Cher Public

  • antikitschychick: dang that does sound like it’s going to be good! But I have so much studying to do…don’ ;t know hw... 1:06 PM
  • DeepSouthSenior: One hour until Berlin Philharmonic live concert at Digital Concert Hall. Anna Caterina Antonacci debuts with the... 1:02 PM
  • armerjacquino: Speaking of sponsors, I’m afraid I’m going to have to decline the kind offer to give them $100 the Met has just... 1:00 PM
  • armerjacquino: DCF: the way you describe Scarpia is one way of playing it, sure, but there’s plenty in the text to support a... 12:53 PM
  • JohninSeattle: Try the Orbach version. No autotune in 1969. And you get Detective Briscoe from his song & dance days. 12:43 PM
  • antikitschychick: Don Carlo F: I too like the blandness/seeming emptiness of Scarpia’s office. I agree he’s more a... 12:42 PM
  • Porgy Amor: Redbear, to give you a bit of personal context, I’m exactly the kind of person who should have been on board with the... 12:31 PM
  • antikitschychick: you’re welcome Lohenfal; glad you read them :-). Honestly (and this is also in response to redbear’s... 12:26 PM

The sea was angry that day, my friends

finley_metIt’s a sad story, really. Debussy and Maeterlinck had what the kids would call Major Drama over who was to sing Melisande (Mary Garden vs. the person you’ve never heard of) and so Maeterlinck didn’t see Pelleas until years after Debussy had died, so he never got to be like “word!” or, I suppose, “mot!” 

Both would surely have gotten a great deal of satisfaction out of the current revival (December 17). When I tell you I shouted “bravo” for the kid playing Yniold, you may know that the cast was a uniformly fine one, as I am of the school of thought that children should be seen and not heard, and only seen if they brought and interesting adult with them, and especially not heard in opera. Nothing has made me mote seriously consider giving up opera than the prospect of hearing one more cutely pitch-deficient Parisian ankle biter whine about how much he wants a trumpet or an xbox or whatever it was that he wanted. I kind of dissociate from pure annoyance right around then.

Anyway, you didn’t ask for my views on the young. Nor did you ask for my views on Pelléas, specifically, but you’re here, so we might as well talk about something. As Miss Golightly was saying when she so rudely interrupted herself, the young Neel Ram Nagarajan is a real self-esteem destroyer to those of us who, at a rather more advanced age, still think “how on earth could you remember this kind of music?” He was pitch perfect and acted in an understated way. I daresay he lived up to his colleagues, and that’s saying plenty.

Primus inter pares: Gerald Finley, by a nose, on account of that precious urgency/musicality balance that makes for the best music drama. I mean Pelléas is one of those things, isn’t it? Like Parsifal? Where you budget a certain amount of time for your attention to drift, despite the beauty of the thing? Mine scarcely did. Finley was at his best in the unnerving scenes of Act III, the best moments of this staging more generally. I’ve said before, it is rare to feel genuinely unsettled sitting in a red velvet seat behind rejects for the cast of a Bulgarian Ab-Fab spinoff, but Finley’s edgy performance contributed to a gratifying

Glamorous, brainy Magdalena Kozena played well off Finley’s Golaud, choosing to make Melisande not some twitchy changeling so much as a wrecked creature, settled into a kind of neurotic state of inability to connect. As program notes are wont to warn, Pelléas has no arias, nothing for the beastly 66th Street Subway Saxophonist to cheer the masses with, but Kozena went right ahead and sang her lines with shape and finesse, opting here and there for special effects like a straight tone when she dropped the ring into the fountain. (This got a laugh. I have long since stopped trying to figure out what audiences think is so damned funny all the time.)

Willard White reminds us that life is unfair; that low voices age into hues of authority and anguish that composers make great use of. White now has the kind of vocal gravitas that makes me still glad to hear the likes of Ramey and Tomlinson, though he has perhaps more voice left than those elder statesmen. His French isn’t as crisp, to my ear, as that of his colleagues, but it’s hardly a barrier to enjoying his performance.

kozena_degout_metStéphane Degout adds to the Met roster another triple-or quadruple threat, capable, versatile, and hot at least. Members of the commentariat who know the role well will, I feel certain, add to my encomium. The always enjoyable Felicity Palmer sang the rather thankless Geneviève with no lack of investment. I’d suggest letting her throw in an improv verse of whatever opera springs to mind like in La Fille, but maybe it would break the mood a little. I mean maybe she could keep things gloomy and sing a catchy riff or two from the death of the old Prioress, but I don’t know how much it would add, now that I think it through.

People whose opinions I defer to find Jonathan Miller awfully tedious, and it’s true that one can’t help thinking about the joke from college with the punchline “I think I’ll paint the ceiling beige!” but Pelléas is something he really gets. This production puts the stage turntable to admirable, disorienting use, heightening the dreamlike air: not in the sense of gratuitous college surrealist imagery; here, much of the action (I use the term loosely…don’t look for a Vin Diesel/Franka Potente Pelléas anytime soon) takes place in spaces that look like ones you’ve already seen, only just different enough to be unsettling. My one real quibble is that the concept is not abstract enough to have people utter things about Gosh What a Dark Forest We Seem to be Lost In while standing by a big non-tree-like wall.

Verily one of those off-night thrillers. The cognoscenti are there, but tickets are to be had and the Met doesn’t seem to be making a big thing of it. These are the best, because you get to feel like you’re in on something.

Photos: Ken Howard / Metropolitan Opera


  • cosmodimontevergine says:

    I enjoyed Maury’s account of Pelleas. Sir Simon is definitely now in the ranks of those conductors who are able to mould a performance based on what they feel and understand. This is especially true of his work with the BPO -I heard a marvelous Mahler 9th that Rattle allowed to reveal itself “pli selon pli” like a great ocean liner emerging from the mist. This, too, is how he conducted Pelleas, a work that requires a free-floating attention in order to be properly understood. This approach is inimical to Jonathan Miller whose pragmatism renders the text banal.

  • kashania says:

    Maury has clearly explained why left the conducting out of his review. He’d rather not give us some generalised blather if he can’t express himself in specific terms. That in itself is hugely admirable. I’ll be the boring voice of reason here and suggest that it would probably have been prudent to at least acknowledge Rattle with some superlative while clarifying that he didn’t have much to offer in terms of detailed criticism. But the haughty outrage directed at the omission is a bit much.

    • La marquise de Merteuil says:

      Dear Kashania,

      Personally, I didn’t gleen much from Maury’s review, there was a lot of witty filler but not much depth and fact that the conductor was not mentioned stood out, but it didn’t bother me either as I’ve read less detailed reviews. What is clear is that Maury loves opera and loved the performance and that was Ok by me.

      Just an observation, but let’s bear this point in mind when some singer / director / conductor takes on a role and decides to leave out a note, stage direction or fluffs a climax or a phrase or has a bad night, or whatever. (And I’m a huge offender here too!)

      Sterlingkay was right, we particularly here at Parterre, are good at giving criticism, but not so good at taking it.

      • Pelleas et Melisande @ Most Addictive Opera says:

        La marquise de Merteuil.

        “Not all of us have English as a first language…”


        And I apologise for not being able to write in Standard Written English at all times.

        “Personally, I didn’t gleen much from Maury’s review…”

        It’s ‘glean’, not ‘gleen’.

        • La marquise de Merteuil says:

          Are you on crack?

          I was referring to someone making a snide comment about CF’s use of English -- not yours.

          And, yeah, English is my second language -- so thanks for the correction you twat.

    • The haughty outrage is kind of hilarious no? One would think that this review insulted the Xmas presents they received from grandma or something. But on a practical point, La Cieca tends to post many reviews from a given performance, this means that reviews serve a different function than ones in a major newspaper. Newspaper reviews must cover the “newsworthy” aspects of any performance in order to make the review as appealing to as wide an audience as possible. The beauty of the many reviews we receive on parterre is reviewers are free to give us multiple perspectives, emphases and voices in their reviews. The problem people seem to be having is that they believe Rattle’s debut is the story of the performance and clearly Maury thought it was less important. As is so often the case when our sense of what matters is not reflected in the media we consume we get annoyed (why else is Fox news so popular with people who are willfully ignorant). Now if this were to be the only review La Cieca posts of MP at the Met, well then I think people have legit beef. Otherwise, lets see what other voices say and what they emphasize.

      • phoenix says:

        Indeed, this “haughty outrade is kind of hilarious”.
        I am sure this is a fine review, but I’ve given up commenting on these performances unless I had the patience to listen through complete to the entire performance, which in this case I did not. So, as far this Pelleas et Melisande review goes, as excellent as I am sure it is, there are no comments from these ashes over here. Your comments, all of you, on this review are wonderful. I have to thank you all because they really cheered me up.
        Long after the memories of this performance have faded (like about 3 hours from now) I will cherish the comments on this thread, particularly those emanating from that star diva SterlingKay defending herself from other high profile parterre royalty (a confrontation matched only by the Act 2 encounter between Adriana Lecouvreur & the “Principesse”)!
        … A total eclipse is coming up tomorrow night. Have fun!

  • m. croche says:

    A commemorative haiku:

    The critic remarked:
    “The sea was angry that day;
    My friends, angrier.”

  • Nerva Nelli says:

    What Maury actually failed to mention was that *Simone Young* led the performance in a cheap curly wig.

    • Harry says:

      She wore a striking wine red silk dress with a long sliver of a train the last time, when I saw her conduct Lulu!

  • scifisci says:

    As a novice reviewer, I can say that it’s impressive that Maury wrote such an informative and entertaining review so quickly. It’s not easy people, especially when you know it’ll be read by the harshest critics around!

    I can’t wait to see Pelleas tomorrow!

  • brooklynpunk says:

    Good descriptive write-up, Maury…!!

    P/M sounded GREAT, on the b’cast , Friday nite…

    ..and it looks like I am gonna have acres of stretching out room, when I go to see it , live on New Year’s Day…the House seems to be less then HALF FULL, as of now…..

    … (the complaints on Maury’s take, here seem much ado about nothin…IMHO… it seems like some folk are in a real sour mood….. !)

  • armerjacquino says:

    Although, now I come to notice it, I think it’s a bit rotten to have a go at the subway saxophonist. I loved it when I clocked him playing ‘Di Quella Pira’ after I saw Trovatore. I’d quite like to fly over for ‘Nixon in China’ just to hear his take on ‘This Is Prophetic’

  • Well, well, seems like I’ve created a havoc. Mon Dieu.

    I feel that a disclaimer is de rigeur here.

    First of all, yes, I believe that La Marquise has a point. I’m pretty adept at English, and being a fluent reader, can manage the idiom pretty well, but here’s the thing: what I consider as elaboration and defending my position may strike native speakers as pompous and condescending. I assure you that my sole objective was to leave no stone unturned and certainy not to conduct an attack. I enjoyed reading whatever Maury had to say about the singers and production, while feeling perplexed at the same time.

    In MY own personal perspective (and I assure you that my sole intention is to reflect my own personal perspective, nothing else, it’s a bit tedious to write IMO or IMHO over and over again), writing about P&M (correct, Armer, these two works are forever linked in my mind) without even mentioning the musical director or the playing is like writing about a performance of Hamlet and leaving out the lead. IMO, IMO again, in P&M the orchestra is the main dish. The conductor’s task is immeasurably difficult : Debussy’s annotations in the score are extremely punctilious: the tempo changes every 2-3 bars, the dynamic markings are minutiae to a fault. Keeping it all together while maintaining a good balance with the stage, allowing the prosody across, especially in such a big auditorium as the Met, is an extremely difficult job. I’d have liked even a small ackgnowledgement of the fact. That’s all. Even Melisande’s small A CAPELLA song at the beginning of the 3rd act “Mes longs cheveux descendent, while reflecting Debussy’s infatuation with rennaissance / medieval music and poetry, is still dove-tailored into the shimmering orcehstral fabric, and the entire song sounds like a quote. Debussy clearly envisaged P&M as a tone poem with voices. The orchestral score revealingly has absolutely no stage directions, just basic captions at the beginning of each scene, describing where they occur -- “une foret, une fontaine dans le parc, une chambre dans le chateau” etc.

    I agree that my remark reg nationality was in very bad taste and unwarranted, for which I wish to apologize.

    • Yet again, Maury made his point very promptly and clearly as to why he had left out Rattle et al. All’s well.

      • Jack Jikes says:

        I find Maury’s explanation disingenuous. Some of the comments rallying to his defense have the stink of the shit you encounter on Opera L -- penned by the likes of ‘Peggy from Lennox’ -- all that back slapping ‘reasonableness’.

  • CruzSF says:

    How very sad that most of the comments in this thread are not about the performance reviewed, but about an unintended oversight by the reviewer, and then a subsequent slam against a whole nation of listeners, and then nitpickings about non-native English speakers. I fear that Maury D may deny us his interesting, and valid, opinions in the future. But who could blame him if he came to that decision?

    • La marquise de Merteuil says:

      I think it is probably best to forget about all of this.

      I think everyone had/has a valid point.

  • Constantine A. Papas says:

    Is now Rattle part of the opera’s superconductors group-Mutti, Levine, Barenboim?

    • Batty Masetto says:

      He is certainly a better conductor than meine Mutti. :)

      • Might “Yes but how was the conductor” turn out to be a catch phrase?

        “You had to be there kind of singer”
        “Voice for hire role”


        • For example
          “Ekaterina Siurina and Joyce DiDonato were magnificent last night as the doomed lovers in Bellini’s Shaekesperean opera, both presented lustrous, shining instruments and collaborated beautifully in the many opportunities given by Bellini.”

          “Yes. But how was the conductor?”

          • Batty Masetto says:

            Or as in: “Last night’s Aida was one of the worst debacles I have ever witnessed in an opera house. Radames was seized with a fit of projectile vomiting in the middle of the first scene. Aida fell off the stage during “Ritorna Vincitor” and had to be fished out of a tuba. Amneris tripped on the rim of her bathtub and had to continue the scene with her coccyx in a sling. Finally, the elephants in the triumphal scene panicked and severely injured three members of the chorus, causing the curtain to be rung down permanently for the evening.”

            “Yes. But how was the conductor?”

          • Nerva Nelli says:

            “Pelleas was played by the youthful, strapping Bart Stryker, whose piercing blue eyes made every musical moment richer in emotion. As his slightly older yet still winningly hunky half-brother, gym-toned Dario X. caressed his legato line with appealing tenderness. Still virile and in taut shape, Lukas Cruise made a dashing, almost boyish Arkel.”

            “Yes, Tony, but how was the conductor”?

  • Maury D says:

    Well, a final word. I blogged for five years. People will say critical things--it’s part of the deal, and if you’re too thin-skinned to take criticism (frequently valid), you shouldn’t put your words in a public space. Much of the time, what people say, especially here, is worthwhile. It’s an erudite crowd.

    What takes me aback is the righteous indignation. If you’re reading me now, you probably have read a word or two of mine before, and it probably isn’t a huge shock to you that singing is what I write about, that and a little quip here and there, where I can.

    A better review would mention Rattle. I don’t dispute it. But if reading a review that talked only about the singing truly enraged you, I don’t much know what to say to you except skip what I write in the future, because, to quote L’Incoronazione di Poppeye, “Io sono lo che sono, e questo e tutto che sono.” I don’t think I’m going to write substantially different reviews any time soon, and there’s no reason you should read what will only frustrate and offend. You can find more complete reviews easily enough. I recommend the ones in the Post, often the best opera reviews out there.

    • Please, mate, this is really embarrassing and if it were possible to re-edit comments over here I’d jump on the train. I’m really not a native speaker and for us there’s sometimes an autistic barrier of socio-emotional context. I guess it my comment sounded like lecturing and posturing. I haven’t seen that many of your reviews and since I started commenting in earnest, I’ve seen you pop up only occassionaly. So there wasn’t much chance of of ‘getting’ your preferences and the context of your contribution. I’ll pay closer attention in the future, contrary to your suggestion. There’s so much to learn from so many contributors here, and your joy and passion, as well as your sense of humour, are clearly evident. So please accept my apologies and I’ll try harder next time. There’s always a lesson to be learnt.


  • Ruxton says:

    Maury, I liked your review- it was entertaining and interesting and I’m never likely to see the production anyway :)

  • RRnest Thesiger says:

    A cup of praise to DonnaCarlo for those fab comments way above. The names Pel and Mel will never be far from my mind when I listen to this opera. And irking the old fart applies in SO many situations.

  • Cocky Kurwenal says:

    Maybe Rattle, like so many other artists these days, was inaudible at the Met. I really enjoyed Maury’s review, and I’m not really sure why the uproar -- it isn’t as if it was set up to be the definitive last word on Pelleas at the Met this season from any source whatsoever. Parterre is a blog and a gossip site, albeit one with a particularly well-informed contributor base, but all it sets out to be is interesting and entertaining -- you aren’t owed a national press style review of anything.

    Incidentally, I’ve seen Rattle conduct both Pelleas and Parsifal and both were, to be frank, dull as ditch water -- I can well imagine not having much to say about him.

    • lorenzo.venezia says:

      interesting. I was in Los Angeles when Simon was the Young Turk principal guest conductor (for Giulini et al, ’80s) and much of what he did was magical, a Sacre du Printemps that electrified, an Act II Walkure that made you forget it was a concert, a Mahler 2 that was, indeed, cosmic, etc. But friends who worked with him at the Aix Ring told another story, that middle age was erasing the blazing youthful spirit and that he was becoming, alas, dull. It was hard to believe, but not so hard after all ;-)

      • Cocky Kurwenal says:

        I always think there must be something wrong with me every time I see him, because I don’t understand the greatness, something which is a bit harder to identify in a conductor in any case. But there it is, that’s how I reacted and it’s not as if it’s my reaction to every conductor I ever see.

    • m. p. arazza says:

      “Maybe Rattle, like so many other artists these days, was inaudible at the Met.”

      There actually are locations in the Met where you can hardly hear the the orchestra’s playing, in which case it would only be correct to refrain from comment, at least on that aspect of the conducting.

      • Jack Jikes says:

        Where? Under the Parterre Box (literally) overhang? Please be specific.

        • m. p. arazza says:

          Yes. (Although I’m sometimes convinced it varies from seat to seat -- here I wish I could be more specific.) But also, in a different way, way down front, although that can be heaven in itself: the orchestra providing a kind of muffled cushioning that never detracts from the real sound of the voices.

          • Jack Jikes says:

            I agree. However I seek out the positions where you get an
            orchestral blast simultaneously with vocal splendor. Based on your astute comments, I think you know the very locations I’m talking about.

    • Camille says:

      COCKY — dull as ditch water was just what I heard the other evening. Sir Simon’s rattle has put Camille to bed, prostrate with disappointment.

      Never thought I would be saying how good Levine was, in comparison to another conductor, but having heard him, along with the MAGNIFICENT Jose van Dam, in 2000, in this same dreary GREIGE production, I must say that the Finley/Rattle was a very weak watery one, in comparison.

      Not to mention, Sir Willard White as a towering and great Golaud, in the Peter Sellars production, as heard in Amsterdam.

      Sorry, kids, but I agree with Cocky. When he had the Berlin Philharmoniker at Carnegie Hall, quite a few years back, in Gurrelieder, well that was something wonderful, but this Pelleas was a real wet firecracker. Sorry, sorry, sorry, to not bow to received opinion. That is my experience of this man’s work.

      • MontyNostry says:

        My general feeling is that the saintly Sir Simon tends to kill scores with kindness. He is so concerned with detail and gravitas that he loses flow and drama.

  • Ruxton says:

    Thanks Batty -- does kind of explain it. Common women frequently sound like the type of queen that hasn’t much vocabulary. It’s easy to mix them up. :)