• Jenůfa – Scottish Opera – Review

    This review should appear in due course at Opera Britannia
    Rating: ★★★★☆
    Scottish Opera have managed to present a very confident production of Janáček’s rather gloomy opera. It allows three fabulous female singers to shine brightly and makes a strong case for what might be regarded as a rather tricky original work.

    In what must have been a rather trying incident for all the performers, never mind the audience, the first night production was unfortunately delayed by three quarters of an hour whilst paramedics attended someone who had had an accident on the balcony steps. It was apparently not possible to put the house-lights down until the matter had been resolved and it was something of a relief by the time that the curtain eventually went up that it was going up at all.

    Fortunately, the delayed start didn’t affect the tought dramatic production and it was soon clear that this was going to be a night to remember.

    Jenůfa is a rather complex piece at the best of times. A certain amount of prior knowledge of the relationships between the characters is required right from the word go. This was provided in the programme along with the curious information that the director Annilese Miskimmon had set this production in the west of Ireland in 1918 rather than in rural Moravia.

    I have to confess that moving the action to Ireland accomplished very little. Fortunately it didn’t get too much in the way of the story and it did explain the large white cottage (with wonderfully smoking chimneys) which had landed in the middle of the stage like a tardis flying in from outer-space. Also, like the tardis, it proved larger inside than it appeared on the outside once it opened up for the interior action later in the evening. The interior of the cottage was a good deal more interesting than the outside though designers Nicky Shaw did manage to produce a very clinically clean early twentieth century rural Irish idyll.

    But enough about the set – on to the singing. After all, this was a night at the opera that succeeded precisely because of some highly spirited and accomplished singing.

    First up was Lee Bissett in the title role. Her Jenůfa was a fairly sad girl from the outset – we saw her first lamenting her lot leaning against the cottage wall. There was nothing sad at all about her voice though which glistened throughout the evening. By the time we got to Jenůfa’s prayer to the Virgin in the second act, she was managing to combine extraordinary passion and beauty.

    It was also clear early on that Anne-Marie Owens was going to be well worth listening to. Her grandmother character managed to combine despair with a certain mournful quality along with some cracking acting.

    Completing the trio of stand-out performances was Kathryn Harries as Kostelnička (ie Churchwarden’s widow) Buryjovka – Jenůfa’s step-mother, if I was keeping up with who was who. It is upon the Kostelnička that the whole story turns. She cares for Jenůfa to the point that she contemplates and eventually carries out the infanticide of Jenůfa’s child in order to facilitate the possibility of a marriage for the girl.

    Perhaps the most uncomfortable realisation in the whole evening is that Janáček dedicated the work to a dead child of his own. What can he have been thinking about?

    Ms Harries had an awesome dramatic intensity to her singing which was more than able to deal with the vast range that Jenůfa demands from the singer. When the Kostelnička is eventually exposed as a child murderer, her reconciliation with Jenůfa and resignation to her fate was genuinely touching.

    Things were not quite so secure amongst the male leads. Janáček calls for a pair of love interests for the leading lady, neither of whom a particularly attractive character. (One longs for a feminist reinterpretation of the ending whereby Jenůfa shakes her head at all that is on offer and marches off on her own but it wasn’t happening in this production).

    Peter Wedd made a reasonable stab at Laca but Sam Furness was a out of his depth as the hapless Števa. It is hard work being up against a full orchestra playing Janáček’s fabulous score at full pelt and Furness never really managed to make much of an impact against the wall of sound that was coming from the pit. Both men looked the part and there was nothing out of place in their acting abilities.

    Stuart Stratford the conductor could have kept a bit more of a lid on the orchestra but there’s no denying how interesting the orchestrations are and a slight tendency towards too much sound could be forgiven for the range of colour that was on display and there’s no getting away from the fact that there was some splendid orchestral playing to be heard. Pacing was quite slick and that only helped to keep ratcheting up the tension on stage.

    Honourable mentions go to two smaller parts. Jonathan May’s Mayor was perhaps the most distinguished male vocal singing of the evening. Rosalind Coad as Karolka their daughter was decidedly perky and fresh.

    A large chorus (described in the programme as The Chorus of Jenůfa) was in good voice as the villagers. Scottish Opera doesn’t seem to be having any more luck appointing a chorus master than appointing a musical director at the moment, but Philip White can feel very proud of what he managed to achieve here before he heads off to become Head of Music at Grange Park Opera later this year.

    Notwithstanding the curious decision to relocate affairs to Ireland, Annilese Miskimmon can be justly proud of producing one of Scottish Opera’s most interesting productions for quite some time. It is easy to recommend this co-production with Danish National Opera. It plays for a scandalously short run in Scotland – just three performances in Glasgow and two in Edinburgh. Worth catching if you can.

7 responses to “Revised Commenting Policy”

  1. Darren Moore Avatar
    Darren Moore

    I try to stick to the policy, whilst commenting on it.

    Most of it pretty understandable/standard. But,
    1.using Scripture as a weapon/quoting isolated verses. To a point I agree, but surely as well as the whole has to be understood as part of the whole, the whole is made us by parts. People misuse the Bible by taking a verse out of context, but they can easily be shown up. Otherwise we can’t use the Bible at all, other than saying – read all of it – there’s something that relates to what I’m saying.

    2. How does the disclaimer square with not being able to comment on PSA? Is that a given (i.e. that it’s nonsense)? Are other opinions banned? Like Roman Catholic views. Even if (highly unlikely) it’s a minority view, are other historically minority views banned (charismatics, baptists) and non-Christians and all liberals – as there views are pretty minority.

    3. Likening gay people to murderers. Unpleasant I agree. Although if (if I may quote a verse – but not to prove a point), this a reference to the 2nd 1/2 of Romans 1, the list includes people who disobey parents and the greedy. Presumably they’re still fair game?

    Just not sure this quite stacks. It’s why people ask, “What are you afraid of?” when it comes to PSA?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Darren – thank you for your interest. However. the question is not whether you think this commenting policy quite stacks but whether I do.

  2. John Sandeman Avatar
    John Sandeman

    Kelvin,
    When reading about theories of the atonement, there is a real risk of continually reading things that have been said many times over – as you point out. But can I credit you with something reasonably original? “We’ve already established that like most Christian people I don’t believe in it.” I have never worked out how to determine the proportions of Christians who believe the various atonement theories. Is there some research out there?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Thanks John – I’m not aware of any research though I’d be interested in any there was. When I wrote that, I was thinking not simply of who believes what now but also of Christians through time. The history of these various ways of understanding the (or an) atonement is fairly well attested and it is clear that some have risen and fallen through time.

      My presumption is that most of the people in the great blocks of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches (both now and through history) don’t believe in penal substitution – or at least, don’t believe it in the same way that a classical evangelical might believe in it as doctrine which must be personally accepted in order to lead to individual salvation. However, as you rightly point out, who believes what may not be so simple.

  3. Darren Moore Avatar
    Darren Moore

    There are a few bits of research on this, but mostly from the context of PSA
    E.g. Chapter 5 of “Pierced for our Transgressions”, by Jeffery, Ovey & Sach (IVP), which is a quite survey of theologians, east & west, a dozen of which are pre-reformation, starting with Justin Martyr.

    Henri Blocher, “Biblical Metaphors of the atonement”, in the journal of the evangelical theological society, 47 (2004), pp629-645
    “The divine substitution: The atonement in the Bible and history” by Shaw & Edwards (Day One).

    I get the your blog, your rules. Just doesn’t sound like decent is welcome.

    1. Darren Moore Avatar
      Darren Moore

      Bit of a PS,
      Robert Letham’s, “Through Western eyes”
      Looks at the differences & common ground with E-orthodoxy on lots of things, including salvation. Letham (Reformed), thinks there’s lots to get from the East re:-Trinity in worship, incarnational stuff, divination (rightly understood), but still holds that his “Reformed”

    2. Kelvin Avatar

      Well, Darren, I’ve found that there are quite a number of people who do want to meet and chat without the Atonement Thought Police stepping in to correct them all the time. In fact, though I expect you’ll be surprised to hear it, to those who don’t believe that particular doctrine, comments rather like your own can appear to be quite aggressive and verging on bullying.

      So, you may not feel welcome to behave exactly as you like here. You are not. And there’s a comminity of folk who like it that way.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • The cross-dressing bearded nun story

    Forgive me, but I can’t help but be interested in the cross-dressing bearded nun story which was in the Herald today. The short version of the story is that a minister removed a picture of himself dressed as a nun from facebook, where it was his profile pic, following a complaint from someone belonging to…

  • Wikileaks and the Guardian

    Can someone tell me the difference between Wikileaks publishing US government cables and the Guardian publishing the same cables. So far as I can see, neither organisation has actually leaked anything, they are both publishing the same material that has been leaked by someone else. I’m struggling a bit to see why the editor of…

  • Tuition Fees

    I’m disappointed to hear that Lib Dem ministers will be going through the government lobbies to vote in favour of raising tuition fees in England. The policy itself isn’t something that I agree with but nor is it something I know how to solve easily either. I do think that making all the tertiary education…

  • Sermon from Bishop Gregor

    Here is what Bishop Gregor had to say to us on Sunday, just after presenting the new Vice-Provost, the Rev Cedric Blakey with his licence.