• Review: Orfeo ed Euridice, Scottish Opera

    This review originally appeared for Opera Britannia.

    Scottish Opera have managed to produce another underwhelming show that, though visually arresting, leaves one with more questions than answers. There are things to praise about Ashley Page’s directorial debut for Scottish Opera: his ballet background clearly has given him an intense sense of theatrical spectacle that was used to good effect. A company of eight dancers often held the attention far more than the musical drama which unfolded around them and from whom they often seemed quite separate.

    Things began quite confidently. The first scene clearly established that we were in a very glamorous 1950s world. Orfeo was lamenting his lost Euridice and we found ourselves at a society funeral. Very quickly it was also established that this performance was going to rely as much on dance as it was on the singing. From within the chorus, eight dancers emerged and began a fascinating dialogue with the music. It was still clear that it was the 1950s and so it was not surprising when the goddess Amore appeared to have taken the form of Grace Kelly. Ana Quintas, making her Scottish Opera debut sounded as glam as her A-line costume. Her singing was consistent throughout the evening and consistently fabulous. The dancers disappeared whilst she told Orfeo where he could find his true love if he wanted her back. Inevitably, he set off on his quest.

    It was at this point that the stage was invaded by eight red space-monsters in latex with glowing eyes on their heads. It looked as though the bar in the first Star Wars movie had suddenly decided to have a fetish night. It was quite astonishing, as was the noise of the latex creaking when they all sat down. Meanwhile, behind the space-monsters, the chorus had also reappeared and had seemingly been invited to a red and black steampunk party next door.

    Had all of this conveyed something of where we were then it might have been an extraordinary coup de théâtre. As it was, it represented the plot being comprehensively lost and it was difficult to know entirely where we were supposed to be for the rest of the evening without glancing at the programme notes.

    If we didn’t know quite where we were on the stage, then the same could also be said of the orchestra down in the pit. It was hard to know whether the conductor Kenneth Montgomery was aiming for an original instruments kind of sound or something full-on and modern. A thin overture was not particularly enhanced by a pair of natural trumpets fluffing their way alongside a modern pair of horns. Although things improved after a while there was never a great deal of excitement. A small off-stage ensemble did provide an interesting echo effect and some lovely playing. The most beautiful music though being the full version of the Dance of the Blessed Spirits. Wisely, the choice had been made to include this from Gluck’s Paris 1774 version of the piece even though most of what was presented was from his earlier 1762 work. The inclusion of more ballet music offered more scope for Ashley Page to show us what he is good at, though even with this extra music it was still a fairly short evening – less than two hours, including a 20 minute interval.

    Once the second half was underway and we were in Elysium, the chorus had thrown tie-died sheets over themselves and were wandering about in the manner of lime-green nuns, each wearing a headdress of flowers as though on their way to their final profession of their vows. At last, Orfeo found his Euridice who was hiding under a red polka-dot burka.

    Though it made little sense, the production was incredibly visually striking. The ballet duets that were danced here in Elysium were utterly beautiful, even if they were, at times, dancing around lime-green nuns. Amidst all this there was some singing though it was fairly obvious that this was not the focus of the evening.

    Orfeo himself was sung by Caitlin Hulcup. Her voice was a voice of two halves, however, the upper register being much more lyrically arresting than the lower voice. Her singing was never anything less than competent but there was no real passion anywhere and little to get excited about. The same was true for Lucy Hall. She was making her Scottish Opera debut and sang well enough, and if well enough is what Scottish Opera are aiming for them, all was well. The reappearance of Ana Quintas’s Amore only highlighted that she was singing everyone else off the stage.

    My Italian companion for the evening did remark on the crisp and flawless Italian pronunciation from everyone on stage, so congratulations are in order on that front to everyone, including the voice coaches.

    Sadly, the designer Johan Engels didn’t live to see the production. A sparse set consisted of a large acrylic box dominating the stage on a revolve. It presented the usual lighting problems that large, revolving, reflective boxes always do in opera productions and lighting superviser Robin B Dickson never entirely managed to stop random lights flashing in the audience’s eyes nor the ghostly appearance of the conductor in the middle of the stage.

    In summary then, we had an underwhelming evening of reasonably pleasant music, though the dance was considerably more interesting than anything that was sung. It is difficult to credit that this is one of Scottish Opera’s few main stage performances this year. It will run only in Glasgow and Edinburgh and for only 7 nights in total. It is becoming difficult not to wonder what this company gets up to when it isn’t putting on its occasional performances

    Rating: ★★★☆☆

8 responses to “Assisted Dying – Why I’ve changed my mind”

  1. BobS Avatar
    BobS

    You lucidly illustrated an example of a family seeking to pressurise someone to influence the process of death. But what was possibly missing was the voice of the person nearing death. Where was their perspective, their reasoning? Assisted Dying starts and driven by the person dying. They are the ones who, with mental capacity, take those steps, if necessary, to expedite death at that final stage. They, together with medical experts, make those decisions.
    The examples cited refer to a family desperate for a skiing holiday and your concern of funeral directors making money through direct cremations.
    I fully agree with your desire for a better palliative care system. Having witnessed their work it is amazing. But that is another argument. To conflate the two dismisses the voice of those seeking assisted dying.
    Your concern over assisted dying seems to be interwoven by a call for improved palliative care and a demise in direct cremations.

    1. Rev Owain Jones Avatar

      Respectfully, Bob S, I think you’re overlooking the one thing that struck me very forcefully from this incident. I’ve always felt profoundly uneasy at the likelihood – I’d say ‘moral certainty’ – that the voice of the dying will in some cases be influenced, even swayed, by the dying person’s assumptions, inferences or intuitions (correct or not) about the needs of those closest to them, and even their desires. These desires might not be articulated, or even correctly guessed – but they might, and as soon as the dying person is subject to them, they are, by definition, influenced in their decision. At that point, Assisted Dying can no longer be said “to start and driven by the person dying.” I’ve been there for a long time – but what I suddenly realized reading Kelvin Holdsworth’s post, was that there’s a much darker issue here, and it relates to a fundamental principle to which I’ve always adhered. Please bear with me, and entertain for a moment an analogy which you might consider to be extreme, and which I’d be appalled to hear deployed by the religiously fanatical opponents of Assisted Dying. It’s this. I have always been opposed to the death penalty for a number of reasons, but very prominent among them is that it takes to an extreme the testing of a fundamental principle of justice (which I know I’m modifyng here to make the analogy a better fit, and of course, you’re free to take issue with that): “It is better that a hundred guilty men go free than that one innocent person be punished unjustly.” I’m aware that there’s a very significant separation between that and this, but I don’t believe it amounts to ‘clear blue water’. Let me try and articulate my conviction in a reasonable way, for you to consider, even if you reject it. I think that there’s a huge danger inscribed in legislation which will, of a moral certainty, permit circumstances in which unwilling dying individuals give assent under pressure to the active premature termination of their lives. This holds true even if a hundred times as many individuals assent freely, and even actively seek, such termination. One of the things that always made me uneasy about the Vulcans was the assertion that “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”. There seems to me to be no way in any legislation to protect the needs and rights of the few in this issue. At the very least, I think that needs to be acknowledged openly by proponents of Assisted Dying. If we’re about to be taken across a Rubicon, I believe that everyone, on both sides of the decision, need to acknowledge that. (Incidentally, I completely agree with Kevin Holdsworth’s horror (I hope I’m expressing that fairly) at ‘Direct Cremations’ and the way they’re advertised. They seem to me to be open profiteering from the death-phobic culture in which we’re immersed. I fear that the impulses behind Assisted Dying as currently advocated may be a good-faith manifestation of the inability of society to look at the full actuality of human mortality and the relationship between life and death. I may be deluding myself, but I think I’d say that even if I were an atheist.

      1. BobS Avatar
        BobS

        Rev Owain, thank you for your response. I fear your analogy was stretched to fit your argument, and, apologies if my education lacked in this quarter, where the reference to Vulcans was applicable.
        If we are concerned that a very small percentage will be wronged, then many practices today should be stopped. The statistical error you describe will always be possible, albeit minimised as much as possible.
        The proposed law tries to cater for such concerns. What appears to be the argument against assisted dying is that it is not error proof.
        If a person who is deemed to have mental capacity with less than six months to live, with suitable medical provision, seeks to alleviate their suffering, and is capable of themselves administering the medication to ultimately ease that pain, then their voice has been heard.
        I also would hope that palliative care continues to improve but that is a separate argument, as are direct cremations, and now the cost of the funeral to families. These arguments are all used to conflate the underlying issue of assisted dying.

    2. Val Dobson Avatar
      Val Dobson

      You are wrong to connect funeral companies’ promotion of Direct Cremation with the push for assisted dying. Nowadays, many families simply cannot afford a “proper” funeral / cremation, and funeral grants come nowhere to covering the the costs. The funeral companies are simply responding to customer needs.

      1. Kelvin Avatar

        I’m happy to speak out about funerals being too expensive. However, it is manifestly not the case taht funeral companies are simply responding to customer needs. If they did they would promote these as being about price. They don’t – they promote them as being about not causing a fuss, which is the point I’m making here.

  2. Nigel Kenny Avatar
    Nigel Kenny

    Thank you for your wise and persuasive words – may they influence MSPs to vote against the Bill.

  3. Chriatine McIntosh Avatar
    Chriatine McIntosh

    Thanks for this, Kelvin – I’ve been thinking more about this as contemporaries begin to vanish from this life.

  4. Helen Leslie Avatar
    Helen Leslie

    Thank you Kelvin. I am someone who has spent the majority of my working life caring for people at the end of their lives. You said exactly what I would want to.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Preaching for Ruth Innes

    Was out of town preaching Ruth Innes into Falkirk at her induction at Christchurch. Here’s something of what I had to say: I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ‘Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?’ And I said, ‘Here am I; send me!’ In the name of God, Creator, Redeemer…

  • Desmond Tutu retires

    Just a quick post to honour Desmond Tutu as he steps back from public life and enters retirement. And a link to his five best pronouncements about same-sex stuff and the current Anglican nonsense. (And yes before anyone commenting on the post below this one points it out, yes I do see that he uses…

  • Inclusive Language – again

    I’ve been meaning to come back to the inclusive language question for the last couple of weeks and say something about it, but what to say at this point? The story so far: after a great deal of shilly-shallying, one of the Scottish Episcopal Church’s liturgies has been given a few alternative texts which replace…

  • Exciting Day for the Scottish Episcopal Church

    It is an exciting day for the Scottish Episcopal Church and no mistake – a new bishop has been elected. Fr Kevin Pearson of St Michael and All Saints in Edinburgh has been elected as the new bishop of Argyll and The Isles, a huge diocese which goes from the Mull of Kintyre right up…