Tannhäuser (Peter Seiffert) and dancers in the Venusberg ballet Images: Clive Barda/ROH |
Royal Opera House
Tannhäuser – Peter Seiffert
Elisabeth – Emma BellVenus – Sophie Koch
Wolfram von Eschenbach – Christian Gerhaher
Hermann, Landgrave of Thuringia – Stephen Milling
Biterolf – Michael Kraus
Walther von der Vogelweide – Ed Lyon
Heinrich der Schreiber – Samuel Sakker
Reimar von Zweter – Jeremy White
Shepherd Boy – Raphael Janssens
Elisabeth’s Attendants – Kiera Lyness, Deborah Peake-Jones, Louise Armit, Kate McCarney
Tim Albery (director)
Michael Levine (set designs)Jon Morrell (costumes)
David Finn (lighting)
Jasmin Vardimon (choreography, Venusberg Scene)
Maxine Braham (movement)
Dancers
Royal Opera Chorus and Extra
Chorus (chorus master: Renato Balsadonna)Orchestra of the Royal Opera House
Hartmut Haenchen (conductor)
London remains starved of
Wagner. This season, its major companies offer but two works, Tannhäuser from the Royal Opera and Tristan from ENO. True, Opera North will
bring its concert Ring to the South
Bank, but that is a somewhat different matter. Comparisons with serious houses,
let alone serious cities, are not encouraging, especially if one widens the
comparison to nineteenth-century Italian composers. Quite why is anyone’s
guess; the composer is anything but unpopular. More to the point, Wagner and
Mozart should stand at the heart of any opera house’s repertory. They can
hardly do so if they are so rarely performed.
I mention that not only because
it is very important in itself, but because it has serious implications for
orchestras. What used to be Bernard Haitink’s orchestra has had a rougher time
of things since his departure. Whilst a great conductor – Semyon Bychkov, for
instance, in the first run of this production, or more recently, in Die
Frau ohne Schatten –
can still summon truly great things from the Orchestra of the Royal Opera
House, its day-to-day experience of core German repertory is fading. Here,
under Hartmut Haenchen, there were no particular upsets, but there were only
hints at what the orchestra has been capable of, and still might be. Haenchen’s
conducting had its moments, but it was the heavenly lengths, and how they might
fit together, that were lacking. A penny-plain opening to the Overture
suggested ‘authenticist’ tendencies, as if Haenchen would rather be conducting
the Dresden Tannhäuser, albeit
conducting it a little like ‘period’ Mendelssohn. When it came to the music
written for Paris, he seemed to linger and to rush, somewhat arbitrarily. There
is stylistic ‘incongruity’, yes, if we want to call it that, but should we not
be making something of that, even making it into a virtue?
I suspect that Haenchen’s tempi
were, on balance, considerably quicker than Bychkov’s; that was certainly not
how it felt, especially in the Venusberg, whose pleasures seemed at times
interminable (in the wrong sense). Indeed, the exchanges between Tannhäuser and
Venus often sounded alarmingly perfunctory, robbed not only of orchestral
‘cushioning’, but of the direction that Wagner’s orchestra-as-Greek Chorus,
even at this stage in his career, offers. Of Beethoven, at least as Wagner
would have understood him, there was little: perhaps there was, however, of
fashionable, ‘period’ Beethoven-cut-down-to-size. Compared to the most recent
other Tannhäuser I had heard,
superlatively conducted by Daniel Barenboim in Berlin, this was disappointing.
Venus (Sophie Koch) |
Disappointing in that very
important respect, anyway. There was much more to savour vocally. Peter
Seiffert gave a strange performance in the title role: it came and went,
seemingly without reason, sometimes, especially in the first act, alarmingly
out of tune, at other times spot on, always tireless, even when,
understandably, his voice acquired something of an edge in parts of the Rome
Narration (movingly despatched). Emma Bell was a wonderful Elisabeth; I do not
think I have heard anything finer from her. Sincere but certainly not bland,
this Elisabeth’s vocal qualities were subtle yet, where necessary (and it often
is!), powerful. Sophie Koch’s Venus was ravishingly sung, words and music in
excellent, dramatically productive, balance. Christian Gerhaher’s Wolfram is a
known quantity to many of us, of course, but no less welcome was it for that.
The startling, almost indecent, yet utterly sincere, beauty of Gerhaher’s
delivery was once again something for all to remember. There was no need to
force the performance; he could draw us in so as to hear a pin drop. Phrasing
was just as exemplary. Ed Lyon’s sweetly-sung, dramatically-committed Walther
was another pleasure; if only he had had more to sing. Thank goodness, at
least, Walther’s solo, only cut from Paris because the tenor could not sing it,
was restored. Stephen Milling's sonorous Landgrave was, quite rightly, especially acclaimed by the audience. Young Raphael Janssens acquitted himself well as the Shepherd
Boy. So did the chorus (and extra chorus) of Renato Balsadonna, although I
think there was greater precision, and perhaps greater weight, under Bychkov in
2010.
The ballet |
Tim Albery’s production does
not seem to have changed very much. The Venusberg scene is strongest, the
ballet well (if more efficiently than probingly) choreographed by Jasmin Vardimon. It might have been
raunchier – Wagner’s music here is, after all, the supreme musical manifestation
of desperately trying and failing to achieve sexual climax – but it works well
enough. Is a point being made about the unsatisfying nature of pornographic voyeurism? That was an assumption, given that our 'hero' only ever watches, but I am not entirely sure. In any case, the sense of the Royal Opera House being on stage is interesting in
this opera. In a work whose central event is a song contest, who is performing,
and why? Alas, nothing is really followed through, so that one cannot even
really tell whether such metatheatrical possibilities are intended. We end up
with little more than a mild compendium of clichés. One bizarre exception is
the appearance of cowbells – there is, frankly, little to see – when Tannhäuser
first returns to ‘normality’. Their lack of coordination would have been irritating
in Mahler, but here, in Tannhäuser?
If I had been Haenchen, or the house, I should have put a stop to it. This was
not some interesting musical recomposition; it was just a bit of a mess.
The war-torn (Balkan?) setting of the second act I presume to have taken its cue from the Landgrave’s ‘Wenn unser Schwert in blutig ernstern Kämpfen stritt für des deutschen Reiches Majestät’. It would be a stretch, however, to say that post-war deprivation was what Tannhäuser might really be ‘about’, at least without some further work on the director’s part. Albery seems content to let Michael Levine’s set designs do the work for him, which of course they cannot. The third act carries on in much the same way. Very much worth hearing for most of the singing, then, but a restricted view would not penalise you unduly.
The war-torn (Balkan?) setting of the second act I presume to have taken its cue from the Landgrave’s ‘Wenn unser Schwert in blutig ernstern Kämpfen stritt für des deutschen Reiches Majestät’. It would be a stretch, however, to say that post-war deprivation was what Tannhäuser might really be ‘about’, at least without some further work on the director’s part. Albery seems content to let Michael Levine’s set designs do the work for him, which of course they cannot. The third act carries on in much the same way. Very much worth hearing for most of the singing, then, but a restricted view would not penalise you unduly.