歌劇與我：拉瑪五世的歌劇之旅

在泰國（舊稱為“暹羅”）境外，朱拉隆功國王（1853—1910）最廣為人知的形象可能是百老匯音樂劇《國王與我》（The King and I）中的年輕王儲，他是在外國教師指導下接觸西方生活方式的暹羅王室成員之一。那位著名的老師——她非常能歌善舞——就是來自英國的安娜·李奧諾文斯夫人（Anna Leonowens）。理察·羅杰斯和奧斯卡·漢默斯坦二世在創作音樂劇時，基于史實做了一些自由的處理——就像李奧諾文斯本人在她的回憶錄中所寫的那樣——但實際上，朱拉隆功在課堂上確實很用功。即使在他以暹羅拉瑪五世（當時該國的官方名稱）的身份登上王位后，并將所學西方知識付諸實踐時，他仍然是一名專注的學生。

事實上，拉瑪五世最后的課堂之一就是歌劇院。在1907年朱拉隆功第二次歐洲之行期間，他花了很多時間來觀察西方科學（通常是醫學）的進步。不過，晚上的行程通常是在當地政要的陪同下，圍繞著歌劇展開。朱拉隆功的日記和信件——主要是寫給他的女兒烏通公主（Princess Nibha Nobhadol）的——字里行間里充滿了對歌劇這種藝術形式的長篇大論。

雖然朱拉隆功從未對西方美聲唱法的真實發聲方法產生過興趣，但他對其藝術表達的寬度感到驚訝。“在這種音量下，我們國家歌手的歌聲聽起來就像是喃喃自語，完全會被樂器的聲音淹沒。”他在給同父異母的弟弟納拉提巴攀蓬王子（Prince Narathip Praphanphong）的信中寫道。納拉提巴攀蓬王子是當時暹羅王室中的宮廷音樂負責人。但當一位意大利教授邀請兩名暹羅學生到歐洲學習歌劇時，朱拉隆功懷疑這種學習的必要性。 “在曼谷，只有少數人有品位去欣賞來自歐洲的聲音”，他寫道，“如果我們的學生去意大利接受訓練，當他們回來時，我擔心他們除了像狗一樣嚎叫外，什么也做不了。”這與其說是朱拉隆功對學生聲樂學習能力的貶低，不如說他認識到暹羅當地缺乏欣賞他們的觀眾。

在暹羅協會（Siam Society）成立120周年之際，協會方構思了《1907：拉瑪五世歐洲歌劇之旅》（1907： Rama V European Opera Journey），這是一部講述并在一定程度上再現了拉瑪五世在歐洲游歷的舞臺制作。該劇于2024年11月下旬在暹羅協會禮堂上演，五晚演出的門票全部售罄。作品中有史實故事的演繹，還有部分歌劇選段的上演，按時間順序跟隨拉瑪五世的旅途，故事從都靈維托里奧·埃馬努埃萊劇院開始。

朱拉隆功對西方歌劇劇目的最大贊賞在于其情節涵蓋了古代神話故事和現代道德題材。當時的暹羅也有相類似的戲劇表演，但背景和故事的范圍很難達到拉瑪五世觀賞的題材那樣廣泛。拉瑪五世在都靈第一個晚上就觀賞了講述巴黎妓女愛情的故事，即威爾第的《茶花女》（La Traviata）。而他第二天看的喬萬尼· 賈尼提的《普林節》（Cristo alla Festa di Purim）則是一個根據圣經故事改編的作品，講述了耶穌從公開私刑中拯救一名婦女的故事。

對于《1907：拉瑪五世歐洲歌劇之旅》的泰國制作團隊來說，這項工作有時相對容易。朱拉隆功在信中沒有提到具體的劇名，但他對巴黎社交沙龍、穿著現代服裝的演員以及被情人的父親敦促忘記他的兒子的描述，清晰地指向了《茶花女》這部作品。另一方面，指名道姓地引用喬萬尼· 賈尼提的獨幕劇幫助不大，因為這部歌劇如今鮮少聽聞。但制作團隊在羅馬圣西西里亞國家學院歷史資料館（Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia）的檔案中找到了《普林節》的鋼琴譜。由《1907：拉瑪五世歐洲歌劇之旅》音樂總監黃國能（Voraprach Wongsathapornpat）精心配器的終曲管弦樂版是演出當晚的高潮。

在舞臺上，導演塔林·普林雅克尼特（Tarin Prinyaknit）巧妙地利用了一個臨時搭建的T形舞臺，而臺上覆蓋著巴米·科查萬（Bamee Kochawan）設計的演出場刊和報紙報道的拼貼畫，40人編制的暹羅小交響樂團放在一側的固定舞臺上。舞蹈編導達倫·羅伊斯頓（Darren Royston）也擔任了該劇的串場主持，幫助T臺兩側的觀眾了解故事的歷史背景，并引用拉瑪五世在信中對每部具體歌劇的評論。隨后的表演在很大程度上反映了這些描述，由四名年輕的亞洲歌手以及當地舞者和合唱團輪流擔綱演出。男高音蘇拉蓬·瓦塔納諾塔奇（Surapong Wattananontachai）在《茶花女》的祝酒歌段落中帶領了一個訓練有素的16人合唱團；6位舞者熟練地演繹了蓬基耶利的《歌女喬康達》（La Gioconda）和馬斯內的《阿麗亞娜》（Ariane）中的芭蕾舞場景。

獨唱家們的演出總是那么的引人入勝，而且常常能戲劇性地應付自如。中國女高音穆宇和新加坡男中音吳翰衛（Martin Ng）演唱了《風流寡婦》（The Merry Widow）中的二重唱“默默傾聽”（Lippen schwenge）的英語演出版本I Love You So，以反映拉瑪五世在倫敦戴利劇院的觀劇經歷，魅力四射。吳翰衛和女高音蘇春雅·坦維琴（Suchunya Tanvichien）演唱的二重唱“瓦萊麗小姐”（Madamigella Valéry），強度令人信服，就像他們剛剛走出了正在進行中的《茶花女》。

在提煉自《蝴蝶夫人》多個選段中，概念和結果最有效地結合在一起。這部作品（包括角色）是給拉瑪五世留下最深刻印象的歌劇之一。朱拉隆功欣賞了巴黎喜歌劇院的演出——在斯卡拉歌劇院首演失敗后，普契尼正是在這里親自操刀，讓這部作品起死回生。在新的巴黎制作中，導演阿爾伯特·卡雷（Albert Carré）不僅展示了西方戲劇的最新進步（如當時的現代舞臺燈光），還展現了日本傳統文化的尊嚴。拉瑪五世給女兒的信中不僅包含了詳細的劇情概要，還包括了他對這部作品人物和舞臺的感想（注：這個制作最初于1906年推出，在喜歌劇院一直上演至1972年）。

《1907》的最后一段基本上成了穆宇的展示舞臺，她表演了一系列歌劇中精彩片段，從巧巧桑的詠嘆調“晴朗的一天”（Un bel di）到二重唱“現在輪到我們談談”（Ora a noi），再到最后的“你，你，永別我的寶貝”（Tu， tu piccolo iddio），當然離不開蘇拉蓬·瓦塔納諾塔奇飾演的平克爾頓和吳翰衛飾演的夏普萊斯的支持。總之，這些音樂速寫為蝴蝶夫人的情感弧線提供了高效而有益的寫照。

看完演出后的幾天里，我有兩個揮之不去的印象。其中一個是黃國能側身站在指揮臺上的視覺強度，他一只手天衣無縫地指揮著樂隊，另一只手引導著舞臺表演。這并不是最佳的指揮位置，但可能與現代管弦樂隊的樂池及監視器屏幕（舞臺上的表演者可以從不同的有利位置看到并跟隨指揮）出現之前的許多現場演奏的作品相似。

然而，演出當晚的效果要微妙得多。聽到兩代截然不同的亞洲人提出他們對西方歌劇的看法，很難反駁當年朱拉隆功國王對經典歌劇劇目是否能吸引亞洲觀眾的質疑。只是，就像在許多其他領域一樣，這場演出證明這位暹羅國王比他的時代領先了一個世紀左右。

Outside of Thailand， King Chulalongkorn （1853–1910） is probably best known as a young boy in the Broadway musical The King and I， one of the royal brood exposed to Western ways through foreign tutors， most famously—and tunefully—Anna Leonowens. Rodgers and Hammerstein took a few factual liberties—as did Leonowens herself in her memoirs—but the actual Chulalongkorn did actually pay attention in class. Even after assuming the throne himself as Rama V of Siam （as the country was then officially known）， when he started putting that knowledge into practice， he still remained an avid student.

One of the King’s final classrooms， in fact， was the opera house. During his second European tour in 1907， Chulalongkorn spent his days observing Western scientific （usually medical） advances. Evenings， though， revolved around the opera， which he usually attended in the company of local dignitaries. Chulalongkorn’s diaries and letters—written mostly to his daughter， Princess Nibha Nobhadol—brim with lengthy reactions to the art form.

Though he never quite warmed to the actual sound of cultivated Western singing， he marveled at its expressive range. “Against this volume， our singing sounds like mumbling， and would entirely be drowned out by the instruments，” he wrote to his half-brother Prince Narathip Praphanphong， who was in charge of music in the royal court. But when an Italian professor asked for two local students to come Europe to study opera， Chulalongkorn doubted it was possible. “In Bangkok， only a handful of individuals have the taste to appreciate the European sound，” he wrote. “If our students go to Italy for training， when they return， I am afraid that they would not be able to do much except howl like dogs.” It was less a disparagement of the students’ vocal abilities than recognizing the lack of a local audience to appreciate them.

As part of its 120th anniversary celebration， the Siam Society conceived and developed 1907： Rama V European Opera Journey， a staged production recounting—and in part recreating—those experiences， which played in a sold-out， five-night run in the Siam Society Auditorium in late November. Part pastiche， part operatic variety show， the show followed the King’s travels chronologically， beginning at Turin’s Teatro Vittorio Emanuele.

Chulalongkorn’s greatest admiration for Western repertory lay in its breadth of subject matter， spanning both ancient myth and modern morals. Thai theatrical performances did much the same thing， but the settings and stories hardly ranged as broadly as Verdi’s La Traviata with its Parisian courtesan， which the King saw on his first night at the opera in Turin， to Giovanni Giannetti’s Cristo alla Festa di Purim， based on the biblical tale of Jesus saving a woman from public lynching， which he saw the next evening.

For the Thai production team of 1907， the job was sometimes easy. Chulalongkorn may have neglected to mention the title of Traviata， but his descriptions of Paris salons， actors in modern dress and the lead female character being urged by her potential father-inlaw to forget his son clearly pointed in that direction. On the other hand， citing Giannetti’s one-act by name helped very little， as the opera barely warrants a footnote today. The team went in search of the music， finding a vocal score in the archives at Rome’s Accademia Nazionale di Santa Cecilia. Giannetti’s finale， orchestrated by the production’s music director Voraprach Wongsathapornpat， turned out to be a high point of the evening.

In the staging itself， director Tarin Prinyaknit made fine use of a catwalk stage draped in scenic designer Bamee Kochawan’s collage of historic concert programs and newspaper reports with the 40-piece Siam Sinfonietta placed on a raised stage at one side. Choreographer Darren Royston also served as the show’s host， engaging audiences on both sides of the catwalk with historical context and quotes from the King’s observations of each particular opera. Musical performances were then staged largely to reflect those descriptions， the performance distributed equitably among a quartet of young Asian singers along with teams of local dancers and choristers. Tenor Surapong Wattananontachai led a well-drilled vocal ensemble in champagne toasts from Traviata； dancers deftly rendered ballet scenes from Ponchielli’s La Gioconda and Massenet’s Ariane.

The soloists were never less than engaging， and often rose to the occasion dramatically. Chinese Soprano Mu Yu and Singaporean baritone Martin Ng offered the duet “Lippen schweigen” from The Merry Widow （rendered in English as “I Love You So” to reflect the King’s attendance at Daly’s Theatre in London） with more charm than stylistic flair， though Ng and soprano Suchunya Tanvichien sang the “Madamigella Valéry” duet with enough intensity to suggest they’d just stepped out of a Traviata already in progress.

Concept and outcome came together most effectively in a lengthy distillation from Madama Butterfly， the show （and character） among the King’s operatic experiences that left the deepest impression. Chulalongkorn had attended the production at Paris’s Opéra-Comique， where Puccini himself had resurrected the show after its failed premiere at La Scala. In its new incarnation， director Albert Carré brought out not just the most recent Western theatrical advancements （such as then-modern stage lighting） but also the dignity of traditional Japanese culture. The King’s letters to his daughter contained not only a detailed synopsis of the plot but also his own reactions to the characters and the staging. （Note： This staging， originally introduced in 1906， was used at Opéra-Comique until 1972.）

The final segment of 1907 essentially became a showcase for Mu， who performed a series of the opera’s highlights， from the aria “Un bel di” to the duet“Ora a noi” to her final “Tu， tu piccolo iddio” （with support from Wattananontachai’s Pinkerton and Ng’s Sharpless）. Taken together， these musical snapshots provided an efficient and rewarding portrayal of Butterfly’s emotional arc.

Leaving the performance—and for several days after—I had two lasting impressions. The first was the visual intensity of Wongsathapornpat standing on the podium sideways， seamlessly leading the orchestra with one hand and the stage proceedings with the other. This was hardly optimal positioning， but probably not unlike many productions in the days before modern orchestra pits， or monitor screens where performers on stage could follow the conductor from different vantage points.

The evening’s emotional impact， however， was rather more subtle. Hearing two very different Asian generations offer their take on Western opera hardly refutated King Chulalongkorn’s doubts that the repertory would ever find an Asian audience. It was just that， as in many other fields， the King was a century or so ahead of his time.