FERRUCCIO BUSONI WEBSITE

THE SECRET OF MARIA CALLAS

by René Leibowitz
Translated from the original French
by Bruce Charles
The extraordinary success of Maria Meneghini Callas could
appear, at first glance, to be one of the strangest phenomena in
the world of "show business" of our time. Uniquely hers, the
reputation of this distinguished singer has been able to
completely transcend the boundaries normally reserved for even
the most celebrated of the great artists of lyric art. There have
been those who have evoked enthusiastic reaction and even
been able to unleash passions, but this always occurs within a
relatively limited circle, composed uniquely of lovers of a specific
type of opera, which we usually call "bel canto". The case of our
diva is entirely different. Her name is familiar, even to those
who have no real contact with opera, nor even with the art of
singing in general. One need only consult the latest "tabloid" or
"photojournal" to be completely up-to-date with "la Callas", with
the slightest of her movements, with her scandals, her habits,
even the fluctuations in her weight, a privilege normally
reserved for movie stars. Her private life, Callas' very existence
seems to belong to all of us, to all those, at any rate who know
how to read, and of whom--it is curious to note--only a small
number has actually heard the voice which is at the root of this
exceptional success. Along these same lines, the recording of
Callas are the only recordings of so-called "serious music",
whose sales rival those of the biggest names in "pop", while
those of the other leading opera stars are far from achieving
similar results. So, here again our diva has far transcended that
which should comprise her niche, and to which her "colleagues",
even the most well-known, are limited.
It would seem apparent that, by the very nature of her
exceptional success, the career of Callas is one of the most
successful imaginable. She has arrived at the very apex of that
which a career of this type consists, namely, to satisfy, in the
truest sense of the term, the desires of all the public, from the
most serious to the most frivolous.
From another angle however, all is not perfect in this immense
concert of praise which allows us, here and there, a glimpse of
strong discord. Curiously, it is above all among the real lovers of
opera (or more exactly, lovers of singing) that we find this
"resistance" to the art of Callas. Her voice doesn't always have a
beautiful tone, it is uneven, her highs are "strident", her
intonation is not always "absolutely perfect", she sings too many
roles that do not always "suit her", and therefore no longer has
any roles which are really "hers"; these are some of the major
reservations and criticisms which we hear regarding the vocal
art of our singer.
All this is obviously no put forth in such a straightforward
fashion, and there are many who, all the while giving sincere
praise to Callas' exceptional dramatic gifts, and to her stunning
artistic mastery and even to her equally stunning physical
appearance, prefer-- as far as the art of singing is concerned--
the voice of a Tebaldi, for example, a less spectacular artist
surely (in every sense of the term) but more moving, because a
better singer.

Must one take sides? Must we believe without reservation, or

side with the critics? Are we to see in the immense success of
Callas, something suspect which would justify the attacks of
certain serious music lovers? Should we even attribute part of
this success to certain shortcomings inherent in the art of our
singer? It seems to us that we should rather try to understand
exactly what this art consists of, and how it differentiates itself
from that of most of today's singrs. In short, we must first find
the answer to one simple question: how does Maria Meneghini
Callas sing?

I. A FEW CONSIDERATIONS ON THE ART OF SINGING

A. The actual categories of the soprano voice
As simple as it might seem, such a question, to really be
understood, implies a certain amount of knowledge regarding
the art of singing in general. We will attempt here to offer some
remarks which will give a resume" of the essential points which
will guide-us in this effort.
Most people know, of course, that Callas has a soprano voice,
but this very general term encompasses several distinct
categories. Today indeed, we distinguish between-in addition to
the mezzo-soprano voice (which is a low soprano)--three types
of actual soprano voice. These are: the light soprano, the lyric
soprano and the dramatic soprano. These three types possess,
grosso modo, the following characteristics: the light soprano has
a clear and agile voice, a very great ease in the upper register
(being able to climb to F and even higher); generally, such a
voice is of weaker volume, especially in the lower and middle
registers. The dramatic soprano, on the other hand, has a
powerful volume (in all registers); but this voice is generally less
agile (because heavier) and it does not normally have the ability
to climb to the very high register. The lyric soprano is situated
between these two extremes. It is quite clear, sometimes quite
light and relatively agile; what's more, its volume is relatively
powerful (the actual timber of this voice being more emphatic
than that of the light soprano, it is nevertheless able to create a
kind of illusion of power); finally, the lyric soprano is often
characterized by a rather easy high register, though it can
seldom attain the highest notes of the light soprano.
The lyric repertoire offers us an abundance of roles, each
characteristic of these different types of voice.
For example: roles of servants or very young heroines (Gilda in
Rigoletto) for the light soprano; tragic roles (in particular certain
roles in Verdi and Wagner) for the dramatic soprano; young
heroines, but here, more "developed" than those sung by a light
soprano (Marguerite in Faust or Mimi in Bohème) for the lyric
soprano. What's more, certain Italian composers have created a
kind of intermediary between the dramatic soprano and the lyric
soprano, the lirico spinto. This calls for a powerful voice, which
can also take on a dramatic role. Numerous operas of Verdi and
Puccini require this type of voice.
The Germans as well, differentiate between a type of voice they
call Zwischenfach (medium use), which is equivalent to the lirico
spinto and that which they call hochdramatisch (highly
dramatic). The first is suited to some of the less dramatic roles
of Wagner (such as Elsa in Tannhäuser, Eva in Die Meistersinger
and even Sieglinde in Die Walküre), whereas the second type--
which paradoxically has the characteristics of the dramatic
soprano--is suited to the great Wagnerian roles like those of
Brunhilde, Isolde and Kundry.
We should note now that, if today these different types of voice
are firmly established and universally recognized, it was not
always thus. We surely owe the creation of the three main
categories of opera that we have just described, to certain
Mozart operas, (in particular Don Giovanni, in which the roles of
Donna Anna, Donna Elvira and Zerlina are sung by a dramatic
soprano, a lyric soprano and a light soprano, respectively).
However--despite the fact that Mozart's operas constitute real
exceptions to the rules of his day [1]--the types of roles in
question were not as clearly defined as they are today. It is
particularly the voice of the dramatic soprano which corresponds
the least to the concept we have of it at the present time.
Indeed, the role of Donna Anna, for example (and we can say
the same thing regarding the role of Fiordiligi in Così fan tutte),
which calls for none of this kind of dramatic inflection,
nevertheless requires an agility and a lightness that we rarely
find in the authentic dramatic sopranos of our time.
 MARIA CALLAS AND FRANCO ZEFFIRELLI

Among the successors of Mozart, even composers such as

Beethoven and Carl Maria von Weber (who we can consider the
actual creators of German opera) remain faithful--the latter
above all--to this type of voice (dramatic soprano capable of
vocalizing with agility). Witness the grand aria of Leonore in
Fidelio and above all, many pages in the roles of Agathe in Der
Freischütz or of Euryanthe and Rezia in Oberon.
If, as we leave German opera, we turn toward Italian dramatic
opera of the first half of the 19th century, this same state of
affairs is even more evident. Indeed, a very great number of the
heroines of the operas of Rossini, Bellini, Donizetti as well as the
first operas of Verdi (up to Trovatore and Traviata) call for a
soprano voice (sometimes even a mezzo-soprano--which is
certainly the case in many of Rossini's operas and also in Verdi's
Macbeth) capable of being both dramatic and light. Protagonists
of this type are often given roles whose dramatic characteristics
require the gifts of a tragedian, as well as a voice with poignant
and impassioned inflections. At the same time these roles
include bravura passages (generally entire arias), in which the
vocal virtuosity is expressed in melodic figures which have since
become the virtual domain of the light soprano.
This kind of specific conception of the soprano voice (or
mezzo-soprano as the case may be) presents numerous
problems and obstacles today, when the "compartmentalizing"
of vocal types, unheard of in former times, makes difficult, and
at times even prohibits the correct execution of certain works.
Until quite recently, the role of Rosina, in the Barber of Seville
[2] was given to a light soprano, while the role in fact was
conceived to be sung by a mezzo-soprano, able to vocalize. In
doing this, one was obliged not only to sacrifice or else
transpose a great number of passages because of the low
register, but also to undermine the dramatic sense of the role.
The young heroines of Rossini's operas are very "practical" girls
who know exactly "what they want", and not at all these weak
and almost unreal characters as they are presented to us when
portrayed by a light soprano.
 MARIA CALLAS AND LUCHINO VISCONTI IN MILAN DURING
A REHEARSAL OF TRAVIATA (MILAN 1955)

La Traviata is a good case in point. Because the role of Violetta

has a number of agile passages, it is often sung by light
sopranos who do quite well (technically speaking) with the vocal
demands of these passages, but who completely undermine the
dramatic sense of the role in the following acts. On the other
hand, it sometimes happens that the role is sung by dramatic
sopranos (lirico spinto ) who are able to give the weight
necessary for the tragic moments of the work, but whose lack of
agility is cruelly evident during the first act.
From the preceding it is clearly shown that the conception of
certain types of voice and even of the art of singing in general
have changed markedly in the hundred or so years since then
works of Rossini, Bellini, Donizetti and the youthful works of
Verdi, and thus it should be evident that these composers have
written their roles for the types of singers that were as common
for their times as they are rare today.
What has been this evolution? Just what are the profound
changes that have shaken the artof singing, and what were the
causes? It is to these questions that we must try to respond.

B. The evolution of the art of singing in relation to the

evolution of opera
The evolution of the art of singing is intimately linked to that of
opera in general. Without being able to go into this question
here, in the depth it merits, suffice it to say that one of the most
important factors in this evolution has proven to be an ever
greater tendency toward an art which, for the lack of a better
term, we can call realist. Indeed, there can be little doubt that
the first operas--this is more or less true up to Mozart--limited
themselves in great part to a purely symbolic and highly stylized
representation of different elements of the story. The action is
generally rather static, the psychological conflicts and the
passions of the different characters are expressed--one could
say almost without exaggeration--in quite conventional
formulas. Generally speaking, we are not dealing here with
musical dramas, but with sung musical representations, and it is
solely the art of singing which is called upon to create the
symbols and the stylistic elements necessary to lay out dramatic
content. Consequently, we can say that lyric art before Mozart
was, above all, a pretext for "exhibitions" in singing, and this
state of affairs is perfectly evident when we muse over the fact
that at the time, the roles of the principal heroines were not
sung by women, but by castrati. The very presence of castrati
proves to us that what really mattered was not realism
(psychological or otherwise), but a certain manner of singing.
Thus, these castrati were virtuosi in the art of singing. Most of
the techniques of which vocal virtuosity is comprised were
invented and perfected by them. We can state here that in
general, the art of singing is confounded with this vocal
virtuosity. Of what does this vocal virtuosity consist? Principally,
of a certain number of melodic figures, ornamental in character:
trills, mordants, different types of appogiaturas, arpeggios,
roulades, rapid scale passages, (diatonic or chromatic). The
correct execution of all these figures constitutes the very
foundation of the fine art of singing. Because all these figures
decorate and the vocal melody, this manner of singing is called
bel canto [3].

However opera could hardly stop there. It seems to me that

Mozart was the first to want to imbue lyric opera with a more
concrete and realistic content. Most of Mozart's operas do away
with the castrati. His characters leave their symbolic and stilted
pedestals to become real "flesh-and-blood" beings, dramatic
action is intensified, the desires and conflicts become alive,
nuanced and complex. It is clear that works like The Marriage of
Figaro or Don Giovanni are no longer just pretexts for vocal
virtuosity, or demonstrations of bel canto art, but that here we
have "musical dramas" [4].
It goes without saying that works of this type should relegate
simple vocal virtuosity to the background. However, even
though it no longer constitutes a basic element, this vocal
virtuosity does not disappear from Mozart's work entirely.
Indeed we know (and we have just spoken about this) that
many Mozart roles call for certain principles rooted bel canto.
The same is true Mozart's German successors (Beethoven and
Weber) and is even more the case with his Italian successors.
Indeed, bel canto experienced a triumphant period, if I dare
say, in Italian romantic opera during the first part of the 19th
century, extending from the operas of Ro'ssini, through those of
Bellini and Donizetti, right up to the first operas of Verdi.

It is true however, that while it was used in the works of this

period to underscore and characterize certain concrete dramatic
elements, bel canto gave way, little by little, to an ever stronger
"realist" tendency which was to make itself felt in the evolution
of lyric art in the following period [5]. Indeed, vocal virtuosity,
in and of itself, can only subsist here as special means of
expression, I would venture to say, as a characterization of this
or that particular dramatic element. And, as aflert means of
expression, it was to eventually disappear, because the
exhibition of vocal virtuosity alone is not thought of as "serious",
when realism constitutes the essential task. Such a state of
affairs is played out especially in a work like La Traviata (one of
the last works to still call for certain elements of bel canto). This
work-which by the way, is perhaps at the origins of that which
we would later call realism--pushes this pre-occupation with
realism further than any previous work (it is without doubt, the
first opera to be in a contemporaneous setting). Thus the
character of Violetta, the principal heroine, is a tragic personage
who expresses herself in a language which is passionate yet
sober, completely stripped of all "fluff". The only two moments
where this "fluff" has legitimacy correspond to very specific
situations in the middle of the first act: the duo with Alfredo,
when Violatta takes on a rather frivolous air; Violetta's aria ever
Sempre libera where after the departure of her guests, our
heroine lapses into a kind of hysterical joy at the thought of
being able to take advantage of that which life still has in store
for her.
If, in La Traviata, the juxtaposition of bel canto and realism is
still played out in a single character, the separation of these two
styles of singing, still brought with it, at that time, ever greater
specialization. Here, I mean that bel canto is as much as it
succeeded in continuing as a style, became the domain of a
single category of singer, namely the light soprano [6]. It could
be, in fact, that this specialization was actually introduced in the
first half of the 19th century in the French grand opera of
Meyerbeer and of Halévy [7]. Be that as it may, this was an
established fact by the second half of the 19th century.
Thus, we now come to the opera of Wagner, one of whose
fundamental pre-occupations was, the revolt against traditional
lyric conventions, and as a result of which, the art of bel canto
now lost all legitimacy, and wherein is created this new type of
highly dramatic singer to which we have already referred. The
same is true of Puccini, where realism is taken to new heights.
We will find, in all the works of Puccini, but a single character
who has recourse to--and again, very sparingly--this vocal
virtuosity, the frivolous Musetta, from La Bohème.
On the other hand, Puccini very often adopts the highly
dramatic type of Wagner, particularly in La Tosca (characters of
Floria Tosca and Mario Cavaradossi) and above all, in Turandot
(princess Turandot' s character).

II. MARIA CALLAS AND THE ART OF SINGING

A. The rebirth of bel canto and the extension of vocal
means
To summarize: opera tends more and more toward realism,
culminating in the work of Puccini. In so doing, bel canto begins
to disappear and now exists only as a kind of speciality reserved
for the light soprano voice. Generally speaking, a concern for
psychological and dramatic believability calls for a greater
choice, a more nuanced variety of vocal classifications than was
previously available; this brings with it an ever greater
specialization of singers, according to the type specifically
desired. This was, grosso modo, the state of affairs in the art of
singing in the first half of the 20th century.
We are now able to weigh the advantages as well as the
disadvantages of this situation. The positive side to the ledger is
easy to see because it is the result, rather inevitably, of the
actual requirements of the works composed over the last
hundred years. On the other hand, it is clear that this situation
brings with it some very real disadvantages, for it became
almost impossible to perform a vast and very large part of the
lyric opera repertoire in the correct manner.
We have already alluded to the fact that most of Rossini's
operas had disappeared from the repertoire, and that even a
work like The Barber of Seville had only managed to survive by
a special remedy, namely the transposition of the mezzo-
soprano role into the range of a light soprano. The same is true
for a great number of other operas of the period, solely
maintained thanks to similar "adaptations". There was only one
solution: allow this state of affairs to continue, or find
interpreters capable of reviving this repertoire; in other words,
of rendering justice totally and with authenticity, to the vocal
requirements this implied.
There can be no doubt that in Maria Meneghini Callas we are
dealing with one of the first interpreters of this kind.
Consequently, here is a first and very significant reason for the
absolutely unique success of "La Callas": it is possible to say,
that this singer has almost nothing inccommon with the other
singers of our time. Her voice cannot be neatly classified into
the normal categories, because it represents a kind of synthesis
of all these types. It is true that in this sense, she represents a
phenomenon which is not altogether new, because she only
returns to a type of voice which necessarily existed before this
specialization according to distinct categories, the reasons for
which we have tried to understand. It remains nevertheless,
that one of the original characteristics of Callas' art (and we will
see later on, that in this she was not alone) resides in an
extremely lucid consciousness of the necessity to re-establish
bel canto.
It is impossible for us to say how Callas arrived at such a result:
we can only presume that, having discovered Italian romantic
repertoire at a given point in her career, she decided to forge an
instrument required for its interpretation. This is simply to say
that she set out to study the precise technique, more or less
forgotten, of bel canto. Once again, here we---are not able to
say by which means our artist proceeded, but we can state that-
-probably alone among lyric artists of our time--Callas
succeeded in completely mastering the exact principles of this
technique. The facts are there, and they are convincing: Callas
was able to execute to perfection all the ornamental figures
(trills roulades, arpeggios, appogiatura, rapid diatonic and
chromatic scales) which make up the fundamental elements of
bel canto. But there's one thing more: the register of Callas'
voice covers more than two and a half octaves, from a low G
sharp up to a high E flat. This is another characteristic that she
is probably alone in possessing. Here again, it could be that this
phenomenon is not entirely new. It seems that artists such as
La Pasta, La Falcon and La Malibran possessed similar ranges;
nevertheless the fact of having developed such a register
highlights our diva's merits even more.
One thing is clear and undeniable: the perfect mastery of the art
of bel canto, as well as her extreme vocal range, enabled Callas
to give authentic and convincing interpretations to a great
number of the heroines of the lyric repertoire. Callas destroyed
a certain number of false traditions, according to which these
roles had been assigned to different types of singers. Callas
could alternate, with the same ease, from "dramatic" Norma to
"light" Amina of Bellini [8]; from the "low" Lady Macbeth to the
"high" of Verdi's Violetta and even from the mezzo-soprano of
Rosina [9] to the light soprano of Donizetti's Lucia [10] or the
role of Gilda from Rigoletto [11].
But we could ask whether Callas was equally at home singing all
these roles? Is she capable of giving an impeccable
interpretation to each of these roles or were there not some
roles to which she was better suited than others? One other
thing: in continually going, from one kind of a role to another,
calling for very different qualities, did this not constitute an
abuse, from which the vocal and artistic gifts of our singer
would in the end suffer? It is here that we must interject certain
considerations related to the different conceptions about the art
of singing, considerations without which we would hardly be
able to answer such questions.
Though it would be impossible to offer any proof, I can readily
imagine that the vocal instrument of Callas was much like those
of the great singers of the first half of the 19th century (of
whom we have already named several). In other words, we can
get an idea about the art of a Pasta, of a Falcon or of a Malibran
by listening to Callas sing, and vice versa. Thus it seems evident
from the roles they sang (a great number of which were
composed specifically for them) that they like Callas, were able
to go with ease from one role to the other. We have already
pointed otit that Bellini composed for Pasta two very different
roles, Norma and Amina. We also know that Falcon had an
extremely wide range, from a deep somber bass like that of a
real mezzo-soprano, up to a high register with great ease.
The same must have been the case with La Malibran who was as
famous for her mezzo-soprano roles in Rossni as she was for
those of the tragic heroines of the operas of Bellini.
Consequently, what is striking in all these singers is not only
that they were able to transcend these categories (still
inexistant in their times) of specialized soprano voices, but that
they were actually able to combine the voice of a mezzo-
soprano with that of an actual soprano. The impression one
gets. from all this is that our artists must have been, above all,
mezzo-sopranos who were able to develop an extended higher
register (doubtless thanks to the vocal ease afforded them by
the bel canto technique [12]. It is perhaps, above all, this
combination of two types of voice which characterizes the art of
these singers of the last century just as it does that of Callas.
But speaking of such a combination of different voices implies,
of course, a hetrogeneous quality and it is here that we touch
upon one of the delicate points of the question. Indeed, it is just
this hetrogeneous quality of Callas' vocal instrument which
constitutes the aspect of her art for which she is most heavily
criticized. It is readily pointed out that Callas' voice does not
have the same timber in the high register as it does in the lower
range, that we are dealing, in fact, with two different voices. We
completely agree, and we will repeat that it could hardly be
otherwise, because for us, Callas represents just this type of
singer, whose mezzo-soprano voice succeeded in allying itself
with that of an actual soprano [13]. However we do not agree
with those that see in this a shortcoming. In fact, the
appreciation of this point is entirely dependent on the ideas we
have about the art of singing itself. It is evident that for today's
ears, used to "specialized" voices, evenness: of vocal timber
constitutes an essential quality, a kind of conditio sine qua non
in the fine art of singing. But let's wipe the slate clean for a
moment of these traditions and let's try to listen to the music of
Italian romantic repertoire, forcing ourselves to grasp these
heroines in their authenticity. We will see then, that their very
existence owes itself, not to the beauty of this or that singer,
nor to any evenness of, timber, but to a certain number of very
specific musical inflections which call for a great variety of
timber, a very extended vocal qapaciy, qualities which are, in
large part, incompatible with the homogeneity of the voice.
It is precisely here that lies one of the "secrets" of Callas' [14]
art . She was one of the first singers who had the courage to
break with certain traditions, encrusted in the art of singing, and
thus to risk--by extending considerably its vocal possibilities--
the wrath of a great number of "connoisseurs" according to
whom she would thus sacrifice vocal beauty, for the
megalomania of the self-absorbed "star". And, it is because she
did not fear-making certain sacrifices regarding this narrow and
conventional notion of vocal beauty, that she succeeded in
breathing new life into an entire :repertoire, a great number of
prestigious roles, and thus to a body of authentic musical
treasures that had seemed destined for oblivion.
B. The Modernism of Callas
Until now, we have limited our analysis of Callas' singing to its
retrospective aspect, for we have only spoken of the manner in
which our artist was able to breath new life into certain
historical particularities of the art of singing. Thus she is able to
give authentic interpretations of a body of work, certainly very
beautiful, but-that the bulk of which was over a hundred years
old. Isthis all she succeeded in doing?
If this had been the case, her success would have already been
great. Yet it would have somehow been tainted, because it
would mean that our artist had systematically ignored some of
the most recent innovations in the art of singing. She would
have thus sidestepped an evolution, not only very justified and
necessary (being that it sprang forth from a group of authentic
masterpieces) but which greatly enriched the world of vocal art
as a whole. We will try to show here that this is not the case,
and that Callas' art constantly strove to integrate everything
that recent lyric repertoire had created in the way of newer
means of expression, and in so doing, our artist actually
responded to the requirements of modern opera.

I don't know which Italian critic invented for Callas the term
voce di soprano assoluta, meaning, that in the end there was no
soprano role which Callas would not be able to take on. The
term seems to me to be well-chosen because it corresponds, in
large part, to reality. Indeed, we have seen that Callas was able
to bring back successfully this universality of vocal technique as
it existed before the "specialization" which has come to
characterize the modern art of singing. We need to try to
understand in what manner our singer was able to take on
exactly these "specialized" roles and in what manner she was
able to go from one specialty to another.
There exists among fans of Callas, a category of listeners that,
while acknowledging her vocal and artistic qualities when it
comes to the older repertoire, would bar her access to modern
opera. Their arguments are the following: on the one hand the
"abstract" voice of Callas, trained in the school, is not at all
suited to the realistic heroines of verist opera; and that, as she
takes on verist opera, Callas must force her voice, this can only
be to her detriment. Such arguments have never convinced me,
above all, because they are based on a kind of
misunderstanding. Indeed, the science of bel canto has never
kept our diva from seeking to give dramatic content to the
romantic heroines she portrayed. In other words, this science
has never, for Callas, represented an end in itself; instead, it is
a technical means without which it is impossible to give justice
to certain roles. It would, on the other hand, be completely false
to believe that composers such as Rossini, Bellini and Donizetti
wrote their operas solely to show off the vocal gifts of their
protagonists. It seems evident to me, that in creating the roles
of heroines as passionate as Semiramide, Norma or Lucia, they
intended to portray their passions as well as the resulting
conflicts, in a very concrete and palpable manner. And, to do
this, as opera composers, they had a means of expression that
was both effective and precise: vocal writing. vocal writing in
this period was affected, above all, by a specific and
conventional technique: bel canto.
Could one say that things have since changed in any essential
way? I don't believe so. Certainly the actual conception of
musical drama has undergone transformations, as has the art of
singing. But has musical drama--verist though it be--really
become something else. Can a work of so called realist art,
actually be confounded with "life"? Does not remain--in spite of
those aesthetic tendencies which animate it, or that it
expresses--an "unreal" object, whose sense can only be
transmitted by conventional means of expression? It seems to
us, that lyric art of the past hundred years, while introducing
means of expression, often of very great novelty, has not really
changed the actual essence of musical drama, whose
fundamental problem is always the same: to somehow create
characters, passions and conflicts by musical means, by an
ensemble of elements which make up a conventional system.
Consequently, we can hardly agree with the point of view that
Callas' voice, and her art of singing were suited to a certain
aesthetic of musical drama, but that they would be ill-suited to a
style belonging to another aesthetic. It only remains for us to
ask ourselves if our singer was able to master the new vocal
means required by the most recent operas.
Here, our response could only be in the affirmative. Indeed,
there can be little doubt, that in the strict sense, the roles of a
lyric soprano (such as Puccini's Manon, Mimi and Madam
Butterfly) are perfectly suited to Callas' art. The lightness so
characteristic of her voice, allowed her to give these young
heroines very convincing interpretations; likewise, the well-
known inflections of Callas were able to express the tragic
aspect of these characters. It is significant to note the manner
in which Callas was able to transport this vocal virtuosity to a
plane which is the very foundation of modern singing, namely,
the purity of timber. She did this thanks to a unique science of
producing sound; she has the capacity for example, to string
together sounds in a manner which is almost unheard of today,
being able thus to rival the greatest "specialists" (La Tebaldi
among others) on their own ground. What's more: here, as in all
the roles she sings, Callas knows full well how to express the
slightest fluctuations in dramatic sense by perfect musical
phrasing. This sense of phrasing proves to just what point she
grasps the real musical problems in the works she interprets.
But if it is relatively easy to accept Callas in the roles of a
dramatic soprano, she encounters strong resistance as soon as
she takes on roles which are dramatic, in the strict sense. The
example of comes to mind, and it is here that even some of the
most ardent Callas supporters have thought themselves justified
to rise in protest. And yet, I confess that her art has entirely
convinced me. Certainly I can see, as well as anyone else, those
passages where her voice seems forced; I've noted the high
notes almost cried out, as well as a lack of homogeneous timber
in general. But, after all, is Floria Tosca's character the type to
be re-created with an even and consistent vocal sound with pure
timber? It seems to us rather that this character, among the
most "realist" and dramatic, can only be convincing if she is
portrayed by one who has recourse to the widest range of vocal
means possible; from the smoothest, purist sound, to a crying
out, from the deep chest-like and somber lows, all the way to
the most sudden and even strident highs, from a sound of
sonorous and delicate ease, to a violent and forced attack. Here
again--in the interpretation of our artist--all the vocal resources
constantly rely on a profound musical sense, which allows her to
find just the right musical phrase, thus transmitting to
perfection, the slightest inflection of the text [15].
CALLAS AS TOSCA
Again, it seems to me, that in the present case, Callas has been
able to sacrifice certain elements of conventional singing
technique, and "put it all on the line" to arrive at as convincing a
portrayal as possible, of a complex character and to articulate it
with a great variety of means.
In drawing attention to this notion of "risk", which is one of the
most characteristic aspects of all of Callas' work [16], it seems
to us that we have touched upon one of the essential elements
which constitute the modernism of our artist. To conclude, we
will try to communicate in an even more precise manner, this
quality that makes Callas such a unique phenomenon today.

CONCLUSION

We have seen that one of the essential merits of Callas resides

in the fact that she has been able to go beyond the limitations
to which the vocal categories of the soprano voice had been
subjected for nearly one hundred years... [17] Here as well is
found one of the most revolutionary aspects of her art.
We have spoken, among other things, of the tremendous care
with which Callas seemed to prepare her roles, in order to give
all the characters she portrayed--however diverse they might
be--the most convincing interpretation possible. What is,
striking about this activity, is not only the extraordinary
intelligence which Callas has been able to ally with her artistic
instinct, but perhaps more essentially, this heightened
awareness of the specific problems which face the modern
singer as Callas conceives them. We have confined ourselves in
the scope of this study to purely vocal and musical problems;
we should add here that pre-occupation with dramatic problems
was just as important to Callas, and the solution to these she
pursued in no less a novel and radical manner. In this way, her
thrust was that of a great actress. Here as well, her results (and
this would merit a study in and of itself) are due to a deep
understanding of the troubled state of modern lyric theater.
Because of the tendency over the past hundred years toward an
ever more pronounced realism, dramatic believability requires
dramatic surroundings which are at least adequate. In other
words, it is not enough just to sing well, one must also know
how to give their role a convincing scenic aspect. Such a
necessity--let us repeat, springs from the very evolution of lyric
art--also implies certain-"conditions" for the physical
appearance of the characters. Given the fact that each dramatic
element find itself more and more "fixed" (and thus distanced
from any primitive representation) it is imperative that each
character have, a suitable physique [18]. Here again, Callas
has been able to innovate in a radical manner. Defying the
conventional myth of the overweight diva (today we still' hear
the theory that a singer ks to be heavy to sing well), our singer
has not retreated in the face of the health risks posed by losing,
at the start of her career, a considerable amount of weight. We
now see fofl the publicity surrounding such a metamorphosis,
that it did not constitute a vain attempt to capture the
imagination of a public hungry for inanities, but that it was the
normal consequence of a real act of courage inspired by an
authentic and modern artistic necessity [19].
It is said that she was very unattractive at the start of her
career. I do not know if this is true, but if this was indeed the
case, how has she been able to transform herself into the
marvelous beauty which appears before us today? But here our
abilities to investigate come to an end, for it is perhaps here
that the Feal secret of "la Callas" lies.

NOTES

[1] See R. Leibowitz: Histoire de l'opera. Our thesis held that

even the Italian operas of Mozart did not actually belong to the
Italian tradition (universal at the time), but constituted the
budding of future German opera.

[2] One of the rare Rossini operas that has survived--but very
poorly as we will understand shortly--the scarcity of singers
capable of getting through the title roles.

[3] We see then, that this term has a very precise significance
which has been forgotten today. This means that at present, we
have a general notion of bel canto which is false. It is evident,
for example, that Puccini's operas do not offer the opportunity
to showcase bel canto, because they do not contain any
passages of this vocal virtuosity as we have just defined it. Even
a singer such as Caruso, for example, could in no way be
considered a representative of bel canto given that he was not
particularly well-versed in the art of melodic embellishment by
way of the precise ornamental figures which we have just
mentioned.

[4] Let's specify that this term is also subject to confusion. We

generally attribute it to Wagner, but we forget that Mozart
already calls his Don Giovanni "dramma giocoso"; Donizetti calls
Lucia di Lammermoor "dramma tragico" etc. As a general rule
we find the term "melodramma", used by the Italians
throughout the 19th century.

[5] It should be said nevertheless, that the art of bel canto

continued to be a fundamental occupation in the instruction of
singing throughout the 19th century. This is why, even in
Germany, theoretician Richard Dannenberg published a treatise
(Handbuch der Gesangskunst, the first edition of which was in
1889, but which saw three other successive editions up to
1912), in which a large chapter is devoted to vocal agility
(kehlfertigkeit). This chapter deals with all the elements of
technical Ornamentation which we have Just detailed and whose
mastery constitutes, strictly speaking, the art of bel canto. The
singers themselves, on the other hand, make use, less and less,
of this instruction.

[6] The light soprano is often called a coloratura soprano.

[7] A score like that of Halevy's is characteristic of this. The

"serious" character of Esther is continually expressed in a sober
and "realistic" vocal style, whereas the "fluff" is reserved for the
frivolous character of the princessefEudoxie. Similar distinctions
are found in the operas of Meyerbeer.

[8] Distributing these two roles to two different singers can only
be at variance with tradition, because Bellini composed then for
only one and the same singer, Giuditta Pasta.

[9] It. is here that, singing the role in its original tessitura,
Callas sings--in her recording of The Barber of Seville-- the G
sharp and A flat basses.

[10] Where she sings a high A flat.

[11] It is perhaps not without some interest to relate the

following: the excellent orchestral conductor, Carlo Maria Giulini,
told me that in a conversation he had with Toscanini in the last
years of the great maestro's life, Toscanini told him that, in his
opinion, the role of Gilda could only achieve its real meaning if it
were sung by a dramatic soprano. This opinion, which goes
against current thought and all convention, proves just how
much the real vocal tradition as well as a true understanding of
the dramatic sense remained living things in the psyche of one
of the greatest interpreters of Italian repertory. Indeed,
Toscanini seems to have grasped very clearly that the tragic
quality in the role of Gilda (a quality, that in any case,
dominates the last act) evaporates, more or less, when this role
is conferred upon a light soprano. The maestro's opinion also
harkens back to a nostalgia for a kind of dramatic singer
possessing complete agility in the higher register, as well as, a
real bel canto technique.

[12] Reynaldo Hahn (in his collection of conferences intitled, Du

Chant) cites this anecdote from Legouve's "Souvenirs: "Mmme.
Malibran's voice was that of a mezzo-soprano... Well! a
conquering kind, trapped between two neighboring states is less
tormented by the need to venture into his neighbors than was
La Malibran as she made the trip to the outskirts of hers... What
a surprise for us then, to one day hear her execute a trill on the
extfeme note of a soprano!" Along these same lines, we know
that the celebrated Piasaroni possessed a contralto voice.
However, Stendhal heard her in Rossini's Semiramide
(considered a soprano role) and it seems that she garnered
universal praise.
[13] To know whether Callas was originally--like La Pisaroni or
La Malibran--actually a contralto of mezzo whose voice would be
developed upwards, or vice versa, is not of primary importance
to us here. Suffice it to say, that she was indeed able to unite
these two types of voice.

[14] Here again, her detractors are right, when they speak of
the lack of homogeneity of her voice; her sometimes strident
highs, etc. It seems that the contemporaries of Pasta and
Malibran also noted similar characteristics regarding these
singers. However, their observations did in no way imply
criticism. Indeed it was here that they-saw the very high point
of portraying, by voice, the heroines of opera of their time.

[15] I am speaking here of a recording, having never seen

Callas on stage in this role. It should be noted that the other big
name on this recording is the great conductor Victor de Sabata,
who gives a deep and searching interpretation to this work. I
don't know to what extent this conductor's conception of the
work influenced in any case, the collaboration of these two
great. artists gave birth to a success of an absolutely
exceptional character.

[16] Did she not quite recently take on one of the most
demanding roles for dramatic soprano: that of Princess Turandot
in the work of Puccini? Perhaps it is possible to say, of her
interpretation--at least that which she realized in her recording
(the only one we know of)--that she gives evidence of a certain
lack of vocal volume. On the other hand, the voice has been
able to find an extremely penetrating quality, an output which
compensates for this shortcoming, and which confers upon this
particularly cruel character, an extraordinarily dramatic
believability.

[17] It goes without saying that what is true for women's

voices is true for men's voices as well. The specialization we
have lamented is a general phenomenon which has determined
the evolution of all voices. This is why today we find as many
categories of tenor voice as is the case with the soprano voice:
light tenor, lyric tenor, lirico spinto and dramatic. It is clear that
this specialization of men's voices had its reasons and origins
similar to those which had determined the specialization in
women's voices. There would be therefore, a place today for a
revolution in the realm of men's voices identical to that brought
about by Callas, in the world of women's voices. To my
knowledge only two men have mafia a similar attempt: the
tenor Jan Peerce and the bass-baritone Marcello Cortis. Both
have a real knowledge of bel canto; both have had the courage
to take on very different types of roles which require a wide
variety of vocal resources. Obviosly we can't go great detail
here on this topic. It seems clear to us that those who have
followed our text up to this point will understand what we mean.

[18] Indeed, why try to create an exacting decor, or why

situate the action in a specific setting, if on the other hand, the
physical representation of the character has little real
believability?

[19] My friend Michel Leris tells me of an article that he has

just read about the famous singer Elisabeth Schwarzkopf, who is
now attempting to lose weight. Leris adds that, by all accounts,
Callas keeps her colleagues awake at night. This also does not
seem to us to be a futile consideration.

http://www.rodoni.ch/busoni/callasleibowitz.html