Hello there - I've been listening to Kaimos and I have to say that I like both versions. (It's a beautiful text, by the way! There's something about Halepas' reply that sounds rhetorical in a rather classical sense - echoes of a very long history! ) For me, though, I think that the text works best when it feels less 'performed'. I'm not sure I can articulate this very well but I guess I prefer the opening of the second version, where the words are spoken aloud rather than whispered, and that's something to do with the fact that there is already enough drama in the interaction of voice and music. And I also like the second half of the first version, where the repetition of the text happens at wider intervals because, again, it sounds less as if the voice is working towards a climax.
But, even as I'm writing this, I'm imagining a version in which the whispering from version 1 is followed by the three closely placed utterances of version 2 - it would be a more 'theatrical' presentation of the text but that might cohere with the rhetorical quality I mentioned before. And, actually, that might have an interesting effect on how the music is heard, framing it rather than drifting over it. Yes, actually I'm erring a little on this side!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I guess my rather indecisive post is basically saying this: there seem to me to be more theatrical, 'performative' elements in both versions and more measured or simply presentational elements in both. I wonder whether it might be interesting to try versions in which all the vocal theatricality comes together or all the more measured and neutral vocal presentation?
ReplyDelete