Cher Public

Who criticizes the critics?

watching_the-watchmenSee, La Cieca thinks Brian Kellow is asking for trouble when, in the second paragraph of his analysis of last March’s Slatkinshchina, he admits, “I did not attend the March 29 opening-night performance of La Traviata, nor did I listen to it on Sirius Radio.”  

Because, you see, it’s hard to convincingly criticize the criticism (as Kellow does in the “current” Opera News, but don’t bother to check because it’s not online) without having heard the thing criticized.

BK goes on to rip Anthony Tommasini‘s coverage of Leonard Slatkin‘s ill-fated foray into Verdi, even going so far as to say that Tommasini’s review “[wound] up causing the withdrawal of a respected conductor.”

But as always it seems La Cieca’s on the wrong side of the argument, because she thought that the Slatkin review showed a welcome hint of snarky spine in Tommasini, who, for all his moistness over barihunks, is after all a well-trained and intelligent musician.

For once (or for rarely anyway) AT worked up a bit of righteous anger over what he saw as a massive artistic blunder. He didn’t explain it away by saying Slatkin had an off day, or maybe his old war wound was bothering him, or, you know, Traviata is such a rare and difficult gem that he deserves kudos for even making the attempt. No, Tommasini yelled “tripe” when tripe was served, to paraphrase one of those early sixties sitcoms La Cieca is talking about so much today.

Kellow does make one solid point, which is that Tommasini might have made “a point-for-point case for how [Slatkin] failed at various points in the evening,” that is,offering specific examples from the score of what went haywire and how. To attempt such an analysis in a daily paper would be folly, of course, even in the capacious pages of the Times. But blog space is cheap, and the NYT even has the advantage of multimedia capabilities.  They could have done a score animation, for example, demonstrating the same passage as led (differently but with equal validitiy) by a couple of recognized experts, as contrasted with the Slatkin stumbling.

Or, then again. As fond as La Cieca is of examples (ask any of her writers what her edits invariably ask for more of), there does come a point when, if only for reasons of convenience, the general reader wants to let the critic do the heavy lifting and then deliver a few carefully-chiseled adjectives to sum up: “is this worth my $200 or should I stay home and catch up on my Real Housewives?”

  • Henry Holland

    Damn, what an ass Doctor Manhattan has/had.

    • Not to mention a giant blue uncut schwanz, at least in the movie. As I said elsewhere after seeing the movie, I can only imagine that production meeting. “How big should his dick be? And are we thinking cut or uncut?”

  • ianw2

    I’m glad I’m not the only one who found that editorial strangely petty and knife-grindy. Poor TT can’t catch a break. If he goes too easy, Parterre readers try to shiv him, if he goes too hard Opera News (Opera News! A publication of course known for its hardcore investigative journalism) accuses him of being a big fat meanie.

    And he can’t even make a comment about the lusciousness of the baritone, or his supple, rich tone and manly, statuesque carriage.

  • mickey

    Brian Kellow would do well to fix his attention on his own magazine, Opera News. The article that appeared there recently on the Saxon State Opera Dresden was intent on pushing the PR agenda of the current dysfunctional management and was based on no objective reality.

  • mrmyster

    As Eleanor once said of her cousin Alice Roosevelt, “She’s not a nice
    person.” I would apply that, exactly, to Brian Kellow. I didn’t realize
    he was still with Opera News. I guess it does not much matter!

  • peter

    Margaret Juntwait is back tonight and she’s in very good voice.

  • scifisci

    a point by point analysis of every place (or even half of them) in traviata where there was a train wreck that night would have put TT so far over his word limit. I can’t even count the number of times I had an conniption in my seat that night. Slatkin ruined what really could have been a wonderful evening at the opera, and for that he fully deserved what he got. If AT’s review helped him get the boot then i’m glad, because he certainly saved thousands of others (paying hundreds of dollars) from having to experience an astonishingly horrid musical experience.

  • m. p. arazza

    I kind of agreed with Kellow; not having heard the performance, I’d also have appreciated some more detail (not necessarily from either Tommasini or Kellow), so I turned to ON’s review section; but I guess we’ll have to wait till next issue for their own review.

  • Gianni B

    I am sorry but I found Kellow spot on. I was there that evening and I have a very different take on what transpired. In my career, having sung the opera early on as Germont and then Alfredo, what Signora Gheorghiu did that evening was nothing short of an assassination attempt on Maestro Slatkin. Entering 3 beats early on entrances, standing in other artists sight lines to block the view of the conductor (which is why Hampson got lost and had to stop), purposely jumping tempi,using ritardandi that were completely unmusical and had nothing to do with Verdi style. This was an artist that knew the score backward and forward making an ass out of someone who was not nearly as familiar.

    Ultimately, it was Slatkin’s fault for being unprepared when he showed up for rehearsals however the review should have been about the performance not about what parterre box had reported for a week before the Opera went up. His job was not to report innuendo and gossip, it was to review a performance. Innuendo, gossip, and vitriol is a byproduct of blogs. It doesn’t have t be true or correct, we understand that. Some of what is said here most people weed through and take certain things at face value and some with a grain of salt. The NY TIMES reviews should be a fair reporting of what went on in the performance and what AT reported was not what went on during the performance but what supposedly happened beforehand.

    For me personally, I enjoy Parterre Box and Opera Chic immensely. I enjoy the tidbits and innuendo and the blind items. However AT seems to be swayed by the fact that James Jordan has become a formidable force in the Opera World and now in the international world of reviews. For example.. “a problem aggravated by the tentative, clumsy conducting of Leonard Slatkin. He also derailed both experienced baritone Thomas Hampson (Germont) and debuting tenor James Valenti as Violetta’s lover, Alfredo.” The review in the NY Post by JJ is an actual review not a piece filled with gossip and inane rationale. If TT wants to start a blog let him, but otherwise let him stick to reviewing not analyzing and reporting on speculation.

  • By the way, as someone who also sings, the fault for losing one’s place in the score in this case should probably be shared equally by conductor and baritone. This isn’t some contemporary opera that changes time signatures every measure; this is Verdi.

    • Gianni B

      Hampson did not get lost in the score. Gheorghiu jumped her entrance and then stood directly in front of Hampson and he could not see Slatkin. The Pit and Stage were completely off and Hampson stopped to listen so he could get back in sync. There are many things Hampson could be faulted for, but this is not one of them.

      • CruzSF

        Is it possible that Gheorghiu was confused by Slatkin’s poor conducting, causing her to stop in an unusual place, thus blocking Hampson’s view of the conductor? Conductors do manage traffic, in a sense.

        • quoth the maven

          AG is always pulling stunts like this--changing tempos and making colleagues and conductors look like asses. She started her romanza in “Simon Boccanegra” at a significantly faster tempo than Fabio Luisi had set, as if to air in public her private grievances with the conductor. Tacky.

  • MontyNostry

    “Slatkinshchina”. Brilliant!

    • Will

      “Because, you see, it’s hard to convincingly criticize the criticism (as Kellow does in the “current” Opera News, but don’t bother to check because it’s not online) without having heard the thing criticized.”

      But, Cieca, that never stopped Edward Rothstein when he was the Times reviewer, did it? :-)

      • tannengrin

        that also never stops anybody on Fox News when they report on, well, anything.

        Fauxpera News?

  • Musetta

    I was there for the opening night. On several occasions, I had my back pinned to my chair in horror. I have been going to the Met since 1995, yet I had never heard the orchestra so out of sync with the singers. At once point the orchestra sounded so lost that I feared they might stop and retake a few bars. I was in the second row of the orchestra. Mind you, I have no formal musical training. Yes I grew up with music (my mother is a music teacher) and yes I do have a decent musical ear, but it’s a sorrow day when a tyro like me can sense such impending disaster. Tommasini was right on the money. This was a special day in the bad way.
    Interestingly, when I went home and listened to the recording, it did not sound nearly as bad as it did live.

  • Valmont

    The first problem is with Opera News in general -- it is essentially an in house publication, incorrigibly slanted toward showcasing all things Met.
    All Met reviews will be good, all artist features will highlight an upcoming Met Live in HD broadcast, and in the event that someone openly attacks the artistic virility of the organization, the editorial department will make the best argument they can that the Met was right in whatever snafu took place.

    • Musetta

      You’re very right, Valmont. But this is why we have cara Cieca. Truth must be told. I saw La Traviata three times this year, and I thought the opening night was Gheorghiu’s best. It’s really too bad that the performance was marred by the poor conducting.

    • Trappedinoperahell

      All Met reviews will be good, Valmont? You’re obviously not reading the same Opera News that I’m reading. All reviews are detailed, and reviewers clearly have the freedom to point out what’s wrong. They’re constantly criticizing productions, singers, etc. I actually find them to be pretty even-handed, surprisingly so for a house organ. The most blatantly tilted-to-the-house review I’ve read in Opera News wasn’t even of a Met performance; it was of Siegfried at L.A. Opera, seemingly written by the L.A. Opera’s publicity department.

    • iltenoredigrazia

      Valmont, I don’t agree with you with regard to Opera News. Until a few years ago, yes, it was a Guild publication that never said anything remotedly negative about the Met. Actually, it only started reviewing Met performances in the last decade or so. To my surprise, and pleasure, the Met reviews have been quite even-handed and many quite negative. Overall performances, productions and specific singers have been harshly criticized at times.

      In this specific case, ON dedicated an entire page to discuss/rehash a performance/incident that I’m sure everyone in the Met management would rather be forgotten. That by itself would have been unthinkable some twenty years ago.

      I read the Kellow article more as a commentary on what a reviewer says or doesn’t say, the influence of the blogs, etc. I for one agree with Kellow in wishing that reviewers were more specific and detailed and also agree with La Cieca that there’s something very wrong with a one-page article related to a performance that the author has not bothered to listen to.

      • rapt

        Opera News has reviewed Met performances starting at least as far back as the early 70s, under the editorship of Frank Merkling; he was proud of having introduced this feature, and the intended aim of objectivity, to the magazine.

  • pernille

    BK’s article touched on Slatkin’s comments on his own blog. Slatkin set himself up for the whole sorry mess by naively ( I suppose) writing that he was unprepared. He must not have realized that blogs ( even self-centered ones) can have such a large audience. It seems to me the whole sorry episode is a lesson about blogs as much as music criticism.

  • Jay

    After last night’s Armide, I’d say La C is very charitable about La Fleming and Zimmerman. I bolted after the second act; although Fleming sounded better than during the May 1 broadcast, this production is more about prima donna narcissism and adulation and I couldnt bear another act of this claptrap. I’ll catch the last act only on the PBS HD summer reruns on Aug. 24.

    The direction was risible, the sets cheesy (when some soliders carried off Rinaldo, they accidentally hit one of the palm trees hanging by a wire and the tree spun around for quie awhile.

    I envied the sight dog who accompanied the operagoer across the aisle from me. The black lab got to sleep in the aisle during the first two acts.

    I’ll be interested to see what ON has to say about this travesty. I walked back to my hotel thinking that if grand opera suffers a (somewhat) premature death, productions such as the Met’s Armide will be partly responsible.

    Brownlee was top notch, but Fleming, as has been noted many times hereabouts, is not a bel canto singer (I did manage to endure her entire Lucrezia a few years ago, but it was a trial).

    Well, at least I got a copy of the newly released Lulu DVD and tonight hopefully things will be much better at the Met.

    • Haimes

      I was at the May 1st Armida and I can simply say that Renee could not perform. At times, you could not hear her. Her Bel Canto was terrible. The stars were clearly Brownlee and Banks. The sets were too abstract and made no sense at times. La Fleming should have bowed out. This was supposed to be highlight of the season! Shame on Gelb and the MET. They are putting on a reprise next year… more of the same. We are not renewing, but will pick individual operas as we please.

  • uwsinnyc

    Re: “All Met reviews will be good”
    Wouldn’t that be unethical?

    Opera News reviews tend in general to focus on the positive aspects, but they do not blankly praise all things MET.

  • PirateJenny

    OT -- but I feel like it’s a public service announcement. The 1978 Adriana Lecouvreur with Caballe, Carreras and Cossotto -- and Lopez Cobos conducting -- that Sirius is rotating this week is fan-freakin-tastic. So good it actually makes me happy I have heaps of boring spreadsheets to do while listening. I seriously had no idea it was such a good opera -- I thought it would be a snooze-fest of waiting for Poveri fiori.

    And at noon today there will be the 1960 Trovatore with Simionata.

  • uwsinnyc

    On another note, I’m sad that the MET season is coming to a close. There were duds along the way but also some lovely experiences. Most interesting to me was that it was the operas I expected to LEAST like that I ended up enjoying the most! (eg House of Dead, Nose, Lulu) and those that I was most looking forward to (Hoffman, Tosca) were hum drum.

  • iltenoredigrazia

    The end of the season is time for nominations for Met Tony’s, isn’t it?

    My thoughts:

    Best new production:
    The Nose
    From the House of the Dead

    Best revival:

    Best female singer singing role for the first time at the Met:
    Racette (Tosca)
    Netrebko (Hoffman)
    Damrau (Fille)
    Garanca (Carmen)
    Peterson (Lulu)

    Best male singer singing role for the first time at the Met:
    Mattei (From the House of the Dead)
    Calleja (Hoffman)
    Beczala (Boheme)
    Kauffman (Tosca)
    Brownlee (Armida)
    Keenlyside (Hamlet)

    I imagine some would also nominate Domingo in Simon and Urmana in Attila.

    These are just thoughts. My way to recap the season. Interesting how much easier to find specific singers who did well than overall productions or performances.

  • stinkbot7243

    Sorry, La Cieca, but as much as Tommassini might be a “a well-trained and intelligent musician,” those qualities doth not an opera critic make. It’s remarkable to me that the critic for the NY Times can give Domingo’s incompetent wand-waving in this year’s Stiffelio a free-pass, while, for all intents and purposes, giving Slatkin a drubbing. I take the main purpose/point of Kellow’s article to mean that Tommassini was merely jumping-on the pile and beating up conductor who had already made the mistake of issuing something of a public mea culpa, rather than espousing a sound critical opinion about a performance, in and of itself.

    • richard

      Hmmm… that’s a good point. If AT were going to make a serious statement about conducting at the Met then certainly Domingo should have been critisized too.

      Why pick on Slatkin when Domingo watched while while the orchestra sections, chorus, and soloists all wandered around lost? I wouldn’t be able to say which was a worse job but both certainly lacked competancy.

      But was slatkin maybe an easy target because he’s a very infrequent visitor to the Met and therefore expendable while Placidunce is a huge, huge box office draw and we mustn’t disturb the cash flow, musn’t we? Even though Domingo’s career(s) should be over. He can no longer sing tenor, which is what he did with success, and he’s incompetant as a “baritone”, “conductor”, and “administrator”.