Images copyright: Iko Freese / drama-berlin.de |
Eugene Onegin – Günter
Papendell
Tatiana – Natalya Pavlova
Olga – Karolina Gumos
Lensky – Aleš Briscein
Mme Larina – Stefanie Schaefer
Prince Gremin – Tijl Faveyts
Filipievna – Margarita Nekrasova
Zareski – Changdai Park
M. Triquet – Alexander Fedorov
Zaretsky – Changdai Park
Captain – Carsten Lau
Guillot – Yuhei Sato
Barrie Kosky (director)
Rebecca Ringst (set designs)
Rebecca Ringst (set designs)
Klaus Bruns (costumes)
Simon Berger (dramaturgy)
Franck Evin (lighting)
Simon Berger (dramaturgy)
Franck Evin (lighting)
Orchestra and Chorus (chorus director: David Cavelius) of the Komische Oper
Ainārs Rubikis (conductor)
What’s in a name? Should
Tchaikovsky’s opera – which, as Barrie Kosky states in the programme booklet,
should be considered alongside Pushkin, not as its musical translation – really
be called Eugene Onegin at all? Or
would Tatiana Larina be the more
fitting title? Eugene and Tatiana,
perhaps? It is a silly question,
really; for one thing, no one is going to rename the work, although someone, I
suppose, might write another. But names aside, there will probably always be
something of a tension between the centrality ascribed by a production to the
opera’s two principal characters; and also something, moreover, of a tension between
Tatiana and Onegin on one hand and Lensky, if more rarely Olga, on the other.
It is difficult to imagine a successful or indeed pretty much any unsuccessful
production that did not involve such tensions, although Achim Freyer, in his bizarre staging for the Staatsoper Unter den Berlin, a few
hundred metres away, may be said to have accomplished that in his very typical
way.
Kosky’s 2016 staging for Berlin’s
Komische Oper, in co-production with Zurich, offers an intriguing, convincing
blend of the broadly yet never lazily conventional; the slightly symbolic; and
the point of detail, even the incidental, made more than that. The latter
first: as the opera opens, Mme Larina and the nurse, Filipievna are making jam.
I am not sure that I even recalled that point of detail, though I am sure that
I will now. The jam jar, however, returns at a crucial point – in Kosky’s
staging, that is – as container for Tatiana’s letter to Onegin. Her nurse,
affecting not to understand for whom it is intended, keeps dropping it, casting
it aside, until she relents and sets that train of events in motion. ‘So what?’
you may ask. So nothing, perhaps; but I think not. For the jar and its contents
take us back to the opening, an apparently carefree summer afternoon, save of
course for beneath the surface. Things have changed – and have stayed the same;
such tends to be the way with life. And the chorus of local girls, more than
usually an emanation of Tatiana’s unconscious – replication and contrast in Klaus Bruns’s costumes lightly
make the point – has all along been framing, voicing,
goading.
So too will the chorus, male
and female, later on, as part of a more general pattern of contrasts and
connections between public and private, indoor and outdoor, country and town;
and the criss-crossing connections between those pairs of opposites. The
fundamental setting, common to all scenes, is that of the meadow on which it
all began: designer Rebecca Ringst’s simple, adaptable focus for development
and memory. Franck Evin’s lighting works wonders in its partial transformations,
highlighting (false or alienating?) community and Romantic loneliness, whilst
never having us lose sight of where we are. So too, of course, do Kosky’s
blocking and, more broadly, his story-telling. It does no harm for the ball to
take place with torches outside for once; its stifling, tragic qualities are
not lost. Only in the first St Petersburg scene is there an additional set design,
but even then, the facade of Prince Gremin’s palace can, like all facades, readily
be dismantled, so that we can turn to the inversion of our central pair’s
fortunes and their resolution.
Like many directors, Kosky
ignores the opera’s strong, at times overwhelming, homosexual subtexts: the ‘Romantic
friendship’ between Onegin and Lensky and, of course, the figure of Tatiana
herself as alter ego for Tchaikovsky,
his fantasy of how a woman might feel and act. That, however, is simply not the
concern of this particular production. For, in the programme booklet, Kosky
expresses a preference for operas with ‘very simple stories and incredibly
multifaceted themes and emotions – precisely as in Greek theatre,’ and also
criticises composers who, over the past fifty years, have, allegedly, ‘simply
set literature to music’. I am not quite so sure that it is as simple as that,
nor that the comparison with ancient Greece is objectively meaningful in this
case, as it certainly would be to Wagner; however, if it is to him, all the
better. There is unquestionably a directness to Kosky’s telling of the story
here, far from opposed to interpretation, but rather open to it, which works
very well: as, say, in his Rusalka
and his Pelléas,
or indeed, harking back to Attic tragedy, in his Iphigénie en Tauride, all for the
Komische Oper, yet sadly lacking in his Bayreuth
Meistersinger. Whose opera is
this anyway? Here, it conventionally, yet never stereotypically, moves from
being Tatiana’s to Onegin’s; the latter character emerges in the reflection,
the memories of the latter’s acts and emotions. That trajectory is delineated
with a power only rarely achieved, at least in my experience.
The chorus sang and acted well
too, its stage direction always a Kosky strength. My sole, relative
disappointment lay in aspects of Ainārs Rubikis’s conducting of the orchestra.
At its best, especially in the middle scenes, there was a telling striving
towards symphonism. Elsewhere, however, much was oddly hard-driven. There were striking
disjunctures, moreover, between orchestra and chorus in the first scene. This
was not, then, an Onegin to think of in
the way of Semyon Bychkov’s (probably the best conducted I have heard in the theatre) or Daniel Barenboim’s (for Freyer, as mentioned above). This was Kosky’s Onegin rather than the conductor’s, yet it
belonged as much to the singers and of course to their characters. That, I
think, was a good part of its point: a point served well.