THOMAS HAMPSON AND MARCELO ALVAREZ PICTURED TOGETHER AFTER THE FIRST NIGHT
Wonderful
performance, shame about the production, about which I shall say a few words at
the conclusion of this review.
Pappano
conducted with both enthusiasm and sensitivity.
Karita
Mattila's Amelia is beyond praise. She produced beautiful soaring high notes,
and sang with passion and intensity that is rarely encountered. Her
"morro, ma prima in grazia" was overwhelming; as she collapses to the
floor in tears at the end, not a sound or a cough could be heard from the
auditorium, still less anyone showing off by applauding or shouting
"brava" BEFORE the sound died away, we were all so stunned that it
took several seconds before the spell broke and people started applauding. She
rose to heights of dramatic conviction that I didn't realise even she was
capable of.
She
was matched in intensity by Thomas Hampson, but not by the tenor, Marcelo
Alvarez, or not to anything like the same extent. Alvarez was in good voice,
sang well but without the same conviction as the other two. Hampson brought all
his usual intelligence and beauty of tone to the role of Renato, starting off
as rather self-effacing - as the role seems to require, I think - and
heartbreakingly despairing in "Eri tu"...depicting anger contending
with grief - finally appearing more grieved than angry as he slumps into the
chair at the end.
Another photo of Hampson as Renato, as he listens to Amelia's "Morro, ma prima in grazia" - conveying stunned disbelief at what has happened.
Hampson is also good at gesture and movement; Renato's shock
and horror when he discovers the identity of the veiled woman is almost palpable,
as the conspiratorscollapse into
laughter. This could have been better done, as they didn't come across as being
particularly menacing before the discovery of Amelia's identity, or
particularly sardonic afterwards - and I think this might have been the fault
of the production. Before I turn to discussing this, I will briefly mention
that I like Camilla Tilling's light, bright Oscar, butI was less impressed by Elisabeth Fiorillo's
Ulrica - again, this might have been the fault of the production, as she is
required to prowl hammily around the stage while emitting eldritch shrieks.
The
singers, especially Hampson and Mattila, were able to rise above thedifficulties of a less than ideal
production. First of all, I must say that I think it makes much more sense in
the Swedish setting - I keep
having
to remember to write "Riccardo" instead of "Gustavus", and
"Renato" instead of "Anckarstroem"...well, this is just the
version I am used to. In the programme, there is an article by David Rosen
outlining all the changes that Verdi was forced to agree to in order to have
the opera
accepted
at all by the censors - and what might have been acceptable in Naples was not
acceptable in Rome, and vice versa. Setting it in Colonial Boston was perhaps
marginally less silly than some of the other changes proposed, including 13th,
century Florence and 17th. century Stettin (Now Szeczin in Poland): the point
was that, according to the censors, a drama about the assassination of a King
couldn't be turned into an opera about the assassination of a King; you
couldn't have any conspirators wearing masks (in a drama about a masked ball);
you couldn't have any dancing (in a drama about a masked ball); you couldn't
have an adulterous love (in a drama in which the tenor is killed
because.......) oh well, you get my drift! So Verdi had to agree to the Boston
setting in order to have the opera performed at all.
BUT...this
current production is set in Boston in the NINETEENTH century, roughly at the
time of the American Civil War, which makes nonsense of it. I did attend a
Study Evening at which the director, Mario Martone, talked about his conception
of the opera, and, in conversation with Pappano, it actually sounded quite
interesting, so it was a great disappointment when it was finally unveiled. In
fairness it should be said that there was a problem with the stage machinery on
the evening I saw it, the mirrors used in the ballroom scene didn't tilt as
they were supposed to, so that was a bit disappointing. But if you are going to
set the opera in 19th. Century America...well, it's no longer a British colony,
so WHAT does Gustavus, sorry Riccardo, actually DO? If you actually look at the
scene in which Renato/Anckarstroem decides to join the conspirators, for him
it's personal, yes, but for them it's political....he's a tyrannical ruler who
seized the castle of Count Ribbing's ancestors, and had Count Horn's brother
executed on trumped-up charges.....which doesn't translate very well into an
American setting.
In
the final analysis, maybe these details aren't important - except the fact that
it's personal, not political, for Anckarstroem/Renato - which surely makes his
act a murder, not an assassination. But I've been at pains to stress that the
performance, especially that of Hampson and Mattila (surely two of the greatest
singers of our time!) outweighed the disappointing aspects of the staging.
The final scene, as Renato unmasks and Riccardo lies dying
And I thought it might amuse you to see some photos of Thomas Hampson with - er - me, actually, taken outside the Stage Door after the performance.
Click here to return to the main opera page.
For the sake of completeness, I decided to add some historical information about Gustav III of Sweden - click on the portrait.
From this it transpires that Anckarstroem was never his friend, but had been opposed to him for years before the actual assassination. Curiously enough, even the biographers of Gustav seem to conclude that the most significant thing about him is precisely the fact that his assassination was the inspiration for UN BALLO IN MASCHERA - so the wheel has come full circle.
.jpg)
.jpg)
to return to the main opera page. 
