Video in Opera Stage
Introduction
Advances in technology and the corresponding creation of digital technologies have significantly impacted the performing arts (Poole & Ho, 2011). Opera has not escaped the technological advancements and as such, new forms of opera have emerged in both digital and virtual formats (Symonds & Karantonis, 2013). Salter (2010) explains that since the 1990s, the scenography of opera has emerged with technological advancements transforming stages into video and monitor accompaniments. The obvious payoff is an enhanced experiential, virtual reality of the opera’s stage. The new technologies blur the lines between the opera’s stage and the motion picture common in the cinematography. As with cinematographic culture, the opera’s stage can now more realistically portray landscapes.
Throughout its history, opera adjusted performances according to available technologies. For example at the earliest phase, used stage machines and acoustic skills for creating sound and visual effects. During the early eighteenth century opera used the projector fitted with motion-image and by the middle of the 19th century, electrical lighting was used (Citron, 2010). In the latter part of the 19th century, telephones allowed audiences to tune into operas remotely and to enjoy opera at home (Citron, 2010). The invention of the headphone and stereos broadened the scope and range of opera. Opera was also soon delivered through the cinema. An opera was also shown on television in 1934. More recently, opera has experienced 3D technologies for creating moving images on stage (Citron, 2010).
This paper demonstrates how video technologies have changed and reshaped the scenic landscape of the opera stage through a comparative study of two operas: Bluebeard’s Castle by Andrew Quinn and Opera Pastorale by Pierrick Sorin. The comparative study will be conducted through aesthetic and morphologic analyses. In this regard, aesthetics refers to feelings, values, judgments and reactions invoked when one looks at an object or a work of art in general (DeClercq, 2002). Morphology refers to the structure of props, lights, images, sounds, dialogue and so on and the narratives and meaning they convey alone and through interactions with one another (Betancourt, 2016). This paper will be divided into three main parts. The first part presents a case study on Bluebeard’s Castle and the second part presents a case study on Opera Pastorale. The final part of this paper presents a comparative analysis of the two case studies.
Andrew Quinn, a computer graphics expert and musician from Australia, created and installed stereoscopic real time 3D virtual sets for the staging of Bluebeard’s Castle in Budapest, Hungary in September of 2011 (Andrew Quinn, n.d.). The opera starred Ildiko Komlosi as Judit and Istvan Kovacs as Bluebeard. Bluebeard’s Castle was directed by Caterina Vianello with lighting director Allessandro Chiodo. The 3D technologies together with lighting that changes form a significant part of the narrative.
Lighting and moving images converge and separate on stage, creating visual illusions as the two actors appear to move magically from. As the lighting swirls around the actors, they appear to be stationary at one end of the stage. However, as the lighting converge, changing shapes and collapse into darkness and a bright light suddenly appears, the actors appear mid stage. Thus, the morphology is enhanced by the digital video aides employed. Aesthetically, the changing lighted shapes, juxtaposed against a black background, with the couple always within a few feet of one another or embracing, is accompanied by emphatic singing and sound effects. These scenes evoke a feeling that the female actor is in distress.
The fast paced female singing is replaced by a more passive male voice and the music slows down a crescendo. Together with the moving and swirling images, lights and colors with a darkened background, this scene becomes atmospheric, The human body is shrouded in shapes, moving images and colors that add a spiritual dimension to the human body that capable of transcending the actual occupied space. As the scene nears the end, three women appear standing up near white pillar shapes in the background. The lead female actor is sitting in the foreground as the male actor sings to her. The actors are then engulfed in darkness and a large, green eye appears eerily, hovering over the stage, pulsating and seemingly evolving. The scene ends with eye disappearing and the stage reappearing with the actors and three women in the background clearly in the foreground.
The scenes change from startling and at times alarming, to calm and passive. The aesthetics are accomplished through morphological imaging, lighting and color. For example, in one scene, the couple appear on a blackened stage which is contrasted by a red, background which blends in with red sharp glass like shapes jutting downward from above. The visual effects leaves the actors with a cartoonish look about them. The performance is rendered atmospheric with the red colors attached to sharp glass-like objects and the off-color glow of the actors’ hair.
The female actor is wearing a blue gown that flows downward, with the end of the gown morphing into the blackened floor of the stage. The male actor stands a few feet below her with only on half of his torso visible as the other half is consumed by the blackened stage. The male actor is wearing a formal green jacket and both actors’ hair is shrouded in a bluish hue.
With the converging of colors and shapes together with an all-consuming blackness, the aesthetic effect is one of both benevolence and fear. The narrative suggested by the changing shapes, lighting and colors portrays a couple going through the trials and tribulations of a relationship. The changing shapes, lights and colors capture the thoughts and feelings of the protagonists and at the same time, compliment the music and the singing.
Quinn’s virtual sets on the stage of Bluebeard’s Castle are consistent with the cultural and media theory’s understanding of technoscience as explained by Kember (2006). Kember (2006) states that technoscience is the “new media” (235). This new media consists of the converging of science, media and technology which are combined to produce arts that are “more manifestly, more complexly – connected” (Kember, 2006, 235). The connectedness of technology, science and media enables the engagement in art in ways that are “physical, as well as intellectual or imaginative” (Kember, 2006, 235). The technosicence of Bluebeard’s Castle is obvious in the interaction of the shapes and colors and their relationship to and effect on the actors. In this regard, the physical engagement is the ability to sit and watch the live action digitalized opera on stage. The aesthetic and morphological display of color, shapes and lights together with the signing and sound effects captures the emotions and the intellect.
Quinn deliberately used the software TouchDesigner and 3DLive in order to produce an interplay with images and sound/music for special effects on the opera stage (Staff Writer, 2011). The interplay of images and sound/music together with the protagonists allows for a seamless transition similar to that of the digitalized moving image in the motion picture genre. The need to interrupt for the closing of the curtain, and the changing of props is significantly reduced. These long and frequent interruptions tend to shake the audience back into reality and as such, can make it difficult for the audience to sustain engagement. With technoscience and the apparent live action that flows without the frequent breaks or the long, one dimensional scene, improves the ability to engage and remain engaged. Thus, the aesthetics of the video opera on stage is improved significantly.
Media and cultural theory suggest that advances in technology have converged upon the performing arts in a way that calls attention to the consumption of “spectacle” (Mendoza, 2010, 46). It is no longer enough to present narratives onstage. Today’s individuals who are accustomed to technology can usually, only be engaged with sensationalism and arresting visual and sound effects (Mendoza, 2010). Quinn’s Bluebeard’s Castle capitalizes on the available technology and delivers a product that the contemporary individual can find engaging. Fantasy and spectacle are created onstage with technologically advanced tools that bring a revolutionary method of watching and enjoying operas. As Oliver Grau (n.d.) points out, technology today has transformed the performing arts, permitting the creation of “virtual agents and avatars,’ as well as “mixed realities” and spaces that combine to formulate “virtual art”.
Pierrick Sorin produced the video scenography in Opera Pastorale. Sorrin was also the stage director in collaboration with Jean-Phillippe Delavault. The cast of actors consisted of 13 with Judith Gauthier and Olivier Durmait as lead actors. There were several cameos so that there were always multiple persons onstage at once. The larger cast is due to the opera’s genre. As it’s title suggest, the opera is set in landscape suggestive of shepherding and the actors are in constant contact with nature. The opera was performed in Tours France at the Theatre du Chatelet.
It is worth noting from the outset that the nature setting is complimented by the natural integration of video equipment such as cameras, screens, and the camera man, together with live modifiers onstage while actors are performing live and interpreting and creating dramatic space. The stage itself is reflexive due to the use of closed video circuit TV. Video conversions produce screens that reflect an alternative reality. Moreover, the performance is constructed through the Chroma Key Tecthnic.
A unique and very interesting scenography in Opera Pastorale is worth discussing immediately. In this particular scene, a large still picture of sheep on an open, hilly landscape consumes the entire background. Only three actors appear in the foreground flanked by three relatively small screen high definition flat screen monitors featuring an identical female in an open field swaying back and forth in a light dress seemingly caught in the wind. One actor appears to interact with the women appearing on the monitor at center stage. An actor is sitting closer to the stage, behind a camera and appears to be filming the scene with his back turned on the audience.
However, what is interesting and unique about this scene is that there are props on the stage. These props consists of man-made sheep held up on sticks that do not appear to make contact with the floor and yet they move across the stage between the large still picture and the three high definition monitors. The sheep appear to come out of the side of the still photo and move across the stage in single file, bobbing up and down on the way across the still screen. This is an interesting and unique prop because, the use of videos and a large still image in the background shows a movement toward the use of technology in a way that is consistent with technoscience within the parameters of cultural and media theory. At the same time, the use of the sheep prop shows a loyalty to traditional operas where the use of technologically enhanced aesthetics and morphology were not nearly as advanced nor were they available for use.
The sound effects are also low key and traditional as well. The operative singing matches the scenes in that the actors never seem to be distressed or concerned, but rather calm and relaxed. There is a comical and at times satirical edge to the opera and the music and singing deliberately never raises an alarm. The juxtaposition against television sets against actors in front of large chroma key screens creates an aesthetics reminiscent of the 1980s television fare. With the interception of the sheep passing by on sticks, unnoticed, a comedic element was added in that particular scene. Moreover, the male actors attempt to interact with the female in the small screen monitor also offered some form of comic relief.
The use of high definition videos is a theme in Opera Pastorale. Sorin’s scenography includes a scene in which high definition videos are played in a large background monitor covering the entire back of the stage and two smaller video monitors are in front of the larger screen showing identical scenes. The scenes are of smoke emitting upward with several actors on stage. The integration of this scene with the visual effects produces special effects where audio and visual interact. There is no sense of panic and the singing is lowkey with matching unhurried music. There is a male lead singer with a bass voice and a harmonic choir that joins him or sings a chorus from time to time. This singing has an aesthetic effect in that it gives off a feeling of unity and harmony among the characters.
A third monitor lightens up the smoke-filled images and adds a degree of comedy to the scene. The third video monitor is small and is centered near the top of the large monitor at the back of the stage. The small monitor at the top center of the large monitor appears to pose as a framed picture as it is surrounded by garlands. Men and women take turns pausing at the garland-framed video monitor and smile as if posing for a photograph. Noticeably present is a man behind a camera on stage with his back to the audience. Therefore, it is quite possible that the monitor at the top center of the large video monitor is meant to be a framed picture. However, dramatic effect requires that the camera interact with the opera singer in order to produce the image of the video stage camera.
The morphology in Opera Pastorale is particularly remarkable. For instance, in one scenography, there is a large video monitor at the back of the stage and it features a large green fern. This video although a moving image, appears quite still. The main effect is the concept of a screen inside another screen creating the stage. The stage is dematerialized via the video in that the scene is broadcast and recorded and in this regard, it is converted to a video signal in a screen. There is a measure of duality in that the human body is intricately linked to the screen. This scenography therefore illustrates the embodiment of video technology on the operatic stage.
Upon a closer inspection, the leaves of one branch, moves ever so slightly. In the meantime, the large video monitor shares the background of the stage with two smaller video monitors in front and on each side of the large video monitor. The smaller monitors features close up moving images of a bird in each frame. The birds have an unusual and comic look about them. They appear to be videos of puppets as the birds move stiffly from side to side and appear to hold their beaks open just enough to suggest that they are signing or at least attempting to join the chorus below them. In the meantime, the camera man is poised on the ground with this camera with a man-made bird within his view.
The morphology is impressive in this particular scene because the video monitors in front of the larger screen are barely visible. In other words, while the images are visible, the outline of the video monitor is very difficult to make out. The green background of the smaller videos blends in with the large green fern and shrubbery, in the larger video. Therefore, the purpose of this juxtaposition is to give off the appearance that the birds in the smaller video are actually in the fern shrubbery contained in the larger video. The green ground at the bottom of the larger video monitor also blends in perfectly with the green floor of the stage and gives off the impression that the actors are standing in the virtual area of the fern and other shrubs.
In another scenography, the audience is taken to a completely different scene. In this particular scenography, a couple is in the front of a video monitor featuring what represents a grey castle-like manor. A large, man-made, animated owl stands in the window looking out. In the meantime, a lone male voice can be heard signing an operatic song in a base voice. Another scene takes the audience to a colorful sea-like scene with a female singing from a monitor. In yet another scenography, videos present unusual activities with a lot of cast members moving about onstage with a chorus of signing. One particularly interesting image is an oblong video monitor of a human being in costume in what appears to be a magic box. Lights run up and down the box and as it does so, the human image changes shape and form. In the background, the large video monitor features the front of a building with cascading lights bathing the walls giving the appearance of flowing paint.
A common theme is the placement of a small video monitor at the center of the large video monitor that is placed at the back of the stage. This set up establishes the screen as the stage’s center. This small video usually features a female actress singing. She always looks quite happy and it is difficult to tell whether or not she is actually in an opening in the larger video or a part of the smaller monitor. There was a scenography where the female singer in the small video monitor was replaced by two small video monitors with two sheep animatedly singing in sonorous bass voices. Sorin obviously created surreal videography in that it was difficult to tell whether or not the singing sheep were actual manual and traditional props made to appear as though they were actually video images. This was a common theme throughout Opera Pastorale.
The scenography through Opera Pastorale appeared to create a satire of technology and digital videos at times. This was more obvious in the scenes with the signing sheep and the sheep moving across the larger video on props. The birds in the monitor and the attempts to sing also appeared to be satirical. Essentially, the video was put to good use for the enhancement of stage props and scenes. However, there were scenes where video monitors were either poorly disguised or only made to appear that they were video monitors.
One of the main differences between Opera Pastorale and Bluebeard’s Castle is the cast of characters. While Opera Pastorale consisted of 13 actors on stage surrounded by several cameo appearances, Bluebeard’s Castle was confined to two actors with occasional cameos in a few scenes. In other words, Opera Pastorale had significantly more live action on stage and there was always human activity to watch in order to keep up with the narrative. Bluebeard’s Castle kept the human live action to two actors and therefore, the audience could afford to look away and focus on the 3D images and return to the actors without losing sight of the narrative.
Aesthetically, with so many actors on the stage in Opera Pastorale, it was difficult to become attached to the protagonists. Whereas, in Bluebeard’s Castle, the protagonists were a common fixture onstage and for the most part shared the stage with 3D imaging and swirling and morphing images. Therefore, it is easy to feel an attachment to the characters played by the actors in Bluebeard’s Castle.
In addition, the operatic singing in Opera Pastorale is more low key while the music and signing in Bluebeard’s Castle is changeable, and at times conveys a sense of urgency. Ultimately, the aesthetic effects of Bluebeard’s Castle is one of drama or more specifically, a melodrama. There is a feeling of urgency and gloom at times. At the same time, one gets the feeling that some form of trouble is always on the horizon.
Opera Pastorale, on the other hand, is always light and cheerful. Even when the larger than life owl appears in the window behind an unsuspecting couple, there is no feeling of doom or horror. Instead, the way that the owl emerges from the floor and slowly rises to his full height is comical.
What clearly distinguishes Bluebeard’s Castle from Opera Pastroale is the choice of video technologies. While Bluebeard’s Castle features a constant flow of 3D images that interact with the featured couple and changes their location and thoughts, Opera Pastroale relies on videos and traditional props. In Opera Pastroale, the actors interact with the videos and in Bluebeard’s Castle, the images interact with the actors. In both operas however, there is no reaction to the images. All actors carry on as if the videos and the images are natural parts of their environments.
Conclusion
The results of the two case studies reveal that video and modern technological tools are useful for enhancing narrative and engaging audiences. In addition, the two case studies revealed that videos and other forms of technological tools can be used to highlight and draw attention to the opera’s genre. For example, video was used in Opera Pastroale to highlight and draw attention to its comic themes. In Bluebeard’s Castle, video was used for the dramatic effect the opera’s narrative relayed.
At the same time, both Opera Pastroale and Bluebeard’s Castle demonstrate in their own ways how video and modern technology are merged to form one medium for engaging audiences physically, intellectually and emotionally. In addition, the two case study results also revealed how video and modern technology can help the story teller create special effects for improving the story to the satisfaction end-users.
References
Andrew Quinn – Sound Reactive Digital Imagery and ‘Digital Sets’. (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.andrewquinn.org/AQdossier.pdf
Betancourt, M. (2016). Beyond Spatial Montage: Windowing, Or the Cinematic Displacement of Time, Motion, and Space. New York, NY: Routledge.
Citron, M. J. (2010). When Opera Meets Film. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DeClerq, R. (2002). The Concept of an Aesthetic Property. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 60(2), 167-176.
Grau, O. (n.d.). Integrating Media Art into Our Culture: Art History as Image Science. Retrieved from: http://www.mediaarthistory.org/refresh/Programmatic%20key%20texts/pdfs/Grau.pdf
Kember, S. (2006). Doing Technoscience (‘New’) Media. In Curran, J. & Morley, D. (Eds.) Media and Cultural Theory. Oxon: Routledge, 235-249.
Poole, D. & Ho, S.L.-P. (June 2011). Digital Transitions and the Impact of New Technology on the Arts. Paper Prepared for the Canadian Public Arts Funders (CPAF) Network, 1-64. Retrieved from: http://www.cpaf-opsac.org/en/themes/documents/DigitalTransitionsReport-FINAL-EN.pdf
Quinn, A. (n.d.). Bluebeard’s Castle. Retrieved from: https://vimeo.com/32923667
Salter, C. (2010). Entangled: Technology and the Transformation of Performance. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Sorrin, P. (n.d.). Opera Pastorole. Retrieved from: https://vimeo.com/5494382
Staff Writer. (24 September 2011). Opera Goes 3D. Derivative. Retrieved from: http://www.derivative.ca/Events/2011/Opera3D/
Symonds, D. & Karantonis, P. (2013). The Legacy of Opera: Reading Music Theatre as Experience and Performance. New York, NY: Rodopi.
