![]() |
| Images (c) Bernd Uhlig |
Lulu – Mojca Erdmann
Countess Geschwitz – Deborah Polaski
Dresser, Gymnast – Anna Lapkovskaja Painter, Negro – Stephan RügamerDr Schön, Jack the Ripper – Michael Volle
Alwa – Thomas Piffka
Athlete – Georg Nigl
Schigolch – Jürgen Linn
Prince, Manservant – Wolfgang Ablinger-Speerhacke
Theatre Manager – Johann Werner Prein
Doctor of Medicine, Professor – Wolfgang Hübsch
Lulu's Doppelgängerin – Blanka Modrá, Liane Oßwald
Andrea Breth (director)
Erich Wonder (set designs)
Moidele Bickel (costumes)
Olaf Freese (lighting)
Philipp Haupt (video)
David Robert Coleman (‘adaptation’ of the London Scene)
Jens Schroth (dramatic advisor)
Staatskapelle Berlin
Daniel Barenboim (conductor)
![]() |
| Johann Werner Prein (Theatre Manager), Georg Nigl (Athlete), Wolfgang Ablinger-Sperrhacke (Prince, or whoever he was supposed to be here...) |
I am genuinely at a loss to know where to start with this performance of Lulu, but perhaps a little chronological background would be as good a place as any. Having admired Andrea Breth’s Salzburg production of Eugene Onegin, which he conducted, Daniel Barenboim invited her to direct Wozzeck and Lulu in Berlin. Wozzeck was much admired at last year’s Festtage; I thought highly of it, albeit with a few more reservations than many seem to have felt. It was certainly, however, a good enough production to have me look forward to Berg’s second opera. Except that it was not really Berg’s second opera at all: instead, Breth and Barenboim served up a bowdlerised version, a ‘Berliner Fassung’ for which I cannot imagine anyone had called, and which certainly did not seem to satisfy anyone in the theatre. The Prologue disappears completely, replaced by a horizontal actor’s drawn out reading from Kierkegaard and Lulu’s third-act scream, as does the Paris Scene from the Third Act. This is not a reversion to the old two-act version, though, even if one discounts the bizarre excision of the Prologue, in which the terms of the drama are set up, the whole world a stage or a circus. For the final scene, set in London, has been rewritten, adapted, call it what you will, by one David Robert Coleman, of whom I freely admit that I had never heard before. On the basis of this encounter, I sincerely hope that reunion should be indefinitely postponed. One might be able to take the use of a radio – presumably a recording, though it may just have been a strange acoustic trick – during the first act, but Coleman’s sketchy orchestration sounded more akin to an undergraduate’s first attempt to look through Berg’s manuscripts than a finished ‘version’, let alone a competitor to Friedrich Cerha’s standard completion.
![]() |
| A metaphor for the production? |
Why was the latter not used? Presumably permission was refused, not unreasonably, on account of the decision to make cuts. Whose decision? Breth’s? Barenboim’s? The former’s, with the latter’s acquiescence? Why, why, why? It sounded as much a mess as what we saw onstage, of which more anon, despite fine musical performances, of which more anon. Berg’s harmonisation of the hurdy-gurdy Lautenlied is tossed aside in favour of a manifestly inferior version by Wedekind. This is not, of course, simply a matter of an inferior harmonisation, nor indeed of having missed the tune’s first appearance in the excised Paris Scene; dodecaphonic writing and method are completely undermined. This is musical violence from which I am frankly astonished that Barenboim did not recoil. Likewise when it comes to the violence done to Berg’s symmetries, dramatic and musical, is unconscionable; this is not some Italianate number-opera. It is mystifying that one of the truly great musicians of our time, someone who has collaborated closely with Pierre Boulez and Patrice Chéreau, the team that brought us the first ever staging of the ‘complete’ Lulu, and one who has so excelled in the music of the Second Viennese School, should have acquiesced – if indeed, that is what happened. It was, apparently, at Barenboim’s invitation that Coleman put together his ‘version’, steel drums and all – yes, really! an intimation of an early jukebox, we are told – but was the original decision to travesty Berg’s opera made by Breth? Let us assume so, for it is difficult to imagine why someone conducting Lulu for the first time would wish not really to conduct Lulu at all.
![]() |
| Lulu (Mojca Erdmann), Geschwitz (Deborah Polaski) |
![]() |
| Lulu and Jack the Ripper (Michael Volle) |
Again, why, why, why?





4 comments:
I saw the premiere and hadn't the faintest idea what was going on, some kind of Beckett parody indeed!
Andrea Berth was booed by the audience, Daniel Barenboim then stood firmly hand in hand beside her, but couldn't stop the booing.
Thanks for the review!
(Leen Roetman, Rotterdam)
I had the pleasure, if I can call it that, of attending the final dress rehearsal for the production on Wednesday March 28. It was without a doubt the most unpleasant experience I have ever had at the opera house in my entire life. It was so unpleasant to watch that there were parts of Act I in which I just had to close my eyes. For me, one of the worst parts was the lack of human interaction, save for a couple of brief moments (the one where Lulu looks Alwa in the eye and tells him that she killed his mother was particularly powerful). Thankfully, one of the people I was there with had brought along an English libretto, which we followed along in during Act II (which I enjoyed much more since I wasn't watching and simply listening to a great performance by Barenboim and the Staatskapelle). Act III, again, was frustrating, because we had no idea that they were cutting the first scene and thus it was almost the end that we realized what was happening.
Several of us got to hear Andrea Breth and Daniel Barenboim speak about the production the following day. She was very proud to tell us that it didn't matter if the audience didn't understand the production, that it was impossible to produce naturalistic opera productions in the 21st Century, and that Act III, Scene 1 was "impossible to stage" and that she would only direct the opera if that scene was cut. I was shocked that Barenboim agreed to it, and even more shocked that he admitted to agreeing to the decision without a thorough study of the scene. I felt like it destroyed the palindromic construction (something both of them harped on a lot), and was disappointed at the apparent carelessness of the decision.
All in all it was a thoroughly unpleasant experience. There was no curtain call at the dress rehearsal, so no chance for anyone to boo, but several people left in the middle. A friend of mine noticed that many chose to do so when the curtain went up on Act II and the set hadn't changed.
that it was impossible to produce naturalistic opera productions in the 21st Century
Sure, except for all the technology now that allows that to happen! This isn't 1812 or even 1912, there's ways to conjure up the *exact* setting that's required. I suspect she meant "modern audiences are so a-historical that they can't imagine something happening in the late 19th century so we have to make it 'modern' or else".
"Scene 1 was "impossible to stage"
She's a liar, and a bad one. I've seen three productions of this incredible opera, all with Cehra's completion, and *gasp* the director moved the characters around like the libretto told them to, had the characters interact like the libretto indicated and the opera didn't fall apart.
I was shocked that Barenboim agreed to it, and even more shocked that he admitted to agreeing to the decision without a thorough study of the scene
What?!?! That's pathetic, and I'm a fan of his conducting.
Thank you all for the comments. Like Henry, I have no idea what Breth could possibly mean. Save for Loy's ghastly non-production at the ROH, I have seen that scene staged perfectly well in a variety of ways - but then that was a problem with the production as a whole, not the Paris scene. Maybe Breth couldn't direct it, but what arrogance therefore to claim that it is unstageable! Barenboim's part in this I genuinely find incomprehensible. When one thinks about the fuss he made concerning Stefan Herheim staging (very well indeed!) the Prelude to Act One of Lohengrin...
The best production I have seen was that from Richard Jones from ENO: 'Lulu' as it should be, the blackest of comedies, a truly unsettling experience. I wish ENO would revive it. Willy Decker's Paris production had much to recommend it too. (I reviewed it last autumn here.)
Post a Comment