# The Most Exasperating Development In Today's Opera World



## Xavier (Jun 7, 2012)

I could not agree more with Lyn Gardner:



> Opera is an art form that combines many disciplines: visual arts, acting, singing, directing, lighting and design. Reviews need, rightly, to critique all these factors - yet for a while now reviews of productions I've attended concern themselves _nearly exclusively_ with a detailed analysis of the director's conception of the drama.
> 
> Why has music taken a back seat?
> 
> Has the pendulum swung too far? Are opera and its critics focused too much on staging and dramaturgy at the expense of the music?



Read here:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/theatreblog/2011/mar/01/opera-reviews-music-critics


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

quite true. It's all about the buzz of this production or that. Desperation regarding getting enough people in the house to cover the expenses. Fans blogs are better at telling you about the music but you've got to be careful with fans' devotion to their stars - who can do no wrong


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

This is undoubtedly true, and something that has been developing during the last decades, up to the current situation.

In my view, there are two main reasons: first, the growing importance of staging for a part of the audience, and most of the reviewers; and second, that in order to write about music, and music performance, you need a certain degree of knowledge and familiarity with the work and the performers, that some reviewers just don't have. It's much simpler to discuss staging or superimposed dramaturgies.

Read some reviews from the 1920s of three stalwarts of the repertory. Staging is not even mentioned:

*A NEW MIMI

The number of Bohemian quarter sewing girls in the Metropolitan Opera Company was increased by one last night when Editha Fleischer made her debut as Mimi in Puccini's familiar setting of the Parisian tale. The work was presented at the Academy of Music as the eleventh in the series of twelve performances planned for this borough this season. Due to the "indisposition" of Nanette Guilford, a new Musetta appeared in the form of Thalia Sabanieva. General Manager Gatti-Casazza also sent some new Bohemians here and Giuseppe Bamboschek made his second visit of the current period to conduct.

In the role usually identified with Antonio Scotti there appeared, last night, Lawrence Tibbett. The American baritone lacks much of the finesse and polish which years of experience have given to the Italian, but Mr. Tibbett made up for this with some excellent vocal displays. Giacomo Lauri-Volpi was again the poet of the quartet, singing in good form and making the most of the passages wherein his strong and lusty tenor could be best heard to advantage. Pavel Ludikar was the Colline, with Millo Picco as the Schaunard. The newcomers seemed more adaptable to their assignments than the veterans who are usually heard in these roles.

Mr. Malatesta again doubled, appearing as Benoit and also as the Alcindoro, both of which are thoroughly familiar to him, while Max Altglass and Giuseppe Cottino had minor bits. Miss Fleischer was in good voice last night and met Mr. Volpi on equal ground whenever this ambitious tenor decided to put on full pressure. The expected rough spots which accompany a debut were present and the young soprano seemed not entirely at home, but Miss Fleischer is first an actress to whom the stage is no novelty and who uses her lyric voice as an accompaniment to histrionics. Her Mimi lacks the vivacity of some others and this is strange in view of the fact that she is more at home in soubrette roles. The Teutonic soprano reads Mini as a waif of the Latin Quarter, hoping for the best, but naïve and unsophisticated in everything she does, a creature seeking something, but not knowing what that something is. She looks on the gaiety of these Bohemians as a spectator and is not entirely cognizant of their point of view. But she is genuinely in love with Rudolfo even when absent from him.

In other words Miss Fleischer differs from the usual type Mimi who hitherto has been a creature of and a participant in the life and activities of this section of Paris. And she uses her voice differently as each new side of this life is revealed to her. There is a subtle change of vocal color in her every appearance and she is never a singer first and an actress some years later, but carefully blends the one into the other. This is characterization in a fine degree, but then Miss Fleischer has shown oftentimes in the past that this is a trait of hers. Would that she could pass it on to others. The familiar waltz of Musetta fell flat last night. Miss Sabanieva does "Butterfly" extremely well, but she cannot do this "Bohéme" role even adequately.

Mr. Bamboschek had his moments of excellent reading, and also those wherein noise conquered art. He set a lively, but even, pace and succeeded in having the work over early despite a late start. Sympathetic toward his singers, he nevertheless insisted that they follow his direction.

**LEONORA CORON'S 'AIDA' REVEALS HER GREATLY IMPROVED

American singers at the Metropolitan Opera House have a way of rarely being self-satisfied. They use success as encouragement for further study and higher artistic effort. Improvement seems to be their constant ambition. Only infrequently does one of our native lyric artists stand still, granted the vocal material and singing talent sufficient to lead on to better things. To prove the point one has only to remember how few Italian or French artists even have graduated into Wagnerian ranks and how many Americans have done so after beginning their careers in the operas of the lighter schools.

These reflections crowded in upon me last evening when I heard Leonora Corona in the title role of "Aida" and noted how she had forged ahead since her "Trovatore" debut here, in security of voice and delivery, resourcefulness in nuance and repose and dignity of acting. She gave a warmly appealing performance as the Ethiopian princess and moved her hearers to demonstrations of sincere enthusiasm. Miss Corona adds to her other excellent stage qualities also comeliness of features and commanding stature.

Frederick Jagel is another home product who proved the moral of this thesis. He has appreciably broadened his conception of Radames and he throws himself and his voice into the breech with a degree of self-reliant passion that was sorely missed in his early essays at the Metropolitan. He, too, scored decisively last evening.

Julia Claussen repeated her admirably composed and fervently sung Amneris, the Ramfis and Amonasro, respectively, were Ezio Pinza and Giuseppe de Luca, and that is enough said. Tullio Serafin, always intensely in the spirit of everything he conducts, made the "Aida" score sparkly and blaze in the ideal Verdian manner.

**Review of W. J. Henderson in the New York Sun

Marion Talley in 'Rigoletto'

Lauri-Volpi and De Luca Also Sing Roles in Performance at the Metropolitan

With the changing of the seasons the stars visible in the firmament are changed. Mr. Gatti-Casazza imitates the shining example of the heavens and permits certain of his lyric luminaries to pass out of sight, while others arise to shed their mild refulgence on the closing nights of the opera season. Last night Verdi's imperishable "Rigoletto," the musical embodiment of Victor Hugo's "Le Roi s'Amuse," was presented with the amiable purpose of bringing Miss Marion Talley once more before the local public.

That there should be some curiosity on the part of observant opera-goers as to whether she had made progress in her art since last heard here was to be expected and, furthermore, "Rigoletto" retains its favor year after year. So the auditorium was crowded and the plaudits were vociferous.

Miss Talley showed no advance in vocal technic or style. In so far as the latter was concerned, she may be said to have sung like an amateur without sense of the melodic line and without conception of the contour of the phrase. But these defects existed in her singing from the outset of her career. What was new was a marked increase of the difference between her medium and her upper tones. The former have become perceptibly smaller and much more veiled, while the higher tones have grown more acid and pinched. Miss Talley began with a scale unequalized. The inequality has of course widened since, as it is evident no attempt has been made to correct it. The bad attack noticed at her debut has become more violent and the scooping more frequent.

But there could be no doubt that many of her auditors liked her piercing upper tones, for every outburst of stentorian applause in the course of the performance followed the emission of a high tone by some one, whether Miss Talley or one of her associates. For finish of delivery, sensitiveness to melodic outline or rhythmic balance there seemed to be no general appetite. Miss Talley, it may be added in conclusion, has gained nothing in stage deportment. She still causes one to think of the conservatory commencement. However, she received abundant applause, and that ought to mean that she is entirely satisfactory to present day auditors of the Metropolitan Opera House.

Mr. Lauri-Volpi's the Duke did some of the best singing he has ever done here. If this tenor can control his voice, as he did at times last evening, and delight the ear with a sustained mezzo voce, it is a pity that he cannot be induced to do it oftener. The ecstatic shouts of his compatriots behind the rail whenever he pours forth a prolonged and powerful high tone are not an expression of general public opinion. Even in these days there is some sense of beauty, and the artist who caters to it is certain of his reward.

Mr. de Luca's Rigoletto is always excellent, though last night his voice seemed to be less resonant than normal. Mr. Rothier was capable as Sparafucile and Miss Telva was an acceptable Maddalena. Mr. Bellezza conducted.*


----------



## JCarmel (Feb 3, 2013)

I absolutely agree...in fact I quite long for the Concert versions...so that I can fully concentrate on the music & the libretto, that the composers laboured-over so lovingly! I am seriously uninterested in Production Values.
I familiarised myself initially with all the operas that I know, with just the words and the music & with the power of my imagination & my knowledge of the 'human condition' (such as they both adequately-are, I believe)...I really don't need anything more.


----------



## AndyS (Dec 2, 2011)

schigolch said:


> This is undoubtedly true, and something that has been developing during the last decades, up to the current situation.
> 
> In my view, there are two main reasons: first, the growing importance of staging for a part of the audience, and most of the reviewers; *and second, that in order to write about music, and music performance, you need a certain degree of knowledge and familiarity with the work and the performers, that some reviewers just don't have.* It's much simpler to discuss staging or superimposed dramaturgies.


I would agree with this to an extent, but if you're making a living as a professional reviewer/journalist then you should be expected to have this knowledge. And if you don't, you go and aquire it. Reviewers should know what they are writing about


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

If I'm reading a review of a production I'm thinking of attending or buying on DVD I want to know the following two things: 1) Is the performance good? 2) How is it staged? I want to know *both* of those things if I'm thinking of spending my valuable time watching it. A reviewer that concentrates on only one of those points is not telling me what I need to know.

If I'm thinking of buying a Cd, of course, the second question doesn't apply.

This seems to be just another of those "only-the-music-matters" things. As I've said countless times before, that is only true for me if all I'm doing is listening . If someone is asking me to use my eyes, they need to show me something worth seeing.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

AndyS said:


> I would agree with this to an extent, but if you're making a living as a professional reviewer/journalist then you should be expected to have this knowledge. And if you don't, you go and aquire it. Reviewers should know what they are writing about


agreed. In this day and age when we've got access to such a wealth of information I don't see how a professional writer can be excused for not knowing about the performers and the work! why are they writing about this subject then?

it's important to know about the production but I think a couple of condensed paragraphs are enough. The writer could just mention if it's a new or old production, whether it's regie or traditional and a few key details to give an idea of how it looks and how s/he thinks it works and maybe mention whatever metaphors we are presented with in the case of regie (or leave us make up our own minds, I think most of us have the imagination to do so). There you go, one paragraph and we're done.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

deggial said:


> There you go, one paragraph and we're done.


That may be enough for you...it's not for me. I can't tell you how many times a thorough review of a DVD - all aspects - has saved me time and money.

But, for those of you who just close your eyes and listen, I can understand it's not important.


----------



## Blancrocher (Jul 6, 2013)

Vesteralen said:


> That may be enough for you...it's not for me. I can't tell you how many times a thorough review of a DVD - all aspects - has saved me time and money.
> 
> But, for those of you who just close your eyes and listen, I can understand it's not important.


I agree with you, Vesteralen, though I'm at the point where I wish they'd just give you a clip from the opera in online reviews, sort of like a movie preview. A picture is worth a thousand words--a million, maybe, if it moves!


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

schigolch said:


> Read some reviews from the 1920s of three stalwarts of the repertory.


These are fascinating! I will have to find more classic opera reviews.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Vesteralen said:


> That may be enough for you...it's not for me. I can't tell you how many times a thorough review of a DVD - all aspects - has saved me time and money.


youtube? most modern productions are partly there. I'm definitely not the kind to close my eyes, btw.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

Partly doesn't quite do it. What if the really repulsive parts don't happen to be on You Tube? And, even if they are, do I really want to look at them? The whole purpose of the detailed review is to save me that kind of negative experience.

I understand that you don't want the evaluation of the production to overshadow the performance review. I don't see that as a problem. But, why put a gag order on reviews so that they can only talk about the conductor or the singers? It's a total package, as far as I'm concerned. 

I'm just as likely to turn down the opportunity to watch a terrific staging with really poor performances as I am a really great performance where all the costumes are made out of duct tape. Neither one would appeal to me.


----------



## deggial (Jan 20, 2013)

Vesteralen said:


> I understand that you don't want the evaluation of the production to overshadow the performance review. I don't see that as a problem. But, why put a gag order on reviews so that they can only talk about the conductor or the singers? It's a total package, as far as I'm concerned.


you're right, I think it came off a bit dictatorial  what I meant to say was that instead of getting lost in musings over the production at the expense of music they could organise the review a bit better and write in a condensed way about everything.


----------



## starlightexp (Sep 3, 2013)

Here is my view on it. Spectacle has always been a part of the opera equation. It is always about a fusion of the whole. Back in 18th and 19th century opera was common and disposable as 50 Shades of Twilight. This was popular entertainment for the masses being written, in many cases in a few weeks. Most of the best loved works of today were knocked off in less time then it takes to broadcast a season of Friends. New works were bigger hits then revivals but the later still brought people in because they had no other way to really see or hear their favorites. People talked about the production yes but the voices were always the most interesting part mainly because they were going to be the thing that changed from revival to revival and not the set. 

For me the music only takes a back seat if you want it too. I love to go in with a blind ear and listen to things for the first time again leaving my personal feelings about how I think this phrase or that note should be done. I find it better that way. I also tend not to re-read the book before watching the move version not because one is better then the other but because all I will do is sit and compare the two the entire time and not give the later the justice it may deserve.
Reading books on the history of opera companies in the 20th century is much different then reading about opera in it’s golden age. Today there are no major composers packing houses with each new work. There is no huge public swell to get tickets. What sells new AND old people to see a 150 year old work that they have seen 5,10,15 times already as well as having several recordings at home on LP, 8-track, cassette, mini-disk, CD and SACD? It is a new vision of the story. A way to look at these characters and situations in ways that makes one think.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

starlightexp said:


> For me the music only takes a back seat if you want it too. I love to go in with a blind ear and listen to things for the first time again leaving my personal feelings about how I think this phrase or that note should be done. I find it better that way.


I don't think anyone could argue that music should take a back seat. But, I have to ask - let's say you go to a live performance of an opera you've heard and/or seen many times before. The conductor does some interesting things with the score that you like, the singers deliver outstanding vocal performances. However, either 1) the direction of the piece is bizarre and the stage settings are repulsive to you; or 2) the singers can't act to save their lives, they just stand around and sing or move stiffly back and forth. Do you wonder why you paid good money to see this? Or. does the musical aspect of the performance totally block out any negatives you might feel about the overall experience? And, if the latter, wouldn't it be just as good, or even better, to have them stage it as an oratorio?

I'm not intending to challenge you on this, by the way. I just wondered how you would look at it since you seem to have given the matter a lot of thought and have some interesting thoughts on it.


----------



## starlightexp (Sep 3, 2013)

I came to opera from a musical theater background so maybe I over think these things. I do my best to get into the whole vision as best I can. I enjoy a certain visual element to my music. I love ‘seeing’ it if that makes sense. I got to the theater to be fully entertained both audibly and visually. I for one am not much for sitting at home staring at the cd player while it plays. I tend to only go to opera concerts when there is no other way for me to see a piece I like. Opera should be fully seen to me. 
There are those times that somethings don’t make sense to me regarding the stage direction either being too dull or to strange and yes I agree that those are frustrating when other things are so well done. One example is the new Met Rigoletto. At first the change in the subtitles was distracting. Well for almost the whole of the first act I was pulled out by seeing the word ‘baby’ or something. But I really got into it after while getting why it was done. I loved it in the end and it’s a new go too piece to get my friends into opera. The text here are not holy writ, they are just one element in a greater story.) Also there are stunning productions that the singing is less then stellar as well so there are two sides to that thought. Ushers famously spout stories of older opera goes wanting each performance to be exactly like the last. Each set piece, gesture and note. Sometimes change is good and can take an already amazing piece like La Traviata and make even jaded goers go wow. To go fully to the other side of the argument of staging vs music…. Opera 101 writers like to write about the tension of will or won’t this performer will get to this certain note this performance and that is wrong as well. When the singer pulls focus making it about them that takes you out of the scene as well. To ‘mug’ the audience and upstage the production are flaws to me. I should be wrapped up in Violetta not Anna Netrebko This is one reason I can’t stand to watch Pavarotti. Great voice, but it’s all about him when he’s on stage. Opera works because of the whole of it. More often then I like to admit friends of mine have seen someone sing something live and say that it sounded better on the album. Well yes it would. When the focus is wholly on the music be it either recording it or a static concert then you naturally become more sensitive to the sound and music because there is less visually for your mind to process. It takes a def hand to get the balance of the visuals and music. When it’s right THAT is what makes the 2-3 duds worth it. The fantastic nights where I can forgive a few flaws and get swept away in the production as a complete work of art are the reasons I keep going back.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

Thanks for your response. That was very interesting.


----------



## starlightexp (Sep 3, 2013)

Vesteralen said:


> I'm not intending to challenge you on this, by the way.


Oh don't worry about that. I love a good discussion on things.


----------



## Vesteralen (Jul 14, 2011)

starlightexp said:


> When the singer pulls focus making it about them that takes you out of the scene as well. To 'mug' the audience and upstage the production are flaws to me. I should be wrapped up in Violetta not Anna Netrebko This is one reason I can't stand to watch Pavarotti. Great voice, but it's all about him when he's on stage. Opera works because of the whole of it.


Maybe that's one advantage of being in a mid-size metropolitan area instead of a big city. The opera company here seldom, if ever, gets the big stars. The productions I've seen have been all about the music and story and never about the "stars".

I do like watching some of the stars on DVD, though, particularly the ones who are also great actors.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

This topic has a practical application for us, since we were deciding which of three baroque operas to go and watch at nearby Snape, when my violin teacher will be leading the orchestra.

We googled English Touring Opera's site and there were clips of the director talking about each opera - we are complete newbies - but he seemed to be talking mainly about the 'exciting' nature of Venetian opera which was originally considered so risqué that the audience were masked. He made this point several times - talked vaguely about the nature of the plots & said he was excited; and there were short clips of 3 songs from each opera, on Spotify, which as we were listening dried up without warning - unless we subscribed to Spotify, which seemed a bit steep just to get a sampler! Dis-aaaa-ster! 

The OP asks if the pendulum has swung too far in opera criticism, so that the director & the new interpretation of older texts to make them meaningful, relevant, daring or whatever is stressed & the music & its performance gets barely a mention. I don't know enough to answer but my impression is - *yes*, it has. Especially when we compare them with the older reviews.

At the same time, when you're looking to buy tickets or a dvd, as Vesteralen says, you want to know what sort of production it is. I personally don't want a daring, sexualised or politicised modern dress production - yes, okay, I'm bourgeois(e) & proud! - but you can always just listen to a cd and save your ticket money if you're warned, *whatever* your views are.

But I think the OP has a point.


----------



## starlightexp (Sep 3, 2013)

Ingenue said:


> I personally don't want a daring, sexualised or politicised modern dress production


Never, I wouldn't want a sexualized opera (Carmen anyone?) or modern dress ( Verdi's ORIGINAL intent with La Traviata) Never no no no this is clean family entertainment.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

starlightexp said:


> Never, I wouldn't want a sexualized opera (Carmen anyone?) or modern dress ( Verdi's ORIGINAL intent with La Traviata) Never no no no this is clean family entertainment.


'Sexualised' & 'politicised' in the sense of overegging a pudding that originally contained its full quota of eggs or egg-equivalents. If operas are written as sexy or political, that's *fine*.

But if *you* like eggs, hey, feel free, go ahead, 'overegg' my post! :cheers:


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Ingenue said:


> 'Sexualised' & 'politicised' in the sense of overegging a pudding that originally contained its full quota of eggs or egg-equivalents. If operas are written as sexy or political, that's *fine*.
> 
> But if *you* like eggs, hey, feel free, go ahead, 'overegg' my post! :cheers:


There's more than a hint of dumbing-down associated with the apparent need to make productions of *Lulu* or *Wozzeck* that aim for shock value. Aren't the music and libretto enough for that?


----------



## starlightexp (Sep 3, 2013)

Ingenue said:


> But if *you* like eggs, hey, feel free, go ahead, 'overegg' my post! :cheers:


Maybe we can have an omelet together.

So how different is the over sexualized nature of todays 'edgy' directors today compared to what was that way back when it was written. Letters abound telling us how women fainted, or crowds shocked when some of these works were first presented. I think these looks are not for everyone but they are necessary to keep the art moving forward. Since the newness of the staging concepts are what is newsworthy then that is what we hear most of. Allot of the major performers have recordings out so we most likely be able to hear for ourselves how they sound so not at much time is given over to them


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

*Starlightexp:* It's a relief to know that I'm not the only one on this Forum who came to opera by way of musical theatre!


----------



## starlightexp (Sep 3, 2013)

lol.. you get the gold star. It was a fave show of mine growing up and a screen name I've had since day one of the internet. I'm not sure I'd know what to change it to lol


----------

