#13: I am the last person who you would expect to come to NYC to see the shabby little shocker, as I much prefer my opera either obscure, contemporary or both. My rationale for coming to NYC was to see Ms. Matilla in a new production. Her qualifications to sing this role aside, I find her a fabulous singing actess, always giving 110%. I’ve seen her Fidelio, Jenufa and Salome.

As for all the hullabaloo about the new production and her ability to sing it, I thought the gals in NY just had their knickers in a bunch over nothing. It was my expectation that I would find the production engaging and sung beautifully.

Having seen the production, the oft quoted adjective ‘flat’ (not for tonality, or even the sets) describes what I saw perfectly. There truly was no there there, and there was cautiousness that pervaded the entire production.

All the detractors going on about stage directions not being followed seems rather petty. Why even bother changing the set from the original production (insert irony here)?

And although it was my opinion that Karita could do no wrong, this role really wasn’t suited to her voice. I am glad, however, to have seen the production live and in person. I just had more fun at Hair.

Overheard as we were leaving, “She was really sharp; especially during the recitative.” Nuff said.

Don Carlo is still Boy Joe’s greatest opera, though. Way ahead of Otello and Falstaff in my book!

I was actually thinking about your mentioning this when I went to see the HD telecast. My feelings are that while he ultimately gets off (sexually) on rape, he’s not adverse to owning people — and just because you’ve got prostitutes doesn’t mean they’re just 100% sexually available either. It’s fairly easy to brutalize an (unwilling) prostitute, too, which was hinted at when Scarpia threw when on the ground.

An analogy that came to mind: just because someone finds ultimately (sexual) fulfillment with another participant doesn’t suddenly make masturbation unappealing.

At 31: I was confused by Falstaff. LOL. I thought I was missing something so I didn’t argue.

I’ve heard friends object to the baby killing elements of Jenufa and Trovatore, which is the reason I listed them as potential examples of “bad taste.”

Re: Tosca, I agree with you that as written, the lead characters don’t have much external life, are not full and rounded characters. I’ve come to see this as a benefit (and note that I didn’t view it this way at first) in that it mostly succeeds, for me, on the singers’ ability to act. They have to bring it, as the kids say, inventing a background for the characters. This allows Tosca to take on different colors and shadings with each cast change.

The opera probably works well enough if the singers don’t make that investment, because of Puccini’s directness — the production I saw live had a Tosca who brought it, a Scarpia who might have misplaced it, and a Cavaradossi who left it at home. That night, the machine rolled along well enough for me to have fun.

THANKS SO MUCH FOR PROVIDING THE TRANSLATION OF “LA TOSCA”…!!

I wonder if the direction in the libretto that the voice is totally disregarded by those on stage who go about their appreciation of watching people burned to death ISN’T ironic.

Quoth LaCieca: And don’t get me started on that roaring fireplace in the middle of July!)

Cieca cara, the Battle of Marengo took place on June 14 and, in history as in the play and opera, a false account of Napoleon’s defeat reached Rome several hours before the truth.

Actually, my comment is just nit-picking because one wouldn’t want a roaring fire in June in Rome any more than in July. The moment the curtain rose on act 2 during the Zeffirelli production’s premiere, I knew immediately he was going as usual for picturesque effect, with no interest in the reality of the situation, as usual.

La Tosca, Act I

La Tosca, Act II

La Tosca, Act III

La Tosca, Act IV

La Tosca, Act V

But to paraphrase former President Clinton: it depends on what your definition of bad taste is.

I think it’s a great starter opera. I’ve only been listening to it for 8 months and one of the things I like about it — or liked about it — is that I always knew where I was in the story, even before I ever read the libretto. The listener can’t get lost, even not knowing the language. Now that I’m past that early stage with it and know the story, I like that it is so compact and direct. There’s very little, if any, wasted space. (I’m still not sure about the opening of Act III — I find the pre-dawn music to be filler but lovers of this work are beginning to persuade me that this music serves the overall purpose of the opera.)

I now view Tosca as comfort food. It’s not the deepest, most psychologically probing opera out there, but when I want to hear some music well-married to its subject, and I’m not in the mood for some heavy thinking, I put it on.

Maybe in 5, 10, 20 years, I’ll have “outgrown” it. But for now, I just kick back and enjoy the ride.

I know nothing about La Fiamma and had to look it up to know what you were writing about. I have no idea why this opera hasn’t become embedded in the standard repertoire, but I’m sure other commenters here will share their thoughts.

Well, there’s offended and then there’s offended. I don’t think there are all that many people who were shocked at the idea of prostitutes being depicted on the Met stage, or even that the performances of the actresses were offensively vulgar or suggestive. I did notice a certain level of outrage at what was perceived to be an unpardonable liberty taken with the libretto, varying along the continuum from “Puccini didn’t write any music for prostitutes here, so they shouldn’t be onstage” to “Why would Scarpia have hookers servicing him when he’s already planning to bang Tosca later that night?” I have to say a lot of the objection seemed to devolve down to “I’ve never seen it done this way before.” (Yes, there were also a significant number of objections along the lines of “the hookers didn’t seem realistic enough — I mean, what’s the deal with those shoes? — and the production chickened out when the one whore gave Scarpia a blowjob without unzipping his pants.”)

But, to get back to the subject, there were and are a lot of objections made using some reasoning on the model of “Tosca would never do that.” Tosca would never wear a black dress, or go into church without a full-scale mantilla, or slash the painting, or get the idea for the murder a few minutes before, or any number of others. This “criticism” I think is rarely valid because we all tend to base our idea of what a fictional character “should” or “would never” do on our experience of previous productions of the work. In the case of New Yorkers, a large fraction of that “experience” is necessarily going to be the Zeffirelli production, which in some ways was vastly conventional and in some others had, well, its own quirks. (For example, where exactly is that torture chamber supposed to be, in the adjoining room or under the trap door? Or, in the first act, if the church is supposed to be locked up tighter than a drum, who are all these tourists and nuns and peasant ladies wandering about? And don’t get me started on that roaring fireplace in the middle of July!)

As I said in my review, this production had elements of both and what we were left with was neither: Not kink, but not vanilla either.

The prostitutes didn’t offend me, I just thought they were one of those things that Bondy used to push the envelope where it was not necessary, or supported by the drama.

How ironic is it for us to have the same opinion since I saw the same performance live at the Met while you saw it at an HD screening?
But in all seriousness, how one watches it should not be the dividing line when it comes to opinion. If we were debating sound or audience reaction, perhaps it would make sense to make that a factor but when judging production, I think we are all entitled to an opinion.
It would be a sad day in opera if it came down to dismissing the opinions of those who sit in the Family Circle in favor of the opinions of those in the Parterre boxes.

@18- Squirrel
I was in attendance for the discussion at NYPL and did not think the double-entendre was intentional on Bondy’s part. English is not my family’s first language and it’s quite common for them to put together sentences similar to the way that Bondy did.
Perhaps I’m the only person who feels this way.

This “Third Camp” you suggest is actually the position that Dawn Fatale is taking here, but you are apparently too dim to get that out of reading it.

However there is a difference between your “third camp” and the Poster’s, which is that you seem all caught up in who was offended by what liberties the director took, whereas I think it’s pretty clear that negative reaction against the Bondy Tosca was not out of prudishness or even this supposed Traditionalism; rather the boos, and most of the press attacks, concern how flat and uninspired Bondy’s staging was. Really, I think I’ve missed all the newspaper and blog criticism that focuses on being offended by prostitutes. Please share.

I’ll bet you don’t even read newspapers, in fact you possibly can’t even read. Just speculating, since I don’t have any idea who you are.

And you are quaint to speculate about my language skills. So right you are! I didn’t even finish middle school.

“Besides, I personally think that setting a torture scene as a symphonic trio with a soaring melody shows extreme bad taste and it always rubs me the wrong way”

..BUT..how about the “Auto-de-Fe”, in Don Carlo(s)?…lol..!

La Cieca, in your piece you talk only about two camps, the pro Bondy and the anti Bondy faction, but I believe there’s a third one (to which I belong myself) – those who don’t think the production is particularly brilliant, insightful, or anywhere near intellectually refined, surprising, imaginative Regietheater, but who don’t understand what all the fuss is about – why several newspapers and blogs were all upset about the prostitutes, Scarpia kissing the statue of the Madonna, the bear-breasted painting of Attavanti, the missing candles and crucifix, etc. I think many people just can’t understand how this could upset anybody, and even less how it could be considered “modern”.

And if I may say so, IMHO, you are going to far when you are saying anybody who saw the “Tosca” just in a movie theater and not at the MET is not entitled to have an opinion and can not possibly critisize the performance. So that means the thousands and thousands of opera lovers who perhaps never in their lives have a chance to attend a performance at the MET (or at any other great, world famous opera house), but who instead flock to the HD broadcasts or watch opera DVDs – those people are just clueless, sort of second class “opera consumers” who should shut up because they didn’t see “the real thing” in the house?