Readers' Forum
“Parsifal and the Parsis”
Freddie Desai’s article "Parsifal and the Parsis” (Parsiana, October 7, 2013) on Robert Wagner’s opera invites a partly tongue-in-cheek response. He has expressed his original fancy that "perhaps one day somebody will produce Parsifal with Parsi costumes and fire temple settings.”
Robert Wagner: "Parsifal with Parsi costumes?"
Diligent readers of Parsiana’s excellent reportages on daft, daring and dirty doings, with subscribers’ occasional pleas for some humor, must have long realized that every issue has unfailingly given us constant dosages of belly-laughs with such narratives.
Let me start: A fresh series of Parsi-fool species of nataks by Waghmar is already in production, for example, Lohraspin, Tahmurauser, Tehmtan and Sillamai, and of course, Parsi-fool (which will last for five full non-stop days as a special gahanbar with incidental/accidental music). All are to be staged in Waras-baug, Vinas-baug and Nahn-baug. We have lots of minnesingers (poet-musicians in German) and meistersingers (master singers in German) — armies of them, in fact.
May I pull Desai up on his comments relating to nirang; Gamuret/Gehmuret (who he wrongly claims is the first man created, according to our scriptures); Jewry and Wagner’s alleged anti-Semitism; mathabanoo (head covering); and fire temple?
Nirang is definitely not as Desai understands it. It is not cattle urine, but a religious formula. We have our nirang-i kushti bastan and gasanig nirang, neither having anything to do with "golden water.” He is getting mixed up with long-standing Parsi distortions arising from disinformation through indifference and ignorance. Cattle urine is gao.maeza/gomez, dastshoi, maesman, tarro, describing stages of consecration. Zarathushtra disparaged it as muthra- ("filth; excrement”), and had very likely applied that pejorative to its gross misuse as some ritual enhancer. It may have been haoma /hom/soma, though what it was in his time is anyone’s inspired guess. The content of Parsifal’s Grail (a Teutonic Christian re-working) was undoubtedly the ritual hom-nu-pani and not the cleansing cattle urine — both of which are golden.
Desai’s Gehmuret could only have originated in Gayomard, the first man created, implying either life-and-death/ mortality, or cow/bull-man (with reference to the Bundahishn’s first chapter). However embarrassingly naive it may seem, this part of the original creation myth has depth and appropriateness for an agro-pastoral society.
The debate on Wagner’s alleged anti-Semitism, like the swings of a pendulum, remains unresolved, yet predictable. It was apro Zubin Mehta who bravely overcame the cultural bias against Wagner — in Israel itself! Think also of the famed critic William Mann who went ballistic over repeated performances and recordings of Carl Orff’s Carmina Burana because of the composer’s association with the Nazi Party. Our Abrahamic friends are ever quick to display sensitivity at every cultural juncture.
Regarding the mathabanoo, whilst Wagner’s Flying Dutchman, Tannhauser, Lohengrin and Parsifal are founded on the morality or otherwise of sacred and profane love, the temptresses are depicted in various stages of dishabille (loose, careless and revealing clothing) while the true loves are modestly attired. Therefore, when we cast our Parsi equivalents of Holda/Hilla, or Kundry/Kumibai, etc, they would be kitted out in the style of the salacious ZYNG calendar girls. That’s why mathabanoos are out!
Fire temples as "staging-posts” is a great idea, but which dhongi faction will permit shriekers (sopranos), bellowers (heldentenors) and bleaters (bass-baritones) to enter them, howsoever clad? [Incidentally, the operas of Rameau and Mozart — both of whose works figure "Zoroastre” and "Sarastro” — were set (staged) in sacred spaces.]
Here’s a warning by way of bonus. The Russian composer Ivan Vyshnegradsky, undoubtedly a musical assassin, scored a "Zoroastr” for four pianos. The piece, which I have hitherto managed to avoid, was described as "a prolonged dizzy spell!” FARROKH VAJIFDAR
London
f.vajifdar@btinternet.com
Let me start: A fresh series of Parsi-fool species of nataks by Waghmar is already in production, for example, Lohraspin, Tahmurauser, Tehmtan and Sillamai, and of course, Parsi-fool (which will last for five full non-stop days as a special gahanbar with incidental/accidental music). All are to be staged in Waras-baug, Vinas-baug and Nahn-baug. We have lots of minnesingers (poet-musicians in German) and meistersingers (master singers in German) — armies of them, in fact.
May I pull Desai up on his comments relating to nirang; Gamuret/Gehmuret (who he wrongly claims is the first man created, according to our scriptures); Jewry and Wagner’s alleged anti-Semitism; mathabanoo (head covering); and fire temple?
Nirang is definitely not as Desai understands it. It is not cattle urine, but a religious formula. We have our nirang-i kushti bastan and gasanig nirang, neither having anything to do with "golden water.” He is getting mixed up with long-standing Parsi distortions arising from disinformation through indifference and ignorance. Cattle urine is gao.maeza/gomez, dastshoi, maesman, tarro, describing stages of consecration. Zarathushtra disparaged it as muthra- ("filth; excrement”), and had very likely applied that pejorative to its gross misuse as some ritual enhancer. It may have been haoma /hom/soma, though what it was in his time is anyone’s inspired guess. The content of Parsifal’s Grail (a Teutonic Christian re-working) was undoubtedly the ritual hom-nu-pani and not the cleansing cattle urine — both of which are golden.
Desai’s Gehmuret could only have originated in Gayomard, the first man created, implying either life-and-death/ mortality, or cow/bull-man (with reference to the Bundahishn’s first chapter). However embarrassingly naive it may seem, this part of the original creation myth has depth and appropriateness for an agro-pastoral society.
The debate on Wagner’s alleged anti-Semitism, like the swings of a pendulum, remains unresolved, yet predictable. It was apro Zubin Mehta who bravely overcame the cultural bias against Wagner — in Israel itself! Think also of the famed critic William Mann who went ballistic over repeated performances and recordings of Carl Orff’s Carmina Burana because of the composer’s association with the Nazi Party. Our Abrahamic friends are ever quick to display sensitivity at every cultural juncture.
Regarding the mathabanoo, whilst Wagner’s Flying Dutchman, Tannhauser, Lohengrin and Parsifal are founded on the morality or otherwise of sacred and profane love, the temptresses are depicted in various stages of dishabille (loose, careless and revealing clothing) while the true loves are modestly attired. Therefore, when we cast our Parsi equivalents of Holda/Hilla, or Kundry/Kumibai, etc, they would be kitted out in the style of the salacious ZYNG calendar girls. That’s why mathabanoos are out!
Fire temples as "staging-posts” is a great idea, but which dhongi faction will permit shriekers (sopranos), bellowers (heldentenors) and bleaters (bass-baritones) to enter them, howsoever clad? [Incidentally, the operas of Rameau and Mozart — both of whose works figure "Zoroastre” and "Sarastro” — were set (staged) in sacred spaces.]
Here’s a warning by way of bonus. The Russian composer Ivan Vyshnegradsky, undoubtedly a musical assassin, scored a "Zoroastr” for four pianos. The piece, which I have hitherto managed to avoid, was described as "a prolonged dizzy spell!” FARROKH VAJIFDAR
London
f.vajifdar@btinternet.com
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive