Skip to main content

Warnings and worries

I am currently in Italy, high in the Picentino, lapping up the sunshine and whatever sauce is left on my plate (yesterday's lunchtime Pasta Amatriciana would have been swabbed up with whole loaves of bread had there been enough of it) but I still find myself drawn to Twitter and the world outside. And it isn't only to post pictures to make you all jealous either; I read an excellent piece by John Allison this morning (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opera/what-to-see/warning-this-opera-may-cause-offence/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter) in which he spoke about the recent trend for warning patrons about the content of productions.

I have to say, we have only ever done this when we have had concerns about participants in our free tickets for young people - as much for the sensibilities of their parents as for the children. Despite John's argument, when a character has his throat cut and there is arterial spurt splattering the walls, an 8 year old could easily find that a bit disturbing, and so we warn parents. Otherwise, we don't issue such warnings, but companies and festivals do need to be careful these days because of the storms of protests that can be ignited by just a few people.

When we produced Aida last year, I can report that I must have received over 100 emails and letters complaining, in the most ferocious terms at times, about the content of the production. The key complaint was a party scene at which a couple of revellers snorted cocaine from the derriere of a woman in scanty underwear. The problem seemed to be more the drugs than the derriere.
However, it strikes me that what many of the people were really complaining about was the modern interpretation, and this is what often lies at the heart of these complaints. Audiences get very cross indeed when classics are updated, and the further inclusion of a bit of sex, or violence, is the icing on the cake that finally provokes the real fury; without the additional spice, there would often only be irritated indifference.

I have sympathy with Edinburgh inasmuch as they themselves were likely to have been hugely reluctant to issue a warning (unless they were cynically seeking sales) but would have felt, in the light of recent uproar, that they had to give the more puritanical opera audience a heads up.
One could argue that the mood of the market is thus, and so we should tread carefully at a time when sales are ever harder to come by. I have no doubt at all, for example, that a sizeable section of our audience were holding back on this year's season at OHP in order to at first discover the nature of our productions before committing. That is the way it is right now, so we should be careful before we condemn Edinburgh too firmly. Equally, we mustn't fall prey to the overt conservatism of certain sections of the audience and encourage them to spread their wings a bit.
But it is a fine line. Iris caused all sorts of outrage and offence, but nobody - at all - wrote to me to complain, because what we showed was precisely what was in there. Which I think supports, if only slightly, my argument that what offends is often more about changing the libretto's original period and setting (especially, in this case, because the audience don't really know the piece and have rarely seen it in any kind of setting, let alone the one we put it in).

If, for example, you set a Tosca bang in period and place, but make Tosca's murder of Scarpia visceral and realistic, with blood and guts splattering the stage, I doubt you'd get much objection. If she did it whilst wearing a tie-dyed shirt and a bandana, you'd never see the end of the emails. We should be a little more aware of this audience train of thought than we currently are.

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