Mozart’s Don Giovanni at Lyric Opera, 2014-2015

Has it really been 10 years since we last heard Mozart’s Don Giovanni at Lyric Opera? The opera has a very special significance for Lyric. It was the very first opera that Lyric staged; it was the opera that put Lyric on the opera map; it was the first opera programmed for Lyric’s fiftieth anniversay. It’s interesting looking at the great casts and productions that Lyric has put on over the years. They’re a veritable pantheon of the opera greats of the mid to late 20th century: Rossi-Lemeni (Lyric’s first Don Giovanni), Tito Gobbi, Alfredo Kraus, Nicolai Ghiaurov, Maria Callas, Elizabeth Schwartzkopf, Richard Stillwell, Bryn Terfel, Sam Ramey, Carol Vaness.

Last night we attended the first production in our 2014-2015 Lyric Opera subscription, Don Giovanni. The principle cast consisted of Mariusz Kwiecien (Don Giovanni), Kyle Ketelsen (Leporello), Marina Rebeka (Donna Anna), Ana Maria Martinez (Donna Elvira), and Andriana Churchman (Zerlina). I would characterize it as a young cast, with ages ranging from late twenties to early forties. I thought they gave workmanlike performances. I found no thrilling moments but there weren’t many clunkers, either.

The 20th century costumes and sets were engaging and interesting. The staging was pretty par for Lyric.

There was an enormous amount of coke-sniffing and groping—the production took great pains to paint the Don as a thorough-going scenery-chewing villain. I think the reality is that Don Giovanni is simply not in accord with modern tastes and a modern audience finds the underpinning drama (and comedy!) very difficult to comprehend.

The question I would ask of the cast and the director (Robert Falls) is, why did George Bernard Shaw proclaim Don Giovanni the greatest of all operas and the Don one of the greatest creations of Western art? Was that apparent in this production?

The Critics

John Von Rhein was pleased with the production:

Lyric has taken justifiable pride in the casts and conductors with whom it has stocked Mozart’s multilayered masterpiece over the years, starting with the “calling card” production that launched the fledgling company in 1954. The diamond-anniversary roster, headed by Mariusz Kwiecien’s volatile, charismatic Don, is in keeping with that tradition – even if the new production is anything but traditional.

Falls and his team of designers – Walt Spangler (sets), Ana Kuzmanic (costumes) and Duane Schuler (lighting) – transplant the action to provincial Spain in the 1920s, a pre-Spanish Civil War milieu where glaring class distinctions and the power of the Roman Catholic Church still prevail, even as traditional mores are rapidly crumbling.

The dramatic conceit is entirely plausible. Falls ratchets up the inherent sex and violence just enough for a modern audience – gorged on the far more explicit movie and cable-TV variety – to recognize, without playing hob with the music or with Lorenzo da Ponte’s libretto. Apart from a few gratuitous directorial touches, the show succeeds brilliantly: This “Don Giovanni” is as nourishing to the eye as it is to the ear and mind.

Carnality hangs heavily in the thick Iberian air. Into this steamy backwater swaggers Don Giovanni, a heedless sexual predator whose courtly manners barely mask his insatiable sexual appetite. Seldom do we see this libertine without various women pawing him, or him pawing them in return (distracting and unnecessary in the Don’s Champagne aria).

So was the Sun-Times’s Wynne Delacoma:

Saturday’s performance of “Don Giovanni,” conducted with a lithe but probing touch by Lyric’s Music Director Sir Andrew Davis, attested to Lyric’s lifelong ambitions and achievements. Falls is a distinguished, Tony Award-winning director, and at its best his staging, which updates the action to pre-Franco Spain of the 1920s, reflects the conflicted emotions of Mozart’s characters. Polish baritone Mariusz Kwiecien is one of the world’s best Don Giovannis, a trim, handsome bundle of raging testosterone. Puerto Rican-born soprano Ana Maria Martinez was fully his vocal and dramatic equal as Donna Elvira, a seemingly liberated, motorcycle-riding lady who can’t decide whether she loves or loathes the fickle Don.

et designer Walt Spangler has placed the action in an austerely elegant courtyard dominated by a grey stone façade and tall, ornate Beaux Arts doorway. The peasants cavorted in a lush garden whose path, hidden among rows of sloping, undulating hedges, climbed to the sky.

With touches like newsboy caps and suspenders for the male servants, costume designer Ana Kuzmanic captured the feel of working-class, 1930s Spain. But in the ball scene, her lavishly stylized, brocade and velvet costumes for Donna Elvira, Donna Anna (Marina Rebeka) and Don Ottavio (Antonio Poli) clearly delineated the chasm between the aristocrats and the common folk, an important point for Mozart and his librettist Lorenzo Da Ponte. Dancing solemnly, the three moved like alien beings among the baffled peasants.

Motivations are often murky in “Don Giovanni,” however, and Falls and his cast haven’t fully worked out the tangles. In Act I Martinez’s Donna Elvira was more a raging harridan than a woman sincerely torn between love and hate. Rebeka brought a ringing, agile soprano to Donna Anna, but we wondered whether her initial encounter with the Don was consensual or forced. As Don Giovanni’s put-upon servant, Kyle Ketelsen’s Leporello lacked emotional shading.

Don Loomis, writing at Financial Times:

Mariusz Kwiecień’s masterful Don Giovanni, good looking and rich voiced, is unusually hot-tempered. But he knows how to captivate, as his robustly masculine yet irresistibly phrased Serenade demonstrates. Lacking a big lyrical aria, Giovanni can sometimes seem a shadowy figure, but Kwiecień ensures he remains front and centre in the drama.

Kyle Ketelsen’s Leporello is nimble and well-sung but hard-pressed to keep up with Giovanni’s aggressive demands. Marina Rebeka’s gleaming, exquisitely focused soprano dealt squarely with Donna Anna’s dramatic high points, and Ana María Martínez’s compelling Donna Elvira, who arrives by motorcycle, was at her best in fulminating against her seducer in her Act 1 arias. Andriana Chuchman and Michael Sumuel sang agreeably as the peasants Zerlina and Masetto, but Antonio Poli’s Don Ottavio had more vocal muscle than finesse. Andrew Davis’s conducting was polished, fluent and correct.

He gives it four stars. I would have said three or three and a half.

At The Chicago Reader Deanna Isaacs saw something a bit closer to what I did:

The announcement that Robert Falls would be directing Don Giovanni , the opener for Lyric Opera’s 60th season, was reason to hope that this 18th-century staple of the repertoire would get a shakeup that would really make it click with a 21st-century audience.

That didn’t happen. Falls does give it a nudge, however. He’s pushed the Spanish setting to the 1920s. And he’s introduced so much coke snorting and erotic pawing you might think you’re at Chicago Opera Theater. But that’s the easy stuff. It would take a more revolutionary treatment to keep this farcical/gothic morality play of a libretto, by Lorenzo Da Ponte, and its repetitive musical format from the occasional dip into tedium.The kind of treatment that would have purists up in arms.

So Falls has delivered a very pretty but basically traditional version of a Mozart opera that, arguably, could end at intermission. With the exception of a couple of arresting pieces of stagecraft—the statue that comes to life, the descent into hell—what (besides, of course, the music) would be lost? Falls has said that his intention was to bring 20th-century psychology to the work, but Da Ponte’s Giovanni is so thoroughly worthless, and such a lightweight, even his rebellious refusal to repent can’t make him interesting.

She goes on to praise the singing.

4 comments

Blaming the Patient

A healthcare worker who treated Thomas Eric Duncan, the man who died of Ebola in Dallas, has tested positive for Ebola:

A health care worker at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital who provided care for the Ebola patient who died there last week has tested positive for the deadly virus, authorities said Sunday.

The care-giver reported having a fever Friday night and was hospitalized, isolated and referred for testing within 90 minutes, Clay Jenkins, Dallas County’s chief executive and its Homeland Security director, said at a news conference.

“While this is obviously bad news, it is not news that should bring about panic,” Jenkins said. “We knew it was a possibility that a second person would contract the virus. We had a contingency plan in place.”

I’ve just been listening to a commissioner from the Texas Department of Health and the the head of the Centers for Disease Control blame the the poor healthcare worker for contracting the disease. I find that premature. When the data contradict your hypothesis you should take at least a second to inhale and consider whether there’s something wrong with your hypothesis before jumping to a conclusion. They simply don’t have all of the facts necessary to prove conclusively that the healthcare worker violated protocol.

I’m not preaching panic. I’m advising humility.

22 comments

Promises, Promises

Kevin Drum raises some interesting points in musing over Barack Obama’s promises during his successful 2008 presidential campaign to seek bipartisan support for his policies:

To some extent, I think it was just the usual chicken-in-every-pot hyperbole of American presidential campaigns. American elites venerate bipartisanship, and it’s become pretty routine to assure everyone that once you’re in office you’ll change the toxic culture of Washington DC. Bush Jr. promised it. Clinton promised it. Bush Sr. promised it. Carter promised it. Even Nixon promised it.

(Reagan is the exception. Perhaps that’s why he’s still so revered by conservatives despite the fact that his actual conduct in office was considerably more pragmatic than his rhetoric.)

So when candidates say this, do they really believe it? Or does it belong in the same category as promises that you’ll restore American greatness and supercharge the economy for the middle class? In Obama’s case, it sure sounded like more than pro forma campaign blather. So maybe he really did believe it. Hell, maybe all the rest of them believed it too.

He goes on to blame everything on the Republicans.

I’m not sure how you reconcile that analysis with President-Elect Obama’s action, taken immediately on the heels of winning the election, of appointing the psychopathically partisan Rahm Emanuel as his Chief of Staff.

My hypothesis is that the president is incredibly cosseted and does not believe that principled opposition, genuine differences of opinion, or even differences in relative preferences are possible. I would also suggest that as Blue States become very deep blue and Red States become redder that sort of isolation will become increasingly common.

3 comments

Could the South Have Won?

This account of Winston Churchill’s excursion into alternate history makes interesting reading.

I find his scenario a bit far-fetched. I think the only way the South could have won would have been to force a stalemate by enlisting active intervention by foreign governments, particularly on the sea and that would have been a long shot. Ultimately, I think the South was always doomed.

7 comments

Move 2

Pat Lang has published the next move in his wargaming of the situation in Syria, Iraq, etc.:

Russia, France and Turkey have agreed to a one time exception to the Montreux Convention to allow positioning of the French Navy De Gaulle carrier battle group in the eastern Black sea for the purpose of air operations against IS in Iraq. France does not want to participate in Syrian operations. France does not want to lured into overflying Syria. Turkey will allow overflight of eastern Anatolia to and from Iraq. Turkey will also allow forward positioning of French naval SAR at Batman and emergency landings at Batman, Mus and Erzurum as necessary. Russia has offered the French battle group port privileges at Sebastopol for ship chandler and re-fueling operations. France has yet to respond to this offer.

I’m still mulling this second move over. The immediate question that occurred to me was why? What’s in it for any of the parties mentioned? I may ask Pat for a clarification.

He also posits further kidnapping of westerners, no successful terrorist attacks in western capitals, Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, a minor Ebola outbreak in the U. S., Iraq’s Anbar province completely under the control of IS, etc.

Under those conditions what happens in the area from November 5 to March 2015?

My hipshot reaction is that The French would fly a few sorties, run out of resources, and return to the Mediterranean. We would continue flying sorties of limited utility, mostly without assistance from any of our presumed allies. IS would take control of the town of Kobani and slaughter the resistance there, expand its buffer zone with the Kurds, and extend their control in Iraq to the outskirts of Baghdad. There would be an uptick of terrorist attacks in Baghdad.

Republican presidential aspirants would compete on how bellicose they could sound. Democratic aspirants would try to split the difference between supporting the administration and changing the subject.

3 comments

My Sole Comment About Affirmative Consent Laws

2 comments

Who Are These People and Why Are They Saying Such Mean Things About Me?

It takes David Gergen several hundred words to get to the real points of his op-ed:

The people who have written the most searching books about his national security policies — Panetta, Gates, Hillary Clinton, and Vali Nasr — didn’t come into this administration as neophytes searching for the brass ring. Each of them had already won distinction for their years of public service.

Panetta and Gates had purposefully moved far away from Washington and wanted to stay away. They had to be persuaded to serve this time — and they did so mostly out of love of country. (As defense secretary, Panetta frequently flew to California for weekends just so he could be home again.)

Even if their books have had some sharp things to say, they thus deserve a reasoned hearing on the substance — not a flaying by people half their stature and with half their experience. (By the way, have you heard any White House aides thank Panetta lately for serving as the chief mastermind in the search for Osama Bin Laden?)

I think it’s pretty hard to hear the brouhahas over these insider “kiss and tell” books without taking away one of two conclusions. Either Bob Gates and Leon Panetta are writing mean, untrue things about the Obama Administration to sell books or the White House really does make its foreign policy decisions solely based on domestic political calculus. You be the judge.

16 comments

Expectations

One more remark on Aaron Miller’s op-ed. I’m not disappointed by Obama because my expectations weren’t that high.

I am, however, disappointed by Obama’s supporters. I think they’re far too willing to forgive him. We are undertaking one military adventure after the next because they’re afraid to criticize.

I think it’s because they possess the mens rea for racism and I’m disappointed about that.

2 comments

The Take on Obama

Aaron Miller of the Wilson Center’s take on President Obama is interesting and worth reading and I agree with much of it. However, I think I disagree with him on this critical observation:

Finally, on character, Obama has had a Jekyll and Hyde problem. Part pragmatist, part believer, but always capable of seeing all sides of an argument, the president has seemed too often at war with himself on how ambitious he wants to be, whether on climate change, tax reform or the size of the stimulus. And that personal conflict has made it too hard for him to make peace with his public. By nature, Obama is not a partisan, a populist or a revolutionary. Instead, he finds his comfort zone in conciliation and accommodation, and in the empirical world of rational policy analysis. Those can be useful qualities in many circumstances, but they won’t make you a transformative president.

I think there’s very little evidence for that other than resume and anyone who’s had a lot of resumes cross their desks knows that it ain’t necessarily so. On the contrary, I see President Obama as a man of very rigid and not particularly well-informed opinions who believes that his opinions should be heeded uncritically and has a very limited political repertoire and no relish for the ordinary things that politicians and presidents do.

As to Mr. Miller’s comparison with Bill Clinton:

Obama more likely has been closest to Bill Clinton, a comparison that historian David Greenberg took note of a year into his presidency. Both men were elected with similar numbers in the electoral college, though not in the popular vote. Both faced strong opposition from Republicans who imagined the president to be far more radical than he was, and both concentrated on the economy.

I think that is true only with respect to the circumstances in which the two men found themselves and not in actions or character. Clinton was and is a policy wonk. And he genuinely enjoys politics, something for which I see no evidence in President Obama.

1 comment

My Dad

One hundred years ago today, on October 10, 1914, my dad, Fred Joseph Louis Schuler, was born in a bedroom in a flat above a saloon at 14th and Clark in St. Louis, Missouri, a rugged neighborhood. The saloon was owned by his grandfather, Joe Schuler, and run by my grandparents.

Esther, my dad’s mother, my grandmother, was, to put it kindly, eccentric. She adopted every fad or quack idea. She was a disciple of Bernard McFadden, a Rosicrucian, and a Christian Scientist. She dressed my dad in Little Lord Fauntleroy outfits which, as you might imagine, were very popular in the gritty inner city neighborhood where they lived. My dad grew up tough with his fists clenched.

“Saloon” doesn’t really cover the place that my grandparents ran. Joe Schuler was politically connected and the real money in the place was in what would now be called a catering business. They had the contracts to feed the prisoners in the City Jail, the judges and other workers at the City Court, and the workers at the nearby City Hall. My dad had the job of using his little red wagon to transport the tin-covered plates of food from the saloon-restaurant to the jail, courts, even the City Morgue. Another early job was distributing half-pints of whiskey to voters on election day. Those were the days!

When he was 10 or 12 he was the batboy for the St. Louis Browns baseball team. I still have a signed team ball he received.

After an elaborate grade school graduation ceremony (my dad was the first in his family to graduate from grade school, high school, college, or grad school) my dad attended Roosevelt High School, at the time the best high school in the city, with other middle class and upper middle class kids. He graduated from high school at 16 and entered Washington University.

At Wash. U. my dad became editor of the college paper and something of a campus character. He created a bit of a stir with an editorial defending the rights of co-eds to smoke (more or less along the lines of “they have the right to make themselves as disgusting as they care to”). I’ll publish that some time. After becoming a member of Phi Beta Kappa and the president of the men’s academic honorary society he graduated with honors and entered Washington University’s law school, graduating three years later, also with highest honors.

After graduating from law school in 1937, my dad made a bold decision. He decided to take the last of the money he’d inherited from his grandfather and spend a year travelling Europe. He spent the full year 1937-1938 touring Europe and North Africa, filling journal after journal with details of his adventures and sending every scrap he’d written or collected home. I still have everything and I’ll get around to editing and, perhaps, publishing his journals one of these days.

He was in Munich on November 9 and 10, 1938. The bizarre and frightening events of those days (along with the note that he, along with all other Americans in Europe at the time, received from the State Department telling him to get the heck out—which I also have) convinced him it was time to return home.

When he returned the Great Depression of the 1930s was still ongoing and jobs were hard to come by. The first job he got was as editorial writer for the old St. Louis. It didn’t pay much. Shortly thereafter he got a job as an insurance claims adjuster.

After doing that for several years he finally got a job as an associate with one of the most prestigious law firms in St. Louis where he worked for the next five or so years until the firm collapsed in scandal. When it collapsed he was left with some of the clients he’d been working with so he decided to go into practice on his own. That, along with teaching law school at St. Louis University, kept body and soul together for him and his young wife, my mother.

Despite his most diligent efforts my dad did not go to war. He was 4F for his vision. After the war he got a call from the OSS, that which was to become the CIA, to go undercover to Europe but at that point he was married with a family (me) so he demurred.

Lest this post become too long I’ll skip to the end.

My dad excelled at just about everything he turned his hand to. He was a fine athlete, a good ball player, swimmer, and a champion tennis and handball player (he thought gloves were for sissies). He had a nice baritone voice. He was a superb scholar and a good, forward-thinking attorney. At the time of his death he was beginning to give workshops on computer law, decades before computers were to become consumer products. He was also kind, gentle, courageous, and adventurous. I am not half the man he was.

Every so often I run into someone whose life he touched and influenced and that influence is still felt today, all these years after his death at too-young an age. That’s the kind of man he was.

4 comments