October 17, 2007
In all honesty, I cannot say that I found this worthy of recommendation. In fact, I cannot say that it was anything other than an exercise in pretension on the part of the composer, lyricist and director.
The idea of a piece of music theatre which examines the nature of obsession and of the human urge to collect is not a bad one. In more skillful hands, it could have been a thought-provoking and entertaining work. However the trio of creatives behind this endeavour seemed more obsessed with their own ideas and conceits than dealing with the topics they were nominally seeking to address.
On a positive note, the set was well designed and the performers certainly committed to what was being asked of them. However looking at things from a technical point of view, the balance between the orchestra and singers was wrong – leaving the (already convoluted) libretto inaudible for large sections, the lighting was not properly focussed and left important moments in half-shadow, the singers were encouraged to use their operatic voices rather than adopting a more direct approach – this meant that the text was sacrificed to beauty of sound. All of this was, at best, a distraction from the real problems with the production.
The libretto had a middle-european quality – self-absorbed, clunky and clearly not written by someone who had a full grasp of the appropriate idiom. The low point, for me, was immediately prior to the interval where the librettist included a letter from herself to the audience. This sort of navel-gazing has no place in modern theatre – it is a device that I thought we had left behind.
The score… Yes, there were moments of lyricism, rhythmic and melodic interest. However the writing for voices seemed confused, the interplay between singers and instrumentalists not clearly delineated and overall it lacked a sense of cohesion.
The director must share equal blame for the failings of the production as a whole. They had the opportunity (some might say the duty) to bring the elements together and make it work for the audience. However the decisions made seemed to go beyond alienating the audience – they seemed to me to be designed to baffle rather than illuminate.
I can see no reason why this work should ever be revived. It has left me somewhat disillusioned as to the state of modern opera. If this is considered worthy, then there is something rotten at the heart of our system.
The idea of a piece of music theatre which examines the nature of obsession and of the human urge to collect is not a bad one. In more skillful hands, it could have been a thought-provoking and entertaining work. However the trio of creatives behind this endeavour seemed more obsessed with their own ideas and conceits than dealing with the topics they were nominally seeking to address.
On a positive note, the set was well designed and the performers certainly committed to what was being asked of them. However looking at things from a technical point of view, the balance between the orchestra and singers was wrong – leaving the (already convoluted) libretto inaudible for large sections, the lighting was not properly focussed and left important moments in half-shadow, the singers were encouraged to use their operatic voices rather than adopting a more direct approach – this meant that the text was sacrificed to beauty of sound. All of this was, at best, a distraction from the real problems with the production.
The libretto had a middle-european quality – self-absorbed, clunky and clearly not written by someone who had a full grasp of the appropriate idiom. The low point, for me, was immediately prior to the interval where the librettist included a letter from herself to the audience. This sort of navel-gazing has no place in modern theatre – it is a device that I thought we had left behind.
The score… Yes, there were moments of lyricism, rhythmic and melodic interest. However the writing for voices seemed confused, the interplay between singers and instrumentalists not clearly delineated and overall it lacked a sense of cohesion.
The director must share equal blame for the failings of the production as a whole. They had the opportunity (some might say the duty) to bring the elements together and make it work for the audience. However the decisions made seemed to go beyond alienating the audience – they seemed to me to be designed to baffle rather than illuminate.
I can see no reason why this work should ever be revived. It has left me somewhat disillusioned as to the state of modern opera. If this is considered worthy, then there is something rotten at the heart of our system.