# How Was Tannhäuser Live from the Met?



## Barelytenor (Nov 19, 2011)

Unfortunately I had to miss this performance yesterday afternoon to attend a birthday party (which was quite enjoyable) for a 1-year-old girl and a 3-year-old boy, combined with Halloween and Christmas, sort of a PumpkinTurkeyClaus affair. 

Tannhäuser was the first opera I saw live in New York City (this would have been around 1998) after I got over my snit at singing badly in the 1983 Met Regional auditions many years earlier, and being told so rather pointedly in the written critique. But I digress. I forget who the tenor was so long ago but he was fantastic. I confess I do not have such high hopes for Johan Botha. But perhaps I will be surprised. Did you watch it, either live in New York or in your local movie theater, and how did you like it?

Best Regards, 

George


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bellinilover made a nice review post 98.:tiphat:

http://www.talkclassical.com/28094-our-own-reviews-operas-7.html


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

It was better than a birthday party  

Especially the third act was an emotional rollercoaster. I think the ballet in Act I deserved a special mention too. 

Tannhäuser was my first introduction to Wagner and to classical music in general, so it was great to finally see it live.


----------



## Itullian (Aug 27, 2011)

The overture alone is monumental.


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

I was there! My first ever Wagner opera. It was great, even from my cheapest of seats.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

isorhythm said:


> I was there! *My first ever Wagner opera.* It was great, even from my cheapest of seats.


Welcome to the club!


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

As Pugg said, I reviewed the HD performance in another thread. But I want to emphasize here how much I liked Peter Mattei as Wolfram; the last time I saw him he was Rossini's Figaro, so it was great to hear him singing Wagner. He created a tender yet strong Wolfram. 

My first Wagner opera was DIE WALKEURE, in 2002 or so. This was my second Wagner opera and my first TANNHAUSER, though I did used to listen to the opera (Solti recording) in college. (I just bought the Sinopoli recording on CD.)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

Bellinilover said:


> As Pugg said, I reviewed the HD performance in another thread. But I want to emphasize here how much I liked Peter Mattei as Wolfram; the last time I saw him he was Rossini's Figaro, so it was great to hear him singing Wagner. He created a tender yet strong Wolfram.
> 
> My first Wagner opera was DIE WALKEURE, in 2002 or so. This was my second Wagner opera and my first TANNHAUSER, though I did used to listen to the opera (Solti recording) in college. (I just bought the Sinopoli recording on CD.)


For me the Solti one stands like a house.
Try the second disc; Elizabeth 's entrance goosebumps


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

Pugg said:


> For me the Solti one stands like a house.
> Try the second disc; Elizabeth 's entrance goosebumps


The Solti certainly is a classic recording, but personally I like Cheryl Studer's voice on the Sinopoli recording better than Helga Dernesch's, and I certainly prefer Andreas Scmidt's voice to Victor Braun's as Wolfram. All a matter of taste, I guess.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

SiegendesLicht said:


> It was better than a birthday party
> 
> Especially the third act was an emotional rollercoaster. I think the ballet in Act I deserved a special mention too.
> 
> Tannhäuser was my first introduction to Wagner and to classical music in general, so it was great to finally see it live.


I thought the ballet was great, too. This elderly lady I overheard during intermission said she had her eyes closed during the whole sequence, though.


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

Some really spectacular athleticism on display during the ballet.

The second act song contest was well dramatized and came off well (though everyone still is unaccountably weird about Tannhäuser hanging out with Venus).

It's interesting to compare Wagner's notions of redemption across Tannhäuser, Götterdämmerung, and Parsifal. We start off with a fairly traditional romantic notion of love redeeming, then a bleak notion that there can be no redemption but at most expiation by burning everything to the ground, and then a swing back towards redemption but this time through force of Will, with love getting in the way and corrupting everything. He was one sick puppy, but wrote some great music.


----------



## Bellinilover (Jul 24, 2013)

gardibolt wrote:
_The second act song contest was well dramatized and came off well (though everyone still is unaccountably weird about Tannhäuser hanging out with Venus)._

I thought so too for a minute, but then I reminded myself that Tannhauser is basically announcing to everyone present that he is a pagan. That would have been shocking in a medieval, Catholic society.


----------



## SiegendesLicht (Mar 4, 2012)

gardibolt said:


> We start off with a fairly traditional romantic notion of love redeeming, then a bleak notion that there can be no redemption but at most expiation by burning everything to the ground, and then a swing back towards redemption but this time through force of Will, with love getting in the way and corrupting everything. He was one sick puppy, but wrote some great music.


It's not just burning everything to the ground, it is cleansing and renewal. The Gods of the old world die with it, and a new world emerges.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

Bellinilover said:


> The Solti certainly is a classic recording, but personally I like Cheryl Studer's voice on the Sinopoli recording better than Helga Dernesch's, and I certainly prefer Andreas Scmidt's voice to Victor Braun's as Wolfram. All a matter of taste, I guess.


For me it's Dernesch all the way. I'm a bit allergic to Studer.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

I saw the encore Met Live in HD presentation of Tannhäuser last night. This was my first Tannhäuser (I have now seen all of the Bayreuth canon, at least on video (6, soon to be 7 in person and staged, plus a concert version of Rienzi)). I was somewhat let down.

There were points when I was mesmerized by Peter Mattei, but he has a supporting role. There is wonderful orchestral music in the score, and fantastic choruses, and ensembles but not enough to carry the piece.

Johan Botha does have a strong tenor voice, but he was dramatically inert. He would occasionally make a face, stick out an arm, or crouch in the corner but that was near the extent of his acting. This came off as lack of concern, lack of engagement, and was catching. Thus it was hard to fit together the penitent deeply moved seeing the pilgrimage to Rome in Act 1 with the defiant man singing his hymn to Venus during the song contest in stuffy Wartburg. There was a weird moment near the end of Act 2 when he grabs Elizabeth's dress (scandalous!) but nothing is made of it.

Eva-Marie Westbroek's "Dich, teure Halle" was lovely and joyful, as was her reunion with Tannhäuser (But then he abruptly leaves). She sounded good throughout, but the part rarely convinces.

The song contest was largely dull, with mostly halfhearted attempts at faking harp playing. And since Tannhäuser wasn't convincing and Venusberg was tame the outrage of the other minstrels and knights comes off as ridiculous and childish. The third act has little tension; it is certainly nothing compared to say Tristan's act 3.

Otto Schenk's production from 1977 is traditional in the sense that the story is superficially Wagner's, it is largely period appropriate, chaste, and vaguely pretty (if you like old-timey fancy dress, which I don't). When it premiered it was recognized that it was not quite a faithful production, "The traditional surfaces of the production, however, are subtly shaded so that what Mr. Schenk and the scenic designer, Gunther Schneider-Siemssen, gave us is actually a modern gloss on Wagnerian tradition" (Donal Henahan in The New York Times, found at the Met Archive).

It almost feels as if this could have played at Wartburg, except for the opening ballet.

The opening ballet is mild, but may have been too much for the court, even if it feels to me as if it were designed by/for those who reject the sensual world Wagner wanted to portray. (They might like that Venus and Tannhäuser recline on the ground rather than a soft couch). The other issue is that we see nothing of the mythical creatures Wagner called for; many there in 1207 would have believed this underworld to be very real.

All of this undermines the stark contrast between the worlds and blunts the conflict of the opera. The contest is already over since Venus' side never shows up.

When Tannhäuser is transported away from Venusburg Wagner's design is once again subverted. This is a barren wasteland (pre-dating Girard's Parsifal by 35 years), not the green valley, blue sky, and warm sun of Wagner's story. We lose this midpoint between Venusberg and Wartburg, though in the text we still follow as we move from Venus to Holda to Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary.

The knights, minstrels, and nobles of Wartburg are dressed (what I can only presume to be similar to) 13th century robes, and I suppose that's fine. Though in the second act another flaw in the production is made clear: the near complete lack of personregie (though it is possible that it is just that Johan Botha can't/won't do much more than make an occasional strained face). Everyone was kind of just standing around and didn't seem to care about the story. It is also possible that this is due to the production being 38 years old; there may have been details lost or otherwise left behind.

This act ends with Tannhäuser being told to go on a pilgrimage to Rome, from Wartburg. Wagner certainly relished in the irony here, and that is likely one reason he melded the legends of Tannhäuser with the Sängerkrieg auf Wartburg. Tannhäuser is saved only upon returning to Wartburg, the pilgrimage back, if you will, due to Elizabeth and her devout Marianism.

I find a straight reading of this ending to be rather unsatisfying; or, perhaps it consciously suggests that the idea that there is conflict between courtly/spiritual love and sensual/physical love only leads to death. Did Wagner want the finale to sound false as it does to me? Or did Wagner believe and wish to showcase the idea that one should choose death over sensual love, as both Elizabeth and Tannhäuser (eventually) did.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

I was disappointed in the opera itself, I was disappointed in the production, I was disappointed in Botha's Tannhäuser, and disappointed in Levine's conducting and the playing of the orchestra.

I would like to try again, with a very different production. I'm not in any rush, though.


And, to be clear, my problem is not with subverting Wagner's directions. I strongly believe that leeway should be given, and I find it can lead to amazing results. 

But this was neutering Wagner so as to not offend, and it gutted the opera.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

mountmccabe said:


> I was disappointed in the opera itself, I was disappointed in the production, I was disappointed in Botha's Tannhäuser, and disappointed in Levine's conducting and the playing of the orchestra.
> 
> I would like to try again, with a very different production. I'm not in any rush, though.
> 
> ...


I can't believe what I am reading, one of the best productions in years. 
I am not arguing the signers ( always a matter of taste) but the whole production was very entertaining :tiphat:


----------



## Cavaradossi (Aug 2, 2012)

I saw this production in person at the Met the week a few weeks ago. I don't know how it came over in HD, but I found it anything but disappointing. I will grant that the opening ballet was rather tame and a bit of a muddle, but I figured that's because the choreographer was trying to be _too_ faithful to Wagner's stage directions regarding the Three Graces, etc.. And having experienced Johan Botha in performance before, I went in with reduced expectations for any stage presence from the title character. I suppose in that way, sitting halfway back in the orchestra section, where the mind's eye can fill in some of the blank expressions, is preferable to the close up camera shots.

Perhaps this set was not designed for the age of HD transmission, but the 'real time' transformation from Venusburg to outside Wartburg was nothing short of stage magic and elicited some hushed 'ooohs' from the audience. If anything, the genius simplicity of the 'barren earth' cross roads set enabled such a seamless transition. And the entry of the nobles, with the trumpeters on elevated portions of the set, was nothing short of thrilling.

I will admit it was an odd feeling leaving the opera house in 2015 and feeling like I saw Wagner's _Tannhäuser_, and not Schenk's _Tannhäuser_ or Tarantino's _Tannhäuser_, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing every once in a while.


----------



## mountmccabe (May 1, 2013)

I am glad that you both enjoyed it!

I have seen Johan Botha on stage before as well, at the Met in 2013 as _Otello_. I had reduced my expectations, but then heard too many people praising his work here that I had started to raise them again.

I agree that perhaps this would have been better in the house (I had a ticket but was unable to make it to NYC), but on the screen there didn't seem to be much of a change from Venusberg to the valley outside Wartburg, even though everything went dark for some time.

Part of the problem may have been that I went in expecting Wagner's _Tannhäuser_, based on what I had heard about the production and some familiarity with Otto Schenk, but I definitely felt like I was watching Schenk's _Tannhäuser_. This may have been closer to Wagner's than say Baumgarten's, but it was certainly a consciously modified production of the piece.


----------



## TTVV (May 17, 2015)

The title of this thread is How was Tannhauser Live From the Met and I have a question specifically about the HD transmission. A small thing perhaps but it bugged me throughout Act 1.

Did anyone else wonder what Venus had stuck to her waist? One of the problems of high definition cinema is that I could clearly see the outline of what looked like a man-sized box of tissues under her dress. I know about the need for many opera singers to wear corsets but this looked distinctly like a box. Surely they know to put the radio mike equipment, if that is what it was, round the back? Or maybe she has the kind of medical problem which requires the wearing of equipment. 

Maybe someone knows what was going on?


----------



## gardibolt (May 22, 2015)

No idea. I didn't notice it.


----------



## TTVV (May 17, 2015)

gardibolt said:


> I didn't notice it.


If your point is that maybe there was nothing to see, well if I'd been watching live stream on a mini Ipad (say) I don't think I would have spotted it (nor if I had been at the Met). But I was watching from the front of a medium size cinema and the hidden thing under her dress was really obvious. I thought if I posted here someone from the stage crew or costume department or whatever might help out.

There is certainly a lesson here re HD: we know that lighting, makeup and many aspects of production now often need tweaking given the new level of image detail. This is another example of where one can't just rely on the old laws of theatre magic.


----------



## Ivanbeeth (Nov 30, 2015)

This was my second Wagner but the one that made me fall in love with his music. I have to admit, though, that, when I got home from the teather, I was wonderfully surprised to listen to the overure without the ballet. That really showed me Wagner's glory.


----------

