A minute and a huff
La Cieca presents an open letter from a parterre box reader.
Dear Metropolitan Opera:
I have been a loyal subscriber to the Met since I moved to the New York area, but I am sad to announce that I will not be buying a subscription to next year’s season.
Looking back at my season this year, I have found that most of the performances for which I’ve bought tickets a year early have had major cancellations, either weeks before or the day of. Here’s what has happened to me this year in my subscription follies:
- Aida on October 21st: Dolora Zajick canceled
- Turandot on October 28th: Maria Guleghina canceled
- Hoffmann on December 23rd: Rolando Villazon, Rene Pape and Kathleen Kim canceled
- Hamlet on March 24th: Natalie Dessay canceled
- Traviata on April 7th: Leonard Slatkin canceled
- Tosca on April 14th: James Levine and Karita Mattila canceled
- Lulu on May 12th: Levine canceled
Now for many of these nights there were great performers in their place. Olga Borodina‘s Amneris was wonderful, Lise Lindstrom was a powerful Turandot, Rachelle Gilmore was a fantastic Olympia. Leonard Slatkin didn’t know the score so anyone will be better than him, and I am a huge fan of Fabio Luisi and trust in his ability to create a wonderful Tosca and Lulu.
I am also aware that these cancellations are not directly the fault of the house, and only rarely the fault of the performer (except in the case of Slatkin), but still the questions remain:
Why should I purchase my tickets a year in advance with this frequency of cancellations? What is the advantage for a young, busy, cash-strapped opera lover?
There must be some incentive to purchasing tickets in advance for it to be viable in the eyes of the opera world as it stands today, but as it is the risk is too great to gamble what spare money I do have on the potential of seeing a poor replacement for a star who I was scheduled to see.
Since I can no longer expect that the announced cast will show up, I will continue to go to the Met, but only purchasing tickets the day of the performance, standing room if need be.
The Met has said over and over again that they are trying to attract the next generation of opera enthusiasts. I am that audience: a 25 year old professional with the passion to attend the opera. Unfortunately, I’m getting tired of the inconsistency and price. As I consider how I’ll buy tickets next year, it seems more likely that I will be calling for standing room tickets at noon each day I intend to go.
Rush tickets are not a possibility for me, as I work all day and cannot sit in line. We might as well face the reality that your rush ticket program is not reaching the audience you targeted. Stroll by the rush ticket line any day and you’ll find the same retirees who would have bought family circle had the rush program not been available.
The money currently put forward for the rush ticket program would be far better spent on a “Young Met” program, allowing people such as myself a way to go to the Met regularly.
The draw for the next generation of opera fans is waning fast, and you must do something to address this situation. Realize that the people you want aren’t buying subscriptions anymore, partly because they don’t have several hundred dollars (at least) burning a hole in their pocket, and partly because they never know what they’re going to get.
You were recently given the largest gift in Met history. I hope to see some progress in coming seasons regarding these issues, and I am looking forward to another year of operatic enjoyment in your storied house, albeit on a day-by-day basis.
I welcome any response and would love to share my personal experience and thoughts with anyone willing to listen, my personal email is devon.c.estes@gmail.com.
With love and hope,
Devon C. Estes
Anna@87: And don’t forget to write a complaint letter, stating how many years you’ve gone to the Met and how you’d like the option to see an opera that isn’t repeated 25 times each season. (I’m not being facetious.)
RobNYNY86#; Your complaint does happen more than many theater managements could like it known. Speaking to a person that was once ushering and stand-by house manger for one theater, he has told me of many similar instances, even to cases of computerized ‘triple booking’ taking place. In your case since it was a subscription and not a ‘one-off attendance’ booking, your problem was magnified ten-fold. Problem I suspect: is the computer program used, or the clown that gave you the initial subscription somehow put your sold block of tickets ‘back in the system ‘and left there-for open sale’.. To think it was not quickly rectified after being revealed at the first performance you attended, is staggering.
That you were subjected to it repeatedly, smacks of MET staff incompetence mixed with disdainful arrogance.
In some theaters where this happens, the ushers usually check the stubs of the two identical ticket holders and provide a ‘House held’ seat to the other. These are a group of top seats that cannot be sold – used, as emergency insurance -should such a problem arise/ a seat in the house became broken / unsafe for one or more patrons, whatever. Then, while the performance goes on, house staff go about checking and investigating on the computer ticketing system ‘where the actual problem lies’.Even to people credit booking, then playing all sorts of high jinks ‘card pull-backs’ yet somehow gaining tickets, then going ‘but unfortunately finding the seat ‘claimed by another’ , a seat then in that case – was correctly resold by management. At an intermission staff re-contact the patrons with the results. Simple as that!
Damn, and here I was thinking that Villazon was UNI-BROW
Having subscribed for thirty years, I have to say I am shocked to hear of the treatment RobNYNY says he received. I have always found the performance managers extremely helpful if problems arise and always willing to reseat someone. From nonstop talkers, board eight year olds, photography nuts, and my current pet peeve – putting supplementary lighting fixtures in the auditoriun where they interfere with people in the box seats-these individuals have always bent over backwards to get me thru any problem nights. I criticise the Met a lot, but these people show it at its best.
…board eight year olds are so much quieter than the bored ones though.
How many eight-year-olds are on the Met Board now? Is this part of Gelb’s goal of bringing in the younger crowd?
You’re the best, Betsy. As for the posting on White, The Times just mixed up the conductor to be replaced. It was Slatkin.
Hey — if those eight-year olds can pay between 250-500K per year, I say let ‘em on the board. Can they do any worse than the present membership?
Maybe Gelb is a puppet of a youth movement looking to revolutionize the Met from the inside.
Oh. Thanks, Sarah.
Ha ha. Oh.