Tuesday, 8 April 2008

Mr M was right

1 During a rummage through old papers, I came across a review, dated 18 March 2006, of Eugene Onegin at the ROH. It was the production which Christa and I attended on my recent birthday, a production which prompted the subsequent disapproving comments. So how did Richard Morrison's views compare with our ones? Read on.

2 'Perhaps opera bosses give half-time pep talks, like football manages. That would explain why, after an Act 1 as lively as washed-up seaweed, this Royal Opera's new staging of Onegin mustered a few late flickers of drama.' was the opening sentence of Mr M's review. The singer who sang the title role 'sang with customary suavity ... and acted with customary impassivity. A broom might have been livelier'. The sets? '..a mishmash of wimpy Romantic paintings and Hollywood sunsets'. The onstage pond? A novelty. And the staging? 'Otherwise, the staging seemed desperately old-fashioned (peasant girls doing dull dances in immaculate smocks), orr inept (the ball scene squashed on to a finy strip of stage), or simply under-directed.'

3 As you can see, I was sufficiently struck by the congruence between Mr M's views and C's and mine to record it on the blog. We choose to attend without recalling the two-year old production - there's been many an opera in between; if we had recalled, if we have our comments on recent productions in front of us as we select our operas for next year and the year beyond, would we have decided not to attend. Maybe. Just as likely - or perhaps more likely - would be the inclination 'give the production a second chance'.

4 And what about the status of Mr M's reviews? Are they to be read before the production or are we to attend the production untainted? A choice. The pre-reading may steer our perception: we may be looking out for what Mr M touched upon. A subsequent reading, that is, a reading subsequent not only to attendance but also to the posting on the blog, is a sterner test - is it? - but we have a foundation for a confidence in our judgement, compared to Mr M's

Don

No comments: