Intelligence² Debate Verdi vs Wagner: the 200th birthday debate with Stephen Fry
Short Summary:
This Intelligence Squared debate, moderated by Stephen Fry, explores the relative merits of composers Giuseppe Verdi and Richard Wagner on their 200th birthdays. The debate features Norman Lebrecht advocating for Verdi and Philip Hensher for Wagner, supported by musical performances from the South Bank Sinfonia and opera singers. Key arguments revolved around the composers' impact on the course of music, their influence on the world (including nationalism and cultural impact), their psychological depth in their operas, and their musical innovations. The debate uses specific examples from their operas and overtures to illustrate their points, culminating in a straw poll that ultimately favored Wagner. The discussion touches upon the composers' influence on film music, with differing opinions on whether Verdi or Wagner had a greater impact.
Detailed Summary:
The debate is structured as follows:
1. Introduction and Personal Epiphanies: Stephen Fry introduces the Verdi vs. Wagner debate, highlighting the event as part of a larger festival. He introduces the debaters, Norman Lebrecht (Verdi) and Philip Hensher (Wagner), and previews the musical performances. Each debater shares their "epiphany moment" with the respective composer: Lebrecht recalls a childhood experience understanding the Hebrew origins of Verdi's "Va, pensiero," while Hensher describes his early exposure to Wagner's Ring cycle through vinyl records.
2. Norman Lebrecht's Argument for Verdi: Lebrecht argues against the perceived bias towards Wagner, highlighting Verdi's earlier success and his portrayal of the oppressed in Nabucco as a paradigm for all marginalized people, contrasting this with Wagner's anti-Semitic writings. He emphasizes Verdi's prolific output, highlighting operas like Rigoletto, Il Trovatore, and Falstaff, showcasing Verdi's mastery of opera and his ability to connect with audiences. He uses the Overture to Forza del Destino as a musical example of Verdi's innovation and foreshadowing of film score composition. Lebrecht contrasts Verdi's focus on individual characters with Wagner's focus on power and royalty. He concludes by emphasizing Verdi's accessibility and influence on popular music, contrasting it with Wagner's elitism. A key quote: "Verdi writes about you and me...he is a populist; Wagner is an elitist."
3. Philip Hensher's Argument for Wagner: Hensher focuses on Wagner's psychological depth and his ability to portray complex characters and moral ambiguities. He uses examples from Götterdämmerung and Die Walküre to illustrate how Wagner delves into the minds of his characters, creating nuanced portrayals of even his villains. He argues that Wagner's music is integral to the psychological portrayal, using the example of Wotan's theme in Die Walküre to show how musical transformation reflects the character's internal struggles. Hensher also highlights the unprecedented scale and complexity of Wagner's operas and the transformative power of his music, using the Tristan und Isolde prelude as a prime example. He acknowledges Wagner's problematic personal life and anti-Semitism but argues that this doesn't diminish his artistic achievements. A key quote: "Wagner's nature might have been bad for his friends and family and his patrons, but it's very good for posterity."
4. Debate and Conclusion: The debate involves a back-and-forth between Lebrecht and Hensher, addressing points raised by each side. The discussion includes the influence of both composers on film music, with differing opinions on their relative contributions. A final straw poll reveals that while initially the audience was almost evenly split, after the debate, Wagner emerged as the winner by a margin of 11%. The debate concludes with a final musical performance.
The debate utilizes musical excerpts from both composers' works as evidence and demonstrations of their stylistic differences and artistic achievements. The use of the straw poll provides a quantitative measure of the audience's shifting opinions throughout the debate. The discussion also incorporates audience tweets and questions, adding further layers to the debate.