• Opera Review

    The following review should appear soon at Opera Britannia.

    Rating: ★★★★☆

    Janáček’s strange opera The Makropulos Case is a curious mix of psychological horror and puzzling fantasy. Who is the central character Emilia Marty and what gives her so much knowledge of the affairs of others?

    Opera North’s new production is a stirring attempt to showcase and make sense of a difficult plot which has naught for our comfort whilst taking us on a compelling and exciting musical ride.

    All of the business starts in a lawyers’ office where legal minds have been kept in clover for decades trying to sort out a particularly complicated inheritance case. As the curtain goes up, lawyers and their clerks are trying to sort through piles of casework. Within this cramped, oppressive set, it felt as though all the boxes of papers and legal bundles are about to fall on everyone’s heads. A moody colour scheme – olives and jades was given some excitement with a classy lighting design by Bruno Poet. Strong shadows seemed to conjure up the feeling of an old black and white thriller. Costumes too seemed to place us in the early years of the movies.

    Mark Le Broqc and James Cresswell put in confident performances as the legal team – clerk and lawyer respectfully. Even stronger though was Robert Haywood as Baron Prus. His expansive baritone was the perfect tool for declaiming the baron’s legal claims to property and inheritance that should have been sorted out years before. Sadly, this contrasted a little with Adrian Dwyer who was playing his son Janek. There felt to be something very easy and relaxed about Hawood’s voice, in contrast to the rather forced, narrow tone of his son. Janek dies an early death. We wept no tears for him.

    Stephanie Corley put in sterling work as Kristina, Vitek’s daughter. She is a putative opera singer and like many a diva in waiting before her, Ms Corley flitted around the stage, a whirlwind of anxiety and emotion. Through all of this though, she managed to hold on to her voice and punch her way through her part with a delightful precision.

    The male protagonist, Paul Nilon as Albert Gregor was confident and secure and a joy to listen to. He seemed to manage better than anyone else on stage to make sense of Norman Tucker’s sometimes rather ragged translation. Gregor needs must come to terms with falling in love with his great, great, great, great, great, great grandmother. (Or something like that – one started by thinking that Mr Freud would be a useful person to have around but ended by wanting a mathematician).

    Comic relief was provided by Nigel Robson as an elderly count with whom the central character had an affair many years before. Robson stoked up the fires of passion and showed what a giggle one can make from a cameo role with a belter of a voice and a twinkle in one’s eye.

    Amongst an otherwise well balanced cast, Ylva Kihlberg as Emilia Marty completely owned the stage from her first appearance. This central role is a tricky one for any singer. After all, she finally leaves us not with a consumptive cough but by aging 300 years before our very eyes. Such a transformation really does require a singer who really can act and Ms Kihlberg did not disappoint in that department at all. She was electric in the first Act where, from the moment she appeared, every other movement on the stage seemed either to be directed by or be a response to flashes from her eyes.

    Vocally she was perhaps not quite so fearless. Within the plot, Emilia Marty (or perhaps EM, as she inhabits various personalities always with those initials) is an opera singer. Oh the irony if the person playing her is unable to quite carry the hopes and expectations of the audience. A slightly tentative first Act didn’t show off Ms Kihlberg voice to the best of her ability but as the score became richer as the evening progressed, so thankfully, she managed to find a greater vibrancy.

    Emilia Marty, of course turns out to really be Elina Makropulos who was born in 1585 and who has been kept alive by means of a longevity potion invented by her father. The greatest drama of the evening came right at the end of the piece when the existence of the potion was revealed and was offered around the stage by EM to all those who had seen the anguish of her sudden aging. The men all refuse but young Kristina snatched it from EM’s hand with great flourish not to apply it to herself but to burn it forever. As she stood with a flaming page held aloft in her hand she looked for all the world like the Statue of Liberty. As the formula burns away, EM dies but even to her last breath it was clear that she was undecided whether she wanted to depart this life or live forever. The play is a brilliant judgement on our aspirations of longevity. Should we chose to extend our lives, we risk having seen it all, long before life leaves us. Freedom is only freedom when the expectation of losing it in death is both absolute and unpredictable.

    Down in the pit, it seemed that Richard Farnes and the orchestra were enjoying themselves though did take just a little while to get into their stride. There was more energy and vitality about them by the end of the evening than there was at the beginning. Top marks to the brass for fulfilling Janáček’s not inconsiderable demands.

    In directing this piece, Tom Cairns took relatively few risks. Sadly one interesting idea fell very flat with a very strangely timed curtain fall at the end of Act 1. The idea was to take us from the lawyers office in Act 1 to the stage of the theatre where EM has been performing. It was a very clever idea to try to introduce the scene on the theatre stage by having EM appear before an applauding audience and take her bows. The sound of an audience applauding had been recorded and was all ready to be played in the auditorium to give Ms Kihlberg something to curtsey to. Unfortunately the curtain had fallen too early in Act 1 for the audience to be sure of what was going on. Instead of greeting the first act with applause, when the music stopped rather suddenly, everyone looked at one another in complete puzzlement. Silence and then an awkward clapping was thus then followed by a recording of a much more appreciative audience. What might have been a coup de theatre if the stage could have been set very quickly, became rather embarrassing. Had the audience greeted the first act with rapturous applause and then EM appeared on stage to courtesy and take her bows leading in to the second Act which all takes place on a theatre stage after a production, the effect would have been simply stunning. One hopes that this rather clunky transition might be sorted out before the production hits the usual Opera North venues.

    Notwithstanding this stutter, the evening gradually became something more rather than less of the sum of its parts. Janacek’s stunning score helps of course. As the chattering rhythms ricocheted around the pit in the final Act, all the singers were fully engaged and one felt that the production was running at full pelt. As EM declaimed to one and all the frustrations of living an extra three hundred years she became more and more fascinating. As she aged, she appeared to inhabit different characters – at one time appearing to channel Garbo and yet all too soon embodying a savage but frighteningly glamorous Mrs Thatcher. Chilling, and naught for your comfort, as I said.

    Note to the Director: Brilliant idea having three prominent clocks on stage all counting towards midnight during the last act faster than in real time.
    Note to the Stage Manager: All the clocks need to keep the same time thoughout.

    Tick tock!

    Rating: ★★★★☆

11 responses to “Providence and Vocation for Liberals in Public Life”

  1. David Evans Avatar
    David Evans

    I was one of the Lib Dems who did foresee the calamity in 2015 and actively campaigned to get the party to change leader – after 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 it wasn’t difficult for anyone to see, but it was difficult for many nice Lib Dems to own up to the fact that they had allowed it to happen. I failed, but I don’t think it was part of anyone’s plan that I did (except possibly Ryan Coetzee and a few other true believers).

    There’s a lot in your points I can agree with, particularly regarding the naivety of referring to God’s plan, when many Christian’s have a view that his/hers/its plan is to let us get on with it and find our own way to salvation. However, the most interesting question is when you say “The trouble is, these are not side issues, these are my rights.” Do you really mean that you have the right to force someone else to marry you who doesn’t want to and believes it is wrong, even though you have the right to and can get someone else to do the same job for you? Do individuals have the right to insist on being married by the registrar of their choice, or just the right to get married? Are you not perhaps just a bit assuming that your tree is that bit taller than the other guy’s?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      I think that people should be able to expect individual people who represent the state not to discriminate against them in any of the protected categories. I think that the equal rights tree is bigger than my tree and the registrar’s tree.

      I don’t claim that individuals should be able to force registrars of their choice to marry them, not least because I don’t think it is a very real question – few people want to be married by someone who doesn’t want them to be married. I do think that local authorities have not simply the right but the duty to remove public officials who can’t serve every member of the public due to their personal prejudices.

      1. David Evans Avatar
        David Evans

        I think you are rather changing your ground here from your original piece. You started with “The trouble is, these are not side issues, these are my rights.”

        You have now moved onto “I think that people should be able to expect individual people who represent the state not to discriminate against them in any of the protected categories.” So we now have a right to expect, but only against a person who works in the public sector, and even if it is against that person’s conscience and only if you are in a specially protected category.

        It gets even more tenuous then as you accept when you then say “I don’t claim that individuals should be able to force registrars of their choice to marry them.” So the right is not to a person wanting to be married at all.

        Finally we get “I do think that local authorities have not simply the right but the duty to remove public officials who can’t serve every member of the public due to their personal prejudices.” So the right is not to an individual at all, so definitely not “your rights” but to a public sector organisation. Hardly a human right, more of an employer’s right by your own statements.

        I rather think that your equal rights tree, however high you think it is, has decidedly peculiar roots.

        1. Graham Evans Avatar
          Graham Evans

          David, I thought most liberals accepted the view that in the provision of services to the general public, whether provided by the public sector or private sector, a policy of non-discrimination was an essential ingredient of a progressive society. I accept that there is a notable exception to this rule in terms of the provision of abortion, but this arises from the broad range of medical procedures undertaken by one type of doctor or another. Surgeons are specialised medical practitioners, as are nurses who assist them, so it is most unlikely then anyone who opposed abortion on conscience grounds would actually be faced with having to refuse to conduct an abortion. The provision of most services to the general public is also a specialist activity, and no-one forces people to engage in any particular activity. The idea that a registrar should be able to opt out of undertaking a civil gay marriage represents the thin edge of a dangerous wedge. If such people wish to opt out of doing so, then they should act as part of a religious community, such as a deacon in Anglican Church, which has the legal power to conduct religious marriages, are still recognised by the State.

          1. David Evans Avatar
            David Evans

            Quite simply Graham I disagree with your view that this is a level of discrimination in the provision of a public service of anything like the scale you imply makes it essential that every individual has to comply with it. The “go with it or get out” philosophy demanded of the state by so many in pursuit of their personal view of their rights is to my mind a greater threat to liberty than the fact that Fred or Freda don’t agree with something and don’t want to do it but George, Georgina, Harry, Harriette etc etc etc etc can do it instead. Ultimately you aren’t stopping someone from exercising their right; you are preventing someone from imposing their requirement on someone else.

            However, I note Kelvin hasn’t responded to my substantive point and I await that with interest.

  2. Iain Brodie Browne Avatar
    Iain Brodie Browne

    Firstly thank you for your posting.
    I have been expressing my concern elsewhere that the main voices we have heard in the debate about Tim’s faith have been firstly from those who think that it wholly a private matter and because his opinions are sincerely held and are derived from his faith the rest of us should back off and secondly those who seem to imply that having a religious faith at all is a negative factor. Until your contribution I am not aware that anyone has directly addressed the issue from different Christian understanding.
    I cut my political teeth at the end of the 1960s opposing the all ‘white’ rugby and cricket tours from South Africa. The dominant voices from the churches were from Trevor Huddleston and David Sheppard. They effectively contested the assertions of those who told us (and they did) that apartheid was part of God’s plan.
    Earlier in that decade Michael Ramsey spoke up clearly in support of what was then called homosexual law reform. David Steel, who pushed through the 1967 Act did so at a time when he was regularly introducing Songs of Praise.
    I regret that equal marriage and the removal of other discriminations against gay people –including the issue you raise about Registrars- have not been as effectively championed by Christians as those earlier reforms. It is fair to say that in the minds of those who you describe as ‘decent people in society’ Christians are seen as opposing these reforms. The priority for the churches appears to be to gain protection for those who oppose such reforms. Imagine if that had been the approach to apartheid.
    My own experience gives me hope that things are changing. Our local church got a new vicar who immediately began to pray for the defeat of the Equal Marriage legislation, got up petitions and lobbied. His views on women priests were no more in tune with ‘decent society’. In common with many churches these matters had not really been properly discussed. It was heartening how many members did openly contest his views and a significant portion of the congregation felt so strongly the eventually relocated to other churches. There is a good deal more support for liberal values amongst church goers than is popularly conceived.

    My view is much the same as expressed in the Independent’s editorial this morning which endorsed Tim but added the rider that : ‘It will be for Mr Farron to make clear to party members, the public at large, and this newspaper, that his faith can indeed be reconciled with a liberal view on matters of birth, marriage and death.’ If faith is the opposite of certainty then I have enough to believe that can be achieved but if would be of assistance not only to Tim but to others struggling to reconcile their faith with liberal views if more church leaders provide a Christian narrative as effectively as did Michael Ramsey and Trevor Huddleston did in their day.

    http://birkdalefocus.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/influencial-divine-former-libdem-ppc.html

  3. Andy Avatar
    Andy

    Personally, as a non-Christian, I find the attack on Tim Farron’s Christian faith distasteful, even disturbing. With the issue of gay marriage, something I wholly support, it is clear to me that Farron was trying to protect freedom of religious thought whilst also legislating for LGBT equality. There is nothing illiberal about that. Freedom of religion is one of the most fundamental human rights, and something liberals should defend. Any definition of liberalism which does not include freedom of conscience, is one I have no interest in supporting.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Thanks for commenting, Andy.

      I’m not aware of people attacking Tim Farron’s faith. I am aware of people questioning whether someone who apparently has anti-gay views is an appropriate person to represent the Lib Dems as leader.

      When it comes to the vote about the registrars, that can either be interpreted as defending religious thought or as defending discrimination. I come to the latter view because if I substitute a couple who are gay for a couple being say mixed race (something many people would once have objected to on religious grounds) then I see clear discrimination at work.

      It is a strange day when people are arguing (as some are) that the leader of the Liberal Democrats has the right to hold distasteful views about gay people in private so long as he defends their rights in public. He does have that right but not the right to be taken seriously as well.

      1. David Evans Avatar
        David Evans

        Sadly there have been many who have been attacking Tim’s faith, some directly and some more with disdain. Comments such as listening to his sky fairy are not uncommon. Also portraying his views as apparently anti-gay are without doubt over egging it massively as opposed to the simple fact that as a liberals we should all have views which take into account the “balance of fundamental values of liberty, equality and community” and that this inevitably leads to differences of judgement on lots of individual issues, but do not undermine the fundamental decency and liberalism of many people like Tim, who have proved it over a great many years.

  4. David Evans Avatar
    David Evans

    Kelvin,

    It is a great disappointment to me that you have not come back to me with any further reasoning in response to my post on 30 June 02:19. Have you changed your views, reinforced them with new vigour or simply moved on?

    1. Graham Evans Avatar
      Graham Evans

      David, perhaps you could clarify what your substantive point is. Having reread the whole thread it’s certainly not clear to me.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Sound of Music

    An inspired offering from the BBC – just press the red button o­n your digital handset during the film and the lyrics of the songs of the Sound of Music come up o­n the screen. Tilly and I had a sing-a-long at the tops of our voices.There is a lot going o­n in the Sound of…

  • Clacks

    For the first time ever, I have managed to drive to somewhere in Clackmannanshire and back to Bridge of Allan without getting lost. I did have a road atlas, a streetmap and a couple of maps downloaded from the internet with me, but it still felt like a great achievement. I don't understand why the…

  • Songs of Praise

    From the BBC website: “Songs of Praise: Christmas Highlights – Pop producer Pete Waterman takes a trip on a steam train and picks his favourite Christmas carols, including performances by Wells Cathedral Choir and Sir Cliff Richard.” Beyond parady.