Microbrow
“I agree that Gelb has had problems actually identifying what’s going to make a successful production. But I submit that the real problem is exactly the same problem the Met had under Gelb’s predecessor, Joe Volpe: not that the company engages unusual directors, but that it doesn’t let them actually do what they’re good at. Gelb seems to me to have the same micromanaging side that Volpe did: the side that would see something unusual in a new production, get nervous about it, and try to rein it in.” [The Classical Beat]
But does Gelb micromanage? We know Volpe did…(then again, I noticed only one parrot in the Armida enchanted garden; stage models and sketches showed at least three. Could that be Gelb’s micromanaging at work?)
WHOA — If Gelb reined in Bondy’s “Tosca”, can you even imagine what Scarpia would have done with that statue of the Virgin…or had done to him by those prostitutes? Yeah, some of those excesses have since been “reined in”, but GEEZE — the mind boggles!
“I am become Gleb, Destroyer of Worlds.” J. Robert Oppenheimer
I think it depends on the micromanager. Back in the 1930s when the MET Board reviewed the production plans for The Emperor Jones, they sent them back to management with the comment than nobody on the Board had ever seen in nature the kind of giant, expressionistic palm fronds as were in the designer’s renderings, nevertheless they heartily endorsed the concept (Interesting that the Board got to review things in those days).
Rudolf Bing sent the plans for his Simon Boccanegra production back to the designer with the comment that the opera and the score are full of the Ligurian sea and the sea wasn’t visible in any of the sets. Bing was also alarmed at Jean-Louis Barrault’s comment that Carmen was the French Wozzeck but said that if you hire a great director you have to express your faith by letting him/her realize the vision their way (echoing Ms. Midgette’s comments about what Gelb should do more of).
Part of an general manager or artistic director’s job is to work with artists who come into a company to assist them in realizing their concepts; suggesting alternates and giving advice is certainly part of it. This assumes that the GM/AD has the people skills to work diplomatically and effectively with touchy matters and personalities, and possesses an aesthetic sense sufficient to the scale of production in a major opera house.
One of the biggest issues that is not touched on in this article is that these experienced theater directors are not used to working within the confines of the Met rehearsal system, which is incredibly challenging.
In theater, the entire rehearsal process is more conducive to the organic way a new production develops. True collaboration with the cast and creative team, and collaboration where things happen in a logical order. Everyone talks about how much money gets thrown into productions, but money doesn’t buy process time, nor does it apparently buy logic. Having to do lighting tech for a show before you’ve even started rehearsing with your cast?? A norm at the Met and unheard of in the theater.
The Met is a giant kitchen where occasionally great things come out of the oven, but more often than not, great ingredients are put in but they are not given the opportunity to marinate and reach their potential. Or the ingredients are put in the wrong order. Or its not clear who the head chef is!
It’s a system that is simply not set up to create great theater. And for me, opera needs to be great theater to be thrilling – otherwise I’d rather just go to a concert or listen to a great recording. Why spend all the money on the theatrical side if you’re not willing to invest in the process needed to make it work? Great singing alone does not make great opera. Now, that gets into another issue about some of the absolutely abysmal singing at the Met… but I’ll try to stay on topic here!
What Aida said … (@ #5)
I think some of what Gelb isn’t so good at is being able to tell which directors’ talents will work or won’t in opera.
Mary Zimmerman is, of course, the poster child for this problem. Her genius has been in developing theater pieces in collaboration with a cast, where they take the time to play with a bunch of material; if any of the material doesn’t work, she can rewrite it, reshape it or cut it. The very antithesis of directing an opera, even in a new production.
@Invererate Gossip
I agree that Zimmerman’s strength is in new works collaboration. If Gelb was really smart, he’d engage her as part of his new works initiative (if he hasn’t already). But the issue I raise is more focused on people like Sher or Noble, who have produced some stellar work in both theater and opera, in the established repertoire, but whose work at the Met has not come anywhere near close to what they’ve accomplished elsewhere on many occasions.
Aida, has Sher done stellar work in opera elsewhere?
Sher did a wonderful production of Mourning Becomes Electra for Seattle and NYCO. That is the only operatic work I’ve personally seen of his besides his work for the Met.
Aida @#7,
Your point would give a practical reason why Gelb’s imported productions have generally been better than those created at the Met. Even for new productions, the Met probably can’t provide the same time for development and rehearsal that, say, the Aix Festival or maybe even ENO can provide.
I’m not sure Zimmerman would work out even for a Met new initiative production. As I understand her method, to get a good result, she’d need very extended rehearsal and collaboration (meaning cooperation) with a composer and a librettist – with the cast on hand to play with the material. That would get very, very expensive. And even so, in her own work she’s used to having the final say, which wouldn’t necessarily be the case in even a new opera, even if she were the librettist.
And she was the librettist as well as the director for Philip Glass’s Galileo Galilei – which wasn’t a disaster by any means, but was far from either her or Glass’s best work.