# Has the Met Lost its Way?



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

I read from time to time that this one or that one thinks the Met has gone off the rails in recent years, and with productions like their recent Sonnambula or Tosca or Comte Ory, well, failed productions loom large in the operagoer's imagination. (I understand some people here probably loved one or another of those. Sorry.) I remember how anxiously I awaited Sonnambula, and how disappointing it was in practice. So I decided to go over the productions the Met has put on in the last four years and see if overall the image was a good one or not, for me. I think the result was pretty heartening.

Four productions I would class as best ever anywhere. Not because I've ever seen any other productions but because the mind boggles, trying to imagine the show better done. I understand: totally subjective and no foundation in empirical fact. No court would admit, etc etc. Those productions are: Barber of Seville, Madama Butterfly, Fille du Regiment, and Die Zauberflote.

Seven more: better than wonderful. I had a BUNCH in the wonderful class that I needed to bump up just because they were fantastic. These are: La Boheme, Contes d'Hoffmann, Elisir d'Amore (the older, Copley production), Hansel und Gretel, Iphigenie en Tauride, Orfeo et Eurydice, and Les Troyens.

Seventeen more: wonderful. Ballo in Maschera, Boris Godunov, Clemenza di Tito, Cosi fan tutte, Damnation de Faust, Elektra, Elisir d'Amore (Sher), Fanciulla del West, Faust, Lucia di Lammermoor, The Nose, Otello, Simon Boccanegra, Turandot, both Traviatas, and Il Trittico. If you've never seen Alessandro Corbelli leaping around on a bed, pretending to be missing a hand, you've missed something special. Or Danielle de Niese hauling the house onstage at the beginning of Cosi fan tutte.

I had seven more at "good" and 21 at "meh" - meaning somebody probably loved them but I didn't. On the dark side, only four got a "no" vote - Attila, Der Fliegende Hollander, Das Rheingold, and Tosca, and only two came in at "burn the sets" - From the House of the Dead and Nixon in China. (Greg ducks as pottery comes flying through the screen) - I know, some people loved Nixon in China. Sigh.

And there were a bunch more I didn't rate because I didn't see them.

But overall it's really very positive, isn't it? I think the only reason people get to thinking the Met has lost its way is the bad experiences just kind of take over, while the good ones roll off your back. Just part of the human makeup. Right?


----------



## Cavaradossi (Aug 2, 2012)

The remarkable part of the the statement: _"Of the 25 or so productions the Met puts on each year, there might be one or two clunkers" _is the not second half of the sentence but the first half.

And I'm going to assume you left this year's Parsifal off the "burn the sets" group only because someone appeared to have already done that before the show even opened. (Well that, and the Act II pool of 'blood' is inherently fireproof).


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Cavaradossi said:


> The remarkable part of the the statement: _"Of the 25 or so productions the Met puts on each year, there might be one or two clunkers" _is the not second half of the sentence but the first half.


Sorry, not getting your point here ... ?



> And I'm going to assume you left this year's Parsifal off the "burn the sets" group only because someone appeared to have already done that before the show even opened. (Well that, and the Act II pool of 'blood' is inherently fireproof).


lol no, I had Parsifal in the "meh" category because I know there are people who loved it. I think one or two even posted here about how much they loved it. I don't think that production was fatally flawed, just ... weird. "Burn the sets" is for productions I actively HATED. I mean, these sets (From the House of the Dead) could have kept someone warm for a few hours ...

Honestly, I think the Met right now is in a kind of golden age of opera production. (Not opera singing, unfortunately, but you work with what you got, and the greatest singers aren't singing right now.)


----------



## Cavaradossi (Aug 2, 2012)

guythegreg said:


> Sorry, not getting your point here ... ?


Hehe, I suppose you wouldn't, spoiled as you New Yorkers are. Look at your numbers from the point of view of someone here in Chicago, where we like to think of ourselves as an opera city too. You rated about 60 productions from the last four years, and mention a bunch more you didn't see.

Here in Chicago we get 7 or 8 productions a season from the Lyric, so the total of just your "good" and "meh" count is about equal to the Lyric's total output for the past four years. And we generally get 6 or 7 warhorses in safe and solid productions plus one "novelty" each season.

Put another way:
New Yorker: "Waaah, our 2010 Sonnambula with Dessay and JDF was substandard! Wahhh!" 
Chicagoan: "Bellini, you guys got Bellini? We haven't had Bellini in these parts since 2001." (Sad but true, with none on the horizon either.)


----------



## mamascarlatti (Sep 23, 2009)

Cavaradossi said:


> Here in Chicago we get 7 or 8 productions a season from the Lyric, so the total of just your "good" and "meh" count is about equal to the Lyric's total output for the past four years. And we generally get 6 or 7 warhorses in safe and solid productions plus one "novelty" each season.


And here it's 2 warhorses a year.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Cavaradossi said:


> New Yorker: "Waaah, our 2010 Sonnambula with Dessay and JDF was substandard! Wahhh!"


the production was **** but Dessay! I loved her in it


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Cavaradossi said:


> Hehe, I suppose you wouldn't, spoiled as you New Yorkers are. Look at your numbers from the point of view of someone here in Chicago, where we like to think of ourselves as an opera city too. You rated about 60 productions from the last four years, and mention a bunch more you didn't see.
> 
> Here in Chicago we get 7 or 8 productions a season from the Lyric, so the total of just your "good" and "meh" count is about equal to the Lyric's total output for the past four years. And we generally get 6 or 7 warhorses in safe and solid productions plus one "novelty" each season.
> 
> ...


Oh I see. lol sorry. But you know, I did actually move here for the opera, I can't really view it as that difficult a feat ... it's had its ups and downs but it's doable.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

To the extent that the MET is said to have lost its way, I think of the shopworn truism "in the Kingdom of the Blind, the one-eyed man is King." I won't disagree that many sets and staging have become increasingly (and, which is more, _pointlessly_) bizarre, that Levine's prolonged absence has decidedly NOT been to the benefit of the music, and that the MET's own business-practices [including the infamous 'Wagnerian Surcharge' and a mission-creep of shifting seats into increasing price-categories] leave one feeling that the MET is stuck in neutral, to use the most charitable possible standards.

However, what's the alternative? Houses that are a veritable Fresh Kills Landfill of Eurotrash? Places that have a reservations-and-seating policy more appropriate to the last Century than this one? Naah... practically in spite of themselves, the MET still appears, in my reasonably humble opinion, to be the world's premier opera house.


----------



## Cavaradossi (Aug 2, 2012)

guythegreg said:


> But you know, I did actually move here for the opera, I can't really view it as that difficult a feat ... it's had its ups and downs but it's doable.


Impressive! (And good to know it can be done.) Believe me, I'm closer to that feat than you think. More on that as things develop. As it stands, I'll probably end up seeing more productions at the Met this year than the Lyric. Right now its 5 and 5, but the season ain't over yet.


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Chi_townPhilly said:


> ... "in the Kingdom of the Blind, the one-eyed man is King."




An interesting view of it!



> ... many sets and staging have become increasingly (and, which is more, _pointlessly_) bizarre ...


examples, por favor?



> ... Levine's prolonged absence has decidedly NOT been to the benefit of the music ...


100% agreed - it's amazing to me, how firm a hand a world class orchestra like the Met's needs. Although, like everyone else, they seem to rise to the occasion when there's an HD Live broadcast, or such has been my sense.



> ... practically in spite of themselves, the MET still appears, in my reasonably humble opinion, to be the world's premier opera house.


A backhanded compliment, but one I gratefully accept on the Met's behalf!


----------



## guythegreg (Jun 15, 2012)

Cavaradossi said:


> Impressive! (And good to know it can be done.) Believe me, I'm closer to that feat than you think. More on that as things develop. As it stands, I'll probably end up seeing more productions at the Met this year than the Lyric. Right now its 5 and 5, but the season ain't over yet.


How wonderful! And you won't just have the Met, of course ... there's City Opera, and Julliard, Mannes, and a surprising number of smaller opera companies here scattered hither and yon, not to mention concert opera productions at Carnegie Hall a few times a year. So there's much to look forward to if you can manage it. Good luck with it.


----------



## Albert7 (Nov 16, 2014)

The Met for me is still thriving rather well in fact. Their productions are top notch and haven't gone as much off the rails like La Scala.

Honestly, I wish that New York City Opera were still around.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Yes the Tosca and Sonnambula (and even that Lucia where the ghost of Lucia decides that Edgardo isn't man enough to do the deed and comes back to urge him on) were stinkers but what company doesn't always have one or two that are not up to snuff?
People aren't happy unless they have something to bitch about, dontcha know.
Let us be grateful and give thanks for the Metropolitan Opera!


----------



## DonAlfonso (Oct 4, 2014)

guythegreg said:


> "Burn the sets" is for productions I actively HATED. I mean, these sets (From the House of the Dead) could have kept someone warm for a few hours ...


Maybe they could do it in their next production of La Boheme and save Rodolfo's masterpiece.


----------



## Gaspard de la Nuit (Oct 20, 2014)

Act 2 of Parsifal was pretty engaging visually, though the other two weren't.......LePage's Ring just wasn't impressive enough to merit such a huge price tag.


----------



## nina foresti (Mar 11, 2014)

Gaspard de la Nuit said:


> Act 2 of Parsifal was pretty engaging visually, though the other two weren't.......LePage's Ring just wasn't impressive enough to merit such a huge price tag.


Agree. Parsifal aside, that LePage Ring was an abomination of ego trips in full force.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

At least the Met has never done anything as perversely atrocious as the productions done all the time in Europe, especially Hermany .
If you think the recent Met Ring was bad ,it was still vastly 
preferable to the disgusting pne at Bayreuth for the Wagner bicentennial, which was was partly set in the Republic of Azebaijan on the Caspian sea ? and which also featured a communist Mt. Rushmore of Mao, Stalin et al !!!!!
Actually , I rather liked the Met Ring, which while not perfect , was still fresh and exciting . 
Or how about the Tannhauser in Dusseldorf recently , which 
was set in the Nazi era and featured peopel being led to execution by the Nazis ? There was so much audience oonjection on the
opening night that the rest of the performances were done in concert form !
Wagner isn't spinning in his grave at Bayreuth - he's shooting out of it like a rocket !


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

The Met Falstaff was brilliant! Wonderful evening.
the Boheme was OK like the Mastersingers but they need freshening up a bit.
I must say though I prefer the Met to some of the appalling stuff from the ROH and Glyndebourne recently. Hopeless!


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

DavidA said:


> The Met Falstaff was brilliant! Wonderful evening.


This one?










.............................


----------



## Loge (Oct 30, 2014)

superhorn said:


> At least the Met has never done anything as perversely atrocious as the productions done all the time in Europe, especially Hermany .
> If you think the recent Met Ring was bad ,it was still vastly
> preferable to the disgusting pne at Bayreuth for the Wagner bicentennial, which was was partly set in the Republic of Azebaijan on the Caspian sea ? and which also featured a communist Mt. Rushmore of Mao, Stalin et al !!!!!
> Actually , I rather liked the Met Ring, which while not perfect , was still fresh and exciting .
> ...


I agree, out off all the Ring productions in the World I would like to see the Mets' ( apart from the Seattle Ring which is very traditional, but can't get the singers). The Met Ring got me into Wagner, I saw it at a cinema in England over two weeks, so I respect it.

But the main problem, is the Met Opera Director Peter Gelb. I agree with what he says, but I don't like the way he says it. He lacks the common touch. His Live broadcasts have been a success,,and yet, because of his cold character he can't promote live Opera! Which is a shame because live performances is where it is at. The Pop music industry relies on on concerts nowadays, so Gleb should be exploiting this to pull the punters in.

This is sad, because live, unamplified music will be very attractive to the public who are brought up on CD or Video.


----------

