• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Wagneriana Endloser Grimm! Ewiger Gram! Spring 2008 Der Traurigste bin ich von Allen! Volume 5, Number 2 —Die Walküre From the Editor ven though the much-awaited concert of the Wagner/Liszt piano transcriptions was canceled due to un- avoidable circumstances (the musicians were unable to obtain a visa), the winter and early spring months E brought several stimulating events. On January 19, Vice President Erika Reitshamer gave an audiovisual presentation on Wagner’s early opera Das Liebesverbot. This well-attended event was augmented by photocopies of extended excerpts from the libretto, with frequently amusing commentary by the presenter on Wagner’s influences and foreshadowings of his future operas. February 23 brought the excellent talk by Professor Hans Rudolf Vaget of Smith College. Professor Vaget spoke about Wagner’s English biographer Ernest Newman, whose seminal four-volume book The Life of Richard Wagner has never been surpassed in its thoroughness. In the early part of the twentieth century, the music critic Newman served as a counterbalance to his fellow countryman Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Wagner’s son-in-law and an ardent Nazi. The talk also included aspects of Thomas Mann’s fictional writings on Wagner, as well as the philoso- pher and musician Theodor Adorno and Wagner’s other son-in-law Franz Beidler. On April 19 we learned the extent of Buddhism’s influence on Wagner’s operas thanks to a lecture and book signing by Paul Schofield, author of The Redeemer Reborn: Parsifal as the Fifth Opera of Wagner’s Ring. The audience members were so interested in what Mr. Schofield had to say that they remained seated, asking question after ques- tion, long after the lecture’s expected ending time. Mr. Schofield’s research and ideas divert the Wagnerian scholar- ship away from the conventional Schopenhauerian theories in a surprising, but eminently sensible and satisfying, direction. We are now planning events for the 2008–2009 season. Stay tuned. –Dalia Geffen, President / Founder Wagner’s Irish Opera Tristan und Isolde, Metropolitan Opera, March 2008; Isolde: Deborah Voigt and Janice Baird; Tristan: Gary Lehman, Robert Dean Smith, and Ben Heppner; Brangäne: Michelle De Young; Kurwenal: Eike Wilm Schulte; König Marke: Matti Salminen; Melot: Stephen Gaertner; conductor: James Levine; staging: Dieter Dorn hanks to the ever-expanding outreach of the Metropolitan Opera through the Internet and its clever exploitation by the T Met’s resourceful general manager, Peter Gelb, many Wag- nerians—not only those who can attend performances at Lincoln Center, but also those worldwide—had eagerly awaited the run of six performances of what, in retrospect, should be forever called Wagner’s Irish Opera. Much anticipation had built up over the sup- posed dream team of Deborah Voigt and Ben Heppner as the two reigning artists, with the result that all six performances had long been sold out. Those who could not be in the house would at least enjoy the experience vicariously through the Saturday worldwide satellite transmission to over 600 movie theaters or hear the traditional radio broadcast. The bizarre and unexpected changes in casting over the entire run brought an altogether new auditory experience for the final performance; the Met chose to simulcast it gratis via the Internet using RealPlayer. This long-time devotee of Wagner’s Irish Opera had the good fortune to experience the work not only in the house (during the third performance) but also at the movie-theater rebroadcast on March 23, as well as the March 28 Internet transmission of what turned out to be the one and only performance with the supposedly legendary Voigt-Heppner duo. The one abiding aural pleasure in all the performances was the superlative playing of the phenomenal Met or- chestra under the magisterial leadership of Maestro James Levine. This conductor’s mastery of the music is tran- scendental in that Levine continues to find new details in the score and inspires ever greater playing, not only over the course of the run but also during his many years of experience with this exhausting and inexhaustible score. From the first yearning notes of the celli (marked schmachtend by the composer) to the final B-major chord (the best- scored and most satisfying chord in all of opera), the orchestra and Mr. Levine produced miracles of beauty and subtlety, of appropriate power when needed, as well as some incredibly delicate chamber music of almost embar- rassing intimacy. Experiencing just this orchestral section alone would have been enough. The vagaries of fortune when it comes to artists’ health, particularly in wintertime in New York, as well as some unexpected technical problems throughout the run of Wagner’s Irish Opera, are too well known to merit repeti- tion here. The cell phone and the Internet have provided Wagnerians the world over with instantaneous reports of events. After the performance when Gary Lehman, the second Tristan cover, slid into the prompter’s box (I hope she ducked in time), it was not surprising that the Met’s technical department modified the placement of the “rug” that Robert Dean Smith, the third Tristan cover, lay on at the beginning of Act 3. The visual experience of this work in the house was quite different from the Heldentenor Gary Lehman telecast. In the house, one has a general and fixed view of the entire stage at all times. Audience members are free to look at whatever singer they want at any time. An appreciation of the inten- sity of “acting” correlates directly with one’s proximity to the stage. The telecasts, however, are created by an array of robotic cameras that capture a huge amount of the visual elements. The movements of these cameras can be, at least initially, distracting for the in-house audience. Previous television directors favored much more close-up work, which enhanced the singers’ acting. I wonder just how much of the director’s and singers’ work is planned for or altered by these multiple cameras. In this production not only was there the usual multiple camera work, but it was all in the service of providing the viewer with a central, general overall stage picture coupled with a virtually nonstop flow of simultaneous close-ups of most, if not all, the singers. At times there were even competing images of the same singer from different angles! One was free to choose what to watch from this menu of images. This new approach to televising an opera apparently won no fervent supporters. While the concept is not bad, in this particu- lar instance the decisions as to which cameras to use for which singers and how long a particular view was to re- main on the screen were poorly carried out. These decisions are not made on the spot. The performance I saw in house was actually a rehearsal for the telecast, with the distracting presence of the robotic cameras and apparently adjusted lighting levels. (The Met no longer apologizes for brighter lighting levels in season brochures or program booklets, so the in-house audience is perhaps not getting what it has paid for.) While the concept of a split-screen technique found some favor with me, at times the choice of camera placement and picture was not terribly well thought out. For much of the “Liebestod,” there was only one image: a long shot that very slowly and belatedly turned into the eventual (and needed) close-up. The 1999 Dieter Dorn production is modern for the Met; and yet it in no way approaches the latest perverted kink of the Eurotrash Regietheater that so many Americans loathe. While the lighting levels may have been slightly boosted for the telecast, the production retained the same absurdities of blocking of live characters (excessive pro- file views) and the disposal of dead ones. (Melot and Kurwenal really did fall off the steeply raked acting area onto a real floor and remained there until the end of the opera. I am surprised there have been no complaints by the American Guild of Musical Artists over such physical dangers.) Once again, the stage director showed not the slightest respect or consideration for the health, well-being, and tonal production of the singers when they were asked to sing while climbing up or down a ladder. (I still remember the ill-fated Richard Versalle, who fell to his death in the 1996 Makropoulos Case.) I saw Ms. Voigt in the house and in the movie theater and heard her on the Internet transmission. While I have great admiration for her artistry in most roles, I cannot say with much enthusiasm that Isolde is a role she should continue to sing. In the house she sounded perpetually angry and unhappy. The “Liebestod,” despite the superla- tive conducting of Levine and the magnificent orchestra, was not the catharsis it needed to be. How could it when 2 she failed to ride over the orchestral crest and never once sang the final note (the F# on the word “Lust”) in tune? Voigt’s commitment to the score and her attractive and slimmer physical presence were undeniable. She had suc- cess in the Narrative and Curse, and the two lightning-high Cs were spot-on. But taken as a whole, the hochdrama- tische Sopran part of Isolde is not for her. (And neither is Brünnhilde, a fact of which the Met is now aware; she is not listed in the 2009 final Schenk Ring outing.) Having heard three different tenors in the title role over a span of about 10 days, I can happily report that Gary Lehman more than saved the day (and performance) with his interpretation of the title role.

Load more

  8

Copy Link