WAGNER
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?
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.
Lindsay Garrett
The section of the opera I chose to look at was from around 45:00-58:00. The scene focuses on the inscription of the grail: “Enlightened through compassion, the innocent fool,” and the moment when the “fool” Parsifal shoots down a swan and is chastised into remorse. With regard to the details of the scene, the music follows along with the expected emotion, which I imagine helps to present the message in a way that words are incapable of doing on their own. When the priest speaks about the grail’s message, the camera focuses closely on him and nothing else. When the swan is killed, the music turns from holy and hopeful to intense and distraught, as the camera zooms out and everyone, including the heathen woman on the ground, takes notice. When Parsifal enters the scene after the swan is placed on the ground, he is rather aloof. Throughout the scene he is then chastised for his behavior, while the camera focuses on his changing emotions in reaction to what he’s done, turning from cocky to eventually remorseful. Parsifal is completely ignorant about who he is and where he’s from at first, until the heathen woman gives him a few hints and he begins to remember. The audience is shown that he regrets his actions. A corresponding scene in the book that is similar lies on pg. 51 of Parzival, where there is talk about his killing of birds, as well as how he’s entranced by the sweetness of their song. There is a lot more background in the book regarding the origins of Parzival’s ignorance, his mother. Also he is definitely affected emotionally by killing birds, and when his mother has a bunch of them killed in an effort to thwart his anxiety, he wholeheartedly expresses his disagreement with her actions. This scene is then used to lead into his mother’s explanation of God and the Devil.
In comparing the two scenes that I chose here, it became apparent rather quickly that the differences are numerous. The focus on this section in the opera is aimed to drive-home a message about how compassion and remorse are positive traits, simply by the way the music follows closely along with the expected emotion, as the camera’s zoomed-in focus being on the grail’s message at the beginning, as well as a zoomed-in focus on the Parsifal’s throughout. The swan that has been killed is treasured immensely as a “faithful” and innocent creature, who was simply “seeking his mate.” Parsifal’s ignorance is really played-up in the opera, as well as there being a focus on how the death of the creature is no one’s fault but his own. They do not pay attention to how he obtained his ignorance at all. During the majority of this scene, the priest chastises Parsifal for what he’s done, and it’s drawn out in order to call attention to his guilt. It’s also easy to see the differences in how he feels when first asked about whether he has shot the swan, and how he feels at the end of the scene as I’ve mentioned above; being that toward the end of the scene Parsifal is so distraught that he breaks his bow in half, and then throws it to the ground. The swan is a symbol of true innocence and purity in the opera, due not only to its innocence being pointed out by the priest, but also because of its size and color; the size being obviously meant to illustrate its importance to the message. In the book however, while there is talk about his killing of birds, the focus is not on one particular bird, and he isn’t forced to accept what he has done by anyone but himself. There’s more of a focus in the book on why he is so ignorant, his mother’s over-sheltering behavior. The biggest similarity I found was how they both reminded me of the very first story of Perceval that we read this semester, being that he is a central character whose mother in an attempt to keep him from harm, sheltered him into ignorance. Also, Parzival in the book feels remorse like he does in the opera, but the focus in the book is more on how his anxiety about the birds drives his mother to have even more killed. The messages for the two forms of media are similar, calling to remorse and compassion, and pointing out how ignorance can still lead to these traits in someone. But with the opera it’s as if the reasons why Parsifal is ignorant don’t matter as much, and as a result it lacks depth in comparison, regardless whether its presentation exists in honor of the main message. The book focuses on why he became ignorant, probably in order to send a message about destiny and lineage.
The one sentence that spells this idea out for me is located just after Pazival’s mother catches him admiring the birds’ sound. It is said that, “She observed that her child’s breast swelled at the sound of their voices, compelled to it by lineage and his desire.” This quote marks the moment his mother decides to take action by having many birds killed, which is her last attempt to keep her son away from the world he is destined to be a part of. It says that no matter what she does, lineage overrides all. I was not able to find another scene within the book which represented the use of birds in comparison to the opera, so I hope I was able at the very least, to get close to something for the sake of this assignment. On a closing note, there is also mention in the opera of Parsifal being, “shielded by his foolishness,” which in a sense is exactly what his mother in the book is trying to take part in; in that she’s hoping to keep him safe by keeping him ignorant.