This page is referenced by:

• 1 media/Parsifal_1882_Act3_Joukowsky_NGO4p119.jpg 2016-01-17T19:09:41-08:00 WAGNER 34 image_header 2016-04-07T22:24:26-07:00 Richard Wagner (1813-1883) was one of the foremost intellectual figures of the nineteenth century. Although primarily known as a composer and for his operas, Wagner's concept of "Gesamtkunstwerk," the universal work of art that synthesizes a number of art forms into one totalized work, pushed him to the bleeding edge of contemporary philosophies of aesthetics (the study of beauty, art, and their meaning).
  
  Wagner was also known for his use of leitmotif, or recurring signatures used to denote characters or themes, in his operas. This concept is especially prominent in his cycle of four operas, often referred to as the Ring Cycle (Der Ring des Nibelungen).
  
  One of Wagner's compositions, "Ritt der Walküren" ["The Ride of the Valkyries"] from his opera Die Walkure [The Valkyrie] was famously used in the film Apocalypse Now (1979).
  
  Wagner built his own opera house, Bayreuth, and this became the only place where Parsifal was played until 1903 (when it premiered in New York). Wagner's interest in Wolfram's tale coincides with a turn in his career toward more conservative views on politics and an increased interest in religion (not only Christianity, but Buddhism). For Wagner, Parsifal was a decidedly serious piece of art. Rather than call it an opera, he termed it a "festival play for the consecration of the stage." 
  
  Read a synopsis of the opera here.
  
  As his career progressed, Wagner's aesthetics and politics became increasingly nationalistic (expressed most bitterly in the writing of his former disciple Friedrich Nietzsche). Parsifal is often cited as a turning point in his career. Over time, Wagner's nationalism, religiosity, and increasingly apparent anti-semitism made him a target to be co-opted by the Nazi movement. This appropriation is, of course, by no means a fair estimation of Wagner's career and of his influence on music and philosophy. Nonetheless, the ties between Wagner's interest in the Middle Ages and the Nazi's search for an authentic origin story should help us consider more carefully the ideological uses (and ethics) of the past, generally, and the allure of the Middle Ages as a site of origins, specifically. 
  
  Check out Hannah's page on Titurel for more!
  
  ***************************************************************************************
  
  Assignment for Tuesday 4/5:
  
  Below I've linked a full performance of the opera from 1981. Although the opera is in German, there are English subtitles. 
  
  The opera is very long-- I do not expect you to watch all of it. I would like you to try to watch an hour of the performance. The plot follows Wolfram fairly closely so, depending on what part of that text you found most interesting, try to watch a chunk that might reflect on some of the corresponding scenes. For many of you, this might be the first (and perhaps only opera) you'll watch, so let's try to make the most of it! Think of it as a sort of "slow looking" exercise. You know my angle on this stuff. Don't worry about following the narrative so exactly; instead, try to find things that interest you!
  
  As you watch, keep these big picture questions in mind:
  • How does Wagner alter Wolfram?
  • What interesting consistencies between the two text can you observe?
  • How does Wagner use the music to tell the story? (Remember, romance too is an oral art-- and was often sung!)
  • Does Wagner's rendition help you see Wolfram's text any differently?
  • Why do you think Wagner was interested in this story? How does he update the play? 
  Now, for the writing part. 
  
  1. Isolate scene/moments that stick out to you while you watch. Jot down quick notes as you watch. 
  
  2. After watching your hour chunk, pick one moment to concentrate on. Find the corresponding scene (or the closest you can find) in the text of Parzival.
  
  3. Watch the scene again!
  
  4. In your first paragraph, introduce the scene with with the time (i.e. 2:48-7:26) and corresponding page numbers in Parzival (2 sentences MAX). Then, carefully unpack how the scene unfolds in the opera. Cite as many details as possible. Concentrate especially on the visuals and the music. Don't worry about analysis at this point-- I just want to see your observations! Extract as much detail as you can!
  
  5. In your second paragraph, compare the scene in the opera to the corresponding scene in the book. If there is no obvious parallel, pick a moment in the book that you think sets up a good contrast to the scene in the opera. Here's where you want to think about analysis. How do the similarities and differences guide your interpretation of what Wagner is trying to accomplish in his scene? 
  
  6. Post your two paragraphs below with your name. 
  
  
  
  
  -------------------------------------------------------------
  
  Nicole Schiro Magee.  I am comparing the first encounters with Parzival of Wolfram’s Cundrie la sorciere in Book VI (pg. 132, par. 312) and Wagner’s Kundry in Act I (54:46 – 57:22.)  The music in the scene is allegro, adding urgency to the events.  At the top of the scene, when Kundry reveals Parzival’s identity, the music is agitato and sinister.  The actress sings the lyrics with severity.   Parzival’s descriptions of the knights he met, and his adventures in the forest immediately follow, and the music becomes staccato, which conjures the images of horses galloping.  The quick change from agitato to staccato marks a contrast between the characters, evoking innocence in Parzival when compared with the harshness of Kundry. This contrast builds until the climactic moment when Parzival asks Kundry who fears him, and she answers “the wicked.”  At this point Parzival asks, “Who is good?”  Gurnamanz replies, “your mother.”  The music softens, and becomes gentle and adagio and affettuoso, supporting the picture of goodness and grieving in Percival’s mother.  The music, particularly the violins, immediately becomes furioso and accelerando when Kundry interrupts the moment pronouncing the death of Parzival’s mother.  The violence of the violins underlies the physical altercation between Kundry and Parzival.  When Gurnamanz breaks them apart and asks, “What has this woman done to you,” the music becomes adagio again through Percival’s fainting, and then becomes allegro when Kundry runs off.  This gives the audience a clue to the dynamic between Percival and Kundry, and foreshadows their ongoing struggle. Overall the changes in pace and style support the character’s emotions, which conveys the volatile nature of this meeting.  As for the visual elements of the scene, which in my opinion are lacking, the main thing that I latch onto is Kundry’s need to always return to the undergrowth of the forest, to lay and wallow in her weariness and wretched state.  The designs, colors, and fabric textures of the costumes also suited the characters, and indicated status.  For example, Gurnamanz’s blue robe gives the audience a visual reminder of his royalty.  In contrast, the deep dark green and brown hues of Parzival and Kundry’s costumes stir up an earthy, i.e., salt of the earth feeling for me. The director could have used lighting more to indicate mood, and levels to indicate status, and to break up the monotony of three people singing at each other on stage for many, many minutes, but it my experience opera directors generally do not give attention to these kinds of details.  Good theatre and musical theatre directors always take advantage of every element of the world onstage to tell the story in the most compelling way. 
   
   
  Wolfram’s Cundrie and Wagner’s Kundry are vastly different.  In Wolfram Cundrie first comes to Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.  In Wagner, we first see her with Gurnamanz near the Grail Castle.  In Wolfram, she is a wise, loyal messenger of the Grail.  In Wagner, Gurnamanz describes her as a “dullard,” and there is question about where her loyalty lies: is she working for Klingsor?  In Wolfram, she is wealthy and fashionable.  In Wagner, she is a wretched “wild woman” and buries herself in leaves, and sleeps in the bed of the forest.  Her message is different.  In Wolfram, she curses Parzival for failing to fulfill his destiny and ask about the grail.  In Wagner, she meets Parzival before he goes into the Grail Castle.  Parzival’s is ignorant of his identity, and she reveals it.  There are, however, consistencies in the characterizations.  In both cases, she is a traveler and versed in Arabic.  She is the bearer of truth, brings grief, and chastises Parzival for being a fool.  Wolfram describes Cundrie’s message: “Her tidings brought grief to many people” (pg. 132, par. 312), and sums it up:  “Her tidings were a bridge carrying grief over joy”  (pg. 132, par. 313).  In Wagner, Kundry brings grief to Parzival by bearing the news of the death of Parzival’s mother: “she grieves no more his mother is dead” (56:04).  She then adds insult to injury by judging Parzival: “she bade me greet you fool” (56:15). Shortly thereafter Parzival faints and the scene ends.  Both operate under a veiled purity.  Wolfram’s Cundrie is physically unattractive.  Wagner’s Kundry is a wild woman, but is fiercely devoted to the Fisher King.  She proves her purity in her humility - she will not accept thanks for her devotion (27:00).  It is through this consistency of veiled purity, and oddly, a common thread in Anton Chekhov’s The Seagull, I have gained a better understanding of the key trait of both Cundrie and Kundry:  purity.   It seems that in the scene leading into this scene Parcival could have been inspiration for the character of Konstantin in Chekhov’s The Seagull.  Wagner’s Parzival predates The Seagull by about eighteen years.  Konstantin is in love with Nina, and when he kills an innocent seagull for no good reason the bird becomes symbolic of many things, mainly both Konstantin and Nina’s loss of innocence and purity.  So in a roundabout way, because of my deep love of Chekhov, and through Chekhov’s parallel to Wagner, I came to have a much deeper understanding of Parzival and Kundry. Nicole Schiro Magee.
  
  -Sophia Heard
          I have selected the scene that compares Richard Wagner’s interpretation of Anfortas’ anguish and later healing in “Parsifal” (3:38:00-3:50:00) to Wolfram’s account in Parzival (p.329-333). Wagner’s scene opens with Anfortas being gently placed before the Grail altar by his loyal knights. It is at this moment that the audience finally sees the downcasted King’s face clearly because before it was shrouded shamefully in darkness. As somber and low music plays in the background, Anfortas begins to sing of his suffering, crying out: “Woe be on me!” Implementing an increasingly dejected and melodramatic voice Anfortas continues to tell of his anguish and desire to die. The music then begins to accelerate as the knights suddenly open Titurel’s casket revealing his body to the shock of Anfortas, the other knights, and the audience. Even after Anfortas is shown the body of his father he relentlessly sings of his own pain, simultaneously refusing to be in the Grail’s presence. Although he rejects the Holy Vessel, Anfortas noticeably grieves for his father: “I, who alone longed to die, to you brought death”. Standing their ground upon the dark tomb like stage the knights earnestly wish for Anfortas to gaze upon the Grail in order to save himself and Titurel. At this moment the music takes on urgent mannerisms as Anfortas loudly begs his knights to end his anguish. He desires them to “plunge [their] swords in deep, up to the hilt”. Suddenly, the music goes through many more alterations. As the knights advance upon the King the tune becomes louder and graver, and then quickly changes into a lighter beat of hope once Parzival appears with the Grail Spear, saving Anfortas. No longer is the King melancholic, but raises his head, straightens his body, and begins to walk without a limp.
  
         
          Although Wagner’s scene and Wolfram’s written interpretation have some similarities, there are discrepancies. The most influential difference is that while both Anfortas in the opera and the prose are in torment the imminent death of one appears more prevalent than the other. In Parzival although the King begs for death and attempts to refuse the presence of the Grail his knights would not let him. Wolfram relayed that Anfortas: “...was carried to the Grail, whether he liked it or not…” (p.330). This moment diverges from the opera because in Wagner’s version Anfortas appears to stand his ground and continuously rebuffs the knights attempts to make him uncover the Grail. So steadfast is Anfortas in his command that even when his father Titurel lay in front of him he refuses to accept The Grail’s healing. One could presume that Wagner’s reason for creating the scene this way was to implement more drama causing the audience to perhaps believe Anfortas might refuse healing, die, and leave the Grail to be forever concealed. Therefore, when Parzival suddenly appears on stage to save the day the climax is reached. An apex that is possibly not arrived at in Wolfram’s version on the Grail story.
  -Sophia Heard
  
  Natalie Cormier: 3:39:05-3:44:30
  This scene in Parsifal features Anfortas lamenting the death of Titurel and his plea for his own death as well, it ends with his knights using force to keep him alive and Parsifal entering the scene. This corresponds to the opening on book XVI in Parzival on page 329-330 where Anfortas begs for death from his knights but they refuse to grant it to him and insist that he must wait for the second coming of Parzival. In the opera, Titurel has died and the knights have carried the coffin with his body off. The scene begins with a slow, mournful tone with dramatic pauses when Anfortas initially laments Titurel’s death and declares his own desire to follow Titurel into the afterlife in the middle of a circle of his soldiers. Also, note that Anfortas is not hindered in his movement when walking around the stage. The knights that surround the Anfortas on stage sing an oppressive cry that Anfortas must stay alive and for someone to bring the grail so that Anfortas will not be able to die. They rush to restrain Anfortas when he cries for them to stop collapsing and singing in a more forceful tone, he demands that they attack him with their weapons so that he can die. Several soldiers approach him with weapons drawn while Anfortas sings and does Parsifal who has entered the scene with the holy spear. The soldiers draw back as Parsifal hold the spear in front of Anfortas and declares that Anfortas can only be healed with the same weapon.
  
  The opera and the book are glaringly different if only Parzival and Parsifal are compared. In the opera, Titurel has died; in the book, Titurel is still alive at the end of the book because Titurel instructs Firiel how to see the grail. The way in which Anfortas is healed is also different. Parsifal uses the holy spear and the holy grail in order to heal Anfortas while in the book, Parzival only needs to ask the question for Anfortas to be well once again. Furthermore, Anfortas can more around in the opera while in the book he is bedridden. Parisifal/Parzival is the one to heal Anfortas using the holy grail but the scences are much different when looking at details. The death of Titurel allows Anfortas to show a wider range of emotions and rather than making Anfortas only capable of lying in bed and screaming, Anfortas is able to fully express how much he wants to die and how much he is suffering. Furthermore, a spear coming together with the holy grail is much more appealing to a visual audience than a question being asked. A holy spear is also present in other versions of the Parzifal tale. Wagner is trying to appeal to a visual audience and create a wider range of emotions for his character so that the audience is more entertained. 
  Natalie Cormier: 3:39:05-3:44:30
  
  To delve into the comparison between the interpretations of Wolfram’s and Wagner’s (pg. 97-105) Parzival and Parsifal (1:11:14 – 1:39:05) respectively, what was most interesting to me started near the beginning of scene two of the first act of Wagner’s Parsifal. The scene begins with a slow reveal of an empty hall with nary but a lone stone pedestal in the center. Parzival is escorted towards and around the pedestal by his guide; the music slowing pace to a steady march and increasing in grandure and volume as the guide leaves Parzival with the question of what knowledge will be bestowed to him. After the guide’s departure, now enters a cluster of robed choirmen, all singing in unison and harmony in celebration of soon to receive communion. The music swells with the voice of the choir but quickly quiets and slow to a somber tone as six men carry in an elderly man on a wooden throne and placed tenderly in front of the pedestal; his expression almost melancholy and bearing with great  sorrow. The choir gently singing as their psalm draws to its end before all was met with dead silence. A commanding voice soon rang through the halls; the voice of Titurel, telling his son Amfortas, the man sitting upon the throne, to unveil the grail. The music proceeding as a slow beat, but swelling in intensity and reaches a sting as Amfortas flails and throws himself upon the stone pedestal; wracked in pain and agony over the shame and suffering he has brought upon himself, flailing as he exclaims his unworthiness of his office as keeper of the sacred relics. He pleads for him to be struck dead where he stood and to be forgiven of his transgression of losing the spear and falling into temptation. The music matching his sorrow as it draws into slow melancholic melodies and sudden stings as he lashes out on himself; Parzival clutching to his heart as he hears these cries of anguish. The melody now begins to build and hasten as the voice of his Titurel and those of the knights around Amfortas urge him to uncover the grail, to which, with great reluctance after pleading mercy to those around him to not do so, he does after hearing of his redemption promised to be brought to him by a innocent, holy fool. The Grail now revealed bathes the hall and all in it in a radiant crimson light and all partake of it. As communion nears it finish, Amfortas returns to his wooden throne and is carried away into the shadows; the music now entering a slow timely march as Amfortas and the knights slowly walk away. Parzival, dumbfounded, is asked what he knows of that he had seen but is unable to answer. He is now called a fool by the one who led his to the hall and ordered to leave, but to heed word to never kill another swan. Soon, angelic choir voices sing of the aforementioned innocent fool as the guide exits and the scene fades to black and to its close.
  
  When comparing the scene in which the Grail is presented, there is a large number of discrepancies present which clash with one another. Let’s us begin with the scene we have read in the book. In Wolfram’s Parzival, Parzival witnesses a procession of fair numbers of maidens and duchesses strolled slowly by; each carrying an artifact of exquisite luxury and prestige. Following them all is the Queen, which in her hands she held the Grail. In Wagner’s opera, we do not see this procession, but rather the entrance of large masses of followers dressed in blue robes; all of which were there to take part of Holy Communion. Also, instead of the Grail being brought in as a priceless treasure by the Queen, it was instead concealed within the confines of the stone pedestal meant to cover the relic. Another difference seen between the two media is the demeanor of Amfortas, the keeper and guardian of the Grail. In Wolfram’s book, not much is really said to describe his actions or his demeanor aside from his actions of screaming in anguish while bedridden. In Wagner’s play, a very clear contrast is seen in the overall expression of the severance of his agony. A final contrast to draw from the comparison is in which Parzival facing the consequences of his actions by not asking questions about the Grail. In Wolfram, we see Parzival startled awake to the unnerving sight of no person within the Grail castle until his departure in which a lone squire mocks him of his reluctance to ask questions. However, in Wagner’s opera, we see Parzival in a much more dumbfounded or bewildered state of shock in which he cannot answer nor ask anything due to his inability to process or realize what had occurred before being sent away. It seems, in my eye, that the method in which Wagner conveys his adaptation of Wolfram’s work is through the use of motion and physical cues in order to relay a more powerful impact in emotion, whereas Wolfram tells what is or had occurred through the role of the narrator. It would seem that Wagner wishes to utilize his actors’ movement and physical expression to create a much broader and more receptive sense of emotion for the characters in order for the audience to gain a sense of empathy and a greater sense of entertainment.
  
  Joseph Hernandez (1:11:14 – 1:39:05)
  
  
  Ariel Craine
  At the very end, in the scene (3:33:34) - 3:52:49) in which Anfortas is healed is interesting to me for several reasons. First, Anfortas is much more mobile in the play. Meanwhile, in the book, it takes great care to discuss how he is bedridden and "how his bed is embellished," (333). Yet despite this change, the actor who plays Anfortas wears very intense make-up to visually express his illness. Second, the setting is different from what is described in the book. The great room is circular, dark and grey. People move in patterns, very carefully and precisely. The movements are slow and ritualistic, fitting the funeral procession that occur within the scene, another departure from the book. Anfortas laments Titurel's death, moving around and calling on others to hear his despair, saying, "Here I am! Here is the open wound!" (3:43:43). This is also different from the book, giving Anfortas the ability to do more than simply scream. Finally, in the book he is healed by Parzifal asking the question, "Uncle, what troubles you?" (333). Meanwhile, Wagner changes this to Parzifal using the Spear and the Grail.
  
  These changes provide a very different scene, one fitted more for a visual medium. Since Anfortas can walk somewhat in the Opera, this allows him to carry a more dramatic weight, giving him the ability to carry a scene. Further, showing his agony after Titurel's death gives him even more to express. In order to impart the severity of his wound, the Opera highlights his illness by giving him dramatic make-up that gives him a very yellowed, sickly appearance. There are other differences between the book and the Opera. In the book, there are descriptions of spices and smell, saying "the air was sweetened" and the wound's stench eliminated. The scene in the book also seems to  be more lavish, mentioning his bed being "adorned still further by gems." This provides a more lavish, adorned and beautified scene in the book. It also brings up other sensory details, such as smell, utilizing the versatility of its medium. Meanwhile, the scene in the Opera is dark, with no carpetry, hardly any colors and certainly not any gems. There is no indication of smell. This scene attempts to be darker, more desperate. While Anfortas in the book may be in agony, his bed is "sumptuous" (331). But while the Anfortas in the Opera may be more mobile, he is without any comforts. Finally, how Parzifal heals Anfortas is very different. In the book, it is a simple question, but still dramatic because the narrator adds a long passage in celebration of this healing. It builds up the moment. Yet in the Opera, we cannot see internal dialogue or have a narrator explain the importance of such a question. Instead, Wagner makes the moment more of a punch by using visual cues, such as the Spear and the Grail -- both very eye-catching, large decals that provide the viewer with a focal point. These changes provide a dark, bare scene but much of the changes work to fit the content into a visual format, leaving the viewer with the most impact. 
  
  
  Delia Davis (3:32:19 to end) 
  The final scene in Wagner's opera adaptation caught my eye for its highly stylized and orchestrated presentation. Operas in general are very performative and sometimes stiff for this very reason, and Wagner's Parsifal is no exception. Nevertheless, I think this final scene presents itself as it does--accentuating specific elements and completely omitting other details from Wolfram's novel--for very specific reasons. The scene opens in a cavernous circular stone room largely shrouded in darkness--an aesthetic decision on Wagner's part that serves as a physical manifestation of the somber and gloomy collective soul of those residing in the Grail Castle. The lethargic music swells slightly as knights begin marching into the hall in a fashion that mimics a funeral procession. They march slowly and in precise rhythm with each other, heads tilted slightly downwards. Titurel's coffin is paraded about for a bit before it is finally set down precisely in front of the Grail's holding place and Amfortas. Although the rest of the scene is mainly centered around Amfortas and Parsifal, who appears at the very end, the ancillary characters are still very specific and restrained, both in movement and in placement of their persons. Amfortas wears a sickly purple robe and his actions are much more exaggerated; in fact, compared to Wolfram's Anfortas, he is quite mobile. Costuming plays a pertinent role as the contrast between the knights that surround Amfortas--who are all dressed in striking red and blue--makes Amfortas' own attire that much more lethargic looking. The music swells and subsides according to action and movement onstage, accentuating the dramatization and emphasis on any emotional or physical agitations that occur onstage. 
  
  In Wolfram's book, the corresponding scene begins on page 329 but events do not correspond exactly beyond the scene with Amfortas' anguish and Parzival's arrival. The most glaring discrepancy between the conclusion in Wagner's opera and that of Wolfram's book lies in the method that Amfortas is cured. Wagner makes a show of the spear whereas Wolfram's original tale discards the material in favor of something implicitly spiritual: a question. Wolfram's plot decision likely stems from Chretien de Troyes' primordial story of Perceval and therefore carries this implied notion of spirituality that de Troyes' text first attempted to raise. Why Wagner chose to deviate from that traditional ending and utilize an object to resolve the main conflict merits some consideration. I think part of the reason stems from the performative nature of the art, which yields much better to flashy props (I mean come on--that spear is huge, and the same can be said of the Grail too). However I also think the way Wagner sets up the main objects in that scene creates a very ritualistic and tacitly religious ambience. This is partly due to the fact that the scene is also a funeral of sorts for Titurel, but the scene retains this ritualistic feeling beyond the parading of his casket. Perhaps Wagner was attempting to create a final scene that is reminiscent of Christian rituals like the Eucharist or baptism. Moreover, Wagner's focus on objects like the spear points the viewer's attention towards a very Christian symbol: blood. The symbol is visceral and visual in the opera and is reinforced not only by the spear bleeding, but also by the Grail. This could just be a disparity in my imagining of the scene when I read the book but I also felt like Wolfram's ending was much more subtle than Wagner's super climactic almost orgasmic ending where Amfortas stands in the center of the stage, surrounded by other knights whose swords are drawn and approached by Parsifal wielding his elongated spear, who slowly and carefully touches the spear to Amfortas' chest while Amfortas watches in awe and gratitude. 
  
  Hannah Jarzombek "Parzival's Swan Song and Parsifal's Beginning"
  
  One of the most musically moving moments in the opera, Parsifal, is the Swan Song from 46:30-51:35.  The scene immediately conjured up images of Loherangin’s Swan on page 346 and swans’ apparent connection to the Grail and Grail knights. This scene really captured my interest because the music changed from an entirely holy church hymnal feel that had this spiritual fullness to it to a completely frenzied, terrifying hysteria, seen also in the acting of the noble man and the holy men around him who jump up and begin looking around. The ferocity and near mania with which the noble man demands to know what is going added to the intensity of the scene at this point. The music then crescendos from terrifying to threatening when the priest realizes that a swan has been shot down and demands, again, that the soul responsible be brought forward. This is the audience’s first look at the titular Parsifal, literally dragged with a decrescendo of music. There are a few tense moments of absolute silence before the music begins again. However, now the music is slower, when the priest speaks, and much faster as the holy men accuse Parsifal of shooting down the bird. Rather than be intimidated by the threatening and accusatory speed, Parsifal answers in like, boasting of his ability to hit anything that flies. Seeing that Parsifal does not understand that he has committed some act of offense (to the priest or the forest or God is unclear) he begins to ask Parsifal a series of guilt producing questions of the forest’s holiness and the animal’s tameness and the swan’s innocence. The priest’s voice and tone remain clear and slow, juxtaposed to the holy men’s loud, quick suggests that “the offender” be “punished”. The priest continues to explain the bird’s magnificence when he suddenly switches, with the music, to the accusatory threatening tone that previously only the holy men had been using. He calls Parsifal childish and angrily pulls him over to the swan. When Parsifal pulls away, the music slows down again but the priest’s voice remains incredibly threatening as he tells Parsifal that swan was “pleasing” to them and asks “what is he now” to Parsifal. In a wonderfully subtle switch, the slow, threatening score becomes a slow, remorseful score. The priest makes Parsifal look at the swan’s blood from Parsifal’s arrow, points out the “drooping and lifeless” wings, and notes the “snowy plumage stained dark”. The priest only has to point out the “glazed eyes” before Parsifal suddenly breaks his bow over his knee and casts it aside. The score crescendos once more as the priest interrogates Parsifal about his “misdeed and “great guilt” and incredulously asks how Parsifal could “commit this crime”. Parsifal replies that he “didn’t know”.
  
  The invocation of such strong language and a variety of condescension in teaching and threatening interrogation, Wagner clearly wants to get across a strong point about the sacredness of the swan. Since Wagner has obviously worked closely with Parzival as a text, he’d be familiar with the line at the very end of the book that discusses Loherangin’s “friend the swan”. The swan brings the boat that Loherangin sails away on when Loherangin’s wife asks his name, breaking a vow they’d made. Assumedly, the swan goes with him. Knowing that Loherangin is Parzival’s son in book and musical adds a layer of metaphor and arc to the story. Parsifal shoots down the swan in the opera, causing a great sin in the eyes of the priest. As the priest is ‘connected’ the audience can assume he knows the connotations behind the swan’s appearance. While it is plausible that he simply sees this unnecessary act of violence and reduction of beauty as a sin itself, the text provided seems to be an overreaction. However, if the swan is connected to the Grail is connected to God, the priest’s reaction is entirely justified and the diction applicable. Compared to Loherangin, Parsifal’s/Parzival’s son, and his use of a swan as his “friend”, more importantly, the thing that facilitates his leaving, the swan becomes something Loherangin cherishes and, possibly, trusts. I found this familial, if not character, arc across mediums to be really engaging and interesting to the growth of Parsifal from the “holy fool”--who "didn't know" about the significance of the Swan--to someone with knowledge of God's ways and holiness, someone with connections and answers, if only of the small variety and if only through his son.
  
  
  Emily Nguyen
  The scene in the opera in which Parsifal witnesses Amfortas lament about his woes in the midst of the Holy Communion (1:05:16-1:36:00) corresponds to the scene in Parzival where Parzival enjoys an extravagant dinner with Anfortas (pages 96-103). The scene begins when Parsifal and Gurnemanz enter a round room. This room is grey and appears to be gloomy due to its dim lighting and lack of décor. There is one table in the middle of the room. Hordes of men and women carrying cups enter the room singing. The music and singing are loud and dramatic (which is befitting for a presentation). Amfortas enters the room by being carried in a chair, and the music and singing become quieter and more dramatic. Amfortas is set down, and the women in the room start singing in a capella, asking Amfortas to start the Holy Communion. The music cuts off suddenly. Titurel’s voice starts singing to Amfortas, trying to appeal to Amfortas to start the communion so that Titurel can continue living. Amfortas stands up and starts singing about his woes and asking to die. The others in the room try to start the communion, but Amfortas refuses. He sings more about his pain as the music in the background becomes more excited and dramatic. Interestingly enough, Amfortas mentions that he is wounded by the same spear that has injured Jesus. Amfortas runs around the room to ask for mercy from anyone. His running is accompanied by frenzy background music to emphasize his strong desire for mercy. He asks to have his wound healed so that he can die, and the music slows down considerably. The people in the room repeat a prophecy mentioned earlier: “Enlightened through compassion, the innocent fool; wait for him, the appointed one” (1:21:03). Amfortas is then forced to commence the communion. The music in the background appears sad in this moment. To push Amfortas to begin, the men and women circle around him and step closer, as if they are trapping him in. The music builds in intensity and pitch until Amfortas lifts the Grail. The communion occurs. The music during this part is lighthearted. The music starts slow but lighthearted as Amfortas is carried out of the room.
   
  This scene in the opera differs greatly from the one in the novel in terms of setting and plot. The similarities are very limited in that Amfortas’ pain is revealed to Parsifal. The differences vary much more and help to emphasize Amfortas’ pain in the opera. Wagner places much more importance on Amfortas and his woes than Wolfram does in the novel; Wagner gives Amfortas special attention while Wolfram focuses more on Parzival and his experience in the castle. The opera highlights Amfortas’ pain through the setting and his complaints of his plight. In the novel, Anfortas castle is filled with “a hundred chandeliers… a hundred couches… such great fires no man has seen” (97), and other similar “costly constructions” (97). On the other hand, Amfortas’ home is gloomy and dark. It is much less ostentatious and warm in comparison. Anfortas sits through an extravagant dinner with Parzival and mentions briefly his wound while Amfortas is placed at the center of attention and sings and laments loudly about his wound. Instead of having an indulgent dinner, he is forced by the people around him to carry out the Holy Communion despite his pleas for mercy, which go ignored. Amfortas appears to have less power over his people. The cold setting and the focus on Amfortas injury make it easier for the audience to understand and see Amfortas pain. This is an excellent move by Wagner theatrically in that there is no ambiguity for the audience as to what saddens Amfortas. The audience has no signs to indicate that his injury has a major impact on his life except for the visual and audio cues presented to them. As such, Amfortas is forced to do something he does not want to do, does not appear to gain sympathy from the people in the room for his pain, and has to be carried around in a chair in such a dismal setting. A combination of all of these greatly highlights Amfortas’ agonies and visibly displays to the audience the depths of his woes. 
  
  
   
  Marisela Gonzales
  I am comparing the first meeting of Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival with Cundrie in Book VI (page 132-135) to Wagner’s Parsifal meeting Kundry for the first time (54:34 – 58:00). In Wagner’s opera Parsifal is speaking to Gurnamanz while Kundry listens in. She joins in the conversation when Gurnamanz inquiries about Parsifal’s nobility and lack of knowledge concerning weapons. Kundry informs him that Parsifal was raised without a father. Even though it is their first meeting Kundry seems to know more about Parsifal than Parsifal himself. Kundry continues to tell Gurnamanz about Parsifal’s background while they both listen intently. Kundry mocks Parsifal for being a fool and even laughs at him. Kundry remains on the ground facing away from Parsifal and Gurnamanz as she speaks. Parsifal seems to be unaware that he is being made fun of as he agrees excitedly that she is right and then goes on to describe how he came to know of the knights and started his own adventures. The music is fast paced at this point and becomes more dramatic as Kundry joins Parsifal in the telling of his adventures. The tone of the music changes when Parsifal ask Gurnamanz who is good and he answers saying that Parsifal’s mother was good. Kundry then reveals to Parsifal that his mother is dead. The music seems to mirror Parsifal’s surprise and grief to hear of his mother’s death. The scene escalates as Kundry insults Parsifal calling him a fool again as she describes passing by his dying mother. Parsifal attacks Kundry and they struggle until Gurnamanz is able to break them apart. Kundry ends up on the ground while Parsifal is standing to the side distraught over the news she told him. The music during this part is much softer. Gurnamanz defends Kundry saying that she only told the truth and Parsifal is so filled with grief that he cannot catch his breath and proceeds to faint. Kundry quickly runs off to bring something to help wake him.
  
  The two meetings are extremely different, however they do share general similarities. One difference is where the meetings take place. Wolfram’s Parzival meets Cundrie when she appeared before Arthur and Knights of the Round Table. While Wagner’s Parsifal meets Kundry while speaking to Gurnamanz before entering the grail castle. Another distinction is that Wolfram’s Parzival met Cundrie after he had already entered the grail castle. The Characterization of the messenger is also different. The Cundrie in Wolfram wears fine clothes and is seen as someone wealthy of a high social class, she also seems to hold her head high and to be more direct. While Wagner’s Kundry is more disheveled and spends most of the time hugging the ground. Kundry is not well kept and rarely makes eye contact with speaking, her insults are also less harsh than Wolfram’s Cundrie. However, they do share some similarities, for example both are messengers who bring bad news but speak the truth. They are also both depicted as being fiercely loyal. 
  
  Valeria Garcia -
  I chose the moment from 37:00 to around 40:00 where the priest is explaining the meaning of the grail and objects similar to it.  This scene is fairly dark to affect the mood. The priest is describing in great detail what the Grail is and how it affects people. He shows the affects of the sinners and what happens to those awaiting the Grail. The scene is deep and dark and powerful, it is full of warnings and powerful emotion.  The emotion and urgency of this scene is more  profound because of the music and because of the scenery itself, it makes it more attention-grabbing.
   
  This moment struck me because it seems vital to the explanation of the story and yet in the book, the explanation of The Grail and anything to do with it is usually only told to the hero and even then the heroes of the tale hardly have an idea of the true meaning of the grail.  This moment really seems important to me as it sets up the rest of the tale, it tells you what you need to know so that the rest of the adventure is clear. I find this intriguing because in the book, the narrator makes the meaning of the adventure clear even when it is not yet clear to Percival (Parcival) himself yet. Maybe it was because of the platform, for example in a book a narrator can explain what is going on without anyone in the actual story really knowing, and in an opera or movie that is a bit more difficult to accomplish. It is possible but having a narrator explain everything in an opera would change the whole pace and dynamic of the performance. It was very interesting to see the different styles of relaying the meaning of the adventure of the Holy Grail, through the book and through the opera.
  
  Chris DuBos
   From 46:33 to 57:25 in Wagner's Parsifal, we are introduced to Parsifal as a boy who shot a swan with his bow in the holy forest. The musical cues become more sinister and frantic as Gurnemanz asks him questions about himself, with Parsifal replaying each time, "I don't know." When he learns that his mother has died, the music's tempo rapidly increases as the strings descend into lower octaves. This change produces a higher emotional effect than what can be gained from simply reading the lines.
  The introduction of Parsifal (who is not named) is much different in Wagner's opera from Wolfram's Parzival  (27-50). Rather than showing Parsifal's experiences with the knights in the forest, asking them questions, Parsifal actually answers questions from Gurnemanz, which makes him less of an aloof and ignorant character and more sympathetic. In removing the scenes of Parsifal constantly asking ridiculous questions, Wagner is obviously trying to get his audience to relate to get closer to Parsifal and feel his emotions. The musical cues contribute to this strategy by emphasizing Parsifal's guilt at having killed a sacred swan. Also, in omitting the scenes between Parsifal and the knights, Wagner condenses the narrative efficiently. This might be due to the better understanding of effective storytelling devices available to 19th century writers that were not widely used during medieval times. Overall, we are left with a less incredulous portrayal of Parsifal in the opera than was given in Wolfram's tale. 
  
  
  Dana Swift
  The scene I chose from the opera, Parsifal, was from 3:06:00- 3:20:00, corresponding to pages 333-334 and page 342 in Wolfram’s Parzival. In the scene, Parzival laments about his failure to heal Amfortas and then is anointed and announced as king of the Holy Grail. Musically, the scene at first is dramatic with trumpets and horns blaring to showcase Parzival’s “woe” (3:11). The music then slows with horns and strings emoting a softer sound as Parzival is blessed with holy water. While the music changes to emphasize a new beginning, the biggest visual effect is the subtle costume change. Parzival wears a black robe that appears rich and gleaming, yet when he collapses he sheds this materialistic layer and appears in a simple frayed shirt. Even though he is appointed King, it is only after he loses the image of wealth and transforms into “pure” “enlightened” and literally “washed away guilt” that he is valued as more than just a failed knight. The moment Parzival collapses and lays upon a wooden bench parallels to Amfortas bed ridden at the beginning and is “enlightened through compassion” (24:00), illustrating how Parzival has fallen and humbled himself to understand God, Amfortas, and the Grail. Later in the scene Parzival baptizes Kundry. Kundry kneels before his feet and is purified with water and follows Parzival’s path to holiness.
  
  The opera scene corresponds to Parzival’s becoming King in the novel. While all the features and characters are not the same, the idea of compassion resonates throughout both mediums. Wolfram denotes Parzival’s “beauty” and “humility” as the reasons for Parzival to triumph and save Anfortas (pg. 333-334). All the exotic remedies and sorcery could not heal Anfortas’ wounds. Inner compassion and the question “what troubles you?” are what bring about a resolution and the Parzival redeeming moment (pg 333). I also saw the parallel between Kundry’s baptism and Feirefiz’s baptism on page 342. The two characters may be different genders, but they both symbolism heathens transformed by holy water. In the opera and book, holy water holds the ability to purify, and “wash away guilt” and lift the “burden” from someone’s head (3:17). Therefore, near the ending of both sources, resolution equates to the good characters connecting to God. Looking at the similarities of these moments shows the transformation that characters undergo to not only be holy, but to wash away past sin and be reborn in purity. Wagner wanted to visualize Parizvial’s scene of cleansing and does a good job depicting the physical water changing Parzival's mentality and ability to become King. 
  
  Tynan Holt
  The bulk of my comparison is 34:01-36:10 in Wagner’s Parsifal, and pages 202-205 in Wolfram’s Parzival; these are the segments in which the Fisher King’s injury and how it was attained is detailed. 
  An overarching difference between the two works can be gleaned from a line in Wagner’s play that handles race, however underhandedly, in a fundamentally different way than Wolfram’s literature. When Gurnamanz is lamenting the King’s condition (20:14-20:47) the music behind is mournful and emotional during the first admission, which then grows to a vehement din and then moves slowly back into a tender amalgam of sounds. Coupled with his words, “how it grieves my heart to see the liege lord of a conquering race fall a slave to his sickness”, a key difference between Wolfram and Wagner is revealed- Anti-Semitism. Though Wolfram von Eschenbach was definitely colorful and imaginative (see: imaginary name-dropping throughout Parzival and Titurel) his work does not appear overtly racist. Granted, a certain level of misunderstanding of racial identity can be expected for medieval literature, which comes from vastly different conceptions of race, especially of bi-racial or mixed-race people, and the correlation between race and religion. In addition to the underlying tones of the two works, the wounding of Amfortas, though similar in its resolution and overall result, is divergent in its details from Wolfram’s Parzival. Though it is stated differently who the King’s savior will be (at 24:40-25:05) and only his characteristics are mentioned such as “enlightened through compassion” and an “innocent fool”, alluding to Parzival, the injury remains the same. Throughout the description of Amfortas’ misfortune, the tempo slows and quickens with the pace of the story, emotive and thoughtful through the parts when Gurnamanz is mourning the pain that has befallen his master, and violent and suspenseful through parts where Gurnamanz is vengefully describing the “woman of fearsome beauty” who bewitched him. 
  
  According to Wagner’s play, the “hallowed spear” was “wielded by unhallowed hands”, which is in accordance with “it was a heathen who fought there and rode that joust against him” (von Eschenbach, 202). Other than that, there are few places where the two works line up. Although, the adversary in Wolfram’s version is not specified to be male or female, whereas Wagner’s version specifically calls attention to the Fisher King’s adversary as a temptress who “bewitched” him, who laid him in her arms, “intoxicated”. This contrasts to the image of the adversary presented in Parzival, “born in Ethnise, where the Tigris flows forth from Paradise” who is an androgynous figure. The reader assumes this figure as male because of the background that medieval literature sets up (men being protagonists and antagonists, and women usually as bystanders or auxiliary characters) (von Eschenbach, 202). However, they are both presented as heathen/pagan/non-Christian. Another notable difference is the king’s accompaniment. Wolfram states “’the king was out riding alone’” whereas Wagner’s version is told by Gurnamanz, who claims he was there and furthermore that he “rushed in” after the king let the spear fall during his intoxicated stint in the sorceress’ arms (von Eschenbach, 202).  This is a minor difference, but one that is, I think, a stylistic and logistic detail. It is more possible to have Gurnamanz retell the story because the retelling takes place in the beginning of the opera versus the middle of the book, rather than introducing the hermit, and finding a new way of retelling the story without including that he is telling Parzival of his brother's misfortune.
  
  Darline Portillo
  The scene that I selected is from the opera is from 53:36-59:40 during this scene Gurnemanz demands Parsifal to tell him the things that Parsifal knows about himself, so Parsifal proceeds to tell him about his mother (Heart’s Sorrow) and his home at the wild moors; these both scenes correspond to the one in page 72-73. Just right after Parsifal tells Gurnemanz that he made his own bow; there is a shift in the music that moves from lively and heroic one to a more serious one. Shorty after that, Kundry starts to retell in a concisely way what happen to Parsifal’s father, Gahmuret, and what Parsifal’s mother did after the death of Gahmuret to keep Parsifal safe; the scene where the reader learns about Gahmuret’s death is in page 45 of Book II and the scene of Parzival’s mother retreating to the forest takes place in page 50 of Book III. Then, Perceval retells about meeting the knights; this scene happens in pages 52-53 of Book III. During the moment when both Parsifal and Kundry highlight the difficulties faced by Parsifal, the music changes to a more slow-paced and dramatic one. The moment that Kundry tells Parsifal and the audience about the death of Parsifal’s mother, the music for a moment stops as to represent a moment of realization. The scene of Parzival learning about his mother’s death happens at the end of page 200 and continues in page 201 in Book IX. The costumes that the performers are wearing are also integrated to the plot of the show. For example, Kundry wears a medieval gown, Parsifal is dressed in peasant wear and Gurnemanz wears long medieval tunic. The first hour of the performance opens in an extensive area that is composed of few decorations, such as the leaves for the forest and the pebbles for the ground, to bring the audience attention to the performers and their performance.
  
  Wagner alters Wolfram’s poem in the scene that I selected by compressing the story with his characters. In the opera, the characters retell previous events of the story while in the poem these same events were known to the reader by the narrator as this narrator tells the story in a chronological order. In the poem, the narrator doesn’t form part of the story while in the performance this narrator is completely omitted, and instead uses the characters are used to retell a flashback or past moment. Some interesting consistencies between the text and the performance are that during this scene: Kundry tells both Parsifal and the audience about how Gahmuret died in battle and how this incident led to Parsifal’s mother to retreat with her son to protect and keep him away from something similar happening to him. According to Kundry, Parsifal’s mother made of Parsifal a “stranger to arms.” Another consistency in this scene is when Parsifal tells Gurnemanz and the audience how he met the knights and decided to follow them because he wanted to be like them. Some of the differences that I found were the spelling and omission of some of the characters. For spelling for example: Parsifal (Parzival), Kundry (Cundrie), Amfortas (Anfortas) and for omission: King Arthur, Sigune, Frimutel, Trevrizent, Feiferanz and many other characters. Another difference is that in the Wolfram’s poem, Parzival meets Gurnemanz closer to his castle (Gurnemanz's castle) rather than the Grail Castle. Another interesting difference is that in the performance Parsifal learns about his mother’s death through Kundry while in the poem it is not until Book IX that Parzival learns this news from his uncle Trevrizent. Wagner uses music to create an atmosphere to the audience like to create a sense of urgency, seriousness, playfulness, and achievement. I also noticed that Wagner uses music as cues to represent situations in which this one, music, reflects the emotions and feelings of the characters. Music is also used to introduce a new scene or entrance of a character. For example, the part in which Amfortas is brought into the hall where Parsifal is waiting, the moment Amfortas intends to stand up (1:11:12 – 1:11:21), the music completely stops thus bringing the spectator total attention to Amfortas. Another thing that I noticed is that both the vocal registration and resonation used by the performers would differ depending of what was taking place or what was been said at a particular moment. For example, in minute 54:57 when Parsifal tells Kundry and Gurnemanz about the knights he met; the tone of the performer at this moment to me is higher as to depict Parsifal’s excitement. Wagner’s rendition helps me see the text a little different because he omits some characters that play an important part in the story. Also, the role of Gurnemanz and Kundry are somewhat different and a little confusing to the roles these same characters play in the poem. I think Wagner was interested in this story because it is indeed an epic story about redemption, but he was also probably interested in the story’s religious elements. He updates the play by removing some characters, condensing the story, modifying many aspects of the story, using his characters to retell an event, removing some romantic parts and making the whole performance a grand opera.