Digital Scenography in Opera in the Twenty-First Century

Caitlin Vincent

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000440737
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Mezzi di comunicazione e arti performative
• Subtopic: Musica lirica

Digital Scenography in Opera in the Twenty-First Century is the first definitive study of the use of digital scenography in Western opera production. The book begins by exploring digital scenography's dramaturgical possibilities and establishes a critical framework for identifying and comparing the use of digital scenography across different digitally enhanced opera productions. The book then investigates the impacts and potential disruptions of digital scenography on opera's longstanding production conventions, both on and off the stage. Drawing on interviews with major industry practitioners, including Paul Barritt, Mark Grimmer, Donald Holder, Elaine J. McCarthy, Luke Halls, Wendall K. Harrington, Finn Ross, S. Katy Tucker, and Victoria 'Vita' Tzykun, author Caitlin Vincent identifies key correlations between the use of digital scenography in practice and subsequent impacts on creative hierarchies, production design processes, and organisational management. The book features detailed case studies of digitally enhanced productions premiered by Dutch National Opera, Komische Oper Berlin, Opéra de Lyon, The Royal Opera, Covent Garden, San Francisco Opera, Santa Fe Opera, Théâtre Royal de la Monnaie, The Metropolitan Opera, Victorian Opera, and Washington National Opera.

1 A new classification system for digital scenography

The modes of synthesis

DOI: 10.4324/9781003093305-1

The extent to which digital technologies can be integrated into an operatic production varies, as do the dramaturgical and administrative implications. The scope of possible variations presents a major obstacle to any attempt to classify different digitally enhanced productions. How can one approach a comparison of the projected backgrounds in Teatro alla Scala’s Madama Butterfly (2016) with the live video feeds used in Beth Morrison Projects and LA Opera’s chamber opera Dog Days (2015) (Woodruff 2015; Hermanis 2016)? Or the fantastical animated drawings in the Théâtre Royal de la Monnaie’s The Tale of Tsar Saltan (2019) with Violetta and Alfredo’s projected social media conversation in Opéra National de Paris’ La Traviata (2019) (Stone 2019; Tcherniakov 2019)? Each production is a reflection of a different creative team, a different venue and presenting company, and a different operatic work. Most importantly, each represents a very different use of digital technology within a scenographic design.

Given the perception of digital technology as a seeming magic bullet for the opera industry, a basic framework to identify and standardise some of these dramaturgical possibilities is necessary. Such a framework will allow for the critical comparison and analysis of digitally enhanced productions, regardless of repertoire, aesthetic, or other variables.

A number of efforts have been made to categorise productions that use projected elements across varying performance genres (see Auslander 1999; Chapple and Kattenbelt 2007; Jacquemin and Gagneré 2007; Oliszewski and Fine 2018). However, the majority of these classifications are not aligned with dramaturgical impacts or practical considerations from an administrative perspective. One exception is Giesekam (2007) who suggests that digitally enhanced theatrical productions can be classified as either ‘multimedial’ or ‘intermedial’ (10).

In a multimedial production, Giesekam argues, projected elements assume a similar role to sets and lighting and help to establish a particular visual environment that supports the narrative of the work. In contrast, an intermedial production employs significant interplay between digital components and performing bodies to the extent that neither can be said to exist independently within the theatrical space. Giesekam acknowledges that some productions may draw on both techniques simultaneously. As such, he suggests that ‘multimedial’ and ‘intermedial’ are best considered ‘ends of a spectrum’ of scenographic possibilities (8).

Applying Giesekam’s framework to opera, we can compare The Metropolitan Opera’s La Donna del Lago (2015), with its digital scenic vista that morphs from dawn to dusk over the course of the performance, to English National Opera’s The Sunken Garden (2013), which incorporates extensive video sequences, 3D stereoscopic effects, and virtual performers (Smith 2013; Curran 2015). In this context, Giesekam’s classification system provides an effective means for quantifying the differences between the two productions. La Donna del Lago clearly functions as a more conventional ‘multimedial’ production, which uses projections as the modern-day equivalent of a painted backdrop. The Sunken Garden operates as an ‘intermedial’ piece, integrating digital media with its live performers as part of an avant-garde and non-narrative aesthetic.

The dichotomy of ‘multimedial’ and ‘intermedial’ presents a useful starting point for a discussion of digital scenography in opera production. Given the scope of technological advancements since the publication of Giesekam’s work, however, there is opportunity to expand upon his approach and examine some of the further possibilities for interactivity and exchange that now underpin digital processes. This opportunity also extends to a consideration of the practical implications of these dramaturgical decisions on backstage processes and opera’s longstanding production conventions.

This chapter proposes an expansion of Giesekam’s approach in which the classification of multimedial and intermedial is reconceived as the modes of synthesis. The modes of synthesis encompass three distinct categories—non-synthesis, partial-synthesis, and full-synthesis—each based on the relationship between the performer, the stage setting, and the spectator that is fundamental to understandings of scenography in practice. Each mode specifically considers the visual relationship, or ‘synthesis,’ that emerges between the live performer and the digital elements within the shared theatrical space.

This framework enables a more detailed analysis and comparison of different digital scenographies that may not be readily apparent from using only Giesekam’s categories. This, in turn, provides a means for identifying trends in the way digital scenography is currently being used on operatic stages. With these benchmark categories in place, it becomes possible to consider the larger implications of digital scenography for the operatic genre, including its potential disruption to existing conventions, both on and off the stage.

This chapter begins by defining each mode of synthesis and outlining both scenographic characteristics and common dramaturgical uses. The chapter then applies the classification system to an analysis of three digitally enhanced productions of W.A. Mozart’s The Magic Flute. Each production features extensive digital elements but exhibits a different mode of synthesis in practice. The analysis will demonstrate the practicality of the modes as a way of differentiating between digitally enhanced productions and contextualising the artistic choices made by their creative teams. In addition, the chapter will consider some of the challenges posed by each technique and explore the critical responses to their use.

Articulating the modes of synthesis: non-synthesis, partial-synthesis, and full-synthesis

Whether digitally enhanced or not, theatrical productions are traditionally framed for the gaze of the audience member, who perceives the convergence of performer, set, lighting, costumes, and projections within the context of the work. This is particularly evident in genres like opera that uphold the primacy of the proscenium stage, in which the spectator is visually engaged but physically detached from the world of the narrative. Only the performers share the same physical space and fictional setting as the various elements of the scenic design. Because of this physical overlap, the particular relationship between the live performers and digital elements can change in digitally enhanced productions, depending on the dramaturgical requirements of the work and the creative decisions of its director and designers. As this relationship evolves and develops on stage, so too does the resulting visual experience for the audience.

The modes of synthesis qualify this potential by identifying three forms of visual ‘synthesis,’ each of which stems from the visual relationship established between the live performers and digital elements. The specifics of this relationship are based on two broad functionalities, which I term ‘visual correlation’ and ‘causal interplay.’ Both of these functionalities prioritise the gaze of the spectator while also addressing the scope of interactivity that can develop between live performers and digital elements.

In visual correlation, live performers and digital elements function as coordinated ‘layers’ without either a sensory fusion (an ‘immersive’ experience) or an interactive one (a demonstration of agency or causality). A narrative connection between the two components frequently exists, but there is never evidence of an interactive relationship within the context of the narrative itself. As an example, in the first act of Polish National Opera’s Tosca (2019), Cavaradossi sings an aria in which he compares the black eyes of his lover Tosca to a painting of Mary Magdalene (Wysocka 2019). As the performer sings, a video projection of Tosca’s eyes (i.e., pre-recorded footage of the performer playing the role) appears on the set piece behind him. While there is clearly a narrative connection between the subject of Cavardossi’s aria and the video imagery behind him, he never directly interacts with or acknowledges Tosca’s projected eyes. Instead, the two elements function solely as coordinated visual layers for the audience.

In causal interplay, live performers and digital elements explicitly interact. The most common example of this kind of interaction is when one entity’s behaviour (either digital or live) appears to prompt a corresponding response in the other. This establishes a shared spatial realm where the live and digital not only meet but co-exist as performers. The initial prompt for this reciprocal relationship between the live and the digital is frequently grounded in physical movement, such as when a live performer gestures and digital elements appear to respond accordingly. Instances of causal interplay can also be situational—achieved through the live performer’s presence within immersive digital environments—or internalised, located within the live performing body itself.

The implication of causality differentiates this relationship from visual correlation, as the performer appears to ‘cross the celluloid divide’ from the perspective of the audience and engage directly with the digital elements (Forkbeard Fantasy n.d.). Consider, for example, the final scene in Glyndebourne Festival’s Vanessa (2018), when Erika orders the Footman to cover the mirrors in the house (Warner 2018). The Footman reaches up to the side of the stage, makes an unhooking movement, and then appears to ‘pull’ a digital curtain across the back of the set and ‘cover’ the mirrors. This moment evokes an intentional causality between the live and the digital, in which one appears to physically engage with the other.

Another comparison of the difference between visual correlation and causal interplay can be seen in the use of projected live video footage in both Beth Morrison Projects and LA Opera’s Dog Days (2015) and the Théâtre Royal de la Monnaie’s Lucio Silla (2017). In the second act of Dog Days, the character Lisa sings to her reflection in a large mirror. Meanwhile, a video camera affixed to the mirror projects a close-up of the performer’s face onto the back wall of the set, allowing the audience to observe Lisa’s emotional distress through a cinematic lens (Woodruff 2015). In Lucio Silla, a similar technique is used to project live footage from a ‘security camera’ that is placed in Giunia’s bedroom. This footage is projected onto a series of television screens on the lower level of the set, which the character Silla appears to review and ‘rewind’ in order to secretly watch Giunia (Kratzer 2017). In both productions, the audience is able to perceive the live video footage as a critical and intentional element of the scenographic design. Yet, it is only in Lucio Silla that causal interplay takes place; here, through the use of the ‘security footage,’ the live performer playing Silla appears to actively interact with the digital elements within the context of the narrative.

Like Giesekam’s ‘multimedial’ and ‘intermedial,’ the modes of synthesis are not fixed benchmarks but function as a spectrum of dramaturgical possibilities, depending on the extent of visual correlation or causal interplay employed (see Figure 1.1). The classification of non-synthesis is essentially a variation of Giesekam’s ‘multimedial’ classification and represents the most traditional permutation of digitally enhanced scenography. Digital elements can be used in a number of ways from a dramaturgical perspective: establishing a projected scenic environment, evoking a certain mood, reflecting the passage of time, providing psychological insight into key characters, and realising special effects, among other functions (Oliszewski and Fine 2018). However, the relationship between the live performers and digital elements is defined by all-encompassing visual correlation. Digital elements play a significant aesthetic role but remain detached from the performers. They are layered with the performers’ physical presence from the perspective of the audience but never actively interact with them in a causal way.

Figure 1.1 The modes of synthesis.

In Finnish National Opera and Ballet’s Don Giovanni (2020), for example, the staging for Leporello’s catalogue aria takes place in front of a series of video projections of women’s faces (Nikkilä 2020). The audience associates this visual overlay with Leporello’s ‘catalogue’ of Don Giovanni’s past conquests, but none of the performers on stage have any explicit interaction with the projected imagery. They neither acknowledge the projected faces nor prompt the faces’ appearance through any physical behaviour. In another example, the Australian International Opera Company’s The Magic Flute (2016) features seven projected scenic environments, including a fantastical jungle and palace courtyard (Vincent, McCormick, and Vincs 2016). As in Don Giovanni, however, the performers do not interact with the digital imagery in any way. Instead, their physical presence is simply overlaid with the digital environments projected behind them.

In both productions, the creative teams present the audience wit...