Watching Opera on a Jumbotron
This is an edition of Time-Travel Thursdays, a journey through The Atlantic 's archives to contextualize the present and surface delightful treasures. Sign up here.
The first time I watched an opera on a screen was in the Dallas Cowboys football stadium. My mom and I picked our way to the front over sparsely filled plastic seats—the bleachers had a hollowed-out, cheerless feel—and settled in for the show, where a simulcast of Turandot played across a 1.2-million-pound jumbotron more familiar with instant replays and fan-cam footage. It was a spectacularly underwhelming experience.
Most opera fans aren't exactly awed by the beauty of the broadcast version, but the practice is still worthwhile, particularly as a way to increase accessibility to the art form (and, frankly, to keep it alive). Televising opera was first proved possible on the small screen in the 1940s—before that, it was broadcast to loyal audiences over the radio—and continues today through the Metropolitan Opera's Live in HD and Live at Home programs, which stream performances to movie theaters and living rooms, respectively. The New York opera house has approximately 650,000 yearly visitors, but Live in HD opera streams reached nearly 1 million people last season. These programs hope to reach you even if you're ' on assignment in Antarctica.' It's hard to argue with that.
But as persistent as the desire to televise opera is the debate over whether—and how—to do it. In 1983, the critic Lloyd Schwartz opined about 'Opera on Television' for The Atlantic, calling it 'virtually a self-contradiction: the most grandiose, elaborate form of entertainment this side of the Ringling Brothers (not always this side, either) diminished by the most intimate, reductive medium of transmission.'
The Met telecast its first complete performance in 1948, collaborating with ABC to bring Giuseppe Verdi's Otello to more than 1 million viewers. They brought the works: long-range shots, close-up shots (those front-row seats didn't stand a chance!), and even the rare backstage moment. It was a success in many ways, but not enough to stop the critic John Crosby from noting that 'the Metropolitan's great roster contains some of the worst actors, and actresses on earth,' and that 'by Hollywood standards,' the Met's female performers 'are not likely to drive Betty Grable out of the pin-up business.'
Crosby understood that live audiences were willing to 'overlook these failings,' and he predicted that television audiences might do the same. But imperfections may be harder for modern TV audiences, with their expectations of cleanly edited, smoothly run perfection, to ignore. Live audiences, however, understand that the most important component of an opera is not the acting or the visual charm of the soloists—Maria Callas comes around only once a century—but the singing. The composer David Schiff mused in The Atlantic in 1999 about what keeps opera magical in the age of movies:
Opera combines storytelling and spectacle in ways that rarely achieve the state of fusion we take for granted at the movies. Only die-hard film fans go to a bad movie to catch a great cameo performance, but opera-lovers do the equivalent all the time, knowing that a few moments of vocal bliss are more important than an evening of credible acting or striking 'production values.'
Seeing the seams is part of live performance's charm—it asks the audience to actively participate in the suspension of reality, as opposed to having it ready-made for them. Broadcast opera retains some of that immediacy, but without the magic of a live performance, it's harder to forgive its failings.
Watching the machinations of the orchestra down in the pit or waiting for the curtains to go up all serve to remind us that 'we're 'at the opera,'' Schwartz wrote, 'watching not only the work but an event, a document of a particular performance.' Knowing that you can experience a moment only once—and being unable to relive it—is a rarity in today's world. Live opera reminds us that capturing also entails destroying, and that sometimes the ephemeral is meant to be just that.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
The 'true' origin story of 'The Ritual' is even more hair-raising: 'Begone Satan!'
The 'true' origin story of 'The Ritual' is even more hair-raising: 'Begone Satan!' Show Caption Hide Caption 'The Ritual': Al Pacino, Dan Stevens take on exorcism horror Al Pacino and Dan Stevens star in "The Ritual," a horror film based on the account of a 1928 American exorcism. "The Ritual" exorcism horror drama (now in theaters), starring Al Pacino as the real-life German-American Capuchin friar Theophilus Riesinger and Dan Stevens as Father Joseph Steiger, proudly claims to be "based on true events." The star duo delivers hair-raising moments as they recreate the 1928 exorcism of Emma Schmidt (Abigail Cowen). But on a horror level, it pales in comparison to the more sensational source material. Writer-director David Midell has made it clear "The Ritual" is inspired by the 1935 "Begone Satan!" book by Father Carl Vogl, a German priest and author. Vogl's exclamation point-filled "true account" of the proceedings in Earling, Iowa, is still available online and makes for great, campy reading. How 'Begone Satan!' emerged as the source of 'The Ritual' in Time magazine Steiger's job was to host (other churches declined) and to take notes during the harrowing (and reportedly successful) exorcism. The Steiger notes are the purported source of "Begone Satan!" which made front-page news in religious publications like Denver's Catholic Register years later. Time magazine brought the story to mainstream readers with a Riesinger-heavy 1936 account of the "diabolical possession." The Time article demonstrates some skepticism by reminding readers "that no Catholic is obliged to believe in any particular account of a case of diabolical possession outside of those recounted in Scripture." At the end of this long, twisted, and sometimes dubious road, "The Ritual" earns the right to make the carefully worded claim in its closing: "The 1928 exorcism of Emma Schmidt represents the most thoroughly documented and well-known exorcism in American history." The devil will apparently mess with your car In an early "Ritual" scene, Steiger apologizes for failing to pick up Riesinger at the train station, attributing the oversight to the devil's mischief. With 19 exorcisms to his name, he knows that the devil will mess with cars. In "Begone Satan!" Steiger can't explain why his "tip-top" car takes two hours to get to the station. Riesinger points out that the traveling mishap is the devil "doing his utmost to foil our plans." Later, Steiger is nearly killed after inexplicably losing control of his still-new car on a familiar road and crashing it to "smithereens." The book's car-totaling "devil's trick" doesn't make "The Ritual," which is a shame, given the rich real-life irony: Stevens' "Downton Abbey" character, Matthew Crawley, was killed in a Season 3 car crash that allowed him to pursue a film career. In "Begone Satan!" Steiger's congregation pitches in to buy a new car for the pastor, which frankly could have been an alternate film ending (with a Ford sponsorship). Riesinger had met Schmidt's demons before In "The Ritual," Riesinger makes it clear that the case is personal because he had previously exorcised Schmidt. "Begone Satan!" says Riesinger "freed her from this possession" in 1912, but Schmidt "became possessed again" in her 40s. Schmidt is said to be possessed by four entities that announce themselves as Beelzebub, betraying disciple Judas, Schmidt's abusive father Jacob and Mina (Jacob's lover and Schmidt's aunt). The devil didn't mess with the 'Ritual' nuns Three nuns are injured while dealing directly with the possessed Schmidt in "The Ritual," and Sister Rose ("Twilight" star Ashley Greene) has her hair pulled out of her scalp. In "Begone Satan!" the devil never attacked the nuns, saving his blows for the bigwigs — Pastor Steiger or Mother Superior (played by "Everybody Loves Raymond" star Patricia Heaton). In "The Ritual," the demons within Schmidt taunt Steiger with knowledge of his brother's recent death by suicide. There's no suggestion of these low blows in "Begone Satan!" But in the book, Steiger gives some memorable verbal shots in that never made the movie, like "detestable hellhound" and "vile serpent." Satan also calls Riesinger "dumbbell" when the overtired priest doesn't get his prayers right. That didn't make the movie, either. 'Begone Satan!' has the possessed woman flying over bed like 'The Ritual' The possessed Schmidt throws up black bile often in "The Ritual," but not as much as in the book. 'It was not unusual for her to vomit 20 to 30 times a day," the book says, including bedside descriptions of wretched output "resembling vomited macaroni." The movie scene featuring Schmidt flying over the bed is detailed in "Begone Satan!" "The possessed woman broke from the grip of her protectors and stood erect before them," the book says. "Only her heels were touching the bed." How 'Begone Satan!' ends the story Unlike the movie, the Iowa exorcism reportedly took place in three stages, in August, September and December 1928. The book's climax differs from "The Ritual" ending, which has Schmidt running through the church catacombs, and Steiger stepping up with an exorcist hero moment, shouting down the demon with the Bible in hand. In the book, levitating Schmidt returns to the bed, and "Satan was forced to leave his victim at last to return to Hell." Schmidt utters, "My Jesus mercy! Praised be Jesus!" showing she's clear. The woman "reportedly lived out the rest of her life peacefully," the movie says in the closing credits. "Begone Satan!" backs up that happy ending, adding "there were still possessions, but of a milder nature."
Time Magazine
4 hours ago
- Time Magazine
The Most Challenging Questions in Jeopardy's History (According to AI)
This article is published by a partner of TIME. 'Jeopardy!' has captivated audiences for decades with its unique format of providing answers and having contestants respond with questions. With its fast-paced nature and broad range of categories, the show challenges not only the general knowledge of its contestants but also their ability to think quickly under pressure. Throughout its history, the show has used some incredibly difficult questions that have left even the most experienced contestants stumped. These questions often require precise knowledge in specialized fields, and despite their seemingly straightforward nature, the pressure of the game can cause even the brightest minds to falter. Over the years, 'Jeopardy!' has tested the knowledge of countless contestants, with some clues proving so challenging that they remain infamous in the show's history. Whether it's science, history, or pop culture, the difficulty of the clues often lies in their phrasing, the obscure details they demand, or the limited time in which contestants must respond. This article highlights 10 of the most challenging questions in 'Jeopardy!' history, focusing on why these clues stumped even the most seasoned players and the lessons we can learn from their difficulty. Thanks to AI, we can now analyze why these clues were so difficult and break down the specific aspects that caused them to perplex contestants. Let's dive into 10 of the hardest 'Jeopardy!' questions ever asked and see how even the most knowledgeable players struggled under the pressure. 1. Category: Science (2012) Clue:"Discovered in 1947, the Dead Sea Scrolls were written in Hebrew and this language." Answer: ' What is Aramaic?' Background: The Dead Sea Scrolls are a collection of ancient texts that have provided significant insight into early religious history, and while Hebrew is a commonly known language in this context, Aramaic was the other language featured in many of the scrolls. This $800 clue stumped all the contestants, demonstrating how even seemingly simple facts can become complicated under pressure. Aramaic is an ancient language spoken during the time of Jesus, but its obscure nature in the context of the scrolls made it difficult for contestants to recall quickly. Despite the relatively low point value, this question showed how unfamiliar or less commonly known languages can cause difficulty in fast-paced quiz environments. Aramaic's historical significance was key but not as easily recognized. The timing pressure caused contestants to second-guess their immediate response. Hebrew's prominence overshadowed Aramaic, causing confusion. The discovery date (1947) added a layer of complexity, tying it to the 20th century. Ancient languages like Aramaic are often overlooked in general knowledge trivia. 2. Category: Music (2018) Clue:"This dance seen here, performed in 3/4 time, became popular in Vienna and spread across Europe in the 1800s." Answer: ' What is the waltz?' Background: The waltz is one of the most iconic dances in European history, known for its graceful movements performed to music in 3/4 time. Despite its historical importance, this $2000 clue stumped all three contestants. The difficulty here wasn't necessarily in knowing the waltz, but rather in recognizing it within the context of the clue and responding quickly under pressure. The contestants struggled to come up with the term "waltz," as they likely overthought the answer, possibly considering other dances or wondering if it was too obvious. The 3/4 time signature gave a big hint, but contestants were hesitant to connect it to the waltz. The cultural significance of the waltz was immense, but it required rapid recall under pressure. The history of the dance in Vienna and Europe may have distracted contestants from recognizing the correct answer. Other dances like the minuet or the mazurka could have caused confusion in the contestants' minds. The $2000 value made the question particularly high stakes, adding more pressure. 3. Category: World Geography (2015) Clue:"This European capital's Vasa Museum houses a warship that sank on its maiden voyage in 1628." Answer: ' What is Stockholm?' Background: The Vasa Museum in Stockholm is home to the Vasa ship, which tragically sank on its maiden voyage in 1628. Despite the fame of the Vasa ship, this clue left contestants stumped, especially given that it was a relatively straightforward geography question. The problem arose from the contestants' confusion about the European cities with notable maritime history. With multiple cities across Europe known for their naval connections, contestants had difficulty recalling Stockholm under time pressure, which led to a triple stumper. The historical importance of the Vasa ship made the clue valuable but not immediately recalled. The location of the museum in Stockholm was key but not universally known by all contestants. European geography involving maritime history may have caused contestants to overthink. The year (1628) was significant, but the city's historical ties to the event were not immediately apparent. The triple stumper highlighted how specific knowledge about European history and geography can cause confusion. 4. Category: Literature (2022) Clue:"The title of this 1961 Roald Dahl story is now used as military slang for someone who flies through dangerous situations." Answer: ' What is 'James and the Giant Peach'?' Background: In this Final Jeopardy! question, the answer "James and the Giant Peach" was famously elusive for all three contestants, despite the book's popularity. The clue's challenge was that the title had been adapted into a term used in military slang, which was not widely known outside of specific circles. The obscure link between the book's title and the slang caused confusion, as most contestants were more familiar with the story's plot than its extended use in military contexts. This clue demonstrates how even well-known works can be tough to recall when the reference point is an uncommon one. The military slang connection made the question more challenging than simply recalling the title. Roald Dahl's literary fame wasn't enough for some contestants to instantly recognize the slang use of the title. The uncommon reference to military slang created confusion. The children's book's popularity didn't translate into recognizing the slang term. Final Jeopardy's stakes added extra pressure, leading to hesitations in responding. The literary knowledge required combined with a non-literal interpretation of the title made it tricky. 5. Category: Television (2016) Clue:"The last name of this TV dad played by John Goodman was actually Harris; the show's creator changed it to honor his own dad." Answer: ' What is Conner?' (from Roseanne) Background: In this $2000 clue, contestants were asked about John Goodman's character on 'Roseanne.' While the show 'Roseanne' is a major part of television history, the clue referred to the character's original last name—Harris—and its change to Conner as a tribute to the show's creator. Contestants were stumped, possibly because the details were considered trivial and not essential to the show's plot or popular discussions. Many viewers at home might have guessed correctly, but under the pressure of the game, the connection to the character's last name was easily overlooked. The creator's personal connection to the character's name change made it a niche piece of trivia. The character of Dan Conner was iconic, but the name change was less well-known. Television history can involve subtle behind-the-scenes facts that aren't always widely publicized. The $2000 value added pressure, as contestants wanted to secure a significant score with this clue. Contestants may have focused on more prominent aspects of the show instead of character details. 6. Category: American History (2020) Clue:"Before the American Revolution, Crispus Attucks, a man of African and Native American descent, was killed in this 1770 event." Answer: ' What is the Boston Massacre?' Background: This clue, featured in Final Jeopardy!, stumped all contestants despite being one of the most significant events leading to the American Revolution. The challenge stemmed from the specific historical context, where Crispus Attucks' death in the Boston Massacre was a pivotal moment in pre-revolutionary America. The contestants had difficulty connecting the year 1770 to the event, and many were unsure of the exact details. Although the Boston Massacre is a key part of American history, its significance in this particular context wasn't immediately obvious to the players. The Boston Massacre was a well-known event, but the association with Attucks added complexity. The year 1770 didn't immediately resonate with all contestants under the time crunch. The specifics of Attucks' death required contestants to recall obscure historical details. The question's phrasing caused confusion about the event's historical importance. The Final Jeopardy pressure made it harder for contestants to connect the dots quickly. Understanding pre-revolutionary events was crucial, yet not everyone could recall it under the time limit. 7. Category: Word Origins (2019) Clue:"From the Latin for 'to roll', it's the type of chair seen here." Answer: ' What is a rotary chair?' Background: This $1600 clue stumped all three contestants, despite the fact that the answer seemed straightforward. The clue's challenge stemmed from the unfamiliarity of the term "rotary chair," which was a specific type of office furniture. Contestants were confused by the term's Latin roots and were unfamiliar with this more obscure category in furniture design. The connection between the Latin word for "to roll" and the type of chair seen in the visual was lost on them due to the obscure nature of the terminology. The specific term "rotary chair" was not part of everyday knowledge for most contestants. The visual aid created confusion rather than clarity, as contestants were unsure of the reference. Latin etymology required contestants to recall specialized language knowledge. Rotary chairs are often associated with office settings but are not universally recognized. The word's origin added complexity, as contestants were distracted by the unfamiliar term. Office furniture terminology is less likely to be top-of-mind in general trivia. 8. Category: Ancient History (2017) Clue:"Built circa 1350 B.C.E., the Temple of Luxor honored this Egyptian god and was a site of an annual festival." Answer: ' Who is Amun?' Background: The Temple of Luxor is one of the most impressive structures from ancient Egypt, but the reference to Amun, the god it honored, was challenging for contestants. The clue required contestants to recall Egyptian mythology and the deities associated with monumental temples, which not all players could do under pressure. The specificity of the festival and the god's role was difficult for many to recall, resulting in another stumper. Egyptian gods like Ra and Osiris are more famous, making Amun harder to remember quickly. Amun's lesser fame compared to other Egyptian gods made it tough to recall. The festival at Luxor added to the complexity, as it wasn't a widely recognized historical event. Ancient Egyptian history requires knowledge of a vast pantheon of deities, complicating quick recall. Egyptian mythology is rich but often difficult to connect with specific monuments. Luxor's prominence didn't necessarily extend to widespread knowledge of its religious significance. 9. Category: Food & Drink (2021) Clue:"Worcestershire sauce is made with molasses, anchovies and this vinegar whose name is French for 'sour wine.'" Answer: ' What is vin aigre?' Background: This etymology question proved too difficult for all three contestants, despite the clues being relatively straightforward. The vinegar in question, vin aigre (French for 'sour wine'), is a key component of Worcestershire sauce but was a tricky detail for contestants to recall under pressure. The need for knowledge of both the French language and obscure details of food production, combined with the complexity of the question, stumped the players. Contestants likely recognized Worcestershire sauce's key ingredients but struggled to connect them to this specific type of vinegar. The French terminology was difficult to recall quickly under the time pressure. The obscure nature of vin aigre made it hard to connect with everyday food knowledge. Worcestershire sauce itself is widely known, but not the specific details of its ingredients. Food etymology is a niche area of knowledge that doesn't come up often in general trivia. The challenge of language knowledge combined with food trivia made this question particularly tough. Vinegar types are many, and remembering the French term under pressure was difficult. 10. Category: Sports History (2019) Clue:"The first official international cricket match was played between the USA and this country in 1844." Answer: ' What is Canada?' Background: This surprising fact about sports history stumped all contestants during Final Jeopardy. While cricket is known as a global sport, the clue's connection between the USA and Canada as participants in the first official international match was a difficult one to recall. Cricket's early history in North America is often overshadowed by more popular sports like baseball and football. The specificity of the year 1844, combined with a lack of familiarity with cricket, made this clue a true challenge for contestants. Cricket's early history in North America isn't widely discussed in modern sports trivia. The year 1844 was an obscure reference, adding an additional layer of difficulty. The USA and Canada's cricket rivalry was surprising to many contestants who were unfamiliar with this sports history. The obscure nature of early international sports matches often causes confusion in trivia settings. Cricket's global dominance outside North America made it harder for contestants to connect to the U.S. The sports history of cricket in North America is less prominent in contemporary discussions. Conclusion on Challenging Jeopardy Questions These 10 challenging questions highlight the intricate balance between knowledge, timing, and the specific context of 'Jeopardy!' trivia. What may seem like a straightforward question can quickly become an insurmountable challenge due to the speed and pressure of the game. These clues demonstrate that while knowledge is essential, 'Jeopardy!' contestants also need to be quick thinkers and adept at recalling even the most obscure details. Ultimately, these difficult questions remind us that trivia is not just about having facts in our head—it's about the ability to connect those facts under pressure. Whether it's obscure historical knowledge, scientific details, or literary references, these 'Jeopardy!' clues show that even the brightest minds can be stumped by the complexity and timing of the game. Related Articles: About the Authors: Richard D. Harroch is a Senior Advisor to CEOs, management teams, and Boards of Directors. He is an expert on M&A, venture capital, startups, and business contracts. He was the Managing Director and Global Head of M&A at VantagePoint Capital Partners, a venture capital fund in the San Francisco area. His focus is on internet, digital media, AI and technology companies. He was the founder of several Internet companies. His articles have appeared online in Forbes, Fortune, MSN, Yahoo, Fox Business and Richard is the author of several books on startups and entrepreneurship as well as the co-author of Poker for Dummies and a Wall Street Journal-bestselling book on small business. He is the co-author of a 1,500-page book published by Bloomberg on mergers and acquisitions of privately held companies. He was also a corporate and M&A partner at the international law firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe. He has been involved in over 200 M&A transactions and 250 startup financings. He can be reached through LinkedIn. Dominique Harroch is the Chief of Staff at She has acted as a Chief of Staff or Operations Leader for multiple companies where she leveraged her extensive experience in operations management, strategic planning, and team leadership to drive organizational success. With a background that spans over two decades in operations leadership, event planning at her own start-up and marketing at various financial and retail companies. Dominique is known for her ability to optimize processes, manage complex projects and lead high-performing teams. She holds a BA in English and Psychology from U.C. Berkeley and an MBA from the University of San Francisco. She can be reached via LinkedIn.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Who is Coco Gauff's boyfriend? Here's what we know.
Coco Gauff has become a true breakout star in the tennis world, reaching No. 2 in the world rankings and winning her first Grand Slam at the 2023 U.S. Open. And if you're here, you might be wondering: does she have a significant other? And if so, who is it? Advertisement Here's what we know: she is reportedly dating someone, but she's not revealing his identity. Why's that? Here's what she told People back in 2024 about keeping some things under wraps: 'I think I felt like I just, some parts of myself I love to share and then some parts I think I just keep to myself.' She has said it's not a fellow tennis player, and she made a funny joke about that after Challengers came out. We know that he's musical and wants to act. There are rumors about who it could be, but we don't know officially since Gauff hasn't publicly talked about him beyond those few details. Here's what else she said to Time back in 2023: Gauff has had a boyfriend for about a year, whose identity she prefers to keep private. She does share that he's from Atlanta, and not famous. 'This is my first real relationship,' says Gauff. 'To just have someone to talk to who is not involved in tennis at all gives me a fresh perspective.' Advertisement There you have it! This article originally appeared on For The Win: Coco Gauff boyfriend: Who is it? Is it Jalen Sera?
