As the optimistic person that I am, I have decided to give the Cassiers/Barenboim Rheingold a second chance; maybe last time at La Scala was just a collective bad day and I was curious about the new pieces of casting. In an impossibly positive scenario, Cassiers could have rethought his concept after the unanimous dislike he met with. But no – he is a man of conviction. I should admire that – if I had been given a free ticket maybe…
To make things worse, this time I could read dramaturg Michael Steinberg’s explanatory text about the production*. In it, he says that he and this production’s creative team are opening a new era in the staging of Wagner’s Ring: all stagings since the 1980’s represent a throwback from Chéreau’s revolutionary historical concept, while Cassiers would be basically “in the same line” as the French director. But, nota bene, Cassiers is supposed to be a development from that concept: his Ring “will show how the globalized world of 2010 is still based on the Wagnerian vocabulary of 1870”. More than that, it “won’t begin in 1870 and move towards 1945, but rather develop from our days – it will take place in the ‘now'”. I know, I too was curious to see how they intended to do this: “these aesthetics work with the double meaning of ‘projection’, as understood by Freud and others. On one hand, projection is the photographic and cinematographic technology – an image is projected from one source onto a surface. On the other hand, a projection has also psychic dynamic that comprehends the externalization of internal experience and (in symbolical sense) the ascription of emotional causes and attributes to a secondary, external source”. OK, now I got the cameras under the waters of the Rhine, but I guess Mr. Cassiers and his team should have rather learned with Chéreau the craft of true stage direction. I’ll make it easy for them: the art of knowing how to place actors on stage and give them meaningful attitudes, instead of having Friedrichstadt-Palast-like choreographies to portray that.
If I have to compare this evening with that in La Scala, the performance tonight seemed more technically finished (especially lighting), but the cast seemed less animated (particularly Stephan Rügamer). I cannot say if it is my imagination, but some scenes seemed cleaner, the Rhinemaidens less messy, Fasolt and Froh less lost in the context and, maybe it is because Berlin saw the thinner Wotan in the history of opera, his suit looked far less salvation-army-style than the one given to René Pape in Milan. On the other hand, Fricka has a kitschier gown to deal with.
Musically speaking, the dyspeptic approach to the score in Milan was unfortunately not accidental. Although the orchestra seemed more recessed here in Berlin (I don’t think that the mini Bayreuth-hood on the pit has any acoustic consequence), with a clear advantage for the singers, the extra sonic beauty of the Staatskapelle Berlin involve some exquisite orchestral effects, particularly in the rainbow bridge episode, what is always helpful in the context of slow tempi. In any case, the absence of rich orchestral sound will be for many Wagnerians (me included) a coup de grâce in Barenboim’s chamber-like (?) new approach.
Ekaterina Gubanova’s sensuous-toned if not completely incisive Fricka is an improvement from Milan. The other newcomer deserves more explanation: I don’t believe that Hanno Müller-Brachmann is going to add the role of Wotan to his repertoire, but is rather covering for René Pape, who has to sing Boris Godunov at the Met. His bass-baritone is impressively well-focused in the whole range; his technical security is such that he finds no problem in producing dark bottom notes and heroic top notes. The sound is, however, a bit slim and lacking weight, not to mention that the upper end of the tessitura may sound a bit clear. However, his main advantage over René Pape is his verbal specificity. Instead of painting with broad atmospheric paintbrushes, Brachmann delivers the text with crystal-clear diction and admirably precise declamatory abilities. The overall effect might not be the most grandiose around, but he does keep you interested in the proceedings. In any case, in a large hall with a powerful orchestra, I have the impression that Wolfram or maybe Beckmesser would be more appropriate for his voice.
Johannes Martin Kränzle was in far healthier voice here than in Milan. He is a vivid actor with a forceful voice, but his open-toned approach to top notes is a no-go for the more dramatic scenes. Stephan Rügamer was a bit less exuberant – also in the acting department – this evening. In any case, his Mozartian Loge is always interesting. It is a pity that he cannot do without the nasality that distorts his vowels. Again, Kwangchul Youn offered the most solid Wagnerian performance of the evening, but Anna Larsson proved to be here more convincing than in Italy. Maybe Ewa Wolak (at the Deutsche Oper) has spoilt the role for me, but the Swedish contralto still sounds too soft-grained for this role to my taste.
* It had been published at La Scala too, but I could not find it among thousands of pages of advertisement.
I HEAR VOICES 
Larsson seems better suited to Fricka than Erda. But this seems to be the autumn for miscasting Erda (c.f. Bardon at the Met).
“His main advantage over Pape is verbal specificity”?!?!
I won’t question HMB’s diction but to me this has always seemed a particular strength of Pape. As a matter of fact we just got back from his Boris at the Met and apart from a splendid vocal performance his diction was not only nothing short of superlative but indeed the best (easily so with the exception of Petrenko’s Pimen) among an otherwise all Russian cast. Literally every syllable was perfectly understandable and this is entirely consistent in my very extensive experience with him. I would guess that between Berlin, New York and other places you’ve heard him many times as well and am curious whether you found the La Scala experience an exception.
Also, as much as I like Terfel’s Wotan it does seem that Pape would be the Wotan of choice.
I dunno about Barenboim’s new chamber music Wagner thing though. It seems rather problematic. For the record I don’t think he used this approach in his Met Tristan in 08.
Hi, Cavalier!
I am not talking about diction – René Pape has terrific diction, of course. I am talking about being able to deliver a text in its most natural and convincing way. Diction is only a part of it. You can have the newsperson and Vanessa Redgrave reading the same text – they both have perfect diction, but I can bet you will feel more inclined to hear what Redgrave is saying. Of course, Pape is not the newsperson, but in Milan he definitely was not Vanessa Redgrave. The whole performance had a generalized quality about it that make you go rather to the back than to the front of your seat.
As for Pape’s Wotan, as I have written in my post about it, it was one of the most disappointing experiences in my life. I went to the theatre convinced that I would see someting I could tell my grandchildren about, but instead got a rather cautious performance, too velvety in tone (yes, his voice is always beautiful) to produce a heroic impression in the Heldenbariton tessitura. No wonder that Kwangchul Youn stole the show from him – both have similar voices and I bet that Youn’s Wotan would probably have the same problems.
As for Barenboim, THANK GOD he does not do in Tristan what he has been doing with Rheingold. I tremble just to think of how horrible Tristan would sound that way.
I think I partly misunderstood your point RML and in return I don’t think I was clear in my comment above. Pape’s Boris was considered in conception and compelling in execution. His very exact enunciation was a notable aspect but by no means the principal asset of the performance.
As for his Wotan I’m certainly inclined to defer to your judgement. The YouTube confirms it and his YouTube “Leb Wohl” could also be described as generalized and somewhat tentative. Still, I’m not sure you were right to be disappointed (although its a disappointment I likely would have shared had I been there). This sort of tentativeness is hardly surprising in the context of a big role premiere for a prominent singer (the same would apply to Terfel, although he is further in the process, of course). The problematic direction could hardly have helped.* It would be great if Pape’s Wotan could have popped up fully formed out of the head of Zeus (or Wotan, as it were) but apparently not.** I would certainly not (and you probably aren’t) despairing of hearing a memorable Wotan from him. An excessively velvety voice is hardly the worst impairment a Wotan could suffer from.
*You might say HMB was debuting the role and appearing in the same production. One could note that the pressure on him was certainly less than on a Pape or Terfel but he still deserved tremendous credit for having done it as well as you say he did.
**James’ Morris assumption of the role in the 90s – and subsequently – was certainly something I plan to tell my grand children about. My impression was the stronger for these having been my first Walkures and Rings that I saw but they have held up well over the years. Yet even at that time, Morris interpretation was still a work in progress, although he had already done two full studio recordings, and sung what I imagine must have been well over a dozen Rings and probably dozens of Walkures. Pape and Terfel will hopefully go through the same evolution.
Cavalier, James Morris first sang the Walkure Wotan with the Baltimore Opera, in 1984. Very impressive debut in the role (although I didn’t care for the long green robe he wore as part of his costume).
By 1996-97 in Chicago and New York, Morris’ Wotan was dry and wobbly and very difficult to listen to.
But then, miracle of miracles, he returned to Chicago in 2004 for the Rheingold Wotan and was superb.
HMB – I guess that everybody understood that those were ad hoc performances. Considering his natural vocal qualities, they only speak in favour of his perfect technique. A German reviewer (with whose review I otherwise agree) said that he was too busy producing “important notes”, but that’s the point – his is not naturally a Wotan voice and he had to conjure all his means to produce the right effect. And so he had – the tricky notes sounded all right important. Between them, he could rely on his well-focused vocal production and found the necessary time to create something closer to an interpretation.
The problem of an excessively velvety voice is that it is harder to pierce through the orchestra (think of Jessye Norman and Gyneth Jones and tell me who had less problem to be heard in a large auditorium). And that is an extra challenge for Pape, especially in a tessitura that is naturally his. But again, I hope that he can find himself more at ease in Die Walküre – he certainly has the nobility of tone and the emotional generosity for the role. And I hope that they give him a better costume too!
As for James Morris, I have always had luck with his Wotans (although I cannot say the same about other roles…). Back in 1997 at the Met, I found him amazing. And ten years later, he could still produce something really impressive. For me, in a good day, he had it all in this role.
Morris was variable; depends on which cycle you saw in 1997. The Met Walkure I saw in 1997 was just as bad as those Wotans in the 1996 Chicago Ring. Brought back all the bad memories from the previous year. But, as noted, in the 2004 Chicago Rheingold, the “good” Wotan sang.
I saw the last cycle in 1997 and found him in superb form. Even in last year’s Ring and free standing Walkures in 2008 he was still, on balance, the most impressive Wotan I’ve heard. His vocal production was by this very patchy but even then he managed to produce some beautiful tone.
In general I’ve had great luck with Morris and have heard him in terrific form in many roles over the years. Naturally in the context of so many performances I’ve also often heard him at less than his best but Loki is correct that he could produce almost ugly singing even in the mid 90s but very impressive performances 10 years later. In fact he sang in the last Boris at the Met prior to the new production circa 2004. They were probably close to the Wota’s Loki heard and must have been a patch of particularly good vocal form. Pape, it goes without saying, has the more beautiful voice at this time but he of course has not been singing Wotan for 20 years.
Morris, Milnes, Pavarotti, and Dame Joan Sutherland. 1976. I Puritani at the Met. The audience was so excited that some people were standing on their seats during the final curtain calls yelling and applauding.
When Morris and Milnes sang “Suoni la tromba”, a couple of their notes bounced off the back wall of the Met and collided, creating a sonic oscillation that I’ve only experienced a couple of other times at the Met.
If you can get ahold of a recording of the 1976 broadcast of that production, by all means do so because all four artists are in sterling form.