paper , I will give a backstory of New York opera as an operatic sub-genre because of its significance in the city ’ s own compositional contribution to opera and to musical theatre in the gravity of its very New-York and therefore Americana creation . It is nearly impossible to give an accurate historical representation of operatic performance in the city without placing emphasis on where the art form started and its place in the compositional origins of contemporary musical theatre . Additionally , I will provide a foundational history of each aforementioned company , both the Met and NYCO , which embody both the traditional and modern views on operatic performance — including repertoire , prevalent figures , and cultural significance . Furthermore , and more so at the root of the paper , I will investigate and express the influence of each company and New York opera on the artistic climate of the art form in New York City , as the city ’ s major contributions to the operatic world .
Beginning with New York opera , it becomes clear upon listening and analysis that the operatic sub-genre pioneered by the city itself is unconventional in comparison to both its European and domestic counterparts . According to John Dizikes , “ Nothing was more characteristic of New York opera other than the insistence that it wasn ’ t opera at all . ‘ Opera ’ was European .” ( Dizikes , 1993 ). Stylistically , New York opera relied on unostentatious orchestrations and singing as well as simplistic production design ( Dizikes , 1993 ). Rather than rely on recitative alone to provide audiences with plot details from the libretto , New York opera instead leaned on spoken dialogue and sprechgesang or “ speak-sing ” ( Dizikes , 1993 ). From a vocal standpoint , Dizikes writes , “ Its principals were actors who sang more than singers who acted . The style of singing was less full-bodied than that of European opera , closer to popular crooning .” ( Dizikes ,
2