|
|
Post by Natasha on Mar 24, 2009 20:37:51 GMT
 As with most of my favorite artists, I remember hearing and either forgetting or disliking Deanna Durbin. However through my friend Jennie, I was introduced to her again, and I must say she has made quite the impression!  I am surprised she hasn't merited her own thread before this, but for those who don't know her yet, here are some samples of what you've been missing! "Spring in my Heart" Age 17- www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ipoo1lKZkc"Largo Al Factotum"- www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mol_ttm6uVI"Loch Lomond" Age 18- www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjgs3pj_38k"Nessun Dorma"- www.youtube.com/watch?v=inV3RlOTOXM"The Turntable Song" www.youtube.com/watch?v=GR6wfJ4SyrQJust search youtube and you will find dozens more!  I know I'm just a student with much to learn, but I would say that I believe this is the most mature and impressive voice I have ever heard on a singer of this age, and from what I can tell with my limited knowledge, her technique seems flawless! I read that opera singers like Kiri te Kanawa have actually been trained to sound like her, and from what I've read at least, opera fans seem to enjoy her which is rare. Apperantly the MET was after her to sing for years as well! She has many delightful films available to see as well, I've seen 5 so far and am astounded at her talent. Of course, I'm a huge fan of that time period in general, and I love the wholesomeness yet maturity she brings to her roles... and yes I do know I am gushing quite a bit, but I am just so excited about discovering her music (my sister not so much, she'd prefer I wasn't listening to so many arias, lol) and she is certainly a new inspiration to me and a positive role model as well. I think she provides a good example of what is possible to young singers, and I respect her even more for retiring and being able to have a family life. So enough of what I think. Any other fans?  |
|
|
|
Post by Natasha on Mar 24, 2009 20:42:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by comet on Mar 24, 2009 22:41:57 GMT
yep ! my mum sang these songs when I was a kid. What an unfortunate lifestyle choice though, such a pity  |
|
|
|
Post by Natasha on Mar 25, 2009 1:24:16 GMT
What an unfortunate lifestyle choice though, such a pity How so?  |
|
|
|
Post by comet on Mar 25, 2009 8:45:50 GMT
What an unfortunate lifestyle choice though, such a pity How so? OOps ! My mistake ! I was thinking of Judy Garland. |
|
|
|
Post by fusilier23 on Mar 25, 2009 23:34:03 GMT
Eh, although she may have had the range and talent of a legitimate lyric soprano and enthralled one voice teacher to make some other singers try to imitate her, she is actually a textbook example of the limits of the angel/princess tintype. Her work consisted largely of sugar-sweet musicals that don't even turn up anymore on AMC or TCM, and her two attempts at serious dramatic acting were not well-received. She also didn't fulfill her professional obligations, in fact she was paid for three movies that were never made because she fled to Paris and refused to do any further work.
I'd hardly call her a role model, married three times before the age of 28, once at 20 which lasted 2 years, then fleeing the industry for an extreme reclusivity in which she granted one interview in fifty years and turned down offers until they stopped coming. I'm all for raising a family and for retiring when you've done your time, but forgive me for saying there's nothing great about slamming the door on the whole world to do it.
Deanna Durbin's nothing more than a 1940s relic, with no relevance nor continuing influence now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Natasha on Mar 26, 2009 0:35:46 GMT
Wow, that is quite a harsh assessment of a young girl, who undoubtedly made mistakes but then, don't we all? Deanna said she didn't like Hollywood, and although she was a huge star and brought joy to many people, I respect her for deciding what was right for her. So many child prodigies lives have ended tragically, and I'm proud that Deanna had the opportunity to be "normal" and private since that's what she wanted. My sister is an example of another incredibly gifted person, who also prefers her privacy and I admire and respect her for staying true to herself. Also I whole-heartedly disagree with the statement that Deanna has "no relevance nor continuing influence now." Her following may not be as great as her contemporary, but just the sheer number of comments and videos of her available on youtube, proves that people are still being blessed by her beautiful voice. There is also still a "Deanna Durbin society" and Deanna herself has been active in responding to her fan's mail. I admire Deanna immensely and would be proud to follow in her footsteps, and am sure other young singers would benefit from listening to her. p.s Here's a picture of her with her special Oscar award!  |
|
|
|
Post by fusilier23 on Mar 26, 2009 1:56:19 GMT
Anyone can listen to a recording from years ago, and anyone can post a video on youtube. As I pointed out, every child today can hum Judy Garland's "Somewhere Over the Rainbow," as could the generation before them and the generation before that, and every generation to come. Joe Average isn't even going to know who Deanna Durbin was, leave alone know any of her films. There is not a single song which is immediately identified with her. At best, she is a niche interest.
It's one thing to be normal and private, we all want some time in our lives to just be ourselves, I myself like some time when I'm not "the voice of the City." But, I was also taught from early on in life that your talents mean nothing if you don't use them, and I'm in a field where you're only as good as your last success, and you don't get to rest on your laurels. Most fields today are that way. Slowing down is one thing, but shutting out the world is extreme. If that was her thing, then fine, but I can't applaud it nor grasp why anyone would. Anyway, the woman's 87 years old and probably due to die soon, but she died to the world 59 years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by chantelle on Mar 26, 2009 3:38:29 GMT
Aren't you being a bit bull-headed and narrow-minded about this, Steven?
Deana Durbin, like Louise Brooks, Martin and Lewis as a team, and countless others, simply decided to call it quits while she was still at the top of her game. She gave great pleasure to the society she lived in, then decided to give herself some pleasure before 'going through the ropes.' (like the champion Joe Louis in his last fight) That she did so completely and irrevocably is a testament to her determination and dedication to a new direction for her life. Would you rather she had wallowed in her past glories, discussing the same triumphs over and over with the press until the whole thing became a tragic farce, rather than a tribute to her talent? She let her work be her legacy, rather than a series of winding-down interviews reflecting on her work "after the fact." Because how long would the press be interested, after all? Isn't part of her intrigue the very fact that she did become a 'recluse'-- though I can't say I care for that word.
And are you saying that if talent isn't in the spotlight-- it's not legitimate? I think the thousands of qualified, skilled music teachers/professors (who are not only talented but kind, generious, and self-sacrificing) across the country would find fault with that statement.
And I think most human beings, talented or not, would disagree with your thought that just because a talented individual doesn't have a desire to be working as a performer, they may as well be dead! That was a cold, hard thing to say, and my heart breaks for Deanna.
A talent is not a commodity that you owe to the world-- it's a gift some are blessed with, and if they choose to make it a public part of their life, so be it. If not, they have every right to make that decision!
While any child may be able to "hum" "Over the Rainbow," (though I suspect that is an exaggeration) and may possibly even be able to identify it with The Wizard of Oz, that child is NOT going to know who Judy Garland is. As a huge Judy fan, I know what I'm talking about-- I try to discuss Judy with my peers, and the younger children I know. They don't have a clue who she is, aside from a very vague notion of "that girl in The Wizard of Oz."
I say that to point out that hardly any star from that era is a "household name" any more-- with the exceptions of, say, Marilyn Monroe and Frank Sinatra (and hardly even Frank, I'm sad to say!).
"Young people", with exceptions such as Natasha and myself, do not know about the stars from 20 years ago, much less 60 or 70-- so anyone who is familiar with Frank, Judy, et all, is likely to be moderately familiar with Deanna as well.
And I'm sorry, but I resent the slight on Judy Garland. Any choices Judy made personally for herself were good choices. But when you're thirteen years old and your own mother is practically force-feeding you sleeping pills and diet pills and "pep" pills you don't have complete control over the path your life is going to take! Judy was a very strong woman who had her weak points, as we all do, and those weak points were exploited by her own family and the people she worked with.
Finally, Steven, think about what you're saying for a minute.
The similarities between Deanna and Hayley are startling-- both are, in your own words, "angel/princess tintype"s. Would a "dramatic" effort by Hayley be taken seriously? Maybe by a few die-hard fans, but by the general public? No, she is too "sugary-sweet."
Consider Hayley in 60 years-- what do you expect? That she WILL be Marilyn Monroe, an 'idol' to young girls across the world for generations to come? Judging from this point in Hayley's career, that's not going to happen unless something drastic changes! Continuing down her current paht, in 60 years Hayley too will be a "relic."
"That girl who sang 'Pokarekare Ana'."
And finally, others are free to correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Hayley herself said that she does not necessarily want to "do music" for the rest of her life? That it's fine "for the time being," but that there are more important things to her than a show-biz career?
I rest my case.
(edited for typo)
|
|
|
|
Post by stevemacdonald on Mar 26, 2009 8:05:51 GMT
... The similarities between Deanna and Hayley are startling... Heh, did anybody bother to read the Wiki on Deanna?: Durbin is perhaps best known for her singing voice—a voice described variously as light but full, sweet, unaffected and artless. With the technical skill and vocal range of a legitimate lyric soprano, she performed everything from popular standards to operatic arias. Dame Sister Mary Leo in New Zealand was so taken with Durbin's technique that she trained all her students to sing in this way. Sister Mary Leo produced a large number of famous sopranos including Dames Malvina Major and Kiri Te Kanawa, all of whom were said to sound like her.(Full article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deanna_Durbin ) |
|
|
|
Post by nicola on Mar 26, 2009 8:45:38 GMT
Wizard of Oz was on the other day, and I had to ask my parents who the actress was who played her, and I'm 24. I had heard of Judy Garland, and I had a vague notion that she died young, but if her name ever came up, she was interchangable with all the other goldie oldies of the hey days. I know who Marilyn Monroe is (obviously) but ask me what films she was in and I can't name a single one. I just know her as an icon, and she had an affair with J.F. Kennedy.
Ignorance, yes, but when and why would any of these celebrities from 5 decades before I was born cross my path? They were not relevent to my education, and they are not relevent to any of my interests. Perhaps it's different in America where there is not so much ground in history lessons to cover and the rise of Hollywood and its stars is important, but we don't give the topic a first glance over here, unless, I guess, if you take a degree in media or history. My degree was in English, and whilst some modules did require us to watch a few old films (12 Angry Men, To Kill A Mockingbird, It's A Wonderful Life) I still didn't take any notice of the performers. The actors were the least of our concern watching those films.
Steve, it's your way or the highway isn't it? No empathy, no appreciation for different backgrounds, values, and priorities, it's just your way. If it's not the Steve code, they're not worth any time.
I applaud her. I imagine I would have done the same - it matches my personality. I would never, ever want to be a celebrity. It doesn't matter how much you are paid, no money can make up for the removal of your private life, stalkers, constant lies in the papers, being paranoid of any new persons intentions towards you, etc. It sounds like my own personal hell, and I can grasp why anyone would want out. It was her own decision, and it was nobody's business but her own.
|
|
|
|
Post by fusilier23 on Mar 26, 2009 11:45:21 GMT
Hmmm, touchy, aren't we? It's indicative of weakness in your own position when you resort to name-calling (bull-headed, narrow-minded), but that's fine, I've been called a lot worse.
When did I say it would be preferable for anyone to wallow in past glories? I specifically said you CAN'T rest on your laurels. You're supposed to BUILD on past glories, and move on to the next project, and the next, and the next, and the one after that. I had a HUGE victory in a very challenging case in January, but that doesn't mean I'm somehow a made man and don't have to keep trying. Most folks in the real world have to prove themselves every day, and the minute you stop doing that, you lose your relevance.
I find no intrigue in the fact that someone chose to become a recluse, to me that's just something worthy of a shrug of the shoulders before you move on.
And when did I say if talent isn't in the spotlight it's not legitimate? I said if talent isn't USED it doesn't mean anything. Please tell me what the value of a great singer is if she doesn't sing a note? What is the value of a great writer if he never puts pen to paper? What is the value of a great doctor who never treats a patient?
And tell me, Chantelle, ever hear the adage "from those to whom much is given, much is expected?"
BTW, Nicola, you just proved my point when you asked why any of these old-time celebs should cross your path. Those who actually accomplished something should, whether it be actually producing a "film for the ages" like Rod Steiger and Sidney Poitier in "In the Heat of the Night," or Judy Garland in The Wizard of Oz, or just keeping people entertained till their talent tapped itself out like Errol Flynn. Why anyone would go searching for a perfomer who vanished long ago and pronounce her an inspiration when she has inspired nothing for over 50 years is beyond me. Actually I think I know why in this case, but that would lead me into personal attacks that don't belong on this board.
I rest MY case.
|
|
|
|
Post by chantelle on Mar 26, 2009 12:01:28 GMT
Most folks in the real world have to prove themselves every day, and the minute you stop doing that, you lose your relevance. Lose your relevance to who? I bet Deanna's family and close friends thought she was pretty relevant!! Who cares what fans and studio executives thought, as long as Deanna and the people who came in contact with her in daily life were happy? And when did I say if talent isn't in the spotlight it's not legitimate? I said if talent isn't USED it doesn't mean anything. Please tell me what the value of a great singer is if she doesn't sing a note? What is the value of a great writer if he never puts pen to paper? What is the value of a great doctor who never treats a patient? The value is this-- that before and after any of those people are singers, writers, or doctors, they are human beings. Plain and simple. And when they cease to sing, write, and treat patients they remain human beings. How can you deny the right of a free individual to decide what they want to do with their life? And how do you know Deanna never again used her talent? It may not have been broadcast to the world, but do you honestly think she never sang another note in her life? And tell me, Chantelle, ever hear the adage "from those to whom much is given, much is expected?" I most certainly have, but tell me this: Who was the one who did the giving? Did "the people" give Deanna Durbin her voice? No, so Deanna certainly did not owe it to the people to give them her voice. Why anyone would go searching for a perfomer who vanished long ago and pronounce her an inspiration when she has inspired nothing for over 50 years is beyond me. Inspired nothing? How can this thread be in existence if Deanna has "inspired nothing"? Not to mention the very relevant quote from the wikipedia article. Deanna may not have 'crossed everyone's path' but she has had a positive influence on many of the people who have discovered her work, and since when is that anything to sneeze at?! You can't deny that she has a legacy, however small, and as long as people are interested in the arts and in history there will be those, however few, who appreciate and are inspired by Deanna Durbin. |
|
|
|
Post by nicola on Mar 26, 2009 13:55:39 GMT
Rod Steiger and Sidney Poitier Who are they? So, if I have never heard of the person, anything they did the past means nothing? Is that what you're saying? It's only the icons that "accomplished" anything? Wow. |
|
|
|
Post by postscript on Mar 26, 2009 19:19:18 GMT
... The similarities between Deanna and Hayley are startling... Heh, did anybody bother to read the Wiki on Deanna?: ...Dame Sister Mary Leo in New Zealand was so taken with Durbin's technique that she trained all her students to sing in this way. Sister Mary Leo produced a large number of famous sopranos including Dames Malvina Major and Kiri Te Kanawa, all of whom were said to sound like her.(Full article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deanna_Durbin ) That is very interesting, Steve as I consider both Malvina Major and Kiri te Kinawa to have totally different voices--and I have heard them both live. Perhaps time has enhanced the difference between them. I am aware they both know each other and are reported as contemporary friends. Peter S. |
|
I am surprised she hasn't merited her own thread before this, but for those who don't know her yet, here are some samples of what you've been missing! 
I know I'm just a student with much to learn, but I would say that I believe this is the most mature and impressive voice I have ever heard on a singer of this age, and from what I can tell with my limited knowledge, her technique seems flawless! I read that opera singers like Kiri te Kanawa have actually been trained to sound like her, and from what I've read at least, opera fans seem to enjoy her which is rare. Apperantly the MET was after her to sing for years as well!
