Chabrier L'Etoile ROH

[makropulos]

I love this and will shamelessly use, if I may.

I love it too - well said LHC!

[makropulos]

There's an enjoyable 10-minute introduction by Mark Elder and two members of the cast (King Ouf and Laouli) from a recent Insights evening up on the ROH website. Certainly worth a watch.

http://www.roh.org.uk/news/watch-mark-elder-explores-the-music-of-letoile-its-quite-extraordinary

[David-G]

I went to the Insights evening. It was completely marvellous - as is to be expected with Sir Mark. This was one of the reasons I have enjoyed L'Etoile so much.

There is a comment on the Insights link page: "Ooh. Wish I'd seen this before watching the opening night. On the tube home a complete stranger carrying a L'Etoile programme said that in all the years he had been going to the ROH, that was the most beautiful opera he had ever seen."

[Rolmill]

Rolmill: you could try Barrafino on the corner of Drury Lane and Broad Court. Very good tapas, very efficiently served.

Thanks for this suggestion utc, also to David-G and Nevilevelis for theirs - I chose the opera, so my wife can choose the food.

I too am intrigued by the marked discrepancy between the reactions expressed on this thread and those of other reviews (not just 'official' reviews, but as has been pointed out, many of those posted on the ROH website). Perhaps it is because critics and cognoscenti are looking for (and therefore concentrating on) particular aspects, from which they conclude an overall rating; whereas ignorami (like me) simply ask themselves first whether they enjoyed it and then (might) consider why or why not. Is this a plausible theory?

On second thoughts, I realise that some of the positive opinions upthread come from professional musicians or critics, so I'm probably talking drivel (again). As you were.

Still really looking forward to it, though, and intend to look at the Insight introduction helpfully linked above.

[David-G]

I too am intrigued by the marked discrepancy between the reactions expressed on this thread and those of other reviews (not just 'official' reviews, but as has been pointed out, many of those posted on the ROH website). Perhaps it is because critics and cognoscenti are looking for (and therefore concentrating on) particular aspects, from which they conclude an overall rating; whereas ignorami (like me) simply ask themselves first whether they enjoyed it and then (might) consider why or why not. Is this a plausible theory?

On second thoughts, I realise that some of the positive opinions upthread come from professional musicians or critics, so I'm probably talking drivel (again). As you were.

Still really looking forward to it, though, and intend to look at the Insight introduction helpfully linked above.

I was enthused by Sir Mark and the two singers at the Insights evening. Thus enthused, I went on the first night confident of enjoying the show; and in this positive frame of mind, and relishing the music and the performances, I was not minded to let my mind linger on certain doubts about the production. The same will be the case tonight. Definitely no Regiemask!

[Prommer]

I was at the General, and enjoyed it. Good, witty production, well played and sung, though the ROH is too big for it. Critics unduly negative, I thought.

[ardcarp]

Perhaps it is because critics and cognoscenti are looking for (and therefore concentrating on) particular aspects, from which they conclude an overall rating

I have not alas seen L'Etoile. But your view about critics, Rolmill, rings very true. One might also add that, maybe in the bar during the interval, the 'particular aspects' may be informally discussed, a consensus may emerge, and no single critic would want to go against the flow in his/her piece next day. Does one often find a crit that is completely at odds with all the others? I think we have a music critic as one of our members. Maybe he would wish to comment?

Warning. Irrelevant ardcarp reminiscence coming up. I remember taking one of my daughters (this was 30 odd years ago) to the premiere of a play in London called something like, "The Secret Life of Cartoons". I can't even remember which theatre it was at or who wrote it, but we and the entire audience rolled about with (appreciative) laughter. Next day it was completely slammed by the critics and it had a very short run. (Incidentally, I have often wondered if it was the inspiration for 'Who framed Roger Rabbit'.)

[Nevilevelis]

I have not alas seen L'Etoile. But your view about critics, Rolmill, rings very true. One might also add that, maybe in the bar during the interval, the 'particular aspects' may be informally discussed, a consensus may emerge, and no single critic would want to go against the flow in his/her piece next day. Does one often find a crit that is completely at odds with all the others?

The London critics definitely hunt in packs (obviously) but also sing the same tune in these respects. Fiona Maddocks often seems to swim against the tide and doesn't indulge in that rather wearied, disappointed and/or patronising tone that some others do.

I remember taking one of my daughters (this was 30 odd years ago) to the premiere of a play in London called something like, "The Secret Life of Cartoons". I can't even remember which theatre it was at or who wrote it, but we and the entire audience rolled about with (appreciative) laughter. Next day it was completely slammed by the critics and it had a very short run. (Incidentally, I have often wondered if it was the inspiration for 'Who framed Roger Rabbit'.)

In my experience there is often a spike in appreciation or the reverse (attendance and applause) when main paper critics have published their views. On the other hand, many punters read the comments on twitter, and by and large for this production they are quite enthusiastic.

NVV

[Nevilevelis]

Thanks for this suggestion utc, also to David-G and Nevilevelis for theirs - I chose the opera, so my wife can choose the food.

I too am intrigued by the marked discrepancy between the reactions expressed on this thread and those of other reviews (not just 'official' reviews, but as has been pointed out, many of those posted on the ROH website). Perhaps it is because critics and cognoscenti are looking for (and therefore concentrating on) particular aspects, from which they conclude an overall rating; whereas ignorami (like me) simply ask themselves first whether they enjoyed it and then (might) consider why or why not. Is this a plausible theory?

On second thoughts, I realise that some of the positive opinions upthread come from professional musicians or critics, so I'm probably talking drivel (again). As you were.

Still really looking forward to it, though, and intend to look at the Insight introduction helpfully linked above.

I wish you wouldn't refer to yourself like that. Your comments and opinions are just as valid as anyone's, the critics included and you PAID for your ticket too!

NVV

[Rolmill]

I wish you wouldn't refer to yourself like that. Your comments and opinions are just as valid as anyone's, the critics included and you PAID for your ticket too!

Actually I didn't, I used theatre tokens given to me as a present - but someone paid, so your point stands!

And yes, I suppose "ignorami" was a little over the top (I've clearly taken to heart my daughters' views on my knowledge of modern culture...) - maybe "amateurs" would have been better. Or how about "dilettante" (I've always wanted to be one of those )?

[Nevilevelis]

Actually I didn't, I used theatre tokens given to me as a present - but someone paid, so your point stands!

And yes, I suppose "ignorami" was a little over the top (I've clearly taken to heart my daughters' views on my knowledge of modern culture...) - maybe "amateurs" would have been better. Or how about "dilettante" (I've always wanted to be one of those )?

There is quite a lot of dilettantism around! Amateur in the best sense, a lover, is certainly preferable. It's so often used derisively - reclaim its older meaning!

[Il Grande Inquisitor]

I have not alas seen L'Etoile. But your view about critics, Rolmill, rings very true. One might also add that, maybe in the bar during the interval, the 'particular aspects' may be informally discussed, a consensus may emerge, and no single critic would want to go against the flow in his/her piece next day. Does one often find a crit that is completely at odds with all the others? I think we have a music critic as one of our members. Maybe he would wish to comment?

Although I may occasionally meet up with a fellow critic during the interval, it's very rare for us to discuss the performance in progress, mainly because it's just that - in progress. We usually spend more time discussing what else we've been to or what's coming up. And I can categorically state that Rupert C would never engage in such discussions. He never attends 'press drinks' (for those companies that provide them) and is very much 'on duty' and is not one for chat or banter.

The London critics definitely hunt in packs (obviously) but also sing the same tune in these respects.

Why 'obviously'? It's rare that we're all agreed about a production/performance (thank goodness), although when the ROH has to sit The Londonist (4*) at the top of the reviews list for L'Étoile, you know there's something up!

I didn't review L'Étoile, but I was there on opening night where it fell very flat indeed. The musical performances lacked fizz and the production disappointed. Those suggesting that it needs a smaller house than the ROH are spot on, in my opinion. Indeed, Elder himself has conceded that it would work better at Glyndebourne...

[Nevilevelis]

Why 'obviously'? It's rare that we're all agreed about a production/performance (thank goodness), although when the ROH has to sit The Londonist (4*) at the top of the reviews list for L'Étoile, you know there's something up!

Oh, OK, now duly corrected, I shall look into that. Do you publish in print as well as online?

[Frances_iom]

Just returned from tonight's production - enjoyed it - as many have said the story is somewhat silly and staged somewhat a la Monty Python with some slightly risque bits + a dig at the then newly introduced department stores, but over all very enjoyablewith excellent voices + conducting - could imagine it being done, somewhat camped up, at the Buxton festival.

[David-G]

I didn't review L'Étoile, but I was there on opening night where it fell very flat indeed. The musical performances lacked fizz and the production disappointed. Those suggesting that it needs a smaller house than the ROH are spot on, in my opinion. Indeed, Elder himself has conceded that it would work better at Glyndebourne...

I was there on the opening night, and again tonight. I simply don't understand how you can say that the musical performances lacked "fizz". I also would not agree that it fell very flat indeed on the first night. I won't defend all aspects of the production, but the whole thing was extremely enjoyable. It was clear that the audience as a whole enjoyed it.