• 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: ★★★★☆

10 responses to “Where does the Church of Scotland stand?”

  1. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    I understand your sentiments, but both on this issue and on the ordination of women in the Church of England the weary words of Mrs Boyle in Sean O’Casey’s ‘Juno and the Paycock’ in reply to her son, who scorns the Irish Free State and wants an Irish Republic or nothing, are inclined to come to mind:

    “To be sure, to be sure — no bread’s a lot better than half a loaf.”

  2. Nick Brindley Avatar

    I think you’re right to think this is a disastrously wrong-headed attempt to avoid having to think the issue through, although we may not agree on what would be involved in such thinking (almost nobody agrees with me!)

    I think we need to revisit some pretty fundamental problems on the nature of the moral authority of the Bible, the meaning of “salvation” and what ministry is to make any real progress with this issue and there appears to be depressingly little appetite to do this in a spirit of mutual trust and of trust in the leading of the Spirit guiding our interpretation of scripture

    http://loveswork.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/failing-to-be-biblical-reflections-on-church-of-scotland-sexuality-debates/

  3. Frank keefe Avatar
    Frank keefe

    This is what happens when you water down Gods truth so the secular world will think what a progressive church you are.When a small secular wedge is pushed under a church door you can bet a larger one will be pushed under it in the not to distant future.I believe a liberal minded church like the Church of Scotland is more dangerous to the Christian faith than atheists like Richard Dawkins and his followers. Jesus found it hard to convince the Pharisees of their misguided beliefs if He walked our earth today He would find those modern day Pharisees in the Church of Scotland even harder to convince.

    1. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
      Rosemary Hannah

      Well, there you go – I think the exact opposite – that Jesus, who plucked corn, and healed, on the Sabbath, would be out partying tonight with all sorts of disreputable people. The Pharisees were the people who stuck rigidly to the law, breaking it even as they kept it. Jesus was the one who re-interpreted it.

      1. Frank keefe Avatar
        Frank keefe

        I find it amazing how those who look for sin to be accepted would try and use Jesus to back them up.First Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man not man for the Sabbath.The Pharisees abused Gods law with their legalism.Its why He said about the rescue of a sheep on that day.He didnt re-interpret it He was showing them how it SHOULD BE KEPT as God ALWAYS intended it.Its the church who is doing the interpretation and Jesus certainly wouldnt be “out partying” such disrespect of our Lords holiness is often the way with liberal ” Christians” Instead of the church being a light to the world that worlds darkness is putting out that light.

        1. kelvin Avatar

          Bless you for your faith, Frank. May it bring you happiness and joy.

  4. Graeme Cowie Avatar

    It’s a fudge, no doubt. And one which, far from preserving the “traditional” Kirk actually serves to undermine it in a number of ways, particularly concerning the status of “doctrine” and who gets to determine what it is, or at least what practical meaning it is for something to be “doctrine” rather than merely a personal religious sentiment. Explicitly to permit complete deviation from “doctrine” by congregations is not very Presbyterian, and the “traditionalists” either didn’t seem to realise that, or they care about preserving substantial doctrines at the expense of, well, what makes the Kirk the Kirk.

    To an extent, though, you could see it coming. I think the traditionalist wing sensed they would lose if it was a straight choice (unfortunate phrase) between 2A and 2B, and so tried to push for something that retains a symbolic attachment to historical doctrine whilst letting liberals have the lion’s share of the cake they want, which is to be able to ordain those in committed same-sex relationships and to be done with it. I know for a fact that a fair whack of liberal commissioners were swayed by 2D (not including my parents, who are CofS ministers who voted with option 2A), many seeing it as a way of letting the traditionalists have some sort of phyric victory whilst in fact enabling ministers to be in civil partnerships without any lasting problems. It is much more likely that 2D will make it through Barrier Act procedure now that it’s got the traditionalists’ name on it, and notwithstanding the extra year it’s going to take to turn it into a proper overture, I think the consensus of the Kirk is that they really want to stop talking about this.

    The new system ought to be fairly robust once the Legal Questions Committee have had their teeth dug into it. The clear intention was conceded by the movers that they did not intend for Presbyteries to be able to discipline or annul decisions made by Kirk Sessions seeking to be allowed to appoint ministers in civil partnerships, and for a lot of liberals (and actually, a lot of those on the conservative wing too) this will be seen as a critical part of the compromise if it is to be laid to rest. My only real concern is that if the traditionalists are for any reason unhappy with the implementation by LQC it could lead to the whole debate re-opening in GA 2014.

    It’s clearly not enough for many liberal ministers, elders and members of the Church of Scotland, for whom this still presents a partial sense of “separate not equal” for congregation and minister alike, and it probably makes it more difficult for the theological position of the kirk formally to be moved away from same sex relationships being sinful, now that the “practical harms” are in a significant sense out of the way, but by Church of Scotland standards, it’s a major step forward for a very broad church, and one which has probably saved it from a major schism (though a handful of churches may still leave over and above The Tron and Gilc South). For those of us in the Kirk 5 years ago, this would have been virtually unthinkable, and momentum has picked up since the Rennie case 4 years ago. The good fight goes on, and hurdles remain, but if it gets through Barrier Act procedure I think the practical objectives, in a Kirk which already offers substantial liberty of personal opinion in matters of doctrine which do not enter into the substance of faith, have largely been met, albeit in a roundabout way.

    For more of my thoughts on this matter, see:

    http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2013/05/church-of-scotland-religious-progress.html

    and

    http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2013/05/presbyterianism-cracking-at-seems-cost.html

  5. Margaret of the Sea of Galilee Avatar
    Margaret of the Sea of Galilee

    And it still does not properly address how LGBTQ people (single or in civil partnerships) will be dealt with (dealt to?) when they offer themselves to Presbyteries as feeling called to the Ministry of Word and Sacrament. Will they be asked about their orientation? Questioned? Interrogated? What responses will allow them to or prevent them from pursuing that call?

    Who is this Albert Bogle anyway – is he about to become the first to be beatified by the Kirk and for what exactly? By-passing (even disregarding) Kirk “Order”, convincing his important friends to let him bulldoze ahead and his less important friends to print off 700 and something copies of a Deliverance which is incoherent and unimplementable.
    Off to read Revelation for other signs of The End Times…
    .

  6. Peter W Nimmo Avatar

    Kelvin, you make lots of good points in your post. But just to clarify- what is the doctrine and practice of the Scottish Episcopal Church on this issue? Does your doctrine approve of persons in civil partnerships being clergy, and is that put into practice?

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Yes – there are quite a number of clergy in civil partnerships. In England, Anglican clergy in civil partnerships are supposed to declare that they are “celibate”. That isn’t the case in Scotland.

      The pension scheme in Scotland recognises Civil Partnerships by giving such partners the same benefits as wives or husbands in marriages. Civil Partners also are treated in the same way with regard to housing as a straight spouse if a relationship breaks down.

      Any candidate for ordination who is in a Civil Partnership is expected to be honest about that at selection.

      The bishops of the church announced a few years ago that they would not consecrate anyone as bishop who was in a Civil Partnership. They were clear at the time that this was a moratorium. However it is not clear to me whether that moratorium still stands. I do expect there to be questions about that at the coming Synod.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Christmas Day – Light that can never be extinguished

    There is one image that comes back over and over again at Christmastime ? the image of Christ as the Light. When Jesus comes at Christmas it is as though a blindfold is being lifted or a light-switch flicked on. Suddenly, things become comprehensible which once made no sense. Suddenly, there is the possibility for…

  • Listen to the Angel

    The angel said to them: ?Do not be afraid; for see, I am bringing you good news of great joy for all the people.: to you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is the Messiah, the Lord.? Let us listen to the angel this night.

  • Light

    Rejoice, rejoice – the light is coming back. The shortest day is past. I hate the darkness at this time of year. I've never understood why Christmas misses the solstice by just a couple of days. It would make more sense to me if they were o­ne and the same. I find the idea of…

  • Cat's Christmas Carol

    Tilly received a Christmas Card o­n Sunday. It features the Blessed Virgin holding the Christ-Child who is looking downwards to where a cat is sitting beside a bowl. The card bears the following rhyme by Dorothy Sayers: All praise to His bountiful name!I do not know why He came;But I'm sure this is true -…