The distributor was also handling the showing of The Barber of Seville and other operas. He got his cast lists for the poster wrong. Seemingly unaware of the mistake: as they already then, were being displayed in theater glass showcases. The distributor gave thanks: by offering (when I suggested it) to save just one of the posters for me, since he wanted to quickly collect and destroy all the embarrassing others. I had this unique gift copy- then laminated.

I have always found the casting of different singers in the main female roles …extremely jarring. IMHO I find it then becomes an Offenbach all star variety show. They might as well throw in scenes from say his ‘First Man on the Moon ‘,then perhaps a ballet ‘being so French’ or from other confections he wrote. All these latest conflicting editions of the work could have the opposite effect intended. A case of ‘Tales of Hoffmann…whose Hoffmann are we talking about?…There are so many!’

The only way your info makes sense is if it was about the long-ago announced cast of Netrebko, Villazon, and Pape.

But, at your local multiplex, who knows any of these names at all? And who would care about an incorrect cast announcement (“Oh my God, Garanca isn’t singing Nicklausse, I want my money back!”).

With all respect to our hostess, but do you really believe that in the 21st century, such issues – as well as cuts, textual variations, etc. – are the sole decision of the conductor rather than being determined in collaboration between the conductor and director? Even in the last century when Levine did new productions of this opera with Schenk at the Met and Ponnelle in Salzburg, did Levine make the decision of order on his own, which those directors just humbly accepted?

As to it being published, I know that Cologne did do his version in a multi-language version, and that the results were fairly disastrous.

Having listened to the numerous versions of Hoffmann that exist, Sher has come to believe that James Levine’s take on the opera is the best. “James has edited everything to make it really sensible — there are a lot of difficult leaps you have to make in this piece — while keeping it engaging dramatically. He’s got such a great dramatic sense. His version clarifies the fact that Hoffmann really is an artistic history, finally, rather than a romantic one. We begin with Olympia first, the doll sequence — right?” Sher pauses, thrown for a moment. “That’s Olympia, right? Then Antonia, the violin-teacher’s daughter, second, and the Giulietta section third. I think that was Offenbach’s original order, and it is certainly the way to go.”

Sher says not a word about singing. Further, it seems quite clear that he’s not offering an opinion of Levine’s recording of Hoffmann, but rather of his “take” on the opera, i.e., what music he keeps, what he doesn’t keep, and in what order. At least on the basis of what is actually quoted here, Sher doesn’t seem to be saying much more than that the Olympia-Antonia-Giulietta running order (Levine’s choice to make, not his) is in agreement with Sher’s vision of the piece as a story about “artistic history” rather than a sentimental love story.

From what Sher says elsewhere in the interview about the ramp in Barbiere, it’s clear that he understands that Levine still wields gigantic clout at the Met and therefore is to be worked with rather than against. So even if Sher took exception to the edition of the score Levine has cobbled together, it would be at best ill-advised for him to complain about it to Opera News.

A minority view.

This is a problem with Levine. His musical knowledge and tastes are stuck in the seventies and early eighties.

Then again, I am certain that that’s precisely why some of those present sought him out for a pint. For a specialist minority-within-the-minority, it’s always gonna be Callejas over Costellos, Goernes over Gunns…