Joy H. Calico the Legacy of GDR Directors on the Post-Wende Opera
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Joy H. Calico The Legacy of GDR Directors on the Post-Wende Opera Stage Although the most influential opera directors of the late twentieth century were German, the prominence of East German directors in that group is largely overlooked. This chapter examines two strands of GDR stage production, Walter Felsenstein’s hyper-realism and Bertolt Brecht’s defamiliarisation, as essential contributions to current trends of Regieoper, which dominate opera production today. The author reasserts the importance of the GDR’s opera legacy along two evidentiary lines. First, the innovative nature of these stagings disproves generalisations of East German culture as monolithic, backwards, and isolationist. Second, situating East German directors at the centre of Regieoper history reveals that GDR culture was inter- nationally relevant even in its own time. It is widely acknowledged that many of the most influential opera directors of the late twentieth century were German, but the promi- nence of East German directors in that group is both significant and unstudied. After Wieland Wagner at Bayreuth, the most famous – and infamous – among them hailed from the GDR, including Walter Felsenstein, Harry Kupfer, Götz Friedrich, Joachim Herz, Ruth Berghaus, and Peter Konwitschny. They represent schools of directorial thought that emanated from two prominent institutions in East Berlin, Felsenstein’s Komische Oper and Brecht’s Berliner Ensemble. Their styles were cultivated in the GDR and exported to the West where they fed into the aesthetic of Regieoper, which is the dominant production trend on international opera stages in the early twenty-first century. This chapter examines the two strands of East German stage production, argues that their convergence is essential to Regieoper; and posits their influences in the work of current directors associated with the phenomenon (Catalan Calixto Bieito, and Ger- mans Katharina Wagner and Christoph Schlingensief). Ultimately this study makes three claims. First, the innovative, often radical nature of these stagings disproves spurious generalisations of GDR culture as monolithic, backwards, and isolationist. Second, situating East German directors in their rightful position at the centre of Regieoper history reveals that GDR culture was internationally relevant even in its own time. Finally, familiarity with the work of these East German 132 Joy H. Calico directors makes it clear that they have had enormous influence on opera production in the early twenty-first century. Regieoper Definition Regieoper may be defined as a radical staging of a canonical opera, typically either non-literal or extremely literal in interpretation.1 These productions arise from the conventional wisdom that an opera’s stage directions and scene descriptions are not nearly as sacrosanct as its score and literary text.2 Even among the most conventional directors the general consensus is that the production – costumes, stage direction, sets; the concept, as it were – is not limited to or by the instructions the composer and librettist originally provided.3 Con- strained by immutable music and lyrics, stage directors may see the visual field as a point of entry for creative intervention, or, through careful study of the score and libretto, find unexpected contemporary significance that can be exploited visually. The common denominator among non-literal productions of canonical operas is that the staging aims to create an unexpected or incongruous experience for the audience. The premise is akin to Bertolt Brecht’s principle of es- trangement, a two-step process whereby ‘dis-illusion (Verfremdung) constitutes a return from alienation (Entfremdung) to understanding.’4 The objective is to take a familiar opera and render it unfamiliar. The resulting disorientation, surprise, or outrage is not the endgame of estrangement, however; once expectations have been thwarted, the new perspective should trigger cognition, or re-cognition. Without this second phase the effect is merely one of alienation. (Needless to say, this is a highly subjective experience, unique to each audience member.) Canonical opera is de-familiarised via the unexpected, be it some sort of anachronism, reflexivity, or intertextuality, and the operas which lend themselves best to this treatment are those in the canon (operas from Handel to Puccini). This is not just because they are the best known; it is also because this repertoire spans the common practice period, which is defined by use of tonality. One need not know the opera in question to have general, reasonable expectations as to how its music will behave. Pursuant to that is the notion that the visual and the aural should be consistent not only unto themselves but also to one another, in a kind of synchronised synesthesia: if it sounds like the eighteenth century, it will look like the eighteenth century. .