|
By Joel Kasow
PARIS, 27 February 2003—Valery
Gergiev's laudable attempts to modernize the Maryinsky's look
brought two questionable productions to Paris, one of which was
receiving its company premiere at the Théâtre du Châtelet
on this visit, Rubinstein's The Demon. Director Lev Dodin, a
well-respected theatrical personality who made a mess of the Queen
of Spades at the Bastille a few years ago, seems to have erred in
the direction of taking no chances whatsoever. The singers did not
particularly interact, there was no sense of drama - to the extent
that one did not really care what happened to the characters - so that
it all resembled the sort of thing one is said to have seen 50 or 100
years ago, except that the sets by David Borovsky were nowhere nearly
as attractive as what we might have seen in earlier days. Clothing the
Demon in an everyday outfit does not really actualize the drama, while
giving Tamara a dress, hairdo and makeup that make her look matronly
does not help our understanding of the work. Unfortunately, Rubinstein
was not a composer on the same level as his contemporaries, so that
there are few memorable moments in a work that seems to go on for a
very long time, a feeling amplified by running the prologue and first
two acts together so that intermission came only after 100 minutes or
so.
The sonorous bass-baritone of Evgeny Nikitin in the
title role lacked personality, while Marina Mescheriakova's virtually
inaudible lower register was totally out of balance with her
almost-shrieked high notes. Natalia Evstafieva's Angel and Ilya
Levinsky's Prince Sinodal were somewhat more effective, even though
the former had little to do but stand around, while the latter lacked
conviction as an actor. We also wonder what in fact were the
contributions of Yury Vasilkov and Youri Khamoutianski, credited
respectively with choreography and movements, as there was none of the
former and precious little of the latter in evidence. Valéry
Gergiev tried his hardest to bring the evening to life, and almost
succeeded. For those of us who had never previously encountered the
work, and probably never will again, the experience was certainly
interesting, if far from shattering.
We had higher hopes for
the following evening's Eugene Onegin, but once again
directors Patrice Caurier and Moshe Leiser were sabotaged by their
designer-in-perpetuity, Christian Fenouillat. The moving walls with
swashes of color were replaced by walls composed of blocks of granite,
only the first scenes functioning well, with a kitschy forest in the
background. For some reason the dancing sequences were fudged or
omitted, something unthinkable for a company with the Maryinsky
heritage. The Polonaise that opens Act III became background music for
an outdoor scene with people arriving at a ball, the Gremins among the
guests. The interview between Onegin and Gremin also took place
outdoors as did the final scene, both framed by the massive walls. All
of this might have worked had the singers possessed more imposing
voices and especially more imposing personalities. While seeing a
young cast, close in age to the characters they are portraying, has
its charms, neither Irina Mataeva (Tatiana) nor Vladimir Moroz
(Onegin) succeeded in arousing our compassion for their plight, the
former's Letter Scene leaving the audience tepid and their final duet
ineffective. The secondary couple of Ekaterina Semenchouk (Olga) and
Daniil Shtoda (Lensky) fared slightly better, but the latter's small
voice did not really have any impact.
Gergiev
did his single-handed best to compensate for the inadequacies of his
cast, but the battle was rough. In such circumstances making the
audience stay in their seats until the end of Act II (almost two
hours) before the single intermission and then returning for the 35
minutes of Act III is an act of cruelty. May we remind those concerned
that although we understand their desire to give the drama a sweep of
continuity, audiences are sufficiently accustomed to using their
brains that they can make the jump in time with two minutes in their
places.
Talking a few years ago to
the director of another theater, I asked if there was a possibility of
him bringing back the Maryinsky for repertory seasons as had already
been done several times. He told me that it would be possible only if
the company changed its production policy, updating its approach. I
fear that they have now landed in the worst of all worlds, replacing
productions that might have been old-fashioned in the eyes of some
with new productions that look modern but barely
function.dramatically. Nor should we forget that there are many in the
audience who prefer the old in which the singers are often more
comfortable and better able to give their best. A major problem is
that singers today are discouraged from manifesting individuality,
something that gave opera its force 40 or 50 years ago. There are
precious few singers today capable of holding an audience in the palms
of their hands even if they can sometimes execute more in the way of
technical niceties (smoother coloratura, trills, etc.). Singers and
conductors are now more passive, which is perhaps another reason that
directors have become so prominent.
Joel
Kasow is the Operanet editor of Culturekiosque.com..
|
|
OperaNet: Features