Opera Australia 2007

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

2007 in review

The season is over. It was also my first year of regular and frequent operagoing. As good an excuse as any for a bit of list making (I like lists). These, then, were a few of my favourite things...

Sopranos and mezzos

Antoinette Halloran. After a sort of nondescript Johanna in Sweeney Todd, Antoinette turned in a breathtaking performance as Stella in A Streetcar Named Desire and made a fan of me. As an added bonus, she singlehandedly transformed The Gondoliers into something I wanted to hear.

Pamela Helen Stephen. A bit of a revelation as Nicklausse in Les contes d'Hoffmann. I disagree with the redoubtable Dr Andrew Byrne's slightly snide comments, I think she utterly deserved her star turn and I'd happily listen to her sing as many arias as could be discovered.

Rachelle Durkin. I've written excessively about Rachelle and will try to restrain myself here. I adore her. I thought her Alcina was just insanely fantastic. I'm trying not to think about the fact that she's about to sing it again in Melbourne and that I can't possibly be there. I saw her four times and would happily see her four more. Bring on Orlando.

Milijana Nikolic. She was impressive in her short roles in Il Trittico and Hoffmann but it was as Venus in Tannhäuser that she really came into her own, resplendent and electrifying.

But the soprano of the year has got to be Cheryl Barker. A sublime Rusalka, and then radiant in all three Trittico roles. Not to mention her wonderful performance in Don John of Austria with the Sydney Symphony and her Jenufa last year, which was the first opera I saw after moving here. A very special artist. We're privileged to have her here so frequently; and next season there are not one, but three fabulous Cheryl vehicles to look forward to. I can't wait.


Tenors and baritones

José Carbo. In his element as both Figaro (in Il Barbiere di Siviglia) and the Count Almaviva (in Le nozze di Figaro). A voice as suave and charming as his stage presence. He's one of those singers I'm always pleased to see and hear.

Joshua Bloom. Absolutely staggering. He was an excellent Figaro and absolutely glorious in the St Matthew Passion with the Sydney Philhamonia Choirs. His career is growing more glittery by the minute so evidently I'm not the only one terribly impressed by him.

Stuart Skelton. Stuart was utterly perfect as Mitch in Streetcar. He sang gorgeously and was almost worryingly convincing.

But my favourite of favourites? Aldo di Toro of course. Twice I saw him sing Alfredo, twice I saw Traviata through Alfredo's eyes and not Violetta's. Rarely have I seen a singer with a more immediately engaging and sympathetic presence on stage and that liquid amber voice and golden age technique are knee weakening.


Productions

The old fashioned but still opulent La traviata, proof that conventional doesn't necessarily mean boring.

Half of Rusalka. I loved the stark, icy, abstract sets. I didn't like all the mad scientist business with Jezibaba. But overall, one of the most visually appealing shows all year.

Sweeney Todd. Scary and funny and compelling. Is it an opera? I tend to say no. But I enjoyed myself a lot.

For all its flaws and mirrors, Alcina. It was fantastical and weird, which is how Alcina ought to be. It gave Rachelle ample space to terrify and bewitch, and I liked the golden light at the end, even if it did leave me temporarily blind.

A Streetcar Named Desire. Whatever you make of the music, this was some seriously impressive theatre. The costumes were mostly good (though Blanche could have been treated a bit better) and the set was ingenious and evocative. All I want to know is — how did Blanche's trunk get to the house? She doesn't bring it with her when she got off the streetcar at Elysian Fields, but it's there by the next morning. Nitpicking of course. This was brilliant.


Moments of brilliance and beauty

Kanen Breen's contortive comic antics in both Sweeney Todd and Hoffmann. I'm not going to claim that he has the world's most wonderful voice but he's clearly a genius of physical and verbal comedy.

Yvonne Kenny's "Soft people have got to shimmer and glow" in A Streetcar Named Desire. She did shimmer and glow. She was heartbreaking and lovely.

I loved everything about Rachelle Durkin's Alcina, but especially her "Ombre pallide", when the look in her eyes was so manic I wouldn't have been surprised if the dark forces she was summoning had actually arrived in the theatre.

A revelation — Amelia Farrugia's Proch Variations in Rosina's singing lesson. Polished, pinpoint coloratura. Give her more bel canto to work with.

The offstage Pilgrim's Chorus in Tannhäuser, which came from the outside the back doors of the theatre. Unearthly, eerie and transcendently beautiful.

What can I pick for Cheryl Barker? Her ability to remain mesmerising and magnetic in Rusalka even while mute. Her real tears at the end of Suor Angelica. And the richness of expression with which she imbued Giorgetta's tiniest phrases in Il Tabarro — how can a simple "Ma che credi?" sound so wonderful?

And the list goes on... these are a few, but every single opera this season (even the ones I've been less than kind to) has had at least one moment which made me think: this is why I'm so head over heels in love with opera. Coming next, a few scattered thoughts (and probably more lists) on next year's season.

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Tannhäuser

My relationship with Wagner is weird. Deep and at the same time appallingly shallow. It's the music most likely to leave me dazed and intoxicated. I love Wagner. And yet what have I actually heard? Tannhäuser, Die Walküre and Lohengrin once each, and they were all Met broadcasts. Solti conducting Wagner overtures. A documentary about Placido Domingo's Parsifal with excerpts. That's more or less it. And never ever anything live on stage, until last night when I went at long last to Opera Australia's Tannhäuser. Good thing I don't scare easily; if I did it might have put me off for life.

But I'll start with the positive side; rant to follow. And by positive side, I mean the music, and only the music. Because it's wonderful. It isn't the greatest Wagner ever but it's still Wagner and still powerfully magical. The AOBO shimmered, trembled and blasted as the mood required, under the nervily energetic baton of Alexander Ingram. Richard Berkeley Steele was, though, a bit disappointing in the title role. Perhaps he sounded fresher earlier in the run; last night he started each act in appealing voice but each time grew to sound overstretched and weak, despite a basically attractive, if occasionally rather mannered, sound. Daniel Sumegi as the Landgraf was big voiced and imposing, though his German diction was a bit muddy. Warwick Fyfe was surprisingly appealing as Wolfram von Eschenbach but his singing, though secure, lacked dynamic shading; he seemed to be set on "quite loud" all night and never shifted much from that. Janice Watson's Elisabeth was one of the few characters in this production allowed to retain her rightful Wagnerian dignity; she was convincingly sweet and youthful, unswervingly virtuous but not a caricature of herself. Her singing was expressive and bright toned, with perhaps a slight lack of power in the uppermost register but much beauty elsewhere, including a stunningly controlled and highly effective lower register. But without a shadow of a doubt, the performance of the night was Milijana Nikolic's breathtaking Venus. She flooded the house with magnificent, billowing, beautiful sound, a performance at once frighteningly powerful and silkily seductive. She both sounded and looked like the mighty goddess she was playing. Truly one of the greatest performances I've experienced this year and in every sense the best thing about this Tannhäuser. 

And now the rant.   

I suppose it depends what sort of experience you want your Wagner to be. If you want conventions questioned and subverted, ideology ridiculed and mythology twisted — and you're completely entitled to want just that — but you don't want all of that subverting to scare you, this is the production for you. If you want to be allowed, and indeed encouraged, to sneer at or dismiss Wagner the man, you'll enjoy free rein here. If you prefer to view Tannhäuser as an offbeat, occasionally grotesque S&M comedy — look no further. If, on the other hand, you just wanted to see an engaging piece of theatre which acknowledges and celebrates a pretty damn good piece of music by a phenomenal composer, well, you might be disappointed. I certainly was.

I have to be frank, and if in the process I make myself seem old fashioned or dense or aesthetically flawed, then so be it — but I am at a loss to understand what the hell this was supposed to be. Apparently Elke Neidhardt's production "underlines the contradictions" inherent in Tannhäuser, and no doubt it does. I'm not the person to make definitive judgements on the subject, because I was the person with my eyes closed half the evening. When they were open I wasn't shocked. I wasn't offended. I wasn't horrified to see The Great Composer treated irreverently. None of that, because all of that is fine with me in principle. What isn't fine with me is a production so deeply irritating that it makes me angry, when all I wanted was Wagner done (at least) medium well. There may well be a lot to make fun of in Tannhäuser or in Wagner generally, but if you think so, perhaps you could do that in the privacy of your own home. In the theatre I think it would be nice to remember that even if you detest the man, his philosophy and all the philosophy of his libretti, the music is actually UNBELIEVABLY GOOD and bringing that to the attention of an audience is perhaps worth doing. It's not that this production attacked the music or mistreated it; it just didn't seem to really notice that there was music there, except when it helped make the joke. So the libretto, and the ideology behind it, was mocked in a thousand laugh-a-minute ways and criticised in a few vaguely more meaningful ways — including obligatory quasi WWII imagery and nice big red RAUS on a wall — but when the music had something to say, well, it was hard for it to get a word in edgewise. Yes, Elisabeth is terribly solemn and you do want to jolly her along a bit. I know. But does that mean something silly has to happen onstage every single time she tries to make a serious point? Tannhäuser is not the world's most likeable hero but does turning him into a gormless ditherer with a disturbing likeness to a carrot-top André R*eu accomplish anything much? Elke Neidhardt is no fool, at least I don't think she is; so I'm sure there are compelling and well thought out reasons why the answer to these questions is a resounding YES. Would I be compelled by them? Not a chance. I spent Act Three experimentally arguing in favour of this staging, devising all the meaningul and convincing analyses I could. A few even made some kind of sense to me. None of them justified obstructing the music with such an overcrowded, visually unattractive and cheaply comic production. The most effective tableau was the curtain call — lined up in neat rows, the elements of this show gave the illusion of having been used far more powerfully than they in actual fact were. This production was neither one thing nor another; neither a worthy celebration of a great work of art nor a whole-hearted and genuinely challenging subversion. Just a halfway there shambles. No thank you.

(By the way, if you've seen the show and violently disagree with me, do feel free to rant right back at me and my ignorance. Response elsewhere suggests a lot of people enjoy and/or understand this interpretation far more than I did, so they may well have a point.)

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Passing notes on The Gondoliers

It doesn't really seem fair on it or me for me to attempt a review proper of The Gondoliers, given my aversion to Gilbert & Sullivan. That I leave to those more favourably disposed. Still, there are a few things which want said. To wit:

  • The operatic universe apparently chose to compensate me tonight for the traumatic cancellations of Rachelle Durkin and Cheryl Barker; Taryn Fiebig, scheduled to sing Gianetta, was indisposed and thus replaced by the wonderful Antoinette Halloran.
  • Antoinette gets another bullet point to herself — Streetcar might be long gone, but she retains the name "Stella" because she remains a STAR. My chief musical pleasure of the evening was in hearing her vibrant, colourful voice transfigure music which otherwise would do little or nothing for me, with a legato and radiance of tone which bode very very well for her Mimi next year. So why oh why is she the cover for this production? And in the second cast for Bohème?
  • The moment the contralto nurse appeared to unravel things, all I could think of was Anna Russell.
  • Judi Connelli was as outlandishly fabulous here as in Sweeney Todd, maybe more so. Reg Livermore, the other import from the world of musical theatre (and, I'm given to understand, Australian performer of legendary status) was brilliant too, delivering his dialogue with a hilarious Castillian accent.
  • Seriously, more Antoinette please. She and Dominica Matthews were both of them excellent as Gianetta and Tessa but all they really made me think was how much I'd prefer to see them as the other, superior sisters with confusing fiancés — Fiordiligi and Dorabella.

Tomorrow, something very strange indeed. Don John of Austria, the first opera composed and performed in Australia (1847!) by the odd and intriguing Isaac Nathan — acquaintance of Byron (some of whose words he set), singing teacher to Browning, delusional admirer of Lady Caroline Lamb, debtor, exile and Australia's first tram accident death.

Sunday, October 07, 2007

Les contes d'Hoffmann

Opera Australia's new, semi-abstract production of Les contes d'Hoffmann apparently draws its aesthetic inspiration from M.C. Escher. I say apparently because, while the Sydney Morning Herald told me in advance that "[t]he walls meet at unexpected angles and the ceiling is an enormous sloping mirror that reflects everything on the stage", from my cheap seat I couldn't actually see any of this. I'm sure it was very impressive; but even with half the visuals missing, this Hoffmann is an appealingly trippy mix of opulence and bizarrerie set against a chilling and stark grey background.

The casual passer-by stopping at this production could be forgiven for thinking that Les contes d'Hoffmann is an opera about Nicklausse. Pamela Helen Stephen, moving seamlessly and ambiguously between (female) Muse and (male) companion, is almost constantly onstage, either as a vocal participant or a silent onlooker. While Hoffmann gets himself extravagantly entangled upstage, Nicklausse watches silently from a downstage spotlight, and it's possible to see his reactions, rather than Hoffmann's actions, as the centre of this story. That re-focusing is aided greatly by Stephen herself, whose lithe, refined mezzo and quietly commanding stage presence make her one of this production's greatest assets.

Tenor Rosario La Spina sings the title role. Offenbach's music is kinder to him than other, heavier roles have been of late, less frequently forcing his tendency to shout and bark. The basically attractive Tenor Lite™ centre of his voice encompasses a good deal of the role, and thus he's mostly listenable, though his congested upper register nevertheless does begin to grate by the end of the night. Opera Australia's reigning prima donna Emma Matthews takes on all four heroines, a Sutherlandesque task which she manages well, if not quite to the level of Joanie's triumph. She takes obvious delight in Olympia's hijinks, and predictably brings down the house with a note perfect "Les oiseaux dans la charmille", though her natural sweetness of tone removes some of the doll's cold, mechanical edge. That same sweetness, however, makes Antonia her greatest success of the evening, her soft, fluttery vibrato well suited to the role's fragile lyricism. Giulietta, however, is not entirely her role — she's impressive in the latter part of the role, as the tessitura rises, but elsewhere tended to be buried by the orchestra. Dramatically, too, she seemed ill at ease — Emma's range easily encompasses coquette but, on this occasion, did not stretch to seductress. The same went for her (non-singing) appearance as Stella.

Emma is not the only singer to take on multiple roles. John Pringle proves himself to be a master of accents and impressions as both Spalanzani and Crespel. John Wegner is suitably devilish and sonorous as the various incarnations of evil and earned a round of appreciative pantomime booing at his curtain call. Kanen Breen — Opera Australia's scene stealing answer to Dick van Dyke — begins as Nathanael, then becomes, in turn, a peg-legged Cochénille, a resplendently foppish Pittichinaccio and an impossibly deaf, arthritic Frantz. Milijana Nikolic makes just one appearance, but it's an impressive one, rising like a gothic cabaret star from the centre of Antonia's piano as the spirit of her dead mother.

Stuart Maunder's production is mostly well paced and interesting. There are a few weak points — the transition from the Olympia act to the Giulietta act seemed a little awkward, unless, of course, I missed something vital in the corner of the stage I couldn't see; and indeed the entire Giulietta act lacks the vitality and coherence of the others. I've a quibble, too, with the Olympia act — Hoffmann's first glimpse of Olympia, as it's staged here, is with eyes wide open, an immobile speciment in a laboratory cabinet. He hasn't been sold his magical glasses yet, so it seems hardly credible that he would believe her to be human, and sing "elle sommeille". It's not a major failing, but it does detract from the impact of his sudden realisation at the end of the act. Elsewhere, however, are some stylish coups de théâtre — The Muse's transformation into Nicklausse is quite gorgeous (provided you're happy to accept Nicklausse as basically a female character throughout), and the chorus' unexpected appearance from on high at the end is wonderfully effective.

Musically it is an evening of familiar and unfamiliar delights. Nicklausse's arias are re-instated (not always the case) which is no less than the excellent Pamela Helen Stephen deserves. Sensitive, evocative string playing ensures stops the terribly familiar Barcarolle from lapsing into Hollywood cliché. Richard Hickox leads a performance which manages skilfully to mix the lightness of touch essential to Offenbach with a hint of a German Romantic dark side, just the same fantastical juxtaposition as is expressed visually. It's a Hoffmann by turns sinister and silly, punctuated with moments of simple loveliness —all of it making for a pretty entertaining evening's opera.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Senza Cheryl (io son morta)

As a gift to myself, I went to a third Il Trittico last night. Let me put that another way — I went to see Cheryl Barker a third time. An excursion which yielded a number of results.

A catastrophe. She cancelled. There was no Cheryl. Nicole Youl sang Giorgetta and Angelica, and Hye Seoung Kwon was Lauretta.

A supplementary catastrophe. This was the broadcast. I had somebody organised to capture it, so that I would have a record of Cheryl's triple triumph for all eternity. As it turned out, the somebody forgot to record it. Nevertheless, what a shame.

A silver lining. I don't respond well to cancellations. They upset me. But the experience did at least re-affirm and deepen my adoration of Cheryl, which is no bad thing. Absence makes the heart grow stronger, even if it does also break it a little.

A mystery. Who in the world is Carlo Barricelli and why has he been given the last two performances of Trittico and, as far as I can see, nothing else this season or next? He sang Luigi, Dennis O'Neill having finished his run with the previous performance. Out of nowhere, here was this swaggering, thoroughly Italianate voice, coupled with a far more convincing stage presence — why in the world wasn't he given more performances to sing? My first thought was: who is this guy? My second: he must be Italian, or he's at least studied there. My third: he's been listening to his predecessors, Corelli et al. I got home and looked him up — he's Italian-Australian and, yes, studied in Italy. With Corelli. Voilà.

A reassurance. It's hard to enjoy an understudy on her own merits when you're tearfully (yes, really) longing for the scheduled star. But, having missed her in Trovatore, at least now I know Nicole Youl will be very good in Ballo.

Just quietly. Hye-Seoung Kwon probably makes a tiny bit more sense as Lauretta. BUT I'd still rather have Cheryl in the role, because she's Cheryl.

Anticipation. I'm not risking — nor can I afford — another attempt to see Cheryl in Trittico. So now I wait until October 18th, when she sings Agnes in Isaac Nathan's Don John of Austria at Angel Place. After that, nothing until 2008 — but then, at least, there's Cheryl aplenty. 

Saturday, September 01, 2007

Il Trittico

Last week I went twice to Opera Australia's Il Trittico — a refreshing pleasure after almost a month of the relentless quasi-modernism and declamatory realism of A Streetcar Named Desire. Whereas Streetcar might not even really be an opera, Trittico simply oozes all that's operatic — red blooded Mediterraneans, besotted young lovers, knives and disguises and family shame. Everything conventionally operatic is thrown somewhere into the Trittico mix, and even if convention sometimes becomes caricature, it remains a rewarding and mostly engaging experience. Moffatt Oxenbould's colourful and robust production dates back to 1973. All in all it has aged well, mostly because it's so wholly traditional — there are no modern quirks or topical eccentricities here, nothing to upset even the most conservative opera-goer. That literal and unchallenging approach may disappoint some; it's true the dark depths of Il tabarro and Suor Angelica are left largely unplumbed, and Gianni Schicchi, though consistently amusing, offers little in terms of real comic invention. But in a work such as Il Trittico, such deeper exploration is really an optional extra. When it's well executed — as this production most definitely is — straightforward conventionality remains a valid and successful option.

Of the three operas, I was (and still am, really) least familiar with the melodramatic but haunting Il tabarro. While Suor Angelica and Gianni Schicchi both offer resolution of sorts, Il tabarro ends on a powerfully unresolved note; ends, in a sense, at its beginning. Musically, I found it the most appealing of the three —  the effect partly of novelty, I'm sure, but also of its evocative and varied score. The prelude which opens the opera is a particularly delicate piece of scene setting; Giorgetta's impassioned tribute to her home village and Michele's lament at the deterioration of their marriage are both beautifully poignant; and the brief quotation from La bohème is a gorgeous comic touch. Suor Angelica is a rather more slow moving and static opera but in its own way at least as moving. Opening with a radiant and beatific offstage Ave Maria, the music steadily grows in intensity, as the innocent chattering of the novices gives way to Angelica's torment and eventual ecstasy. Last of the three is the rather silly Gianni Schicchi, insubtantial but charming in its way. Musically, its greatest attraction is probably the chance to hear the impossibly over-exposed "O mio babbino caro" in context for once; it also offers something relatively rare in Puccini, a star vehicle for both baritone (Schicchi) and comic mezzo (Zita) while lyric soprano Lauretta, despite getting the best tune, is relegated to a relatively minor role.

Of course, each opera stands perfectly well on its own. But Opera Australia's production offers a wonderful unifying thread — the utterly beautiful Cheryl Barker, who sings all three heroines. It's no easy task she's taken on; these three women pose, both together and separately, a variety of vocal and psychological challenges. But if anybody's up to it, Cheryl is. She is an extraordinarily lovely chameleon, inhabiting each of these three very different roles with grace, authority and thrilling vocal command. She is a vivid and touching Giorgetta, slicing through layers of orchestration while maintaining sweetness of tone; the role also shows off nicely her rather seductive lower register. As Angelica she is electrifying and deeply moving; the prolonged suicide scene is beautifully difficult to bear. Finally, as pretty little Lauretta, she is adorable, a surprisingly convincing teenager after the dark veined maturity of the previous acts. Her "O mio babbino caro" provides the highlight it should, though it's almost bettered (to my mind, at least) by her ensemble singing, especially in duet with Henry Choo's Rinuccio. The role's only drawback is its brevity — Lauretta is allowed far less time on stage than the glorious Cheryl deserves.

Alongside Cheryl is another singer who appears in all three roles, mezzo soprano Elizabeth Campbell. Her triple star turn, if perhaps marginally less arduous than Cheryl's, is nonetheless mightily impressive — she's marvellous as the eccentric Frugola in Il tabarro, a stern Abbess in Suor Angelica and, best of all, a wickedly funny Zita in Gianni Schicchi. Baritone Jonathan Summers appears twice — he's an intense (if occasionally slightly strained) Michele in Il tabarro, but scores his real triumph in the title role of Gianni Schicchi. Dennis O'Neill sings with lyrical majesty as Luigi in Il tabarro, though he's rather difficult to credit as a love interest for Giorgetta. Milijana Nikolic is absolutely terrifying in Suor Angelica as La Zia Principessa, her deep, commanding mezzo and wide-ish vibrato ideal for the role. Henry Choo makes a very sweet Rinuccio in Gianni Schicchi, his "Firenze e come un albero fiorito" providing one of the evening's brightest non-Cheryl vocal highlights. Other highlights include, in Suor Angelica, Dominica Matthews' warmly sung Monitress, the excellent Rosemary Gunn as Mistress of the Novices and Hye Seoung Kwon's sparkling Genovieffa; an impressive cameo from Andrew Moran as the lawyer in Gianni Schicchi and an appallingly funny performance from Shane Lowrencev in the same opera, as a thieving, good-for-nothing  Betto di Signa.

Maestro Licata draws a generally cohesive and expressive performance from the AOBO. I might have wished for just a touch more heavy tragedy in Suor Angelica — a slightly slower tempo in "Senza mamma" would afford Cheryl's gift for Puccinian despair even more opportunity to devastate. But Il tabarro is perfectly measured and atmospheric, quiet and subtle to begin with and building powerfully to its frightening and tragic conclusion; and Gianni Schicchi maintains an effervescent comic bounce. Together, the trio covers practically the whole Puccini spectrum — a varied evening. It's also a long one. But with so much on offer, there's bound to be something in Il Trittico to capture the imagination of just about anybody. Opera Australia's appealing production adds one especial attraction, in the form of Cheryl Barker. High drama, broad comedy, big, expressive music and a soprano showcase  — what more could you want?

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Stellar

The puns are irresistible — as Stella-for-star in Opera Australia's Streetcar, Antoinette Halloran is just that. A star. Or rather, a star. Just Google antoinette halloran streetcar and on the very first page, you'll see all the raves. "The standout performance was Antoinette Halloran's." "The star of the show is undoubtedly Antoinette Halloran." "Antoinette Halloran is outstanding." You'll also see my words: "Antoinette Halloran is a revelation."

All of it true. Alongside three singers with well-established and glittering international careers, Antoinette — whose name still seems always to come prefaced with the words "rising soprano" — not only holds her own but creates perhaps the biggest sensation of the four of them. No mean feat when you've Teddy in his shirtlessness to compete with. She is helped somewhat, it's true, by Previn's writing for Stella, which is among the most immediately appealing music in the opera. Elizabeth Futral, for whom the role was written, also steals the show on Deutsche Grammophon's recording of the premiere.

Nevertheless, that only goes so far. What makes Antoinette's performance special is Antoinette herself. Her Stella is a tour de force, vividly characterised and stunningly well sung. She breezes through Previn's challenging music as if to the manner born, combining a crystal clear upper register with a wealth of darker, more sensuous colours. Sweet yet strong, just like Stella. In "I can hardly stand it" she moves between radiant, youthful adoration and a more explicit and adult longing; the raw power with which she imbues the word "wild" is startling. The brief Act Three duet with Stanley is another memorably gorgeous moment, her phrasing fluent and persuasive — the moving way she sings "she's my sister" sticks in my mind still. Her acting is likewise persuasive. There's a look she throws Blanche just before "I can hardly stand it", when Blanche deems it a relief that Stanley is "on the road a lot", which on its own says as much as the aria which follows. The cinematic Stella of Kim Hunter was a slightly childish, simple figure, not hugely endearing; but Antoinette brings such humanity and compassion to the role as to make Stella touchingly sympathetic.

I said she was a revelation, and so she is — certainly to me. Her voice was not what I expected; it was better, stronger and more interesting than I had imagined. Though I'd seen her once before (in Sweeney Todd) I really wasn't sure what to anticipate from her Stella. So it has been a delight to discover such an excellent performance. And such a complete performance, as exciting theatrically as vocally. This star doesn't merely twinkle; she scintillates. Brava, Antoinette.

Monday, August 13, 2007

Rights and wrongs

I readily admit that despite all the attention I've lavished upon it, I don't by any means consider A Streetcar Named Desire a particularly amazing opera. There's a certain affection that comes from familiarity — and a thrill in finally hearing something so familiar brought to life in performance. But there are plenty of things I don't like about it. The fact is that even in its best and most melodically interesting moments, the music still doesn't do much more than simply carry the action. When I engage with this opera, I engage with it as drama; the music really only matters to me insofar as it supports that drama. By way of contrast, take, say, Figaro. I could adore Figaro without necessarily following the plot or caring what happened. Or how about I puritani? I still don't really know what happens in that opera — or why Queen Henrietta is in it — but I nevertheless engage with the music. I can spend a day humming "Qui la voce", and I can appreciate that aria regardless of its dramatic context. The music has a presence in the world — and in my consciousness — independent of the words. But I never hum Streetcar. I do spend days with parts of it on loop in my brain but always with the words foremost.

This is not a blanket dismissal. There are passages of Streetcar which do have that musical independence and very real appeal. Stella's vocalise is the most obvious — attached as I am to Blanche, it's always that tune which remains with me as I leave the theatre. And there's a wonderful swinging little tune in the interlude before Scene Two, Act I which always has me swaying. But otherwise, when the music is at its most exciting and most vivid, that's because of the actions and/or words it's coupled with. It's illustrative, sometimes quite powerfully so — but I don't think that's actually enough in the end.

There are other infelicities, both textual as well as musical. I'm not particularly fond of the libretto. I realise Phillip Littell didn't have a great deal of room to move but I still question some of his choices. I've gone into that in (possibly excessive) detail in my dissection and won't repeat myself too much. Now that I've seen the thing staged, I'll concede some of those choice make a bit more sense. But some still don't. I'm afraid I'm still inordinately outraged at the omission of one single word — "children". Even leaving aside the dramatic merit or otherwise of some of Littell's changes, though, what troubles me are the instances where those changes seem to me to betray an actual mistake or a misunderstanding of the play. There's the fact that he's added sixty-three pounds to Mitch's weight. And at the beginning of Act Three, there's a point at which Stanley says "temperature a hundred on the nose" which is supposed to refer to the temperature outside but which now refers to the bathroom. I know these kinds of things seem terribly trivial written out like this, but nevertheless they just make me wonder at the depth of thought which has gone into this adaptation.

One of my favourite things about Opera Australia's production is that it does deal quite nicely with some of the things I've found problematic about the opera. One major improvement — I can't not say it — is the absence of Renée Fleming. Renée is many things; she is not a Blanche. I know Previn wrote it for her. All I can say to that is — he shouldn't have. By which I don't necessarily mean he should have written it for Yvonne Kenny. It quite possibly requires a different kind of voice altogether, one more naturally suggestive of fragility. But of the two, I truly do believe the sound Yvonne makes is a better fit for Blanche than Renée's. Neither exactly screams fragility but to my ears there's a certain delicacy and transparency in Yvonne's singing which is not to be had from Renée. Temperamentally I'm not sure if either is wholly ideal but Yvonne comes closer — after a career full of queens and countesses and virtuous, well-adjusted young women, she manages to channel her inner Lucia quite briliantly for Act Three.

Other little things mean a lot. One detail which makes me rather happy is how the Act Two prologue has been staged. There's plenty happening in the pit so there needs to be something happening above. So Blanche is writing a letter. Perfect. Because if you know the play, you know there's a pretty substantial scene missing here, in which Blanche writes to her former beau Shep Huntleigh — her first attempt to extricate Stella and herself from New Orleans. Nobody ever mentions Shep Huntleigh in the opera, but at least now he's at least vaguely implied. The concept of a letter is a nice fit to the music, too, which starts with city hustle and bustle and suggestions of rough and ready Stanley before dissolving into something lyrical and Blanche-ish. It's a summary of all the contrasts and conflicts so far, so it's appropriate that it should accompany a letter in which Blanche writes and thinks about the very same thing.

Another aspect of the opera which troubled me listening to the recording was the overimportance which Previn's vocal writing occasionally gives to Blanche's throwaway lines. Blanche speaks quickly, frenetically and endlessly. She speaks before thinking; so it doesn't make a huge deal of sense to triple underline every statement she makes. The first example which springs to mind is one of Blanche's more quotable lines — "I won't be looked at in this merciless glare", which in the opera becomes "Don't look at me. Not in this merciless glare". In the film, Vivien Leigh just tosses that line off, almost as a joke. Previn makes it a Big Moment, complete with a climactic high note on the first syllable of "merciless glare". But Bruce Beresford and Yvonne Kenny between them have played it down as much as possible. She hits the note lightly, doesn't force it; and her gestures remain lighthearted and non tragic. We know Blanche's fear of light runs much deeper, but that facet of her character has plenty of time to develop — it doesn't need to be spelt out in big bold capitals just yet. (And just by the by — I happen to think the way Yvonne sings "merciless" is one of the best sounds I've ever heard her make. And I've heard her make quite a few.) The very fact that this can be done, of course, suggests that the problem mightn't lie in entirely in the writing; it might be due in part to Renée. Either way, it's nice to have it sung in a way which makes more sense.

And generally speaking, that's one of this production's best qualities. Previn's Streetcar isn't necessarily the most blindingly brilliant opera, but Bruce Beresford, Tom Woods and everybody else involved have, for the most part, made as much sense of it as possible. If this production succeeds — and it definitely does — I daresay it's they, rather than the opera in and of itself, who are ultimately responsible for that. Well done to the lot of them.

Saturday, August 04, 2007

Nuit blanche

A Streetcar Named Desire

Opera Australia's new production of André Previn's A Streetcar Named Desire has a great deal going for it. I'll get to all of that in a moment. But its biggest advantage is the most obvious one of all — it is A Streetcar Named Desire. Transformed into an opera, it remains well and truly the beautiful baby of Tennessee Williams, a work of incandescent genius which any relatively faithful realisation would have difficulty destroying.

Phillip Littell's libretto isn't always the most subtly wrought adaptation but it nevertheless remains very close to its source. Even where the poetry is lost, the plot is not — and in Williams' play, both aspects are as enthralling as each other. Whereas in previous centuries we can find operas whose primary claim to brilliance is their music, inspired enough to make libretto and plot secondary concerns, Streetcar works in reverse. Provided it was set with a reasonable degree of intelligence and flair, it would always have fascinated because the story it tells is fascinating. There's very little could mask the essential shimmer and glow of this play and its beguiling protagonist. If it sounds like I'm saying that any kind of operatic Streetcar given any kind of production would be some kind of success, that's because I more or less am. If Tennessee Williams' basic creation is left intact then the result, even if lacklustre, could never be wholly hideous.

Lacklustre, however, this Streetcar most certainly is not. Opera Australia has lavished the best of everything upon it and such pampering has paid off spectacularly well. Every aspect of this production has been realised with intelligence, sensitivity and passionate engagement. Designer John Stoddart's production is of startling, spectral beauty. His sets are realistic but not quite real, New Orleans Gothic in greys and blacks. The women are dressed in pastels — Blanche always in shades of blue; Stanley as plain and practical as can be until the terrifying appearance of his devil-red silk pjyamas. Michael Gruchy's film projections are used to mesmerising effect — images of Belle Reve and old South grandeur which bleed hauntingly in and out of the rundown Kowalski home. Bruce Beresford's direction is subtle and surefooted, concerned at every moment to present truth and not melodrama. Even where Previn's setting is at its most sweepingly operatic, he never allows things to go over the top. He strikes an ideal balance between musical showcase and credible theatre, so that you'd almost — but never entirely — forget it was an opera. Tom Woods is an attentive and revelatory conductor, bringing out exciting colours and sounds that even in eight months of immersion in the Deutsche Grammophon recording, I'd never entirely appreciated before. What a difference a theatre makes. Previn's jazz and blues inspired phrases come to far more vivid life with space in which to breathe than squashed onto a CD, and what seemed needlessly complex orchestration makes far more sense when matched to action onstage. I'm still not in love with the score but I felt more affection for it last night than I have all year.

Animating this enchanting framework is a spectacularly strong cast, with even the smallest roles given excellent and individualised voice. Dominica Matthews is superb as Eunice Hubbell, imbuing Previn's slightly merciless Sprechstimme lines with as much music as possible and resisting the temptation to caricature which such a brief role could easily afford. Tenor Andrew Brunsdon is spot on as her rough and slightly hopeless husband, Steve. As the Spanish flower-seller, Catherine Carby is a wonderful luxury. Her monologue is one of the opera's oddest passages, a cryptic tirade about death and fire and flowers. On the DG recording it's given a dementedly exaggerated reading by Josepha Gayer which recalls nothing so much as Bela Lugosi's inexplicable ranting in the Ed Wood classic Glen or Glenda?. Catherine's more understated performance — and much sweeter voice — turn this scene from laughable to genuinely eerie and effective. Angus Wood is convincingly earnest and awkward as the young collector whom Blanche half seduces.

Antoinette Halloran is a revelation. She expertly captures both Stella's powerful attraction to Stanley and her genuine love and compassion for her sister. This is not the earthy, slightly immature Stella of Elia Kazan's film. Antoinette's Stella — indeed, Previn's Stella — is a bit more thoughtful and sympathetic. She adores Stanley to distraction — the physical chemistry between them is evident, but so too is a gentler affection. Previn gives Stella some of the opera's loveliest, purest music, which Antoinette sings with poise and surprising power. Her "I can hardly stand it" in Act One is glittering and impassioned; her morning-after vocalise at the end of the same act a smoky, sensual knockout. I can only hope she has opportunities to perform the role elsewhere — this is a truly impressive performance.

As Mitch, Stuart Skelton is one of most perfect pieces of casting I've ever seen. He's built for the role. This is an important concern in any case, but especially so because Mitch actually sings his measurements. That said — they're wrong. Phillip Littell, for reasons known only to himself, has made Mitch a full sixty-three pounds heavier than in the play — he goes from 207 to 270. For Stuart, they've shaved a few inches off Mitch's height as well; but at 6'1 he's still just as imposing as Blanche tells him he is. Much more important, of course, is his vocal suitability — and he's an absolute dream. He shapes Mitch's surprisingly elegant lines beautifully, his easy, mellifluous sound underpinned by just enough heldentenor solidity. It's just the right mix for Mitch, youthful sweetness edged with something a bit heavier — a diamond in the rough. His acting conveys much the same sense — a genuinely sweet natured boy, if a bit dopey and awkward. Even when he's drunk and gets rough with Blanche, his movements and reactions speak more of bewilderment and disillusionment than real violence.

Teddy Tahu Rhodes brings his very own brand of charisma and physicality to the role of Stanley. The self declared "king around here", he dominates his home (and his wife) with calm and unselfconscious assurance. Stanley is the polar opposite of Blanche — there's no affectation here, nothing false. He's as natural in his tender moments with Stella as he is in his violent treatment of Blanche — whatever he does, he does because he feels it's his right. Thus there's an odd sort of sincerity to his character which prevents him becoming entirely despicable. He's brutal, yes — but not necessarily malicious. Though he looks like Lucifer himself when he emerges from the bathroom in his red silk pyjamas, his most hideous act — his rape of Blanche — is driven more by a primal, animal urge than calculated evil. That's not an excuse. Stanley is still bad news — but in Teddy's hands he's at least three dimensional bad news. His voice, in its own way, is just powerful — and utterly unmistakeably. Teddy sounds quite unlike anybody. It's a dark, deep-set, bronzed kind of sound. Smooth as smooth can be but at the same time richly textured, full of glorious and surprising vocal colours. It maybe isn't always the most conventionally attractive voice (or maybe that's just me) but there's a definite allure to it just the same, not to mention irresistible authority. Little wonder this is his fourth Stanley.

Blanche. Yvonne Kenny is Blanche. I mean that — Yvonne Kenny is Blanche. She's not Vivien Leigh's Blanche, so small and fragile that you want to look after her right from the start. Nor is she Renée Fleming's Blanche, oversized and overtly tragic. Yvonne's Blanche takes a little longer to warm to. The cracks in the façade don't show straight away — thus in the first act we see her mostly as she wishes to appear; or in the way she's perceived by others. Prim, superior. A little insincere. Of course, there are moments. In front of the mirror, before Stella arrives — "I look so old". But she maintains the lie quite well for the first act. Then in the second act she starts to crumble and it's here that her performance really blooms and draws us in. Her gestures have been so contained and refined that when Stanley finally gets to her and she starts thrusting papers violently into his hands — then stops just as suddenly and regains composure — the effect is quite shocking. She portrays Blanche's descent into madness with heartbreaking stillness, a stillness which makes Stanley's every push and shove that much more brutal. In the scene with the young collector she is mesmerising. Just before Stanley brings her to her lowest point, she is at her most breathtakingly beautiful, a vision of loveliness in her ballgown and tiara. It doesn't look like a "worn out Mardi Gras outfit" at all; she looks perfect and so when Stanley pushes her and the clasp comes undone and she's left exposed in her slip, the cruelty and humiliation are that much worse.

In Blanche, Previn has devised one of the most taxing roles in the soprano repertoire. Just the psychology of it is an immense emotional undertaking. It also has to be sung. It is not an easy sing — it's incredibly long and vocally demanding. At a point in her career when nobody would look askance at her for sticking to recitals and vineyard concerts and the odd Hanna Glawari, Yvonne has taken up this monumental challenge instead — and she emerges transcendentally victorious. She throws herself into this music with a lyrical forcefulness and fullness of tone which surprised even me. Blanche's music reflects her mental fragmentation, alternating between frantic, spiky vocal writing and comparative peace, with simpler, more conventional music. She's in electrifying command in both states. The story of her young husband is riveting, brought with exquisite judgement to its unbearable climax. Her pianissimi are celestial. And the truth is, if you don't happen to be among the 10543 or so people who will see this show in Sydney, your life will be forever poorer for having missed her "I want magic!" — a thing of such sublime beauty I can't trust even my own floridity to do it justice. Yvonne's Blanche is an extraordinary achievement — among her finest to date — and a priceless gift.

Indeed this production in its entirety is one to be treasured. Even with a few opening night hiccups, last night was a singularly powerful performance. As the season progresses, I've no doubt it will intensify and improve even further — and when it does, it'll be electric. Opera Australia has something rare and valuable  on its hands. A remarkable triumph for all concerned.

Monday, July 16, 2007

Die Entführung aus dem Serail

I thought I'd be frustrated by Opera Australia's production of Die Entführung aus dem Serail, which opened on Friday night. And I was, but not in the way I expected. We were promised an Entführung with an "ingenious contemporary twist", updated and set in "the cultural melting pot of an international airport". It was a concept which seemed to me both absurd and unnecessary, and I expected to be exasperated by disregard for the text and irrelevant attempts to make the opera "relevant" — whatever that means. I should be so lucky. There was nothing of the sort. Rather, this production was simply frustratingly dull, a series of missed opportunities and undeveloped ideas. In the end I would have prefered even poorly executed controversy to this, which was downright bland. The airport only features in the first and third acts. The second act, in which most of the action takes place, is set in a very traditionally Middle Eastern palace — were it not for the Western characters' modern day clothes, it could have been any standard Entführung. Even in the airport scenes, there was little ingenious or contemporary taking place. The "twist" such as it is seems to stop at the sets and costumes. It might look like a present day setting, but there's not much in the way it's played out to distinguish it from any other era, either in conception or in individual characterisations. Belmonte wears camouflage pants, Blonde is a platinum blonde, Pedrillo is an iPod and Osmin has a machine gun — but despite the props, there's nothing specifically contemporary in the way this Entführung plays out. It's thoroughly conventional and bland besides.

And yet it's by no means a failure. Theatrically it might be bland but musically there's much to recommend it. Jonathan Darlington's conducting is bright, multi-layered and idiomatic, uncovering facets of the music I'd not particularly noticed in the past. His mobile, enthusiastic style is appealing and I hope we'll see and hear plenty more from him. Andrew Goodwin as Belmonte is a godsend, a Mozart tenor who manages to sound suitably sweet but never thin or gormless. His "Hier soll ich dich denn sehen" was particularly appealing. He's aided and abetted by another Andrew — Andrew Brunsdon — as Pedrillo, singing ably for the most part though a touch strained in his "Frisch zur Kampfe". There's no question, however, that among the men — and indeed, the entire cast — the vocal star is Peter Rose, as a sonorous, velvety-voiced Osmin. This is no loathsome and lecherous Osmin but rather a rotund and rather likeable character, with a voice almost too beautiful for the part. 

Emma Matthews sings Konstanze with consummate ability, sailing effortlessly through a particularly perilous and taxing role with admirable agility and precision. She's unfortunately left slightly stranded by weak direction — her Konstanze lacks both definition and motivation. She's too inscrutable, neither dangerously tempted nor beautifully dignified; the anguished torment which "Martern aller Arten" ought to depict elicits little more than a lot of walking back and forth. It's possible too that the role ultimately requires a slightly fuller and more penetrating voice than she possesses. Certainly an excellent performance but, for all its brilliance, one slightly lacking in substance. Natalie Jones puts together a rather more individualised and vivid performance and a delightfully brassy and British Blonde. She sings with bright, pearly tone, rising adorably to the role's vocal challenges and taking obvious delight in its feisty humor — a total delight.

Kenneth Ransom is a surprisingly young and elegant Bassa Selim, a very contemporary royal and a highly engaging one, who makes it particularly hard to understand why this production chooses to have Konstanze remain steadfastly unattracted to her captor — a bit of chemistry between the two of them could go a long way to enlivening the show. Even Opera Australia's website assumes that such a temptation exists — according to the promotional blurb, "[t]he feisty pair must escape but when their lovers come to the rescue, will they want their freedom?" — but if it's intended, it's hard to detect.

A theatrical disappointment, then. A contemporary update ought to illuminate its subject, to inspire a reconsideration of its themes; even if it fails, it should at least stir up some kind of response, be it positive or negative. To my mind, this production does neither. Its good intentions seem to have died aborning, the concept never fleshed out or followed through. Instead it's stultifyingly conventional and static, enlivened only by the energy of a few individual performers. Musically, however, it's very successful and in the end it's this concern which triumphs. Not an Entführung to be watched with much interest — but definitely one worth hearing.