A tale of 2 opera events

So, this is the story of my attendance at two opera performances, where one was in the theatre and one was the spectacular that is Opera On The Harbour. Both very different, both a bit flashy and glam, but one moved me, and one left me feeling WTAF?

First, to the special. Faust. With the David McVicar production from the Royal Opera, a much loved and praised production, that manages to include much of his usual visual language, while still remaining true to the story and libretto. Everything that is needed is there, with a few extras (I never worked out the point of the black evening gown for Mephistopheles, but it worked in context)  and the story is told in a way that leaves this archetypal morality play still relevant for today. To be sure, we do not expect supernatural intervention in our lives, but this tale of innocence lost, and of "be careful what you ask for" still rang true, helped by superlative performances.

For this was truly international A-grade house casting. First of all, the young up coming tenor that is getting everyone excited, Michael Fabiano sang the title role. As a singer that did not automatically leap to mind in this role (I expect to hear him in Italian ones), I was impressed by his versatility. His musicianship was never in doubt, but French is a language that not every opera singer can sing successfully in. The fact that after Sydney he flew to Paris to perform the role at the Bastille Opera also probably says a lot. Needless to say, if you have the chance, I strongly recommend you go hear him, he is a very impressive singer, who is going to continue to improve.

As his love interest, we had the stunning Nicole Car, who once again showed why she is now going places. (currently singing in Berlin, then off to the Royal Opera as Tatyana) Last time I heard her, I loved her voice, but was a little underwhelmed by her acting in a role where she did not fit the production. This time, she was fine. She took the star role that Marguerite is and ran with it. If her French did not always sound French, that would be my biggest criticism, which in a young singer, is nothing that time and coaching will not fix.

And then we had Teddy Tahu Rhodes stepping into the big badboy role of Mephistopheles. And loving it. I have said before, that Teddy is such a great stage animal. Once again, he got a role to sink his teeth into and have fun with. And he did. I'm finding him sounding more basslike each time I hear him, less baritonal. And I like it. Especially in this role, where the usual performers are basses with secure top notes, not baritones who can go low. And of course, the best recorded performers of it are the Russian/eastern europe basses like Cristoff and Ghiaurov, so the darkening of Teddy's sound worked well here. Although, there is no real opportunity for him to show off his chest this time...

Then, we had the smaller parts filled out by Giorgio Caoduro as Valentine, Anna Dowsley as Siebel, Richard Anderson as Wagner and Domenica Matthews as Marthe. Each of them great singers and worthy of major roles, filling out smaller roles and making them vivid and real. And each of them well loved by Australian audiences.

The result of this? A performance of Faust that will live as the one to beat in my memories. Admittedly, only my second, and the first live, but it left me moved, and aware, that even if I will never be a Faust fan, it is certainly a much stronger work dramatically and musically than I had given it credit, in the correct hands.

Which leads me to Aida, which is a whole different kettle of fish.

First of all, Aida seems a natural fit to be mounted in stadium style productions, with big choruses and lots of put everything on you have on stage scenes. It's why it remains popular at The Met for example, who can fill their stage with hundreds of big voices raised in triumph or horror, as the mood dictates. The only problem with that idea, as everyone quickly discovers when performing Aida, is that it really is about the love triangle between the leads, stuck into the situation where they are all people of influence and importance, and love and the requirements of society do not match at all. Not to mention the requirements of religion. The big scenes are the setting of the scene for the important drama, what happens to the people at the centre of it

As a result, big flashy productions of Aida tend to fall flat on their faces if you do not have four performers giving performances that make you care about them. If you are more concerned about the spectacle than the story, then your Aida ultimately becomes the the souffle that fails to rise.

Now, to be sure, there was much to love about this production. All the voices (except one) were right for the parts. Visually, it looked amazing. It was just totally schizophrenic in its imagery. Amneris's costumes looked straight out of Elizabeth Taylor's Cleopatra, yet Aida's looked like they belonged to the heroine of  The Number 1 Ladies' Detective Agency. I mean, I get that Aida is meant to look different to Amneris as one is Egyptian and one Ethiopian, but really??? And, that is before we start on the dancers and their outfits. Yes, let's not discuss the dancers at all, because what they had to do was mostly laughable and totally wrong in context (there was a context to them?)And their outfits belonged to the 1am show at RHI at the Sydney Mardi Gras Party.

So, yes, there was much that was quite frankly so grossly over the top, the production threatened to out camp a John Waters film. Think on that, and remember this is a serious drama about a love triangle caught up with societal pressures in a rigidly structured society. Or, it is written as such, at any rate.

Thankfully, the music making was mostly of a high standard. As Amneris, Jacqui Dark was pretty much the star of the show. Her character is traditionally the villain of this piece and she got to be that writ large. Always bringing a strong performance to her characters, here she revelled in playing the spoiler. Her voice is also well suited to the role, so she got to prowl the stage belting out her music with abandon, and generally acting the maneater, with her eye on someone else's man.

As the man in question,  Arnold Rawls brought a remarkably fresh voiced tenor to the role, singing the opening aria which trips up many, with ease. To some, he me have failed to lack the daring do needed to be convincing as the man who risks throwing everything away for love, but to me, he was more the man paralysed by love's demands, than the do-er many assumed this role must be. He certainly sang the role comfortably, with more enthusiasm than many. His was a performance that left you thinking you would not mind hearing him again.

As the title role though, we had a singer who quite frankly did not cut it. Sure, she had all the notes, and she has a reputation as a spinto soprano, but that is where the good things ended. I couldn't help thinking at times, that her staging was very clearly designed around the other cast Aida (Latonia Moore) who has the voice to make you forget anything except what she is telling you. Daria Masiero does not. What Moore could convince with the power and beauty of her voice, Masiero would do and come across as looking stagy and tired, producing a "please like me" response, that REALLY grated on me. If your heroine who is going to die at the end, cannot make you want her to live, you have failed. And, that was the biggest problem for me in a problematic production. The Nile Scene where you see Aida being torn between her love for her man, and her desire to be back in her homeland, which can be a lesson in how to sing beautiful high notes softly, became an "oh my god just get over it" trial, as well. We felt nothing for her as a character, and the sounds she was producing, were frankly not that pretty either. Certainly the worst sound I have heard from an Aida (six staged performances, 2 of them video)

For the most part, the other performers were all quite acceptable, singing what really are roles that are cyphers, rather than flesh and blood characters, although the Ramfis of Conal Coad will remain with me, purely for the camp factor. Him walking up the stage with his cape could teach Joan Crawford how to go OTT for pure campery.

However, I have to admit, knowing Aida, I still have no idea what killed them in this production. There was no attempt to try to confine them, or to place them in some sort of lower location to suggest they were trapped. Rather they were stuck alone on the middle of that huge stage. Death by excess fresh air perhaps? Certainly not the suffocation they were singing about. It was also telling that I was eager for them to get it over and just die at the end. This was not a production to leave you sobbing at the end (which it should), rather, most of us left laughing. Which, considering this is a tragic love story, is probably all you really need to know.

Can we talk about Tatyana instead?

So, Eugene Onegin, that glorious lush Russian opera full of dance music and angst and love and death. It also starred a great cast singing beautifully and acting up a storm...

And yet, I was not happy. Mainly because the production of Kaspar Holten worked against the story, adding extra elements that worked against the story, to create the idea that the story was all about the memories we carry, not that it was just the sad tale of young lovers who make bad choices, then live to regret them.

It is also fair to say, that when he planned the production for the Royal Opera (it is a co production with Covent Garden and Teatro Reggio, Turino), that he expected much older leads, which could make the young lovers/old lovers thing work, but when you have a singer in the (old) role who is probably the same age as the young dancer doubling her, it becomes both confusing and distracting. "Is that Young Tatyana, or is it Old? Oh, she is singing, its the Old one." is the sort of thing that would go through the heads of the audience, assuming of course they had read the information beforehand, and knew this was happening, and did not just think there was a mute sister who danced (at one point I was asked "Is she meant to be miscarrying?", which would make for a very different Letter Scene!!!)

Also, it took a while, but eventually, I got the point of why everything got left on stage and never cleared, the books, the letters, the tree, the snow, dead Lensky, the broken chair, etc. It was to highlight that these people are carrying their history with them, as surely as if it was packed in a backpack and permanently attached to their backs. Well, we get that, it is constantly reinforced in the story and in the music; that the awkward mistakes that these characters make and must live with, are what has caused the traumatic ending for them. Doomed to love each other, but unable to do anything about it, because of the decisions they made in the past, that lead to this point.

But, we do not need to have that drummed into us, it is there in the story and the words, and the music, for all to see. Leaving all these reminders is just awkward, and does not help the story. Having Tatyana come close to falling on dead Lenksy is not going to make things believable, nor is she catching her dress on the branch left behind, as she tries to turn and walk angrily away from Onegin while inside her palace!

So, yes, there was lots about this performance that I did not like.  And most of those related to the work of Kaspar Holten, whose work I have seen before on DVD and found awkward. On the other hand, there was also much to admire. There were no weak performers in the cast, and lots to admire. I have to say, most of that flowed from the high musical standards, held together with precision and fire by Guillaume Tournaire. This is the second time I have attended OperaAustralia this year, and the second time I have found myself in awe of their musical standard.

First of all, if this is not the role that marks Nicole Car as a star, then, I would be curious what would. She inhabits this role as if born to it. Her sweet lyrical voice rose to the occasion beautifully, never feeling underpowered, and sounding every bit the dreamy, yet innocent girl who she portrayed. Considering her age, I was surprised to hear she was cast in this, but having heard her, I could not imagine another local singer come even close to her in this role.

As her would be suitor Onegin, we had the Slovak Baritone Dalibor Jenis in his first season here. He sounds strong and powerful, but I found his soft notes a bit off. An off night? Problems with Russian? I can't say, but it affected the way I viewed his performance. I thought he seemed to be portraying Onegin as a heartless bully and very abrupt, until I realised, it was actually his voice I was reacting to, not his acting. Once I realised that, I could see a much more nuanced performance, just one with a vocal challenge.

As Tatyana's sister, we had Sian Pendry, released from the realms of pants roles, and freed to play a very girly girl, one not yet ready to settle down with the ardent Lensky, and more than eager to flirt back with Onegin, setting up the duel that is in many ways the centre of the piece. Her early scenes with Tatyana showed beautifully matched voices, setting the tone for the opera well.

As Lensky, James Egglestone was ardent and hot headed as we expect. His argument with Onegin at the party was quite physical, and believable. His voice is a bit darker than expected in this role, and his Kuda kuda, was beautifully sung, but not quite the meltingly lovely tone that we hope for in this role. The fact that he then got killed at the front of the stage and remained there till the end of the opera, deserves special praise for being dead so effectively, though why it was thought needed is another question.

Also worthy of mention were the glorious cameo arias of both Kaneen Breen as Triquet (hilarious) and Konstantin Gorny as Prince Gremin, bringing a cultured authority to his part, though why he had to appear briefly to witness the big scene between Onegin and Tatyana was beyond me. It was not needed, and just drew focus away from the fine anguished and passionate performances we were riveted by.

So, to sum up, this is not an Onegin to go see if you do not know the story. This is also not a production to see if you get annoyed by directors who play with stories to suit their pet ideas. I admit, I left both annoyed by what I had seen, yet blown over by the performances.

However, it is a production to go hear if you love this music. That was very well served by all, and has been haunting me for days since. I can think of no better praise for a performer, than that they served the music as well as this cast.

Happy families, not...

Ok, so Salome and her crazy family. I just saw them today. And, yes, they are all nuts. Mum clearly does not like her husband, and is jealous of her daughter, but also clearly taught her well. Daughter uses her beauty to get her step dad to do what she wants. Clearly she has learnt to twist men around her finger, but not anything about right or wrong.

Which really gets to the heart of the matter. Salome is both femme fatale and yet naive innocent. She knows how to get What she wants, but she clearly has no moral compass. She meets someone with a powerful one, but fails to convince him to succumb to her charms. And from there it all goes pear shaped.

The decision was made to show the feast that is repeatedly referred to throughout the opera. They are at the back of the stage, raised up but also hidden behind a curtain of clear plastic strips, letting us know they are there, but seeming them not noticing what happens outside. "Outside" is a circular platform with a huge metal grate in it. There are a series of about 7 curved stairs down to the floor level of the stage. Most of the action takes place on the round platform, or the stairs in front of them. The grate of course, is raised up to allow access to Jokanaan, when needed. Costumes are best described as regie-light. Yes, none of them match the period this opera is set in, but they all are appropriate for the person wearing them. Herod looks like a overweight pimp in a shiny yellow suit. Salome and Herodias have out there trashy look at me look at me dresses, with head gear to match (and OTT hairstyles often too) . The religious guests at the feast are all dressed in the costume appropriate to whatever type of priest they are representing. (They are not all Jews here) And Narraboth and the soldiers are a mix of army camoflage pants, with upper body armour that looks like it came from some scifi movie. As I said, regie light costuming.

So. You begin to get a sense of what it looked like, what did it sound like? Well, to be honest, mostly very good. No one stood out as bad, most were very well cast, some were astonishingly good. I heard no bad singing, and a lot of amazing singing. I also saw a lot of powerful acting in what ultimately is a how not to guide to family values.

None of the minor characters stood out as bad, most surprised with how good they sounded. The fact that Kanen Breen was relegated to mere First Jew, gives you an idea, that luxury casting was applied. David Corcoran was seriously good as the doomed Narraboth. His death early on, both shocked and upset (as it should) when he realised that Salome in person, was not the beautiful ideal he had in his mind, but a twisted soul trapped within a beautiful facade.

Salome herself, performed by Cheryl Barker, was a monster, in the best way. Her performance was gripping, moving and also believable. She portrayed Salome as both victim and as active participant who causes things to happen. Yes, I still think Salome needs a bigger voice, but Cheryl makes a strong case for not needing a dramatic soprano in this role. To be sure, there are times when her voice struggles to deal with the combination of heavy orchestra and the vocal writing, but she rises above it to deliver a towering final scene that had us believing. And moved. And it has to be said, she does have something of the girlishness about her voice still, that this role should have, but few do.

As her mother, Jacqui Dark was suitably demented. She adds to her list of demented monster roles, a Herodias who you seriously do not want to meet in the street. There was nothing subtle about the performance, but then, Herodias was not written to be subtle. Her stentorian tones blasted across all others in the take no prisoners style we expect. You almost do not blame Herod for looking at his stepdaughter, when his wife has become such a vile harridan of a creature.

And Herod? Well, John Pickering was amazing (and creepy). This is the first time I have encountered him in the flesh, and, well, I hope to again. Im thinking he would make an excellent Mime or Loge. Here he makes light work of an incredibly wordy part, flinging off huge amounts of dialogue through the music, while remaining totally musical and in character. He was far and away the best performer, in my opinion, in a very strong cast.

As our Jokanaan, we had the ever reliable John Wegner, portraying yet another tortured soul. This one though, is physically tortured, while his soul is elsewhere. I was perhaps less convinced by him acting as the otherworldly prophet, but there was no complaints about his sound. I felt that using speakers for him when in the cistern, was probably unnecessary, but I also recognise that with the stage at the Opera House, putting him in the pit to sing his "in cistern" lines, would not give him much time to get to up to where he needed to be when he emerged into the light. It was probably unnecessary, but it also worked. It gave his prophetic pronouncements more power, making him more the person to be afraid of, even when imprisoned. At times I did wonder if I needed to see more otherworldliness from him, but then, he did seem comparatively sane, in a world going mad around him.

Now, about the Dance. That fraught thing about Salome, is most singers who are believable in the famous Dance of the 7 veils, are not likely to be capable to sing the role. Rather than have Cheryl do some sort of big long dance number shedding clothing, our director opted to have each of the seven veils represent a different female character, an archetype of men's fantasies of women if you will. It works, probably better as a concept than in reality, but if you know it in advance, it certainly made sense. And it was a lot more believable than her doing a solo dance for the almost 10 mins of the dance, shedding clothes as she goes….

So, to sum up, on a scale of 10? I would give this production, as seen today a 9. Not quite as amazing as Lucia, but still awesomely sung, and brilliantly theatrical. And yes, moving. Though, to be honest, I have no idea why I cared about such vile people. That I think says all you need to know.







Here is something of the infamous dance:

And ABC TV's news report:

Marriage of Figaro - Benedict Andrews production

I often think that Figaro is one of those operas that is hard to kill. It is set in a time that is different enough from ours, that the behaviour and motivations of the characters can seem a bit odd, but yet it is full of universal truths that we can all relate to. Love, lust, jealousy, revenge and fidelity are things that we can all relate to, even if some of the situations seems frankly a bit out of our experience. Not to mention that the whole opera is so full of humour, it is almost like you can't make it not funny. Though, I am sure some directors have managed it.

Which brings me to the new production of Figaro for Opera Australia, by Benedict Andrews. My understanding is that this is his second opera he has worked on. I would definitely argue that this showed. Not that I think that fresh eyes are a bad thing with an well known and loved opera, but at the same time, experience with opera will show through in a great production.

Now, I am going to be harsh here. This Figaro is one where the comedy is played up, but the soul is missing. Anyone who thinks that the Mozart Da Ponte operas are not works of genius probably are not going to understand why I am ambivalent about this production. Frequently the finely drawn characters were lost in the constant efforts to milk every laugh possible out. Yes, it should be funny. But, not to the point that characters lose their essential humanity, which I felt at times happened.

To be sure, setting the opera in current times, makes a certain logic. If you want to make it accessible to those who do not go to the opera, making it seem normal, or something they can relate to, does work. But if you want to capture the heart and soul of Figaro, modernising it usually fails. Yes, it lets you see things you may not have noticed, but the problem is, the behaviour of the characters of the opera does reflect their time. Droit du seigneur is not something that happens today, and would never even be contemplated. In the time of Figaro, it is supposed to be something that happens, even if not as often as it has been referred to. This fact alone will always make a modernised version awkward. A traditional version always has this as believable, so the scheming to avoid it, does not seem so crazy and silly as a modern one does.

Having said that, if you could get past that fact, as a production there was a lot to like about this one. The set allowed for rapid and easy switches between scenes. Not having to take the time to switch between Figaro's room and The Countess's worked, although having Susanna present while The Countess sang Porgi amor seemed awkward, breaking the servant/lady divide, even if their relationship always needs to be more than just servant/mistress. It just sat wrong, as if it was a step too far.. The costumes mostly matched what those sort of characters would wear in modern times, though I felt the act 2 dress for The Countess should have been more showy. A minor thing sure, but she IS a countess, not some 20something girl off for a night on the town.

Speaking of the Countess, I thought in many respects she was the weakest performer, both vocally and dramatically. She was the one performer who frequently was hard to understand. Having said that, I doubt my Russian diction is acceptable, so you could say that was being petty, except she is doing this professionally, and I do not.

On the other hand Taryn Fiebig as Susanna is an old pro at this role. Her diction was always understandable, and her comfort in the role, having played it frequently before, shows in her assurance on the stage. This is a Susanna that would stand up in companies overseas with higher reputations than OperaAustralia.

As her husband, Joshua Bloom seemed to grow into the role as the evening progressed. His is not a big voice, but well used. And his increasing confusion as the day progressed was totally believable.

As the Count, we had Michael Lewis, for once given a major lead role that enables him to shine, both vocally and dramatically. His is a count sure of his entitlements, and eager to claim what he sees as his. He seems unable to see that his behaviour is what is causing the whole mess, rather railing against everyone for preventing him getting what he feels he deserves.

Then of course, there was the comic relief. Bartolo and Marcellina in the hands of Conal Coad and Jacqui Dark ensures that every time they walk on stage they basically take over the scene. Their confident singing and love of any joke and mischief meant that if they could steal a scene, whether with Bartolo's oxygen tank, or their general foolery, they took it. And of course, they made the whole thing funny, every time they appeared. Possibly too much, I would argue, because the characters they were portraying tended to get lost under all the physical comedy. They do both have some very distinct motivations through out the opera, but those were hard to tell in this production, as they were too busy keeping the gags running thick and fast.

Likewise, Kanen Breen as Basillio was also hilarious, but I do not think anyone can ever take Basilio serious. He is there purely as a gossip and to be a figure of fun. Kanen of course, is always happy to be a source of hilarity in a production, and he gets plenty of chances in this one, whether his lechery towards Cherubino, or attacked by the dead deer or, well, you get the picture.

On the night I was there, Domenica Matthews was unwell, and her understudy went on. I won't say too much about Anna Yuen as a result, except to say this production requires a fearless Cherubino, which she pulled off fine. Her voice may not be the match of some others I have seen in the role, but she was certainly not bad, or the weakest lead.

So I guess really, my description of this production was, it was fun. It is a production for young non opera goers, who have no idea of the story. They will come away loving it.

On the other hand, those of us who know and love Figaro, are likely to be less thrilled. This is not a production that enables the essential truths of the story to come forth. This is played purely for laughs. If that is how you see Figaro, go and enjoy yourself. Me, I expect more than just a barrel of laughs. I expect to see an understanding of the humanity of these people, a sense of something other and a concern for the characters and their plight. The fact that I did not, I think says all I need to.

A short Don Giovanni post....

This is not going to be long…

I was just thinking I should write about what I am looking forward to this year, when I realised that somehow, I managed to miss writing about Don Giovanni, that we saw last year…..

Oops.

So, Don G. At Sydney Opera House. With Teddy Tahu Rhodes as Don G, Conal Coad as Leporello, and the usual production that has been doing the rounds there for years. You know, with the collapsing pillars at the end and the leather shorts and the stunning bod and…..

Oh, and Jacquie Dark as Elvira.

Hang on, that's not a mezzo role?

Well, of course, Mozart wrote when the terms soprano, mezzo, etc, were not really used. He wrote for individual singers, which makes it interesting that his roles are often used to define fachs (voice types, for those who were wondering)

Jacquie is a big meaty mezzo (dramatic mezzo, okay) and her voice actually fits Donna Elvira really well. She takes the shrieking harridan and turns her into well, a rounded character, whose coloratura turns become a part of her personality, freak outs that are explaining her inner torment, rather than just exercises in vocal technique and "look at me, aren't I an amazing singer" outbursts. In short, she built her performance around what the music showed, which is how it should be, rather than the usual, somewhat understandable "park and Bark" role it often is (its bloody hard music)

Teddy as Don Giovanni? Well, I admit, I have often thought that TTR is a bit bloodless vocally. As in, its a pretty voice, but his recordings (I have rarely seen him live) seemed to be lacking a bit of commitment, or engagement with the role or something. I will never say that again!!! The man is clearly a stage animal, sinking his teeth into DG, making him a believable lecher in the first act, then turning the later parts of the opera with its supernatural elements into a mad scene. The intervention of the statue became more like the results of hallucination than supernatural events, but it made sense because of his totally committed and demented performance. All sung in his beautiful (and surprisingly expressive) voice. Did I mention he ends shirtless?

And of course, there is Conal Coad, a comic bass of many years experience and huge talent. This was the second time I saw him live last year, and each time he has brought a stunning performance, hilarious, yet also real and true to life. He really does make these roles his own, applying his beautiful rich voice to these complex roles with seeming ease, yet working them for the inherent humour. We really forget just how amazing he is most of the time, having seen him so often taking a back seat role, then, give him a moment to shine and he is still stunning. (He was amazing in Capriccio too)

Anyway, just a few thoughts, because I figured, I needed to clear the decks before I started writing about the huge amount (for me) of opera that I am going to be seeing this year. That will probably be my next post, unless I do one on Rodelinda this afternoon (not sure if we are going…)

I also did not write about Siegfried, which was fab. But, as I am seeing that this year in the flesh… That can wait..