Royal Opera House
20 May 2013
Quiz question: what opera features a woman singer who has to
wear a skirt in order to be convincing as a man? Less a trouser role, then,
than a kilt role. Is this a Rossinian joke?
John Fulljames' production employs a framing device: the work is
apparently being created in the imaginations of early nineteenth century
contemporaries of Scott, so that it takes place in an oak-panelled museum and
culminates in a version of the British King George IV’s ceremonial visit to
Scotland in 1822, which had genuinely been stage managed by Scott himself and concluded his invention of a romanticised Highland-focussed, tartan-and-kilt tradition of
Scotland.
It’s probably useful to be reminded of Scott’s contribution
to this nationalism, but it is confusing, and introducing peculiar anachronisms
to the opera actually weaken the reference. There is little gained by turning the (Scottish) King and his soldiers into English redcoats. The Scottish
tradition may have been invented after England had become the dominating force
in the United Kingdom, but surely Scott intended his countrymen to be proud of
their independent monarchical heritage?
What any of this has to do with Rossini and his librettists,
and so with the opera, is a mystery. It seems to me the opera could plausibly
be set anywhere, and while it is mildly concerned with patriotism, its real
interest is in the tangled love story of its central character.
The production is handsome, and in general the stars look
good. Ah, yes, the stars. Rather like Il Trovatore, this appears to require
four of the best singers in the world, so it was just as well it got them.
It needs great singers because while some of the music is
very beautiful, this tends to be the quieter, slower arias. Yet every aria, it
seems, threatens to outstay its welcome, then proceeds to do exactly what it
threatened by turning into a formidable cabaletta. The lack of variety made the evening
something of a chore, though the voices were astonishing, and this was just about enough to
maintain interest.
Rossini’s dramatic intentions coincide well with his style.
His works, with almost any librettist, portray people as puppets, not really
motivated by any inner sense. It’s as if we get the external show of emotion,
but that as everyone gets the same musical treatment, that emotion is generalised.
This distinctive approach defines Rossinian comedy, a form
of zany farce with pessimistic undertones. His comedies are near-masterpieces,
but I think the approach is less special in the serious works, with only some parts
of Guillaume Tell achieving a distinctive effect.
Perhaps this is because it is too easy to make melodrama a
collection of generalised emotions, and Rossini doesn’t have anything new to
add to the large number of eighteenth century opera seria in a similar mould.
Or does he? The ‘kilt role’ version of the trouser role may
have been intentionally zany, and Fulljames only increases this factor with some very
kitsch jarring effects such as rugged highlanders rum-ti-tumming on their
shields, or the two male heroes heaving outsized swords for their duel.
Probably Rossini didn’t intend his beautiful harp ‘bardic’
music to be accompanied by the disembowelment of a sheep, but the effect gets
the eyes rolling, and these are just the most obvious outlandish touches in
this production.
That these peculiar effects didn’t seem to mar my experience
of the opera may be the most effective criticism I can make of it. But the
evening was enjoyable, just about, due to the voices. I can’t imagine the piece
obtaining a better performance.
No comments:
Post a Comment