Got a call the other day from someone representing the Metropolitan Opera: they were promoting both expanded and new technologies (and seeking donations, of course). The biggest technological leap was the broadcasting of some of this season's performances in Live HD, to various Theaters across the country. I visited this site and searched the theaters, hoping to find one in the Metro. My hope was in vain. However, they are being screened in Tulsa (Cinemark Tulsa, 10802 E. 71st Street South). Frustrating, but a good excuse to visit Tulsa once again.

I immediately attributed the choice of venues as yet another indication of at least a perceived lack of interest in high-culture in the OKC Metro. However, perhaps there are technical, rather than cultural, reasons? Even if that's the case, it's still sad: why should Tulsa have technology that her big sister lacks?

Or perhaps the Tulsa Opera worked with the Met to make it happen? I have no idea how the Opera is doing in Tulsa. However, if they're doing well, then there's a solid, ready-made audience available.

Well, at least it's being screened somewhere closeby. I'm a Puccini fan, and Il Trittico will be performed on the 28th of April. I'll head to Tulsa for a few days and see the sights, along with a bit of Opera.

Not quite the same but I wonder if they knew the Trans-Siberian Orchestra was completely sold out? I consider that an interest in 'high-culture'.

Maybe not the Opera but culture nonetheless. It wasn't the Truck Pulls, lol ...

__________________
" You've Been Thunder Struck ! "

First, let me go on record an emphasize that an opera, orchestra or ballet is not culture. It is an attribute of culture. A city with a diverse ethnic population is a city that has culture. The symphonies and festivals are attributes of culture, and Oklahoma City has plenty of it.

I will concede, however, that Oklahoma City does not have an opera. I'm not sure the reason behind that, but I doubt that a lack of interest has to do with that. But instead of taking the initiative to start an opera, Oklahoma Citians are enticed to Tulsa or Dallas to see the opera.

Likewise, Tulsa's orchestra, I believe, ran into serious trouble recently and went defunct. I am not sure if anyone bailed out the orchestra there, but what does that say about Tulsa? Tulsans have been strong supporters of the opera. But why revel over new technology and watch a simulcast of the opera when I'd rather be there in person? I'm afraid I'm not impressed.

But the true hardcore fact of life is this...

Not matter what Oklahoma City does, no matter how much we change, or how fast we grow, or what new attractions we will have to offer in the near future... or even how "cultured" we are, Tulsa will always look down on us. Always. No matter what. Heck, I knew a few Tulsans who lived in OKC for a while that didn't know we even had a ballet company, much less a venue with class (Civic Center Music Hall). That's how they see us. Just like how the British see the Irish. That will never change.

__________________
Continue the Renaissance!!!
www.okcpulse.net

I think it's simply that Tulsa has a full-time opera company, which Oklahoma City doesn't, and the Met surely is aware of that.

My girlfriend is an Opera singer. She has an audition for the Met in Tulsa next month.

There is plenty of Opera in Norman for anyone that is interested.

When I lived in OKC, I went frequently.

Trans-Siberian Orchestra is pure schlock, crap. It's not culture, it's crap disguised as culture.

Tulsa had two orchestras, the larger one went bankrupt several years ago, the smaller one remained as a pops type orchestra. Tulsa has a new full time classical orcheastra again now.

Tulsa Opera again is a top ten regional Opera, and Tulsa Ballet has been reviewed as one of the best in the world.

You can compare your offerings all you want, it gets tiring.

I would guess you don't have this offering from the Met is simply because Tulsa has an IMAX theater and OKC does not. Nothing more or less than that.

Lyric Theatre is one of the top 10 regional musical theatres. Go to sleep.

Yet, you do exactly that in your post.

OKC has an IWERKS theater. Tulsa does not.

__________________
Continue the Renaissance!!!
www.okcpulse.net

Now, is this a constant, year after year review? Because if I recall, in the OKC Zoo thread, you disregarded our zoo being one of the top ten in the nation simply because you claimed the cited source was hardly an expert source.

__________________
Continue the Renaissance!!!
www.okcpulse.net

Point being that OKC sold out over 19K tickets to see what many people do perceive as 'culture'. The market is viable and welcoming for whatever art expression or venue that comes here to OKC. The Opera would have been just as much a success here, if not more so, than in Tulsa.

What qualifies a person to judge what 'culture is and isn't'? Are you a musician? An artist? Even if you are, it means different things to different people.

Musicians who study, learn, practice and perform to sold out crowds across the world most certainly aren't 'crap' just because the performance is not to your taste.

__________________
" You've Been Thunder Struck ! "

I made no statements of comparison, I said nothing to compare or contrast Tulsa’s arts offerings to what Oklahoma City had to offer, you may have inferred a comparison, but I made none.

I really only posted to let you know the status of Orchestras in Tulsa, which have had a hard time here. And to let you know that I think the reason that Cinemark in Tulsa got the Met performance has nothing to do with something that is lacking in the arts community in Oklahoma City.

That theater in Tulsa is an IMAX theater. That’s why the show is on there, period. If you had an IMAX, it’s likely you would have the show too. That was not meant as an insult, quite the opposite actually, just a statement that I don’t see the lack of a showing in Oklahoma City as a statement of anything more than you don’t have a theater with the IMAX format.

As for attributions, Tulsa Opera’s rating as a top regional Opera, I have read before in the World and in other publication, the only attribution that I can find right now is on their own website. I said nothing about the Lyric, but I do notice that they claim to be the only professional musical theater in Oklahoma, and that is not true. They really should consider Discoveryland before making that statement.

And really, are you going to compare Musicals to Opera?

Lastly, what I said about the Trans Crap is not an insult to Oklahoma City, it’s meant to give my opinion of that group, which is a pretty widely held opinion. It’s overdone prog rock attempting to pass itself off as fine art. It’s so saccerine it makes my stomach ache.

If you want to comment on the classic music scene, let me remind you that the MULTIPLE orchestras in OKC are recognized as in the top tier of the regional orchestras (in which OKC and Tulsa lie since neither city is Boston or Chicago)... The Philharmonic, Pops, Children's Series, Lyric, not to mention the multiple local groups like the OKC Community Bands and Chamber groups.

Let's check again in 5-10 years and see if the opera is still around. The average age of a operagoer at the Met is over 65 as told by their recent simulcast information. They are spreading the feeders to new territory because they need money. If the MET needs to find new revenue, I don't think the Tulsa Opera will stand much of a chance once the old folks kick the bucket. The main point, younger folks just aren't interested in it anymore. Fortunately for the OKC Phil, the auidence has stayed broad in age and so has the performers.

I don't see any reason why anyone would expect every attraction in Tulsa to be in Oklahoma City as well. It wouldn't even make sense to do that in most cases. They just aren’t big enough or far enough apart to warrant duplicating everything in each city.

Besides, Oklahoma City has had several art attractions, be they performances, showings, or traveling exhibits that did not and will not visit Tulsa, as well. Tulsa in no way upstages Oklahoma City in its overall art offerings and I'd say that the local art scene is much better and better supported in Oklahoma City. Tulsa has had a longer tradition with classic arts and probably has a better reputation overall, but I think the diversity is better in Oklahoma City, which, as an artist/musician and with lots of friends in the Oklahoma state art scene, I happen to enjoy more than what I have experienced in Tulsa and from what I have been told by artists who have worked in both cities.

Oklahoma City is in no way starved for art, be it "classic" or local art, and Tulsa has many art events that make it worth visiting. But I do think both cities could use more and could use more support, but they are small markets and, even in big cities, art is often a struggling (and money losing) proposition that has to be subsidized by the city and/or rich local "angels". As a result, both markets tend to compliment each other more than they compete with each other (ok, Tulsa is always competing with OKC for perception, but once you get over that, both have a respectable amount of art and art events to experience).

So, in opera’s case, you might have to make the short drive to Tulsa, but that in no way means that there isn’t plenty to do at home either.

Well said BDP. I think it's great how complimentary Tulsa and OKC can be sometimes when we avoid being so competitive.

I actually agree with SWAKE (the bold part). OKC was not considered because OKC doesn't have an IMAX and Tulsa does.

while sometimes OKCans are a bit "touchy" and don't fully read things - it just shows you the complex OKC has from Tulsa.

Thanks for setting us straight SWAKE, but I think the BOLD was the most valuable thing you said concerning this thread.

__________________
Oklahoma City, RENAISSANCE CITY!

So swake, having an IMAX is culture but Cirque de Soleil is not? How does that figure. And as someone mentioned, OKC has an IWERKS theatre, very similar.

I don't think he was saying that the IMAX is culture, but simply that it is the kind of theatre they are showing this on, and we don't have one. Yes, IWERKS is a large-format theatre, but requires a completely different print. It's a dome, as I'm sure you know.

So yeah, I think Swake is right in that regard.

You are a complete moron, you know that right?


It is meaningless which city has IMAX, it has nothing to do with culture. Learn to read. Tulsa has this show due to IMAX, period, it means nothing.

Swake, I understand your frustration, and I agree with you on many levels. But please, no personal attacks. Thank you.

__________________
Continue the Renaissance!!!
www.okcpulse.net

So this is just an IMAX product?

Anyway, a lot of people don't understand that IMAX is a vertically integrated company that does its own production. If only non-morons understood that, then there would be a lot of morons.

But wait, there are a lot of morons... oh well.

Tulsa does have an IWERKS now.
TASM Planetarium with ESky™ Theater

Yes swake I'm a moron, you're always right, Tulsa rules the U.S. , and the world makes sense again. That's why you spend so much time on a site about OKC.

Yeah, sure is a lot of time to post 80 times in six months, as compared to your 3000 in 26 months.

Boo hoo, you hurt my feelings