What's Opera Doc: Is Bugs Bunny a Castrato?

It may sound like a crazy proposition. But think about it, folks.

Anyone who's seen even a handful of the cartoons featuring Bugs and his nemesis Elmer Fudd may have noticed the frequency with which that "wascally wabbit" dresses in drag to stymie his persistent pursuer. For a while, I just assumed that it was part of the role-playing dynamic in their relationship. After all, every time Bugs donned a wig and a dress, Elmer's interest shifted from blood sports to courtship (never mind that some people seem to think of them as the same thing).

So, what made me start thinking that there may be more to it than sexual titillation? I'll tell you: I saw "What's Opera, Doc?". Elmer, in his most heroic role yet, singing: "Catch the wabbit, catch the wa-bit..." to the tune of "The Ride of the Valkyries," is smitten by the sight of Bugs, resplendent in his gazebo, wearing long blond braids and georgeously long eyelashes. I put it to you: have you ever seen a more convincing Brunehilde?

It was at that time that the idea first took hold. It took me a while to start considering the implications. After all, if my hypothesis could be proven, the consequences could be dramatic indeed. Think about it: the practice of castrating boys before they reached puberty in order to preserve the purity of their soprano voices really took off in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, in Italy. The rest of Europe didn't really take to the idea of castrating youngsters. As far as I know, the practice was never really undertaken at all in North America. Wouldn't it be incredible if Bugs were the only bona fide castrato cartoon rabbit the world has ever seen?

And as far as those sixteenth century Italian castrati went, don't get me wrong--there was a lot in it for those who did agree to make the sacrifice in the name of art. They were generally in high demand. While their fellow soloists and choirboys were often destitute after their voices changed, the castrati lived in relative luxury, teaching, performing and continuing their studies. They played both male and female roles, particularly in those parts of Italy which did not allow women to perform onstage. Parts were written just for them.

They also had their share of both male and female "groupies," so that, depending on their sexual orientation, they could continue on the pursuit of their amorous adventures as well, if they so wished. Contrary to popular belief, it is held that the castrati were not much impeded by their operations and were generally fairly promiscuous fellows. And, as an added bonus, paternity suits just never stuck.

But, I won't go too much further along that line of thought. If you're still curious, you could always go and rent Farinelli from your neighborhood video store, for a fictionalized portrait of one of the more popular castrati. In order to simulate Farinelli's range, the voices of a counter-tenor and a soprano are convincingly blended, with fascinating results.

Nowadays, of course, women sing the female parts formerly performed by the castrati (notwithstanding Bugs' occasional appearances, of course). But, what about the male roles which were written for those sopranos who wore the seventeeth century equivalent of a jock strap?

Sometimes, a counter tenor will be able to sing the part. Counter tenors have the highest vocal range among the male opera singers. They are also extremely rare and in very high demand. So, in the absence of counter tenors, sometimes the male role is transposed down into the tenor range. Tenors are relatively commonplace (and sometimes even come in threes, more's the pity).

But, there are still some purists, who want to hear some of the older scores performed the way they might have been when they were first written. Women get to indulge in a little drag in those instances. About time, I say--after all those centuries of not being allowed to perform onstage, at last, women are being allowed to usurp male roles, in the interests of authenticity!

The castrati weren't the only sideshow dramas which were being performed around the evolution of opera over the centuries. By the beginning of the seventeenth century, opera had become a popular entertainment--attended by both the wealthy and the not so wealthy. There were operatic celebrities and there were operatic controversies.

A lot of the works being written could be seen as the historical equivalent of Hollywood fluff-- lavish productions (minus car chases), performed in order to make a profit and divert their audiences with melodrama and slapstick. At the same time, however, there were some operas which concealed cutting satire or pointed social critique amid all the jokes and the twists of plot.

One example of such a controversial work was put on by the Vancouver Opera Company earlier this season. As those of you who have seen Amadeus might know, Mozart derived The Marriage of Figaro from the second in a trilogy of plays by Beaumarchais, which satirizes the upper classes. Marriage had been banned in Austria when Mozart decided to take on the task of making it into an opera. Another work of his, Don Giovanni, was even more condemnatory of the exploitation and double standards which the upper classes imposed upon those who were subject to their whims.

Yet, opera doesn't only express political and social critiques: what would be the point, after all, of going to all the trouble of writing all those pages and pages of music, if it were merely to facilitate social critique? Naturally, opera is really about music.

That's really where I come in. After all, while some people like heavy metal, some like grunge and others prefer folk, my affinity lies with opera and classical. The problem is, it's just so intimidating.

I guess there are know-it-alls in every realm, but lets face it-- they seem to abound in the operatic and classical arenas. To be fair, those who put on airs and condescend to share knowledge are generally justified in their confidence. There are people out there who know so much about opera, it's scary. I don't happen to be one of those people, with the result that I am sometimes talked down to.

My dilemma lies in the fact that, dammit, I really like the music! Over time, I have learned to harden my protective shell. I refuse to be scared off by people who think that if I can't tell the difference between the Italian accents of two different tenors, I shouldn't be there.

The results of my persistence have been rewarding. Without it, I would never have had the opportunity to see something like Jenufa, another VOC production from earlier this season. The music in it was powerful, while the plot was minimal. It seethed with emotional resonance--tragic and cathartic. I have also met a number of very interesting people over the years, some of whom give me hope that I may be able to become a true aficionado of the genre while evading the trap of simultaneously becoming a pretentious jerk.

I guess I went on a bit of a tangent, as it turns out. So...back to what's really under discussion here: is Bugs Bunny a castrato? What do you think?

---

homepage current issue past issues search contact

---

more issue #5