Thoughts post Trojans from The Met

Right, yes, I know the above link is not from Les Troyens from the Met but is from the Covent Garden production by David McVicar with Anna Caterina Antonacci, but such is the strength of her performance in Trojans, that any discussion about another production inevitably has to reference her, so I thought I would throw it in at the start. This is the finale of Act 2, the final scene in Troy before the opera moves to Carthage with Enée and his entourage, en route to Italy. It is without a doubt the most glorious mass suicide scene I know in opera, and ACA in the role of Cassandre is intensely haunting and musical. She lives the role of a somewhat maddened oracle, not wanting to see what she is seeing, and haunted by it. Her performance was mesmerising and gripping, as well as being beautifully sung. Friends who went reported being haunted by her for days after.

By contrast, the Met had Debbie Voigt, a very different singer. While ACA is very definitely zwischenfach, Debbie is defiantly dramatic soprano. She lacks the darkness of tone that ACA brings, and frankly needs in this role. She also reportedly found the lower range of it a challenge in some of the earlier performances. This I would believe. Having said that, Francesca Zambello's production also makes Cassandre a very different beast to McVicar. In McVicar, she revels in the oddness of being prophetic, even as the visions she sees frighten her. She is shunned only because she brings bad news, not because she is odd. In the Met, she is cast in the weird woman/witch/evil keep away mode, even though she seems eager to lose the visions. It is more her being prophetic despite wanting it, rather than clearly revelling in the role, as in the McVicar.

Its a valid choice, but the McVicar provides the more exciting performance. Yes, ACA is a better actress, but I think it is also the direction made it work. Having Deb Voigt run round the stage trying to get people's attention, only to have them all run away in fear made her seem less a figure we cared about, while ACA was defiant in her isolation, and seemed to almost revel in it, when people would not listen. A curious distinction, but one that helps to explain why one was vastly more compelling. It seemed more organic to the story, and less an idea imposed from the director, if you will.

Having said that, if I had not seen the Covent Garden production first, I would have been very happy with Deb's performance. She sang securely, with depth and feeling. This is a demanding role, and a big one, and she was convincing, just left me wishing I had seen her first, not second. On the other hand, if I had seen this production first, would I have bothered with the Covent Garden as well?

As her fiance, we had Dwayne Croft, who brought a larger voice to the role than I gave him credit from his stint in Das Rheingold as Donner. He sang as a man who clearly did not understand his wife to be. At times I was not convinced he was in love with her, rather, this felt more like an arranged marriage, yet they sang of love...

The other performer of note in the Trojan acts was of course Bryan Hymel, the surprise tenor of the Covent Garden Trojans, who replaced the ill Jonas Kaufmann. Here, he took over for Marcello Giordani, who pulled out, realising this role was no longer right for him (was it ever?) Bryan brings a huge bright tenor sound with clarion focus to this role. All I think I need to say about him is, if he is singing a big tenor role near you, make sure you go hear him. Hell, for that matter, you could probably hear him from outside most theatres, that voice has cut and heft to carry for days. And he can sing this role easily at 33!!!! (Enée normally goes to Wagnerians) Enée is a role that is already something of a specialty for him, and will remain so. He lives this role, singing it with passion and power, and also lyricism as required.

Having said that, special mention must be made of the chorus in this production. When the Met puts on their full chorus, with extras, you know the show must need it. There was (I believe) about 110 in the chorus for this production. It showed, and they sounded fantastic. They sang beautifully off and on stage, and portrayed their various roles well, be they soldier, sailor, farmer, wife, whatever.

After Troy, the next acts all move to Carthage where the beautiful Didon rules over a happy peaceful community founded after they fled from Phoenicia at the death of her husband. As Didon we had the glorious sounds of Susan Graham, with her sister played by Karen Cargill, one of the few none US based singers. As a pair, they were well matched, both big luscious voices and strong stage presences. Having said that, watching Karen Cargill is an entertaining experience all in itself. Unlike most singers, who when they sing the effort shows on their face, on Karen's face, there is no sign of the effort she is putting in to produce the sound. Sure, her mouth stretches open as she shapes the sounds, but her cheeks and eyes show no sign of the effort she is doing. There is an almost serene relaxation happening when she sings, allowing her to express what ever she wants, unencumbered by the effort to achieve the sounds she is producing. At times it seemed almost disconnected, but after seeing some appalling face pulling on stages recently as singers fought to produce the right notes, it was a very welcome change.

As Didon, Susan Graham produced glorious tones and a performance that started distant but approving of her subjects, to passionate lover of Enée, to unhinged wronged woman when she is left. She never once lost character or produced sounds that were not beautiful or musical. She also clearly enjoyed partnering with Bryan as her love interest.

Also featured were Kwangchul Youn as Narbal Didon's chief minister and Eric Cutler as Iopas, her court poet. Both sang well, bringing to life their roles, even if Iopas spends a lot of time onstage, but not singing.

At this point I also need to mention the ballet. Now, it is French grand opera, so I get you need ballet. But really, do we need ALL of it? The ballet in act 4 seems to take over half an hour. You also have ballet music in earlier acts. Surely some of the Royal Hunt music should be dropped to bring the length under control if you are going to do Les Troyen in one night? I mean, it is 5 hours of music, surely we can cut some of it? The ballet does seem an obvious place to shorten, especially if you decide to use it to re-enact some of the story. The whole story comes to a grinding halt for half an hour, then we have some discussion about the 2 lovers, then we get their glorious duet. Did we really need all the ballet to stop the story completely before that?

The next act of course is where everything goes horribly wrong for Didon. Enée abandons her then sings his biggest solo (see below) and after various of his group sing their own solos, he has harsh words with Didon and they sale off leaving her bereft. She then has a complete meltdown on stage and kills herself, prophesying of the coming of Hannibal from Carthage to destroy the city of Rome Enée is off to build.

Now, I have to say that the biggest difference between the two productions I have referred to would be the theatricality of the productions. One was an unashamedly modern mishmash of scenery that clearly represented specific places without caring about the time. It created great effects in a small space and forced you into its own world.

The other was a less showy event but that used more. More people, more space, more levels on stage. Yet rather than making you feel more in place, you felt less a part of the event. Too much was spent on creating the look of something, without actually being that thing. Somehow in not even trying to be historically accurate but socialogically accurate, the Covent Garden worked, while the Met production somehow failed, because it kept paying lip service to what it thought things should look like, without following through on them. So the modern items jarred against the authentic, stopping the illusion taking hold.

So, on the whole, I found the Met production a bit of a blancmange. Much of it was great, but I found things about it that left it feeling less than the some of the whole.

But, I'll leave you with Bryan singing his big aria in the final act, which is amazing.

Thoughts that arose after seeing "Wagner's Dream"

Ok, so I have now seen "Wagner's dream" - the documentary to pull more money for the Met. Sorry, raise the profile of The Met's Ring cycle. That was a bit cynical wasn't it? It's actually worth seeing if you went to the Ring operas from this new production, either at the opera, or at The Met itself. And yes, I am glad I saw it.

But, for me, what was most telling is what was not covered. Yes, I get that the machine, and the staging was the big deal about this new production. And, to be sure, this is probably what most people were interested in, but, really, that is only one part of what goes into making a production like this.

Where was the sections of the orchestra rehearsing with James Levine, before he had to leave for health reasons? Or him working with some of the singers? Or, how about some stuff of Debbie Voigt working on learning the words and music of what is a humungous role, which she had never learnt before? I mean, even the preparation of some individual scenes, which were shown, in every case focused on the interaction of the characters and the machine, not even once did I hear a performer talk about motivations or "how do you want me to play this scene?"

Of course, I do know why none of this featured.

This was a production by a director, who while known for innovation, is not exactly known for depth. This is not a production to make people discuss what was meant, or why someone did what, it was opera as spectacle, as a literal reading, utilising technology to bring things to life that have always been essentially unstageable.

My spies, who include people who sang in the show, inform me that they did not have much in the way of interaction with Robert LePage. Most of the blocking, that is, the building up of how the characters move around and interact was worked out with assistants. LePage was more focussed (dare I say, obsessed?) with his monster of a set, and all its technical challenges.

Yet ultimately, what matters with any opera, in the end, is the music, the characters and the performances. Do we believe in them as individuals enough to care what happens? Are the musical values strong enough to make us care? And, is the music working to strengthen the performances, or do those actually work against the music being sung?

And to be honest, having seen this production in cinema, and now having seen the documentary, I am truly convinced that what worked owed most to Richard Wagner, then to James Levine and his musical staff, then the performers and finally to Robert LePage's organisation. This, for all its marketing as an innovative production, was really at its heart a very traditional telling of the story. Yes, the set was unusual, and used in interesting ways, but that does not detract from the fact, this is a very traditional Ring.

And I say that, not meaning it in a bad way. This is a Ring cycle to show to people who do not "get" Wagner. It presents the operas in a way that is clear, does not clutter the stories with unnecessary details and is performed by people who mostly are at the top of their careers. There are a couple of smaller performers who, in the performances screened in cinemas, seemed outclassed, but they were minor roles, compared to most.

But, Wagner is expected to offer more. As a writer, he was concerned much more with the meaning of the tale, than just the tale itself. Normally, in modern productions, you come away with a sense of what the director thought the operas were about. You gain a sense of what his or her pet theories are, or his choice of things to fetishise. With this production, you only get opera as spectacle and storytelling. Which, while enjoyable, does leave you wondering, "is that it?" I think for the length of time we commit, we (and Wagner) should expect more.

A Rant

Extreme frustration…

That is all I can say about what has just happened. Apart from the fact that I am distraught beyond words. Upset. Needing to cry and rant for days.

And it is all happening, because an invoice that should have been paid months ago sat on someone's too hard pile. Meanwhile, we sat and wondered why it was taking so long to pay. When The Gorgeous One was able to break free of regular day job induced deadline hell and family stress to find out, butts were kicked and numerous apologies issued, but the damage was done. We now had to restart the approval process for payment all over again. And being a Govt organisation that is funded by multiple areas of government, that takes time. You would think two weeks would be enough, but no.

So, instead, we have to sit back, rant and rave and wait for this money to come through. In the meantime, we watch our tickets to The Met's Ring cycle go to waste. Tickets we organised back in September last year. Our plans to do a range of things, fall apart. Our chance to meet people who have been responsible for keeping me sane through some very black days, gone. You begin to see why I am upset.

So, what am I missing you ask? Well, this:




Has that whetted your appetite for more? Try here:  This is the official video for the full cycle


So, instead, we are waiting to hear when we do get this payment through, then trying to work out what we can do. Needless to say, this is not a good time to be in our household right now.


If we appear a little distracted, upset or aggro, you at least know why, and hopefully will be sympathetic. Right now though, I think I will go have another cry. You might want to turn away.

And yes, this might seem a little melodramatic to some of you. But, this was going to be our first real holiday together, that was not for family reasons. This holiday has also already cost me several jobs, because they wanted someone who could start straight away. It has been the one thing I had been looking forward to, while I was out of work. Now that has gone too. I think I am entitled to be upset.

Gotterdammerung in HD

I admit to approaching this review in 2 minds. Do I write my normal review, or do I write a love letter to Deb Voigt's immolation scene? I am not being silly. Her immolation scene IS that good. The rest of the performance that we saw in the cinema was mostly fantastic, but that huge final sing that Deb did was truly something else again. Just so that you know what I am talking about, here is one of the better sounding immolation scenes available on line:



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2581375664047517259

This was Eva Marton singing Brunnhilde, I have no idea where, but it gives you an idea what I am talking about if you do not know the piece.

This is sung at the end of a 6 hour opera! This is what brings it to a close. Tonight, listening to Debbie Voigt sing this music, whatever hesitations, what ever doubts I had about her as a successful Brunnhilde were swept away. She took charge and sang her heart out in a way we wish we got all the time, but rarely get. This was singing (and acting) of the highest order that left me shocked. Do not get me wrong, Debbie Voigt is a very good singer, and one of the few who can successfully negotiate the demands of Brunnhilde at The Met, with its barn of a theatre. But I was not expecting to be shocked out of my seat with brilliant singing at the end of the opera. The only conclusion is she was holding back enough to really let rip at the end and stun us all insensible. It worked!!!

But as for the rest? Well, really, there were no weak links. The Norns at the start all sang beautifully, even if their costuming and makeup was quite unflattering (occupational hazard in Wagner unfortunately)

Jay Hunter Morris continues to grow in his Siegfried performances. Give him another ten years, and he will either be truly fabulous, or his voice will be shot. I am not sure which but I am hoping for fabulous. As it is, he is really bringing the character to life beautifully. If his voice is a bit small for the role, well, that is something we have to live with. Siegfried Jerusalem was a freak of nature, and those tend to be few and far between.

Also stunning was Hans-Peter Konig as Hagen. Seriously, his is a voice born to play villains, big dark and beautifully expressive. Eric Owens in the cameo as his father was also his usual great self, continuing his outstanding success in the role.

And of course, the chorus were their normal amazing self. Seriously, that number of singers all working brilliantly together is amazing, and they did it well..

Which brings me to the production…

The Machine continues to be its mix of wonderful and infuriating. Wonderful in that so much of it works so well. Infuriating for those times when they seem to be doing things, just for the sake of doing it. Yes, it is great to have so much flexibility. But, that does not mean you have to use it all the time!!! Going through about three different stages each time the scene changes begins to get a bit old very quickly. And yes, I get that water features prominently in this opera. But do you have to constantly have it featured in the projections on the machine? It probably explains why regular toilet breaks are a must in this opera!!!

Something I have not mentioned much in my previous comments is the costumes. Part of that reason is that most of the previous operas are full of supernatural characters, gods and demigods and the like, so you do expect them to have out there costumes, rather than something normal. But most of this opera the characters are fully human, normal people in a medieval world. Their costumes worked in with that well, and it was the first time I noticed how well.

Oh, the other thing that Gotterdammitslong (as I call it) stands and falls on, is how well the staging of the ending is. Does it tie up the loose ends, does the burning work convincingly, is it believable? Well, to be honest, yes and no. It was not believable for the cataclysmic ending of the world with hope for renewal that we are led to expect. Yes, the important bits (Siegfried, Brunnhilde and Grane) burnt up, the subtitles indicated that Valhalla was going to be burnt (not that we saw it ever in any of the operas) and then the Rhine came up at the end and everything was brought to a calm serene ending. Yes, cathartic. Cataclysmic? No, and with everything at their disposal, I frankly expected more. But, considering the performance I had just sat through, I was happy with that. Not a perfect ending to a perfect Ring Cycle (is that even possible?), but one that got the important bits right, and left you knowing you had just witnessed something extraordinary. Really, should you ask for more?