Reflections_Susannah - Page: 1 of 1

By Paul Joseph Walkowski
OperaOnline.uys

It may be one of the most performed operas in the American repertory, next to George Gershwin’s “Porgy and Bess,” but unlike “Porgy and Bess,” Carlisle Floyd’s folk opera, “Susannah,” just doesn't seem to get the respect it deserves.

When it was performed recently as part of a National Lyric Opera’s northeast tour, box office receipts were disappointing. The opera audience that usually awaits anything from Michael Capasso’s talented New York troupe just couldn’t get excited about this one. While the tour was a success, many who normally attend, took a pass.

Still, the overall numbers for “Susannah” are impressive: over 230 productions and 700 performances. But even with this solid record “Susannah” is still a rarity compared to the works of Puccini, Verdi, Rossini etc., and it makes you wonder why.

The music is likeable enough, to be sure, and in some parts, it’s foot-thumpingly so. Who can forget the energy Sam Ramey brought to the charismatic preacher Rev. Orlin Blitch, belting out “I am the Reverend Olin Blitch,” to an ostensible backwoods New Hope Valley Tennessee congregation. Wow!

This opera has pleasing arias and rousing choral arrangements and, at times, it soars. Yet, it is still a hard sell to opera audiences. Some just write it off because they don’t enjoy American opera’s, or operas sung in English. But even they might be persuaded to give it a try if there was a reason to put aside their own preferences for a couple hours.

“Susannah” suffers from something, or lack of something, to be more precise, and it isn’t language, because the elements are there for this thing to attract an even larger audience.

Here at OperaOnline.us, we not only reviewed the performance of “Susannah” in May of 2005 (Previous Reviews) but devoted a full Feature article to it (Archives) titled, “It just doesn’t get any better, in a Praise the Lord, Hallelujah, get down, jump and shout sort of way.”

Everyone, it seems, produces it at least once, and then you don’t see it around for years. This year, it appears to be hot on the West Coast, with the most recent production being from Opera Pacific. Yet, a glance back of our own “Previous Reviews” shows an endless parade of productions of “Carmen,” “Butterfly,” Barber,” “Marriage,” “L’Italiana,” “Rigoletto,” etc. Why not “Susannah”?

Maybe it’s not the music. Maybe it’s something else. Maybe it’s the lead character herself, and how she’s played. It’s worth considering.

And in 2007 director Sam Helfrich heated up the Cutler Majestic stage in Boston when he turned soprano Ann Burton loose in “Mahagonny”, wearing a low cut dress and fishnet stockings to sing the part of “Jenny” for Opera Boston audiences. Kurt Weill’s music wasn’t the draw, the show was the draw.

But “Susannah” has music that is far better than the previous two, far better, yet it still suffers from audience indifference.

When OperaOnline.us interviewed director Michael Capasso, a couple years ago, we questioned him about Susannah, the character. His answer was insightful and might just provide a hint of where the problem lies. He said he didn’t view Susannah as a sensual character at all, but rather as an innocent youth, a victim. And indeed, she was. But not sensual? What was it, then, about this young girl that attracted all the men and was the envy of every women of New Hope Valley, if not her raw sensuality? Yes, the Biblical Susannah may have been innocent (although there is some question about just how innocent she was) and she is certainly portrayed that way in classical paintings. But, Susannah from New Hope Valley? Does she have to played the same way? Are we losing something here in translation?

The above vision of the character as seen by Capasso is the vision of many, and may be the reason why this opera has failed to catch on. The fact is, “Susannah” screams innocence and huge doses of youthful, innocent sex appeal. The audience feels the sensuality but those who produce this opera seem to only want to play it straight.

“She’s a victim,” said Capasso, “She’s a victim of the community . . . and while the central controversy of the opera swirls around her being observed bathing nude in a pond, the pond is on her own property. There’s nothing sexual about her, nor is she aware of her sexuality. She’s very, very, childish. She is not in any way aware of the affect she has on men, in my opinion. I play her as a tremendous victim – almost a battered woman, battered by the community.”

Hmmm!! Could it be that that’s the problem? In reviewing Opera Pacific’s production of “Susannah” last month, Marc Swed, Los Angeles Times music critic, hinted delicately about the more sensual side of her character when he observed in passing that “Perhaps a sexy Susannah might have been nice . . . By not being especially provocative," he wrote, "Armstrong [the singer] made her character more a universal symbol of woman as victim.” Indeed! How many others in the audience felt the same way? I donlt know about you, but every time I hear Carmen sung, I have to see Carmen performed as well, and the singer who sings the part but doesn’t act the part, as well, doesn’t help matters any, and may actually hurt the overall production, and mor than one critic has faulted an overall performance because while the voice was fine, the characterization was not.

It’s not that the audience feels cheated when it doesn’t see sensuality, but rather it may feel somewhat let down because what they intuitively sense about the character, as Swed sensed above, is denied them by -- dare it be said – prudishness!

Directors need to see Susannah both as a young and innocent woman, but more importantly as sensual woman. On the day this occurs audiences will start talking about and viewing this opera entirely differently. It has the potential to be a sizzler; instead it's kind of limp and hesitant.

The key scene in this opera is when Susannah is seen bathing naked on her property. Okay, so we don’t need to see Reneé Fleming nude at the Met – well, maybe some of us would like that – but that scene is meant to be part of the show and done properly can raise temperatures and set a tone that can and should be maintained throughout. I suspect many would like to see Susannah played differently where the director plays up the sensuality, instead of playing it down. This may be what audiences expect but rarely see.

When Orlin Blitch sings to Susannah that he’s a lonely man, and wants her in the way a lustful man wants a woman, he’s yielding to the power of her sensuality, not her baby good looks. That’s what “Susannah” is missing; that’s what “Susannah” needs and that’s what will get “Susannah” the respect it deserves, as well as more bookings and larger audiences – of that we are certain.