Skip to main content

Reflections on a repellent week



It's always a relief when a show opens to popular and critical acclaim, especially when it is the first show in the season. This year, there were added pressures; it was our first show as an independent company, Investec had  just put pen to paper on a new three year sponsorship and we were opening with a rarity. Such operas are our staple of course, but Iris is the piece that put us on that road in the first place. Oh, and four members of the Mascagni family were in the house which is bound to elevate the anxiety a little.

What has been fascinating is  the depth of the reaction to Iris. I won't rehearse the arguments on the merits of the work - and its motivations - that I have been having with many people about it, but one thing is for sure, Iris has had a dramatic effect on most who have seen it: both good and bad (mostly bad, but in a good way.)

When we have talked about the opera in the office in recent months, the discussion has often centred on the current obsession with how operas are directed and the resultant controversies. Sex, violence, nudity, rape..... The interesting thing about Iris is that there are no overt acts of violence or sexual assault for a director to amplify or go over the top on – no unseen or seen murders, for example.  Iris is a child who is exploited, for sure, but even then, Osaka does not get his way with her. So it would be interesting, we thought, to see what reaction there would be to an opera and a production that merely followed the libretto, ripe with cruelty at its heart,  to the letter, with no embellishments. True to say that Olivia Fuchs has ensured we are under no illusion as to what Iris is going through, but you take my point. 

We now know that critics were deeply affected by the production, some in a negative way, and reviews have been full of powerful language to describe the graphic realities of the opera. If you read some of them, you would be forgiven for thinking that the production is full of sex, murder and debauchery (it is, but only in threat). Indeed, one patron wrote to us and said he wanted a refund because he understood from reviews that it was "very graphic" and was concerned for his wife's sensibilities on what would be a birthday treat. The email was headed "Birthday disaster". When I wrote back and explained there would be no nudity, no rape, no murder or blood, but that it was an uncomfortable and difficult subject, he was becalmed. "Oh, OK, she can handle difficult subjects."

All of which raises interesting  thoughts about audience outrage at recent operas, the debate about modern productions and the disgust with directors who some audiences feel are doing a disservice to the work. It is often pointed out that the operas they believe are so sacrosanct are chock full of hideous acts, but it would seem some audiences just don't  want it threaped down their throats. Perhaps the issue is merely "offence"? Maybe (and this is not an opinion, just a genuine question) they are being less puritanical than we sometimes believe them to be?




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Gelb and The Met

Having posted a piece that was kind to critics and thus risking opprobrium from all quarters, I suppose I ought to be wary of writing a piece that is sympathetic to the current opera demon, Peter Gelb.  Let us be clear, I don't know what the detailed financial situation at the Met is, I don't know how its budgets are split and allocated, I don't know how much they spend on sets and productions. I just read selective figures used negatively and that is always something we should be wary of.  What Gelb and the Met are going through is probably entirely unique in the opera world given the scale of economics involved and the accusations of mismanagement that are being thrown around are hard to reconcile with some of the realities; it is certainly true, for example, that Gelb has taken the Met's turnover from $222 million to over $300 million in eight years which doesn't immediately suggest mismanagement, but that is as glib and superficial an analysis as anything else I

Honorary Doctorate acceptance speech

I have been asked for the text of my acceptance speech from the graduation ceremony at Oxford Brookes University, 20th June, 2016. The audience was 170 graduates, in various arts, performing, publishing and other creative disciplines, as well as hundreds of their family members. My intention was to confirm that in an age of undervalued arts education, their choices were the correct ones; that despite the prevailing desire of the government for more engineers, mathematicians and computer experts, their talents would come to be as valued as any others. ----------- It is with great surprise and pleasure that I come here today to accept this honorary doctorate, the giving of which is met with more pride than I can actually express. To be recognised by an academic institution is not something I ever thought possible as I grew up. My two oldest children have achieved far more than I have in academia, but, as a competitive Dad I just want to say to them…erm, Doctor?! I am also honoured

Sometimes, facts really don't matter to people

Since the Brexit vote, and especially since the recent Autumn statement, there has been something familiar nagging at me; the remarkable refusal of Brexiters to accept or acknowledge the facts set out by the government and in the OBR's forecasts. It reminds me of something, a feeling I have had before. I know that the expression post-truth annoys a lot of people, but it is a thing, it really exists. People, for whatever reason can knowingly refuse to accept bare facts when it suits them. It isn't a new phenomenon at all. I am bound to say, moreover, that I have tended to experience it in a malign sense, when the things people want to believe are unconscionable or driven by prejudice of one kind or another. Last night I remembered where it was that I had last seen the phenomenon and it was an experience that left me astonished at the time, but which also provoked in me a genuine disgust for my fellow citizens. I am afraid it is an unpleasant parallel scenario, but it was pro