that your career is on
the line every time you walk on the stage?
Capone: No, I don’t think in those terms.
When I walk on the stage, I’m not thinking about my career.
BD: [To the director] Do you feel
your career is on the line every time you put a piece out there?
Bakman: I feel part of me is up there.
Anything in the arts is a very naked and exposed situation that I have hopefully
interpreted correctly. I feel I give a service to the composer,
and I assist the artists who are singing the piece to make them comfortable,
and to bring across what the piece is about.
BD: Is there ever a conflict of interest
between the artist and the composer?
Bakman: There are some pieces I won’t touch
because my feeling is that I must save it, or figure out what gimmick I
can come up with to make the piece work. A director has a terrible
responsibility of honesty. When you teach a piece, you’ve got
to be very honest. Either the piece responds to you or doesn’t,
and if you don’t have a personal response to that piece, then don’t touch
it. If you do not believe in the piece, you should let it go. However,
who’s to say what the actual interpretation is meant to be? But
if you can’t feel that there is some sense of humanity in the piece,
and that humanity is something you wish to bring across to the audience
through your performers, then don’t touch it. You’ve got to learn
to walk away from pieces, even if it means you’ve got to find another
job for that month to pay the rent. I learned about the need to
be honest in this business very early in graduate school. As I say,
there are pieces I won’t touch because they haven’t touched me yet, and
I sit there trying to contemplate what the gimmick will be to make it work.
When I finally see what I’m coming up with is a gimmick, then I’m
not being honest. It’s a very hard thing to say what that process
is, but something just suddenly hits you in the gut. I like to believe
my pieces are visceral. They are very physical, and my job as a director
is to physicalize the music, and to physicalize those ideas. I make
that music take on a physical image, because when I hear music, I get an
image. Even a simple chord will generate an image in my mind.
It’s what an actor does. Even a single word must inspire a picture
in their mind. That’s what an actor plays. He creates. He
paints these pictures. This is the same thing I’m doing with the performers.
It’s like a painter with his paint. Yes, a painter will have some
idea, but until his paints start mixing on the canvas, he won’t really know
where that picture is going to end up. It’s being responsive to the
performer by seeing how much they take, or what they do with the idea.
The exciting thing about a rehearsal period is not having all the answers.
The most wonderful thing is coming in and making discoveries. That’s
what makes the rehearsal process interesting. Yes, you have to have
a starting point, and you give that to your performers. Then you must
trust them to start interacting with that idea, and you must respond off
of them, and let the piece grow from that.
BD: [To the soprano] Do you do this same kind
of preparation? When you’re preparing a role, do you think about
what kinds of possibilities can happen, or do you just prepare it musically,
and wait for stage director to give you the input and the blocking?
Capone: If you think in a dramatic
way, you can’t possibly prepare it without having images coming into
your head. But we as performers are in a slightly different position
than the director. We don’t have to decide things about the staging.
We can certainly come up with a conception of a character, which I usually
go into a show with, but it’s important to not be so tied into that, that
you can’t change. For example, in this particular situation, my mind
has been changed on a lot of different points within the story of Susannah.
Bakman: I’ve done the piece before, but I haven’t
touched it in six years. I have friends who ask if it isn’t easier
the second or third time around, and I keep saying, “No!
It’s ten times harder.” It would have been
much easier if this had been my first Susannah because I have
to fight my old ideas. I have an overall feeling where I want the
piece to go, but I have to make sure I don’t just rely on the discoveries
I made the last time around. I have to trust that the performers
either will make those same discoveries or new ones, and it’s
been exhausting for me to sit back and see that these are different
people. I throw out ideas of some staging that I’d done before,
and suddenly realize I’m now different. I don’t believe that anymore!
It’s not right! I have to throw it away! So, it became more
exhausting for me to throw old things away, and make myself responsive
to the performers.
BD: Would it have been easier for you just
to scrap everything, and start fresh?
Bakman: It would have been, but you can’t.
They’re some personal part of you, even though I don’t have any staging
written in any of my scores. I never write things down.
I try desperately never to have any permanent record of anything, so
that way I’m never calling on anything. But there are certain things
that are real gut responses of mine to the performers. I’m sure most
directors would be very much against me on this, but I feel that a director’s
job is really not directing the body. The staging is almost immaterial.
What you direct is the imagination of the performer. Once you
can get into their minds with what you think is the idea of the character
they’re playing, and start directing that, and stretching their imaginations,
then the body starts to go in its right way. I’ve learned this from
working with singers like Thomas Stewart. I had the great privilege
of directing him in Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg. No
one needs to direct Tom Stewart in that opera, because he’s done it a
great deal. So when we started a scene, he said, “What is your idea
for this scene?” Not, “Where am I to go,”
and that’s what he would do. You tell a singer what the idea is,
and where you want the piece to go, and then you start working out the
actual picture. But you’ve got to have some imagination going, some
direction that the piece should be heading in, not just, “On this line
you’re going to move here, and you’re going to touch this person on that
line.” That’s stupid, and that’s what has given opera such a bad
name, and a bad place in the dramatic world.
BD: [To the soprano] You’ve worked with a
lot of directors. Are Patrick’s ideas rather universal, or are they
rather peculiar and special to him?
Capone: They’re definitely not universal.
[All laugh] The great majority of directors will come in with
more of a ‘go-here go-there’ approach, and I certainly prefer Patrick’s
way of working. If he didn’t have a good sense of where you should
be on stage, it could be a mess. But this is just something that’s
unique to him. He has a way of working the picture out in the absolute
perfect way by starting with the core of the scene, which is, “What
is the scene about? Who are you at this moment in time, and what
are you feeling?”
* * *
* *
BD: Have you done some world premieres?
Capone: I did the American premiere of
Mary, Queen of Scots [by Thea Musgrave, recording
shown at right].
BD: I just wondered if it’s easier or harder
working with something that is new, and being able to either get ideas
from the composer, or give the composer ideas, and have them modify the
work slightly for you.
Capone: That happened with Of Mice and
Men actually. Carlisle Floyd was not directing the show, but
the director had given me an idea, and she hadn’t helped me that much
with it. I was finding a lot of it on my own, and she certainly
did what she could, but we were struggling with it. Floyd came in,
and having been the one who conceived the pictures, [snaps her fingers]
he said a few things to me and I ended up doing exactly what she had
wanted.
BD: When you’re doing a piece like La
Bohème, do you wish you could go back and have Puccini give
you a few ideas?
Capone: He did! [Laughs] He
wrote a few ideas into the score.
BD: How much do you rely on the score,
and how much do you rely on the stage director, or is that an impossible
question?
Capone: You can rely on the score for the
music, and you have to read what’s written there in terms of stage directions
and ideas with a grain of salt. Listen to the music.
The music usually tells the story. If it’s an opera that’s worth
doing, it’s in the music.
BD: How much of your career is contemporary
music, and how much is standard works?
Capone: Lately it’s been more on the contemporary
side.
BD: Why do audiences seem to be a little
hesitant about contemporary music?
Capone: Because it’s unknown. It’s just going
into foreign water. They’re afraid of something that they don’t
understand. They can go and see La Bohème, and know
what it’s going to be. It predicable. They’ve already decided
what their response is going to be. They’ve also decided they
will love it, so it’s easy for them. They can just sit back and relax.
BD: Does that make it harder if you have
a really unconventional production?
Capone: Maybe it does. It’s possible.
You might have to work harder sometimes in those pieces to make them convincing.
BD: Do you find yourself feeding off the
audience each time?
Capone: Sure.
BD: Is the audience different each time?
Capone: Definitely!
BD: How? What kinds of differences
are there?
Capone: It’s a really difficult question to answer,
because with me it’s something that I pick up on in the first two minutes
I’m on stage. They don’t even have to have clapped or breathed.
You feel an energy when you get out there, and you know if you’re going
to have to really work a little harder, or if you can just sky-rocket.
It’s an energy thing, and I don’t mean to be too medical, but it really
is something that you sense. It’s always nice to have them be responsive,
but you have to learn how to play when they’re not.
BD: [To the director] Do you
stay around for the whole run of performances?
Bakman: No, I generally don’t.
BD: Is that a mistake, or just an impossibility?
Bakman: More often than not, it’s an impossibility.
BD: You would if you could?
Bakman: Yes, I would like to. Ideally,
if there are enough performances, what I would like is to break away from
the middle of them. I always like to see if it plays over a period
of time, because that’s the best way to check myself and my work. That
way there is some distance to forget about it... if one could have the
luxury of a week, or two weeks to get away from it, and then come back,
because a piece will change. It has to change. It has to be
slightly different every night. There will be certain timing changes.
The important thing is for directors to come back and see the piece,
and see how it has grown. If it hasn’t grown, you haven’t done
your work correctly. However, if it has grown, but not in the direction
that you set the characters into motion, then you haven’t done your work
either. When mistakes happen, how well will those performers be able
to make those changes in the character? How well have they really
gotten to know the character, and how that character would think and respond
in any situation? So, ideally, it is best to go back. I never
want any more than rehearsal for everything to be a blue-print, not that
it must always be this same way. I’m more anxious to see how they
respond off of one another, and react off of one another within the framework.
BD: Do you feel your performances grow
from performance to performance?
Capone: Yes. They change, certainly.
Every one is different, and it’s starts to get tighter and tighter.
There’s no question about that.
BD: Is there ever a chance that it can get too tight
if there are, say, thirty-five performances in a row?
Capone: You can maybe start to take things
for granted. It can get sloppy. You always have to go over it
in your mind and with your body every night, especially if you’re running
for a long time, which I’ve done.
BD: What’s the longest run you have had?
Capone: Once I did twenty-five performances
of A Little Night Music [photo shown at left], but that was over
not such a long period of time. Timing is what that show is about, and
so we had to really be on our toes.
BD: That’s a musical. Is there a
big difference between doing a musical and an opera, or is there just
a little more energy in one or the other?
Capone: It’s definitely different, because
you don’t have so much of the singing aspect in it. In some ways
it’s harder, and in some ways its easier. That’s a very simple
answer, but it’s the way it is.
BD: Have you made some recordings?
Capone: Yes. Besides the Mary,
Queen of Scots premiere, the other was of a piece called The Prayers
of Kierkegaard by Samuel Barber [shown farther above-left].
BD: Tell me a bit about Samuel Barber.
Capone: I never met him. I made the
recording with the Louisville Orchestra and Jorge Mester, and we got
a letter from Samuel Barber about how he felt about the recording.
BD: Did he like it?
Capone: Oh, yes.
BD: Tell me about the piece.
Capone: It’s a beautiful piece for chorus
and orchestra with a soprano solo. It’s based on poems of Søren
Kierkegaard. The beautiful poetry, and Barber’s wonderful music,
which is poetry itself, make it a marvelous piece. It has a lot of climaxes.
I am sorry he didn’t write more operas. He had such
a gift for melody.
BD: Is that what opera should be
— melody?
Capone: It needs to have that. Menotti, who was a very
close friend of Barber’s, said that anyone can write an opera, or a
musical drama, but only God can give a melody.
At this point, the soprano had to leave
for a costume-fitting, and the conversation continued with the director
BD: Tell me about the Manon production that
you did.
Bakman: I had the great pleasure of working with
Manuel Rosenthal on
the piece. [The production was in Seattle in 1985, and the program
is shown below-right.] I met with him first in Paris to discuss
the production, and I had the opportunity of really discussing French
music and French opera.
BD: Was this your first French piece?
Bakman: No, I had also done Werther.
But working with one of the Deans of French music, I decided to really
go out on a limb. His first question to me was to ask what I thought
of French opera. I knew, as we plunged into this, that I would either
make a friend or an enemy! I simply said that the American point of
view is that it’s too pretty. It’s decorative. I said that
I knew French opera is very different from Italian, but it’s very serious,
and real flesh and blood with an incredible veneer over it. He seemed
rather pleased with that comment. As we talked, the whole idea was
that Manon was not going to be pretty. It was not going to
be about Fragonard and Boucher [eighteenth century French painters],
but it was going to be about a woman who destroys herself for pleasure,
and that whole image of what pleasure is. The sets and costumes were
incredible, and we moved the period up a bit. It was really at Manuel’s
suggestion. I had hinted at it, and he said, “Don’t
hint! Let’s do it!” So we moved it forward
to 1780, right on the eve of the French Revolution. This made it
a little bit more interesting with the costumes, and it showed how decadent
the world was. This helped particularly for the Cours-la-Reine,
and the Hôtel de Transylvanie. We did it without any
cuts. The only cut we made was the ballet in the Cours-la-Reine.
Manuel said that he had never seen the Transylvanie work in
his entire life, and he wanted to make cuts there. I told him that
I thought I could really make it work, and he said fine! By placing
it in that slightly later period, we could go for an after-hours effect
as an after-hours bar. It was really dingy and decadent, so one easily
understands why Manon died at the end. Her will for life simply ceased
because it had been shattered. Breaking in on the Transylvanie
just crumbled the world of illusions that she was living in. It became
a whole sense of this woman plunging into decadence. She was by-passing
what could have been a very simple and interesting life with Des Grieux,
for one where she would rather go for the jewels and diamonds. It’s
a place where the libretto is very specific about what is happening, and
that music of the Transylvanie, which is so decadent and steamy, is
usually always done prettified. It turned out to be one of the hottest
scenes I’ve ever directed, and it was wonderful to see, as was the Cours-la-Reine.
In the 1730s, where the opera’s set, but certainly by 1780, the Cours-la-Reine
was not a fashionable place. It was the place for prostitutes to go.
It was quite fashionable in the early 1600s when it was the Queen’s Way,
but not in the 1700s. We did it by torch light, and when Manon came
out in her red and orange gown, you knew what she was the Queen of. [Laughs]
It was a wonderful design, and I had a wonderful time with my designers
of the sets and costumes. It was a very unified production that
made people sit up and see this as flesh-and-blood, as well as a blood-and-guts
work that goes along with an incredible sense of style of the period.
Even in La Traviata, Violetta has style but she is a courtesan.
It doesn’t mean you play her as Lulu, but you do create an atmosphere
that is different than a very elegant drawing room.
BD: Is there any chance that Manon could have been
happy if she had gone off with Guillot at the beginning instead of Des
Grieux? [Vis-à-vis the program shown at right, see my interviews
with Archie Drake, and
Carol Vaness.]
Bakman: She does eventually go off with de Brétigny.
Initially, it was Guillot de Morfontaine who wanted her, and who
was the one who offered the carriage. She recognized at the beginning
that he’s a fob and a fool, and nothing would happen. The one
who’s got the money is Monsieur De Brétigny, the tax collector.
He was the one who was fleecing both royalty and peasant at that
time. So in my production, even Guillot gets his money from de
Brétigny. De Brétigny uses Guillot for title, and
to be in a world of aristocracy, but the aristocrats needed de Brétigny
for the money and for their daily existence. So they were feeding
off one another. It was a very voracious group of people. I
loved doing it, and I loved the response. Some people were absolutely
surprised that it was not a lot of little angels and pastel colors all
over the place. But that didn’t bother me. People said they
realized this piece is dramatic, and that made me happy. They also
said that Massenet’s work is not long, and it’s not boring, and it doesn’t
wander. Manuel told me it’s not going to be chi-chi, and it wasn’t.
Our set was a unit set that no one knew was a unit, which was just
wonderful. There were very few pieces of scenery, but they were
monumental. It moved so that the set changes were down to thirty
seconds, so there was a wonderful sense of continuity in the piece.
BD: Did the curtain go down between the scenes, or
did it revolve in front of the audience?
Bakman: The main curtain came down because
musically you really need that break. The vista changes would
break the style of the music, and that is what it is all about.
BD: How did you distribute the five acts?
Bakman: We did it in three acts with two intermissions.
Our first act was Amiens and the love scene [the original Acts 1 and 2],
then Cours-la-Reine and Saint-Sulpice [the original
two scenes of Act 3] as the second act, and Transylvanie and
the Le Havre [the original Acts 4 and 5] was the third act.
I loved having this experience of working with the French repertoire,
and having the chance to prove that it was real theater.
BD: Where did you do Werther?
Bakman: I did Werther at Lake George.
I’m doing to do it with Manuel Rosenthal in Seattle in two years’
time. We’re doing the baritone version!
BD: Tell me about that.
Bakman: Massenet re-orchestrated it, and
re-wrote for baritone [for Mattia Battistini in 1902].
BD: Have you thought about it yet?
Bakman: I’m working on it. It’s very
different. It’s a different temperament and a different quality.
It gets a little closer to the character of Eugene Onegin, as opposed
to the almost insanity or the hyper-emotional plane that the tenor quality
gives it. [As it would turn out, the Seattle production would be
staged by Francesca Zambello, and conducted by Antonio de Almeida. Dale Duesing would sing
the title role.]
BD: Does an opera where the title character commits
suicide for love speak to audiences today?
Bakman: Yes! It’s not so much just
for love. It’s his obsession. There’s
an interesting scene after Charlotte reads the letters, and she comes to
realize that he’s really not so much in love with her, and she feels responsible
for leading him on. She sees something very vulnerable in him, and
it’s that vulnerability that she herself relates to. There’s a loneliness
in her, but there’s also that practical-ness that one can’t wallow
in self-pity. That’s what Werther does, so he doesn’t
really kill himself out of love. He’s so obsessed
to have her, and to own people, and own things and objects, that the
killing even shocks him that it actually happens. I do it very differently.
I have a very different place where he kills himself, and why he kills
himself.
BD: He’s not in
his apartment?
Bakman: No, he’s not in his apartment. I do a
situation that the mother is buried on the property. So Charlotte
does a scene with Werther over the mother’s grave in the first ace. She
is upset, and she’s always working with this death-motif. She wonders
why must someone die, and this question of being taken affects her very much.
When Werther actually kills himself, he goes back to where the mother’s
tomb was, and where he was the happiest on first meeting Charlotte, and
kills himself there. Part of it is how to explain the children coming
out, and singing the Christmas Carol because it’s right within her property.
She’s someone who knows him, and goes searching for him, and finds
him there. So, graveyards and gravestones become important in the piece.
BD: It shows a whole knew angle on the
opera.
Bakman: Even with the tenor, I think the piece
is quite wonderful.
BD: Thank you for spending time with me this afternoon, and
be sure to convey my best wishes to Gloria when you see her next.
Bakman: I certainly will. Thank you. This has
been a great pleasure.
========
========
========
---- ---- ----
======== ========
========
© 1986 Bruce Duffie
This conversation was recorded in Chicago on January 24, 1986.
Portions were broadcast on WNIB two days later. This
transcription was made in 2023, and posted
on this website at that time. My
thanks to British soprano Una Barry for
her help in preparing this website presentation.
To see a full list (with links) of interviews which have been transcribed
and posted on this website, click here. To
read my thoughts on editing these interviews for
print, as well as a few other interesting observations,
click here.
* * * *
*
Award -
winning broadcaster Bruce Duffie was with
WNIB,
Classical 97 in
Chicago from 1975 until its final moment
as a classical station in February of
2001. His interviews have also appeared in
various magazines and journals since 1980, and he
now continues his broadcast series on WNUR-FM, as
well as on Contemporary
Classical Internet Radio.
You are invited to visit his
website for more
information about his work, including
selected transcripts of other interviews,
plus a full list of
his guests. He would also like to call your
attention to the photos and information about
his grandfather,
who was a pioneer in the automotive field more than a century
ago. You may also
send him E-Mail with
comments, questions and suggestions.