A Fright at the Opera! Ballo in Maschera 2nd January 2015

Copyright Catherine Ashmore

Oh dear!  I had hoped that my first opera excursion of 2015 would be something to inspire and kick the year off in fine style!  Despite the dark rumblings of discontent following the first (and subsequent) nights, I hoped that inspiration and a Christmas miracle might have intervened.  Alas, and sad to say, it has not.

Un Ballo in Maschera (to give the opera its full title) is fabulous middle-period Verdi and full of wonderful if tricky arias, duets and ensembles.  Verdi's original version was set in Sweden with the story portraying King Gustav III's assassination at a masked ball,  Of course, the censors would not allow this on stage and so he was forced to change both character and location - Gustavo eventually became Riccardo the Governor of Boston.  In this latest production however, all is a bit more vague.  While the Boston version names are retained, the location appears to be some Ruritanian middle-European location prior to World War 1 - none of which really has any impact on the story telling.

I really have nothing positive at all to say about the physical production and direction on display. The sets and costumes looked cheap and old-fashioned, the choreography dismal and singer-direction non-existant.  My initial tweeted reaction was to use the word inept.  Today I would add amateurish - except that would be an insult to some fine amateur performances I have seen.

There was conversely too much action in places and yet not enough in others.  Focus was constantly pulled from the lead singers by distracting stage business going on around them.  The overture was of course staged - to no real effect.  More annoyingly there was a side-show with Amelia's little boy constantly in and out of bed and Oscar (the page) having a bit of hanky-panky with the maid - all while the lead singers attempted to focus audience attention - and failed for the most part.  It really looked as though the director Katherine Thoma, had concentrated her attention on the peripheries and totally abandoned any attempt to direct the lead singers.

On paper the cast certainly appeared to have the vocal goods, although in my pre-season round up I did express doubts about their dramatic abilities.  Joseph Calleja, Liudmyla Monastyrska and Dmitri Hvorostovsky are very fine singers - great actors they are not.  Casting all three in the same production is unfortunate as even one great acting performance might have enlivened the evening. But it was not to be and unfortunately they received no help at all from the director.  They were all at their best when left alone singing solo arias and the audience rewarded those efforts appropriately.

Joseph Calleja is a fine tenor but his vibrato heavy voice is an acquired taste and I haven't really acquired it.  I don't think he's quite got the measure of this particular role but that may come in time and with better direction may well be a success.  I don't think pairing him with uber-dramatic soprano Liudmyla Monastyrska particularly helped his cause.  She has a magnificent voice it has to be said, although I did feel at times that her lowest notes were completely disconnected from the rest of her voice.  I've now seen her in three roles including a previous Lady Macbeth and Abigaille and unfortunately I've seen no dramatic engagement on any of those occasions. She faired slightly better here it has to be said but only slightly.  Hvorostovsky is pretty much a known quantity at this stage in his career and there were no surprises pleasant or unpleasant.   

Real dramatic engagement and some vocal allure was provided by both Serena Gamberoni as Oscar and Marianne Cornetti as Ulrica the fortune teller.  The conspirators as played by Anatoli Sivko and Jihoon Kim were also well within their roles dramatically and vocally.

Daniel Oren in the pit managed to suck the life out of what should be music of sparkling wit and hidden depths.  Combined with the directorial ineptitude of Katherine Thoma this Ballo really had no chance at all.

Addio del passato......La Traviata, Royal Opera House, 30 April 2014

I wasn't originally going to attend this set of performances of Verdi's classic opera; performances are split between two casts and I was saving my pennies for the second cast - more of which later.  But thanks to the offices of a Twitter friend (thanks Ruth), a standing ticket became mine for this matinee performance.  Even better, due to the slow tickets sales in the more expensive parts of the house, I found myself sitting in the stalls - a very rare occurrence.

This is a handsome and well-known production of Traviata, first seeing the light of day in 1994 and I remember it well from the tv broadcast with Angela Gheorghiu who made such a splash in the role. My hoard of programmes also reveal that I saw this production in the Albert Hall in 1998 during the period when the opera house was closed for refurbishment.  To be honest, I can't remember that much about the Albert Hall experience so I was keen to reacquaint myself with Richard Eyre's production.

The physical production is as traditional as they come but is relatively uncluttered and tells the story well - which is all you can ask of a a production be it traditional or modern.  I liked the contrast between the sumptuous Parisian settings of Act 1 and the second half of Act 2, and the more restrained and slightly abstract look for Violetta and Alfredo's country hideaway at the beginning of Act 2.  Act 3 of course, was all whitewashed desolation as Violetta met her tragic end.

Diana Damrau as Violetta, was one of the main reasons I wanted to catch this cast.  She has only recently taken the role into her repertoire, having previously concentrated on the purely coloratura soprano roles. Reviews have predictably been mixed after performances at La Scala and at the Met.  I wasn't exactly sure what to expect but in the end I found her portrayal of this iconic character very moving.  The first act vocal hurdles caused her no problems at all, although I was less keen on her physical embodiment of the character, with a slight case of overacting and over the top gestures.  'Old fashioned' is the phrase that springs to mind. This gradually settled down as the opera progressed - or perhaps I just got used to it.  Either way, she was very physically into the role, certainly fainting and collapsing very impressively on several occasions.  The final act was the most impressive of all and I don't think I have seen another soprano embody the physical frailty of Violetta quite so well.  She even managed to carry off the final 'swan-song' in this production - where the soprano has a last burst of energy and runs around the stage before collapsing. She managed to make this look not only plausible but heartbreaking.

Vocally there were no complaints at all from me.  Not only did she fearlessly throw off the coloratura of the first act (complete with high E to finish), but also negotiated the more dramatic and emotional requirements of Acts 2 and 3.  The audience were suitably appreciative and she received the biggest applause of the day.

Dmitri Hvorotovsky is no stranger to this production, in fact he made his ROH debut as Georgio Germont at the Albert Hall performances which I attended in 1998.  He is probably a little more suited to the elder Gemont now, although he did sound a bit 'throaty' to begin with, he soon warmed up and his duet with Violetta in Act 2 was a masterclass in controlled and beautiful legato.  His physical interpretation was also interesting, suggesting an attraction to Violetta which he manfully tried to hide.  I actually quite liked this approach which makes the elder Germont seem less of a one-dimensional 'baddie' than I have seen portrayed in other productions.

In fact, I did wonder at times why Violetta didn't run off with Papa Germont rather than his son! That's not to say that there was anything wrong with Francesco Demuro's portrayal of Alfredo - just that I didn't really feel there was any special chemistry with Damrau and so I was less involved with the 'tragic romance' aspect on this occasion.  Demuro has a fine lyric voice well suited to this role his Alfredo was impetuous, naive and somewhat self-absorbed and selfish.  I haven't always noticed this about Alfredo before, as in other productions the emphasis can be towards the romance and the undercurrents are forgotten.  It worked well but as I said, I did begin to wonder why Violetta had fallen in love with him.

All in all it was a very satisfying performance of an old favourite.  I tweeted after the performance saying it was 'delightfully old-fashioned'.  This is not a criticism by any means although there was a touch of (deliberate?) nostalgia about the whole thing.  Interpolated high notes, all cabalettas included, sumptuous sets and costumes and end of act curtain calls made the whole things seem like a throwback to another time.  But there were also the old fashioned virtues of fantastic singing, an understandable narrative and total commitment from all involved.

As I mentioned, I'm going to see this production again with the second cast.  Ailyn Perez stars as Violetta with her husband Stephen Costello portraying Alfredo.  And if that wasn't enough there is also the attraction of Simon Keenlyside as Georgio Germont.  To say that I'm looking forward to this would be understatement indeed.

Heart of Darkness Part 2 - Il Trovatore

In my previous blog post I looked into the background of Il Trovatore and confessed to some of my problems with it, or rather my problems in experiencing a fully realised dramatic production of the work.  I'm going to get down to specifics in this post by looking at two very different productions - and both with some satisfying moments.

Going back to 2002 , the Covent Garden production directed by Elijah Moshinsky is updated to a 19th century, roughly pre-Napoleonic era, a fact that doesn't really add anything but on the other hand, doesn't detract either.  The sets are dark and monolithic with Moshinsky's trademark columns and large oppressive sets.  The military setting is very much emphasised here with lots of male-bonding amongst the bored troops and the Count di Luna sporting a set of very snazzy uniforms.  There is very little to upset anyone here - as would be expected for a Covent Garden production.

The singers are of a high standard - Jose Cura as Manrico, Dmitri Hvorostovsky as Di Luna, Veronica Villarrroel as Leonora and Yvonne Naef as Azucena.  Cura is an effective actor and is always in character although sometimes this is achieved at the expense of the vocal line.  I have always admired his voice - its tone being baritonal and hefty and yet with a reasonably easy top.  His portrayal of Manrico emphasises the gypsy almost to the exclusion of any other character traits - you would never doubt that he was Azucena's son and they even have a physically similarity.  He copes admirably with the all of vocal challenges and the Di Quella Pira seems to hold no fear.  Like Jonas Kaufmann,  his is a divisive voice - you either love it or hate it.  I happened to love it although that was in 2002.  I fear the years have not been kind to his voice and he doesn't appear at the big houses that regularly any more, although I note a recent, not totally successful Otello at the Met earlier this year.

Dmitri as Di Luna comes across as a little reserved and uptight but that works in the context of the role.  His singing is beautiful and heartfelt and you do have to wonder why Leonora doesn't run off with him instead. Okay, so he may be a little obsessive but what a voice. Veronica Villaroel has a rich spicy tone but lacks the bel canto qualities that Leonora requires and you do feel towards the end that the role is perhaps one step away from being too heavy for her voice at that stage. However she has nice chemistry with both leading men - it just needs a little more oomph.  Last but not least is Yvonne Naef as Azucena.  The voice is more refined that many Azucena's I have heard and perhaps a little more madness/obsession is required in her portrayal but she is a fine singer.

The production however doesn't really move beyond telling the story as laid out in the libretto without really digging into the terrible events described by Azucena and the consequences for all the characters.  The production teetered dangerously close to 'Carmen' territory in Act 2, and by that I mean you could quite happily have imported the gypsy chorus from Carmen into Trovatore and no one would have been the wiser. There was also a slightly distasteful if half-hearted rape scene which I presume was an attempt at controversy. Uncalled for rape scenes in opera always set my teeth on edge but luckily this one didn't labour the point.

The highlight of this production was actually the closing scene which was done very effectively indeed.  In most productions Manrico is dragged off to be executed (sometimes off stage) with Di Luna and Azucena looking on.  Here, Manrico is actually shot by Di Luna, Azucena then sings her triumphant 'he was your brother' line, and Manrico slumps lifeless into Di Luna's arms, ending with that tragic tableau.  I thought it made the ending even more powerful than usual and was very effective in bringing home exactly what Di Luna  - and Azucena - had done.

It is an effective production in many ways and one which I would happily watch again.

Which brings us to this.

This image is just one action packed scene from the recent Munich production of Il Trovatore.  There is no possible way I can go into every single detail of this production - and in a way that's what I didn't like about it.  There is far too much going on here and for very little benefit.  Apparently set in a dreamscape, the stage is constantly revolving, the story constantly moving around between reality and nightmare.  Some things worked for me and some things didn't.  Having Leonora portrayed as being blind might have been interesting if they'd developed the theme, but alas it just came across as a way of getting around the problem of mistaken identity in Act 1 - after that the blindness just gets in the way. I can only imagine the restrictions placed on the singer.

The overall impression I got was that the director, Olivier Py doesn't trust the story - or the singers - or the composer...or even the audience come to that..  Why else would you have to constantly change the images?  Why else would you have Azucena's mother wandering around the set and her execution acted out in some sort of dumb show?  The music tells us exactly what happened, it doesn't really need saying that Azucena is haunted by her mother because we know that. For the main part, this production reveals nothing new and simply serves to obscure the story further.  It drastically needs paring down to the essentials and getting rid of the clutter to concentrate on the principles.

Speaking of which, I thought the four principle singers coped admirably with what they were being asked to do, especially as this was Jonas Kaufmann's first attempt at the part of Manrico.  What an introduction!  He has said in previous interviews that ideally he prefers to sing in a 'traditional' production of a new role first and then he always has something to refer back to if he should find himself in a wacky, way-out production. Unfortunately he had no where to turn here but delivered a sterling committed performance anyway.  I still don't think it's an ideal role for him but he made a pretty good case for it.  I'd certainly like to see him in a less cluttered production. I heard him sing Manrico twice (one audio and one webcast) and he had definitely improved on second hearing - not that the first was bad in any way but you could hear the improvement the second time.  As always he got a lot of stick in the press once they finally realised he hadn't sung the unwritten high C but he was quite open about it and frankly I don't blame him.  I am not a high note freak when it comes to tenors - especially when the composer didn't write them.

Anja Harteros was sublime as Leonora and is probably the world's pre-eminent Verdi soprano today.  If her acting was less convincing then she was restricted by the blindness concept and the fact that the libretto gives her little scope for doing other than singing spectacularly which she does.  She does interact with Kaufmann very nicely indeed and I'm looking forward to La Forza del Destino which they will be doing together in Munich later this year.  It is also being broadcast on the web on the 28th December for anyone interested.

Alexey Markov as Di Luna was a bit bland for my tastes.  Vocally he was fine but he was left floundering dramatically which may be the fault of the director as the individual 'personregie' or actor direction was lacking in most cases, Py being more obviously interested in abstract images than telling the story.

Which leaves us with Azucena as played by Elina Manistina.  Azucena is actually the pivot of the opera- everything stems from her actions past or present and if a director doesn't realise that then he's directing the wrong opera.  Fortunately this is one area that actually worked for me although it still could have been better. I couldn't actually tell if the mezzo was a good actress or not but she did what she was given to do with conviction so it sort of worked.  Her voice was good if not as ultimately thrilling as some others in the role and she cut a striking figure in top hat, flouncy skirt and dramatic make-up.

Where this production really worked for me was in the pivotal scene between Manrico and Azucena in Act 2 but before I get to that I may have missed out a little bit of the back story.  You see, when Azucena's mother was burned alive and she kidnapped the Count's younger son, she was so crazed she intended to wreak revenge by throwing him into the fire!  Except that in her grief and madness induced trance she threw her own son into the flames - at least that's the story she tells in Act 2.  Oops. Which makes her fraught relationship with Manrico open to all sorts of possibilities - semi-Oedipal or otherwise.

This then is the dark heart of this opera, this twisted, dark, confused relationship between mother and foster-son.  This relationship is ripe for exploration and at least some of it is delved into here.  Although never totally explicit, my impression is that Manrico is somewhat of an abused child - both physically and possibly, now that he is grown up, sexually.  Azucena certainly has no problems clambering into bed with him, running her hands over his body (ostensibly to check for wounds) and then finally planting an very un-motherly lingering kiss on his lips.  Well, she knows that he's not really her son I suppose.  Manrico is submissive rather than willing, quite often flinching as she touches him or trying to shield himself from her.  But she is also quite happy to tie him to a chair (and you get the feeling that's not the first time) or hold a blade to his throat in order to get him to do what she wants.  Theirs is a very confused relationship indeed.

Others may disagree with this approach but it totally worked for me.  Of course Azucena would have conflicted feelings about this child/man - not only had his father killed her mother, her own guilt at killing her son by mistake would be quite successfully deflected onto poor Manrico.  This is the only production I've seen where its made explicit that Azucena has totally groomed Manrico to be the tool of her revenge so that at the end of the opera there is no sense of regret when Manrico is killed by his own brother.  I don't think the final scene actually worked that well to be honest -  the blocking and timing of it was very anti-climatic as the Count's aide stabs Manrico in the back.  Could have been done better.

But that sentiment applies to the production as a whole, for in spite of illuminating the dark relationship between Azucena and Manrico it failed in too many other places.  I leave you with one of the more successful images of the production....