CommentAug06 - Page: 1 of 1

It’s a topic we see cropping up more and more whenever the subject of opera is discussed: What is the future of opera in the 21st-century? Last month, "Opera News" raised the issue in a feature commentary by Philip Kennicott, offering what we think was a peculiar remedy: be more angry! "Opera Now’s" editor Ashutosh Khandekar weighs in on the subject regularly, arguing usually for greater state subsidy and innovation.

It’s a subject that has occupied its share of space on these pages too.

Not to beat the proverbial dead horse, but we want to touch on the subject here once again because there is a growing rift between traditionalists and the hauteur -- a rift that is not over the question of whether there needs to be some change, but rather a digression over what direction and how much change will attract and grow a new audience beyond its eight percent of the theater going public.

As we see it, there are three issues that need to be addressed: first, there is the debate over what subject matter is most suitable and likely to hold the existing audience and then interest a new and younger audiences. As it stands right now, the inside track is held by those who want to champion current issues (as opposed to personal stories) with a decidedly “liberal” operatic slant. The danger here is that the message may so overwhelm the medium, that whatever is produced won’t be palatable to the majority of the middle-of-the-road public which may see a new production once and forget about it afterward if it disagrees with the message. Need we be specific? We write this, knowing full well that the history of opera is the history of composers and librettists using the medium to communicate messages. But that was then and this is now. Using the medium of opera to send "political messages" is not wise. Today’s public is inundated with “messages” and “agendas” from newspapers, magazines, the Internet, radio, movies and television – mediums of expression not even dreamt of in the 16th-century. Do we really need to be hit over the head with it in opera, when human dynamics and relationships are so much more interesting a subject?

Second is the question of the manner in which new opera is presented. Some prefer the European trend of in-your-face offensive and downright abstract productions. Others prefer an approach that is more conventional (modern) and less irritating to the senses. It was encouraging to see the comments of San Francisco’s David Gockley, Seattle’s Speight Jenkins and Columbia Artists Management’s Matthew Epstein in a recent edition of "Opera News" – all of whom seemed to have a pretty good handle on casting sensible productions and avoiding the obtuse. We share that view.

The third debate evolves around the issue of music. Many critics, composers and conductors prefer music that pushes the outer edges of melody. In this category, while the scores may be challenging to singers, they are often confusing to audiences and, in many cases, have no melody or thematic consonance to them at all. Here, the major houses with the money to commission new operas need to seriously think about what is and isn’t going to be put before an opera audience. The co-commissioning of “Grendel” by Los Angeles Opera and the Lincoln Center Festival was underwritten by some pretty big Foundations. While the production value of “Grendel” was rated highly, and audiences are curious enough to attend once, the music was pretty much panned, leading us to wonder whether “Grendel” as big and as glittery as it may be, will ultimately be deemed a fringe production too – and a waste of Foundation money. Opera, to survive, like any other entertainment medium needs “legs.” Those who produce opera need to understand this. And legs in this business means enjoyable music that the public will want to hear again and agan.

Simply put, when the discussion of performing, changing, updating or creating new opera is considered these three areas need to be considered and factored into the final equation. Opera is far too complex to believe that simply hiring a new and innovative director, commissioning a new and challenging score, or hiring high priced-star talent is going to provide the magic formula that will guarantee a successful future for the art form, for all that glitters in opera is not always gold. Indeed, as Epstein pointed out, the smart trend for companies may be to integrate everything together and focus less on big star power and more on solid productions. In his "Opera News" interview, he said it this way: “The future lies in ensemble-oriented productions – well-directed, well-designed and well-conducted productions of interesting repertory, fully rehearsed and cast with the finest singers available.”

We agree. Many new commissions after they are performed languish and die slow deaths because the audience’s interests were not paramount in the minds of those who commissioned or staged the shows. This is what happens when the “method” and “egos” of those producing opera outweigh the substance of what is being offered to the audience.

We here at OperaOnline.us will continue to speak out on the issue. We hope our voice is helpful to those who will ultimately make the decisions about what is offered on stage. We believe that the voice we offer is the voice of the vast majority of the opera audience.