Le Nozze de Figaro at ROH

16/09/13

David McVicar is back at Covent Garden to direct this revival of his production of Mozart's most perfect opera. When it was done last season I wrote very positively about the production and music making. That review contains many of my thoughts about the piece and my basic thoughts on the production, so I won't recap, but this time I wasn't nearly so captivated.

The biggest problem was surely John Eliot Gardiner in the pit, whose approach to this music is sounding distinctly "old school" these days. Banning all vibrato, insisting on brisk tempos and dessicated, spiky textures, expunging any legato playing or sense of the longer line and leaving Mozart's ravishing orchestration undernourished due to poor balance were all perhaps hallmarks of early "historically informed performances" but we've moved on so far since the 1960's and 1970's. Just look at the magnificent work of the OAE or William Christie with Les Arts Florissants for modern HIP where the music is allowed to live and breathe again. (The recently departed Charles Mackerras and Colin Davis were also bastions of truly great Mozart performance with modern orchestras and contemporary taste.) The orchestral playing was scrappy throughout the entire evening - ensemble was poor, there were endless tuning problems and stage and pit were very often totally at odds. Banning a modern orchestra from using vibrato or legato is a very risky business - deprived of expressive resource, players feel very exposed and on edge and as a result tend to make poor music.

I found David McVicar's direction very fussy this time: the stage positively teems with extras, presumably to provide a sense of the daily bustle of the household and reflect the hectic activity of the score, but the result is always the appearance of "stage business" without any feeling of real life. Perhaps it was Leah Hausman's revival direction last time, or a cast that were better at acting, but for whatever reason, the show was more successful then. Character regie is very detailed throughout, but only intermittently convinces - what was with all the direct addresses to the audience, double takes, knowing glances and other self consciously "stagey" acting? The result wasn't bad exactly, but was quite uninvolving emotionally with little pain to temper the slapstick.

The cast is decent though not stellar. (I didn't envy any of them having to sing with what was going on in the pit, and it must have been off putting for all.) Head and shoulders above the rest is Christopher Maltman as Count Almaviva who is at every moment musically and dramatically expressive, the only fully rounded character on stage. Maria Bengtsson's Countess is vocally beautiful, if occasionally a little small scale. The sotto voce she did during the second "verse" of Dove Sono was arresting and lovely though. McVicar makes sure we know that the Countess is still a girl, but she is also totally in the thrall of Cherubino in Act II and so her protestations make her seem almost as vain as her husband. Mary Bevan impressed vocally as Barbarina, but shared with Bengtsson the unsettling feeling of looking somehow too modern - certainly something to do with their hair and make-up (probably no fault of their own) and perhaps also their bearing. Hard to put one's finger on, but definitely there. Lucy Crowe's Susanna was charming and very well sung, though occasionally a bit too cutesy acting wise for my taste. Renata Pokupic's Cherubino was short on legato and so struggled to make an impact vocally. Luca Pisaroni's Figaro was fine though a little bland vocally next to Maltman's Count - the timbral and expressive palette is by comparison quite narrow. Jean-Paul Fouchécourt is in the unfortunate position of having to play Don Basilio as an OTT gay stereotype, such a boring cliché in this role.

All in all a so-so revival.

Photos copyright Mark Douet/ROH

Le Nozze di Figaro at Guildhall

02/03/13

Mozart is often seen as a very good match for young voices, and while it is less demanding stamina and volume wise than much of the standard repertoire, there is also little that is so exacting and exposed vocally. While I have been impressed in the past by some student productions of Mozart, this evening also outlined some of the pitfalls of conventional wisdom.

Catherine Backhouse as Cherubino
credit: Clive Barda

Martin Lloyd-Evans new production for the Guildhall updates things to contemporary America, with the count transformed into a Republican Governor, the Countess his neglected media wife, and Figaro and Susanna and the others "the help". Cherubino is a stereotype of an American high schooler, and it's not clear what he's doing hanging around the American upper classes. Virtually every other male character becomes another grey suit and utterly indistinct from one another. It's OK, though not particularly interesting as a concept, but the main problem is that it's barely developed - there are power suits, TV news screens and political slogans ("Today's Illegals, Tomorrow's Democrats" ironic considering Almaviva's suspiciously Hispanic sounding name), but basically there is no significant impact on how the story is told, especially on the subject of class division, and actually some of the updating serves to make the story less credible than normal. There were also numerous incongruencies in the characterisation. Would a man of the social status of a Governor really throw himself at the feet of a maid he was trying to bed? Would a middle aged Governor's wife really countenance an affair with a high schooler? Would she really fail to cower as her husband re-enters the room brandishing a blunt object when just two minutes before he had slapped her to the ground in a rage? Would Figaro really just come into the room and sit on his employers' bed? Too many moments like these muddied the waters dramatically.

While sitting in the theatre it was not at all obvious how the opening sequence related to the rest of the opera to me - apparently it was the smuggling in of illegal immigrants for the Governor's household which serves to underline his hypocrisy (I only understood this when I bumped into someone at the tube who had worked on it, as well as the significance of the Count's gift of a passport), so I'm willing to entertain that I missed more. These interferences aside, what mostly registered was a staticism in the outer Acts and a lack of sharpness in the acting with intentions only half heartedly acted on. It felt like a long evening. Figaro is all about detail,  warmth and pain, it's all there in the score, and a moving and powerful dramatic realisation needs to be much more clearly tied to the music.

The production is double cast and I saw the second cast. Unfortunately, I didn't really feel that any of these young singers were fully ready to tackle their roles, quite unlike the recent Royal College production I witnessed. A part of the problem may well have been the set, which had everyone singing inside a small letterbox like room which severely limited movement and may have affected the sound that reached the audience, and it must be said that the acoustics of the Silk Street Theatre are very dead and unflattering.

Hadleigh Adams and Ben McAteer
credit: Clive Barda

Most impressive perhaps was Ben McAteer as Count Almaviva who sang with a very wide range of dynamic control and excellent textual nuance, though occasionally resorted to shouting. His "Contessa perdono" was very moving. Hadleigh Adams had the notes of Figaro, though had difficulties with the diction. Raphaela Papadakis was an even happier Susanna than we normally see and although this is a promising soubrette voice, at the moment there is not yet the vocal ease and fluency that the role requires - quite often notes felt squeezed and held which made the phrasing suffer. As the Countess Magdalena Molendowska also revealed a promising voice which will surely be quite beautiful one day, but the line is constantly broken up, and while she was good in the ensembles, the Countess' two arias, some of the most deceptively difficult that Mozart wrote, proved too great a challenge at this stage. I wonder whether she was undersinging and holding back too much for stylistic reasons - there was far greater vocal freedom and an exciting vibrancy when she sang out more.

Opera orchestras at UK conservatoires usually seem under rehearsed and scrappy, probably because the students are so busy with other things but it highlights quite how difficult good orchestral accompaniment is when one realises how good many of these players are individually. Generally, conductor Dominic Wheeler marshalled things quite well, and the all important Act II Finale was beautifully realised. Elsewhere there were serious woodwind tuning issues, and the Act IV Finale wasn't as wondrous or momentous as maybe it should have been. At least he was attentive to what the singers were doing on stage, and ensemble was mostly very tight.

I wonder whether the concept hampered these young performers in getting more fully into their roles, but this was not the most convincing evening I have experienced at the Guildhall.

Le Nozze di Figaro at Glyndebourne

08/07/2012

Quite a while ago now, but better late than never? This production (directed by Michael Grandage) was a frustrating as it seemed to have such potential as a concept, but had so many ideas that no one followed through with, and aside from the updating it didn't feel like there was enough risk taking or sense of purpose. At least it wasn't updated to the 50's.

photo by Alastair Muir

Putting Figaro in the Alhambra is cool - despite its setting being clearly set out in Da Ponte's libretto, Spanish references in productions of this opera are usually few and far between, so it's nice to bring out this element for a change. But here it changed nothing about the presentation of the action or the drama, and in the end this was as traditional a production as I have ever seen. Why bother making the Islamic reference if you're not going to follow up on it?* Just to look pretty?

Even more pointless was setting it in the early 70's - this creates problems because the whole plot centres around avoidance of the Almavida's Feudal right (and no attempt was made to address this anachronism), but added nothing in terms of casting the drama in a new light. My instant thought was that if they'd made it a commune (all the rage at that time), with Almaviva as the head honcho, he may well have had a "right" to the women in the commune, and he'd still be a figure of (abusive) power. Also, the Count cannot be a truly threatening character due only to his status in the 70's because there were of course by that time severe limitations on his power and what he could do to his servants. For there to be a real sense of dread he'd simply have to be a physically or psychologically threatening man (which he wasn't at all here) but then this would render certain character's actions inexplicable without some further serious character regie. I don't like when things are just glossed over. I've seen reviewers suggest that this weakening of the Count is a strength of the production (e.g. Rupert Christiansen of all people!) - it's not, it undermines the drama.

photo by Alastair Muir

I missed too the painful edge of this opera, the bitter tang of every trick which rebounds and causes almost as much suffering on the trick player as the victim. This idea is taken up by Da Ponte less subtly in Cosi Fan Tutte, and in fact becomes the central thrust of the drama, but in Figaro it's just one of a number of important interlocking elements. Itis of course also so beautifully encapsulated in Mozart's music that it's impossible to ignore; when it is, as here, the whole things falls flat and ends up being rather bland - nothing more than non threatening buffoonery, japes and mild humour. Of course there were roars of laughter every time people danced in a 70s style to Mozart's music. People are so very easily pleased.

As to Christopher Oram's sets - I have to say that though very detailed, I thought lots of the scenery was rather crudely rendered and far less beautiful than actual examples of Islamic architecture and ceramics of this period. One big problem was that both the window and the main door of the the Countess' bedroom were deeply recessed into the right hand wall and so key points of the action in Act 2 (Cherubino's jump, and the locking of the doors) were invisible to half the audience. So unecessary.

The cast were very young, each debuing their role as far as I can tell, and though youth is entirely appropriate in this piece, their inexperience showed. Michael Grandag 's direction, which is detailed but quite unspecific, rendered characters generic and largely uninteresting, with emotional content relegated to the background, and larger dramatic arches left undernourished. But more experienced singers can often transcend an indifferent production and at least effect something special in their own parts. Overall I found it hard to feel too much for any of the characters.

photo by Alastair Muir

Sally Matthew's Countess was vocally by some distance the most impressive cast member, but due to the production seemed short of genuine pathos, and so failed to move the heart. The costumes saw to it that she couldn't be elegant or graceful, but I'm not sure the voice is quite right either for capturing this character's poise, warmth or softness. A few months ago I wrote about her voice as it sounded close up in the Wigmore Hall, and my impression wasn't all that different here - it's superbly produced, extremely even, technically very secure, but also extremely covered which gives it a shiny, but rather dark and steely unfeminine edge. The top gleams, but it's laser like rather than crystalline. I love her Fiordiligi here and here and I think it's probably a much more interesting role for her.

Lydia Teuscher's Susanna was quite nice, but in voice types this common one can afford to be very picky, and she offerend nothing truly distinctive. I thought she was occasionally quite hoarse in the upper register too. Vito Priante's Figaro was also decently sung but overall slightly bland. Audun Iversen's Count Almaviva was more interesting vocally, but had too many comedy double takes (which the crowd ate up) to be credible. Isabel Leonard made a decent Cherubino, nicely sung, but again failed to be very memorable. All the supporting roles were adequately taken (except for Ann Murray's Marcellina who was far more than adequate - such a natural presence on stage, and still far more than acceptable vocally).

Robin Ticciati was in the pit and all eyes are surely on him at the moment since he was announced last season as Glyndebourne's next music director, succeeding Jurowski in 2014 (with a rumoured Rosenkavalier, another Glyndebourne classic). I was absolutely enthralled by his Don Giovanni last season with the OAE which was full blooded, ultra detailed and thrillingly intense. His Figaro was also very good, sensittively played and carefully thought out, but it felt a bit too much like the production: all a bit subdued and soft, lacking piquancy and bite. Still he's profoundly musical and has excellent rapor with his musicians who manage to play superbly apparently in spite of his almost obstinate lack of clear beat. He's so young too - I have no fears whatsoever about his take over (though at the moment Jurowski seems quite determined to make us regret that he's going with superlative performances every time.)

Perhaps surprisingly, this Figaro is a co production with the Met, a much larger stage, so presumably the sets will all have to be rebuilt for then. Hopefully they'll hire some experts in Islamic art, improve the look of it, and iron out some of the set's problems. Although it is an updating that will no doubt receieve some grumbles when it crosses the pond, there is nothing here at all to challenge the arch conservative Met audience intellectually, morally or emotionally.

*In fact, it gave me such a good idea for a production but I don't want to write it here for fear that the idea will be stolen!

Le Nozze di Figaro at the Royal College of Music

02/06/2012

I chose to review the second cast because usually they never get any press coverage, and it doesn't seem fair. Sadly I didn't see the other cast, but there it is. Luckily this cast was uniformly of a high standard, so I didn't feel the need to be blandly noncomittal in this review - all of them surely have careers ahead of them, but as is to be expected, they are not all equally finished as performers yet.

In this production, the sets were rather simple - clean white boxy rooms which descend from the ceiling and cocoon each other, and a four part screen at the front which had the words "Le Nozze di Figaro" on it. Not sure why this was written there, other than to break up the white. The rooms also had the beginnings of the famous arias on them, ostensibly to show you who the room belonged to I'm guessing, but no doubt also to break up the monotony of minimalist white. Quite vanilla then, literally and metaphorically. Unfortunately the direction reflected this - traditional, which isn't bad, but a bit plain and lacking in dramatic momentum. Figaro is an opera that really doesn't require a big budget to be done superbly - its all in the wit and subtlety of the social hierarchies and interactions (and that score!), which means you need a really sensitive director who is up to the job. To cut a long story short, the main problem with Jean Claude Auvray's production was that it lacked tension and dramatic impetus largely because the count was not in the least bit threatening - if he's just a buffoon, the endless vacillations to avoid his wrath seem frivolous and pointless, the dramatic and musical linchpin of the opera (the Act II finale) falls flat, the class tensions aren't explorable, and the final reconciliation of the count and countess loses some of its poignancy.

Emilie Renard as Cherubino

There were lots of nice unusual touches though - Susanna getting very angry at Figaro's insensitivity at the end of Act I; being able to see inside the closet in Act II; the lights going up for Figaro's Act IV aria about women, and he walks into the audience addressing us personally. But every time, the novelty was squandered, the idea wasn't developed enough, or didn't actually change the drama at all, or teach us anything new about the characters. On the plus side, the production was energetic and fast paced, so rarely felt boring, but too often the young singers seemed to just be going through the motions of the plot, rather than really having compelling reasons for their actions.

Musically this was a strong evening, and the cast really worked well as an ensemble. The RCM orchestra mostly played very well, a few intonation issues aside, and the score bristled with energy and dash as it should. Sometimes, the larger structures didn't seem to hang together quite as well as I would have liked, but maybe this is cavilling in a student performance.

For me the stand out in the cast was Emilie Renard as Cherubino. I first saw her in a concert performance of La Celemenza Di Tito and thought she was superb vocally there, so it's very satisfying to see that she is so good on stage too. She was the only person who presented a fully rounded and believable character, with subtle emotions, charming points of characterisation, never over or under acted in this often misjudged role. Her first aria,  Non so piu..., was exquisitely sung, with a beautiful tone and affecting ardency. She clearly enjoys the singing, but is never given to show boating - just really great to watch and hear. Probably precisely because it sounds so simple and is so exposed, her second aria Voi che sapete... didn't seem quite as ideal, but no doubt her interpretation will settle in time. I expect she'll sing this role everywhere very soon.

This cast's Countess, Abigail Mitchell, was sick so the other cast's Countess, Anastasia Prokofieva, stepped in. She has a very interesting voice which may be very beautiful indeed one day - she certainly delivered the goods beauty wise, in the two excrutiatingly difficult arias, negotiating the passagio admirably, and her Piú docile io sono at the end of Act 4 was as special as one was hoping for. However, her Italian was often quite muddled, and the vibrato was much too wide in the recitatives to hear what she was saying. Additionally, she wasn't really stylistically on the right lines - although I fully encourage the attempt to sing every phrase legatissimo as befits this character, there were a few too many portamentos for comfort. She still has plenty of time to develop and as I say, she has the makings of a gorgeous voice. Acting wise, (and I blame the director) her Countess was much too vampish for my tastes, really indulging in Cherubino's affections and acting completely inappropriately for a woman of her status and class. The result was that she seemed just as indulgent and vain and almost as hypocritical as the Count, which is an interpretation to be sure, but for me not the most effective or moving one.

Filipa can Eck and Bradley Travis

Filipa van Eck is really natural on stage, ultra smiley, ebullient and plucky, with a lovely youthful lyric voice that seems right in line with the traditional picture we have of Susanna. Occasionally I wanted a bit more emotional range from her, but she's a good actress, has a very fine voice and was clearly the centre of the show. A real charmer.

Bradley Travis' Figaro was similarly well sung, but his acting seemed a little more generic; not bad by any means, and again it might have been the fault of the direction, but just a little too blank to render a fully believable character. Morgan Pearse's count was splendid vocally, with an interesting timbre, lots of nuance, but as already mentioned physically lacked the dignity and menace that he needs. His Act III aria Vedro mentr'io sospiro was fantastic though.



One thing that I absolutely hate in Mozart is when the asides (and there are so many) are delivered directly to the audience, breaking the fourth wall, rather than as an internal commentary of the sort that occurs in real life all the time. This connects to the bigger issue of how arias should be presented. Personally I want to feel as if I'm looking into the scene, overhearing a moment of personal reflection, anger, jealousy, lust or whatever. Never that the character is telling me what he is thinking or feeling. It's a subtle but important distinction, and was another problem in general with the direction in this production. Only Renard fully avoided this pitfall.

Hannah Sanidison, Pnini Grubner and Vasili Karpiak

The smaller roles were all well taken. Best of all was Vasili Karpiak's Basilio (the music master) who was finally played as I always have wanted to hear him - as an italianate bel canto tenor, with a sob in the voice, every phrase milked for its lyricism, and with the occasional interpolated high note. He was also subtly characterised in actions too in a character that often barely registers. Great stuff. Pnini Grubner's Dr. Bartolo was pleasingly gruff and very well sung, and Hannah Sandison as Marcellina had a very pleasing and timbre. Anna Anandarajah's has a very sweet and pliant voice, but it is also rather dark and seemed a little inappropriate for the 12 year old Barbarina. Strangely in what is after all meant to be a show case for these students, the commonly cut Basilio and Marcellina arias were cut here too... I fully understand why this is done normally (though I like Marcellina's one as a feminist aria and foil for Figaro's anti-women rant) but I personally always regret the choice, and thought it particularly inexcusable here.

Overall I enjoyed myself very much, and it's always exciting to see new talent emerging and blooming.

Figaro at ROH

And so we come to the last opera of the "Da Ponte cycle", which is actually the first. Figaro is the most perfect Mozart opera in my opinion, which is to say the most perfect opera of all. Every number is not just superbly beautiful as in Cosi and Don Giovanni, but also memorable, dramatically apt, emotionally revealing - the musical and dramatic means are never at odds. The characters are beautifully drawn, likeable, three dimensional, alive with real feelings always exquisitely revealed in the vocal line even when it might be lacking in the text, the action is subtle, nuanced, multi layered, and the orchestra teems with a soft hued delicacy and felicitous brilliance more refined than anything he achieved before or after.*

Just as he did with Meistersinger, McVicar updates the action to the Regency era. The political undertones of the opera (more explicit in the original Beaumarchais play), the theme of master and servant and class frictions, were again very pertinent during this era of course, so the updating makes perfect sense in that way. McVicar doesn't force the point though, and he introduces nothing major that is not in Da Ponte's libretto, nor does he leave anything out: mainly this is a way to do something new visually with the piece and avoid the crinolines and fussy 18th century decor which can be so distracting when badly done.

And it's wonderful. The beautifully capacious sets, all high windows and creme panelling, together with the always sensitive lighting of Paule Constable gives the whole thing a soft, fresh aired luminosity and allows the cast to breath in the space. Tanya McCallin designed both the sets and costumes which gave the piece an aesthetic unity. Act changes are all deftly and smoothly handled with huge moving panels and sections which never seem cheap or clunky. Everything, in other words, is working in perfect accord.

The cast work wonderfully together too, revival direction by Leah Hausman keeping things feeling spontaneous. The casting is excellent, not just vocally but in terms of the dramatic temperament and even the physical stature of each singer as well. Rachel Willis Sorensen makes a gorgeous Countess, vocally polished, controlled and expressive, actually pretty astonishing considering she is just 28 years old. She might be someone very special indeed. She really plays the part beautifully too: poised, restrained in her gestures and with a serene countenance entirely befitting her role. She is also very tall, towering statuesquely over Figaro, Susanna and the rest of the cast so looks great on stage. Lucas Meachem is a superb Count (so much so that one didn't regret Keenlyside's recent withdrawal from the part) displaying the requisite suave assurance and composure of the character, with vocal acting that was sophisticated and commanding. I liked him very much much last summer as Don Giovanni at Glyndebourne but here he was even stronger, and the role seemed to fit better.

Ildebrando D'Arcangelo has a wonderfully rich bass-baritone voice which is just a pleasure to hear. There's a tendency only to boom and the voice isn't well supported when he sings quietly, but it's such a lovely voice, and he's a charmingly affable and sexually appealing enough Figaro that this doesn't matter much at all. The chemistry with Aleksandra Kurzak as Susanna was palpable, and though Kurzak has a tendency to overact, she was very good here I thought, with less of the mugging I've seen her do in the past. Vocally too she seemed very at ease, producing some lovely things, even if not quite as special as her colleagues. The lesser parts were brilliantly and characterfully taken by Ann Murray (as Marcellina), Carlo Lepore (a slightly camp Bartolo) and Jeremy White (Antonio) - luxury casting all. With such talent on offer it seemed a shame that their arias should be cut in Act IV. Susana Gaspar made a minute Barbarina, reminding us that she is meant to be twelve years old (as Anna Gottlieb, the first singer of this role was in 1786) making it all the seemier that the Count might have been after her. The voice is sweet and apt for the role though the part never seems big enough to really be able to judge the quality of a singer. The only real disappointment in the cast was Anna Bonitatibus as a rather wispy and breathy Cherubino, finely acted though it was.


What McVicar understands so well about this opera is not just the dramatic pacing and the relationships that need to be carefully sculpted, but also the spiritual difference between the different characters - the Count and Countess' travails really do contain something more painful and earnest, their reconciliation far more meant and heartfelt because more was at risk - things that the servants simply do not fully fathom. Thus Mozart adds a considerable amount of ambiguity to this apparent class satire and critique of the upper classes. McVicar really makes sure every detail of every character is right, and while there are only a few original touches, it's just satisfying for being so meticulous. The finale of Act II is one of the very greatest things that Mozart ever wrote and here it was wonderfully done - not just musically, but dramatically every gesture spoke and was reflected in the text and especially the music - that McVicar listens to the music so intently for clues is one of his greatest strengths.

Pappano's conducting of this score is absolutely superb, really truly beautiful. The joy he gets from it is so clearly communicated to his musicians who respond in kind. The pacing and instrumental balance was always meticulously well planned and executed: the difference between this sort of playing and the Cosi I saw two weeks before is amazing, and it is worlds apart from the Don Giovanni I witnessed. The ROH orchestra can and will play superbly for conductors they really like!

The best operatic experience I've had in a long while. It's almost sold out, so you might have to queue on the day for a ticket, but few productions this season have been as good as this one.


*(sorry, I can't put it better than I did before!)

New ENO season announced

And what a fantastic season it is. For obscurists like myself it's an absolute dream, and provides a brilliant contrast to the Royal Opera House's ultra traditional season (which I've come round to and am also greatly looking forward to). There's almost nothing I don't want to see.

Outrageous claims are made for Weinberg's music (for instance that he should be considered as the third of the "great three" Soviet composers), but though he's very inconsistent (something he does share with Shostakovich and Prokofiev), at his best he writes music of genuine pathos and beauty. I don't know The Passenger, but I certainly am looking forward to it... maybe one to look out before seeing it live - the story sounds extremely interesting, though I'm wary of another concentration camp setting. We'll see!

Figaro is possibly my favourite Mozart opera overall and I never mind seeing what a new director has to say in this piece. Kate Valentine has recieved what might be described as rave reviews for her Countess at Scottish Opera, so it'll be great to see her in London.

Rameau is always a favourite with me, probably my favourite Baroque opera composer. Amazing that the ENO have never staged a Rameau before, and Castor and Pollux is a great one. Looking forward to seeing Roderick Williams on stage - have only heard him in lieder recordings thus far.

Eugene Onegin is another one of my all time favourites, it's just a magnificent score, a brilliant piece of dramaturgy and is probably my favourite piece by Tchaikovsky. Don't recognise any of the cast, but it's hard for this score not to be enjoyable. (Apparently the Royal Opera House have it slated for January 2013)

I like the way the ENO calls their revival of Tosca a "classic revival"! Not sure I'll be attending either this or Butterfly later in the season - the only things that don't really appeal.

Naturally I cannot wait for the Rosenkavalier with Sarah Connolly as Octavian, Sophie Bevan as Sophie, Amanda Roocroft as the Marchallin and God as Ochs. I always sort of dread looking down the cast list for who the Marschallin will be in Rosenkavalier productions - if that piece of casting isn't just right, the whole thing will fall flat. No need to worry though - Amanda Roocroft is both a magnificent singer (this is her role debut) and a fantastic actress, so I'm very happy. Amongst singers that the ENO can afford, especially English ones, they couldn't have chosen better. One thing though. Why on earth did they use such a hideous picture of Connolly as the image for the production?! (UPDATE 26/06: after hearing Roocroft in the ROH's Peter Grimes, I'm now not so ecstatic at the prospect of her assumption of the role. Ho-hum)

Never seen an Offenbach opera, so will be good to see Tales of Hoffmann which strikes me as potentially being one of his most interesting.

Adams' The Death of Klinghoffer is a great score in my opinion, definitely one of Adams' better operas. Only know it from the recording so looking forward to seeing it realised on the stage.

Jacob Lenz, Caligula and Doctor Dee again completely unknown by me - did I mention I was excited by the obscurity of this season! - not many details on any yes, but looking forward to all.

And finally Billy Budd and Dutchman - the former yet another favourite, the latter again new to me on the stage.

The only thing wrong with this season is no Janacek (there's none at the ROH either), but with so much that's exciting, I'm just cavilling.


ENO 2011/12 season

The Elixir of Love, Donizetti , opens 15 September 2011

The Passenger, Weinberg, opens 19 September 2011

The Marriage of Figaro, Mozart, opens 5 October 2011

Castor and Pollux, Rameau, opens 24 October 2011

Eugene Onegin, Tchaikovsky, opens 12 November 2011

Tosca, Puccini, opens 26 November 2011

Der Rosenkavalier, Strauss, opens 28 January 2012

The Tales of Hoffmann, Offenbach, opens 10 February 2012

The Death of Klinghoffer, John Adams, opens 25 February 2012

Jakob Lenz, Wolfgang Rihm, opens 17 April 2012, Hampstead Theatre

The Flying Dutchman, Wagner, opens 28 April 2012

Madam Butterfly, Puccini, opens 8 May 2012

Caligula, Detlev Glanert, opens 25 May 2012

Billy Budd, Britten, opens 18 June 2012

Doctor Dee, Damon Albarn, opens 25 June 2012


Click here to check it out for yourself.