Skip to main content

Gushing over The Queen of Spades


It is common for those of us who work in opera (and probably also those who don't) to take works for granted. What I mean is that we sit and consider a future season, rake through the works that are on the list, imagine people in the roles etc. And then sort of judge the whole thing on the reputation it has, as much as on the extent to which we might admire or like the work.  Boheme is a good example of this; it's Boheme, right?  So it is about time we did it - but I'll be honest, it is a long time since I sat and listened to it on CD. Yet when it gets into the theatre and you start to hear it in detail, live,  with the orchestra rehearsing, you again realise how very, very good it is. 

Some operas you may listen to more frequently as you sit on a bus or do some work, but when it gets into the theatre, with a staging, when all that narrative music begins to make perfect sense, the opera in question can take on an even more profound dimension. This is what is happening with Queen of Spades at the moment and it hit home with real force yesterday as I sat and listened to the sitz probe. As the first time to hear cast and orchestra together, the sitz is always exciting and revealing, and of course there are the musical team's technical processes of getting balance right (especially in our peculiar pit arrangement) to interest you. But the most exciting thing about yesterday's rehearsal was realising again, but with bells on, just how remarkable an opera The Queen of Spades is. I have always preferred it to Onegin, but sometimes, one wonders if a preference is based simply on the premise of the opera rather than its music and I think in this instance it is probably both elements that elevate it beyond probably anything Tchaikovsky composed operatically (I reserve judgement on Mazeppa which I love but haven't seen in a theatre). 

QoS has that quality where the entire opera makes you feel uncomfortable, anxious, excited, moved, and never in a predictable way. The virtual incantation of "three cards" throughout is dread personified. There are other operas like this; Turn of the Screw springs to mind. But QoS does it with more lavishly beautiful music - is the final hymn the most wondrous thing in Tchaikovsky's rep? - with not a wasted note, not a scintilla of fluff or nonsense and motifs that bore into you with devilish persistence.  

And what of the singers? Peter Wedd drew applause from his colleagues and the orchestra- no mean feat! And of course there is Rosalind Plowright, her assumption of the Countess is, I can tell you, a terrifying, physical creation as well as a vocally commanding one. Watching the first tech rehearsals, she basically shit the life out of me.  Natalya Romaniw has been hoovering up praise all summer after her Onegin at Garsington, but one of the most exciting things about sopranos "on the rise" is that each time you hear them, there is a change in their voice, a growth or a blossoming. I have had the pleasure of hearing this development over several years from Gioielli, through L'amore dei tre Re and now into this Lisa in QoS. Her Act 3 aria Akh! istomilas ya goryem wasfrankly, breathtaking. My seven year old daughter, Fiora, had popped by the theatre and sat with me to watch it too, and from that relentless introduction of strings and funereal trumpet to her last note, we were both utterly transfixed. That is no mean feat, either! Audiences have a real treat in store. 

We have had such a strong season - everybody seems happy and excited by what they have seen on stage at Holland Park. But the past couple of weeks has been Rossini and Straussian waltz, so it will be good to get back to anxiety, horror, heartbreak and music of such gravitas. I am also aware that it is  unusual for me to express such views before a show: I think the last time I was so publicly excited was before Francesca da Rimini and the first review from David Nice tore it a new fundament (it got much better thereafter). But as my twitter profile says, "often wrong, but never in doubt."



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...

Journalists: keep it simple!

An open letter to Eva Wiseman Dear Eva I read your recent piece on the Guardian website ("Is there anything worse than a man who cries") with mounting horror. I also noted the nearly 3,000 outraged comments below it and, I have to say, you brought it all upon yourself. I have no sympathy, but I am happy to help you by explaining where you went wrong. The most important thing to note - and Eva, this will stand you in good stead hitherto should you hold it in mind - this is 2015. Why is that relevant? Well, this isn't 1928, for example, when a book like "A Handbook on Hanging" by Charles Duff could be published and people "get it". And you're no Henry Root, love, let me tell you. And can you imagine what the world would say now if Clive James's line about that Chinese president "whose name sounds like a ricochet in a canyon" was published on Twitter? There would be bedlam. You can't possibly hope to get away with writing a piece t...

My name is Jose Mourinho, and I'm not Special (at the moment)

.....The words that Jose Mourinho needs to utter to himself, the reality he has to face in order to change himself and the fortunes of his team. Such a recalibration of self-image won't be easy for a man who frequently embroiders his press conferences with 'I' and 'My' and references to his past achievements. He is a winner, not a loser and as such won't take easily to his new role, one that has to feature a cold-eyed acceptance that his magic, such as it is, has been diluted.  Mourinho is an egomaniac - not unlike many successful people - but he has an edge of narcissism that makes it difficult for him to see the success of his teams through any prism but his own greatness. When his club wins, "I" win. So when things are not as they should be, Jose takes it personally, as an affront to him, an insult, he is embarrassed. He'll take it out on players, make grand gestures by dropping his best, and he'll search for outside influences - excuses - ...