But I'd still be interested to know what anyone thinks about the ways in which opera might be 'taught', whether at universities or lower down the scale.
I suppose the immediate question that throws up is if this intended as an "appreciation" course? I guess it is, as there are already lots of courses teaching practical skills (although not many for would-be Directors - although I think they emerge by themselves anyhow, mostly from Napoleonic Studies courses
)
I would hope to see some input from those many disciplines who are rather "taken for granted" by operagoers. Firstly, scenic designers and costume designers - how does their work originate, and how is it then realised (and built, sewn etc)? How do they get their work in the first place? In many theatres it's because the Producer invites his favoured designers to collaborate... is that necessarily a good way of doing things? It's kept Stefanos Lazaridis in work for years, of course
Then there's lighting, probably the most maligned skill in the business - I'm continuously amazed how audiences and critics alike never even mention lighting? Yet it's capable of entirely altering the visual perception of what's on stage. Then there's the work of the music coaches - which ranges from note-banging for the cretinous through to stylistic interpretation, along with offstage conducting, taking orchestral sectionals, and prompting. Then of course, there's acting (ehem) - although teaching it isn't within the remit of the course, it would be useful to go through some basic stagecraft, blocking a scene, how to make your gestures and movements clear to an audience, some mention of Stanislavsky (and the difference between "Russian* Stanislavsky" and the thing called "Stanislavsky Method" in the USA - which is actually quite different). Oh, and other approaches to stage acting too, of course - Brecht ought to be in there, Peter Brook, Artaud (I suppose, ho-hum), the Polish/Czech school, building a character through improv, etc. Really this would be best taught by getting guest lectures from people like Richard Jones, Keith Warner, etc. Or better still, arranging to sit-in on their rehearsals and see how it's done in practice. (Not all Directors like to be observed in rehearsal, however). Singing - someone ought to cover the black arts that enable a singer to do what they do. Make-up should be covered too.
If I were to exercise a personal desire in the course construction, I would like to chop the legs from under all the theorising about concepts, allegories etc. Any reasonably intelligent person can come up with a production concept, and many/most of them are workable... but it's only one fool in twenty who can then make that
work on the stage in a credible way, so that it's not laughed off by the audience. It's the stagecraft that makes all the difference. Let me give an example. I saw a notorious AIDA three years ago in Moscow - the director, in his wisdom, had moved the location to what appeared to be Kosovo. Risky, challenging, but in principle could have been a devastatingly emotional production that brought the realities of civil war to life. However, in Act I the chorus stood in straight lines from beginning to end, and never moved (I kid you not). The rest of this dismal rubbish continued similarly. I had no idea who was Pharoah and who was Ramfis - were they different people? With everyone in identical army fatigues, it was hard to tell. At the end Radames and Aida escape in a rainstorm (hello?) and Amneris was cut (!) from the ending. Mind you, she'd been left standing stationary in the Judgement Scene, during which the conductor obliterated her with doubled-up
ff trombones. [I was sitting next to an Amneris from another theatre, who was muttering "Jesus F**** Christ, this bloke is a sadistic madman"]. I don't mind what concept you want, but please let me see it in action??
Out of interest, I would be interested to know what the course participants want to get out of the course, and what (if anything) they plan to do with their qualifications? Teach? Research? Run opera houses? Direct? Perform? Conduct? Write books?
* for me, the biggest difference has been to work with British performers, who are largely passive and do what they're told (because there is no time to discuss it or try anything else, and because they live in holy fear of the Management), and Russian performers, who have all got Stanislavsky coming out of their ears, don't need to be told anything because they know it already, and can be pre-programmed and set in motion like a clockwork mouse. The danger is that you get pre-programmed performances that all look identical, of course. British rehearsals start with blocking - Russian rehearsals start with (heated) discussion of the motivations and backgrounds of the characters. British opera direction still follows the "inspired genius leader" model, in which some perceived expert (his expertise comes from an Oxbridge background, usually...) has a "concept", and his job is to win-over the cast into doing it for him... the pay-off for them is the furtherance of their careers by being in a show directed by the famous X. The rehearsal methodology is based on clear instructions (with little or no explanation), backed-up by pep-talks about you all being the greatest luvvy darlings and you will be vindicated on the night, believe me.... I am not really sure this can ever be changed, because of the rehearsal-time available... it certainly gets quicker results, because there is never any discussion about anything at all, but it all depends on the competence of Captain Bligh. I ought to add, by way of corollary, that the few shows I get to direct are mostly because British directors have a reputation for doing quick work with no messing, and I'm then obliged to do exactly the opposite of what I preach about Stanislavsky etc, and get them into shape and under lights in three weeks 
Although this can produce "workmanlike" shows, and occasionally good ones (the ticking clock lends a terrifying spur to action), I'd point to at least one major drawback... the casualty list that results. This sink-or-swim school of production has wrecked countless potential careers, of both newbies and established performers. Left without any rationale or explanation for what they're supposed to be doing, and shouted at by everyone, they're expected to do the most difficult roles in the repertoire without a safety-net. Some have crashed and burned as a result - I can think of at least two major performers I won't name, whose careers suddenly fizzled... one had a nervous breakdown in the dressing-room and couldn't go on. With another, one of my lowest points ever was - with the assistance of another member of staff - forcibly dressing the performer in their costume whilst they were screaming "I can't do it, I can't go on, you've got to help me...". (this was not even a show I'd worked on - the Management figured the performer trusted me, although it was a trust I ultimately betrayed ) You need the "tools for the job" - which, I'd contend, is Stanislavsky-type training.
