Vanessa: Glyndebourne Live Screening

[Conchis]

That was the impression I got, mainly due to Oedipus being the book read from early on.

Didn't spot that; or, if I did, I forgot about it.

As to the future...I think Vanessa would be a bit long in the tooth to provide another Anatol to replay the situation with Erika.

[Dave2002]

Didn't spot that; or, if I did, I forgot about it.

As to the future...I think Vanessa would be a bit long in the tooth to provide another Anatol to replay the situation with Erika.

The Oedipus connection is possible, and one I thought about previously. Was there “evidence” in this production - if so I missed that? If the connection is that Vanessa was reading Oedipus that could still be the director’s interpretation, rather than that of the composer and librettist.

Re Vanessa providing yet another Anatol for Erika - yes - unlikely, and Erika’s own child was never born, so that is ruled out - assuming “logic” applies - which of course it doesn’t. Perhaps the work was intended to be enigmatic.

Another possibility is that Erika is actually Vanessa’s own child.

[Conchis]

of course it doesn’t. Perhaps the work was intended to be enigmatic.

The Oedipus connection is possible, and one I thought about previously. Was there “evidence” in this production - if so I missed that? If the connection is that Vanessa was reading Oedipus that could still be the director’s interpretation, rather than that of the composer and librettist.

Re Vanessa providing yet another Anatol for Erika - yes - unlikely, and Erika’s own child was never born, so that is ruled out - assuming “logic” applies - which
Another possibility is that Erika is actually Vanessa’s own child.

Yes, I like that idea, too.

I suppose the fact that we're debating this in a constructive, interested manner means that the production was a success and that Keith Warner's directorial touches were well-judged and stimulating. Would that the same could be said for his Covent Garden Ring which is getting an undeserved third airing this autumn.

[Pulcinella]

I think that we have to get the doctor drunk again, and then maybe he'll spill the beans and tell us all the sordid family secrets!

[Conchis]

I think that we have to get the doctor drunk again, and then maybe he'll spill the beans and tell us all the sordid family secrets!

The drunken doctor appeared to have been lifted bodily from Chekhov's Three Sisters.

[crb11]

The Oedipus connection is possible, and one I thought about previously. Was there “evidence” in this production - if so I missed that? If the connection is that Vanessa was reading Oedipus that could still be the director’s interpretation, rather than that of the composer and librettist.

It's in the libretto: reasonably early on, Vanessa asks Erika to read to her, and that's the book read from. (On stage, the book was being read from by the Baroness prior to this.) Vanessa then says that Erika's reading is not very heartfelt and "reads" the same passage far more passionately. One conceivable interpretation of this that comes to mind is that Vanessa is going to play the Oedipus role rather better than Erika - so she gets to marry her own son (Anatol II) but there is no parallel of this for Erika - she will be waiting forever. But the whole thing is sufficiently openended that this isn't going to be the only option.

[Dave2002]

It's in the libretto: reasonably early on, Vanessa asks Erika to read to her, and that's the book read from. (On stage, the book was being read from by the Baroness prior to this.) Vanessa then says that Erika's reading is not very heartfelt and "reads" the same passage far more passionately.

Indeed I remember the interaction now, but I didn't notice the book, nor the particular text. Is it only a hint of a connection, or is there more to it than that? I don't have access to the libretto or the score. Did Barber and/or Menotti make any attempts at an explanation of their work?

[Pulcinella]

I should have done more homework.

It is in the libretto (included in the Mitropoulos recording).

Erika:
Shall I read to you?
Vanessa:
Yes, Erika, read to me.
(Erika goes to get a book and they both sit by the fire. Outside the tower bell begins to ring at regular intervals.)
Erika:
Here it is:
(reading)
Oedipus: “Woe, woe is me,
Sorrowful that I am!
Where am I, where am I going?
Where am I cast away?”
(Vanessa gets up and snatches the book away from Erika.)
Vanessa:
You do not know how to read.
You have never known what love is!
(reading as she paces up and down the room)
“Woe, woe is me,
Sorrowful, sorrowful that I am!
Where am I?
Where am I going?
Where am I cast away?”
(throws book away)
Why does he not come?

[Constantbee]

It is in the libretto (included in the Mitropoulos recording).

The plot certainly thickens. Thanks for the quote, Pulci Even though it was sung in English it would still have helped to see the libretto, wouldn't it.

Here's a quote I found from Oedipus Rex, the play by Sophocles.

'And he will turn out to be the brother of the children in his house—their father, too, both at once, and the husband and the son of the very woman who gave birth to him.'

Teiresias (a blind prophet), Episode 1

Does that give us a clue? We can perhaps see why Vanessa would have reacted hysterically in the circumstances.

[Dave2002]

1. Does that give us a clue?
2. We can perhaps see why Vanessa would have reacted hysterically in the circumstances.

1a. It could be irrelevant - a book she and the others enjoyed reading.
1b. If it is relevant - is it relating to Vanessa or the Baroness? I'm assuming that Erika would not have been involved at that point.

2. If Anatol (2) is Vanessa's child as she is aware that he is different from Anatol (1), would she really want to go off and marry him,
apparently happily, given the interest in the Oedipus story? The relationship between Erika and Vanessa would seem to have become somewhat strained whatever the case. As for Anatol (2), he was portrayed as a bit of a ....

[Belgrove]

We saw this at Glyndebourne on Friday and were impressed. I know the work only from the Slatkin BBCSO recording, but seeing it in the theatre brings immediacy and the LPO, conducted by Leo McFall, delivered a performance of volcanic intensity - I did not expect the work to be this dramatic. The production is actually set within the frame of a mirror and contains many more reflecting and half-mirrors through which we see scenes from earlier times that mirror the present. The initial scene where Anatol 2 (?) is born precisely mirrors the later scene where Erika's miscarried child is borne away by attendants, a devastating image that the orchestra intensifies. The Old Baroness's rejection of Erika once she has appealed to her for solace is desolating. The Baroness herself is hardly the exemplar of moral certitude, for there is more than a hint that she had an elicit affair with the Doctor in times past. This is a very dysfunctional household with involuted relationships that recur, like an infinity of mirrors.

The opera really should be called 'Erika' for she is the emotional focus of the work - Vanessa is a rather selfish and unsympathetic character, albeit sung with intensity and amazing power by Emma Bell (her voice seems to have gained weight and nuance since last seen here as the Vixen).

The use of large scale video was especially effective. Before the interval, where the projections of Erika's hot-house fantasies juxtapose those where the other characters attend church ends with a chillingly effective and unexpected coup-de-theatre. And Erika's journey to the lake to attempt suicide is also cleverly portrayed.

There are enough intriguing ideas in Warner's intelligent and successful production to repay another visit, for this will surely be revived. He has clearly thought deeply about the spaces between the events that the opera depicts on the page and fills them with fascinating hints for the audience to develop for themselves. It does good service to a neglected work.

[Constantbee]

The Old Baroness's rejection of Erika once she has appealed to her for solace is desolating. The Baroness herself is hardly the exemplar of moral certitude, for there is more than a hint that she had an elicit affair with the Doctor in times past. This is a very dysfunctional household with involuted relationships that recur, like an infinity of mirrors.



The opera really should be called 'Erika' for she is the emotional focus of the work - Vanessa is a rather selfish and unsympathetic character .

There are enough intriguing ideas in Warner's intelligent and successful production to repay another visit, for this will surely be revived. He has clearly thought deeply about the spaces between the events that the opera depicts on the page and fills them with fascinating hints for the audience to develop for themselves. It does good service to a neglected work.

Watched this a second time before the expiry date. For some inexplicable reason I was able to get the libretto the second time watching on a tablet so that made it easier. Liked it even more and very much hoping this appears on DVD one day. Reached the conclusion that if the familial relationships were more obviously stated it wouldn't be worth watching. It's the fact that they're not and you're kept guessing that makes it so compelling. One for the psychoanalytically inclined critic maybe - opera and psychoanalysis is a lively field these days, I believe.

[Belgrove]

Glyndebourne are streaming this at 5pm on 14/6. A rather disturbing and thought provoking production.

https://www.glyndebourne.com/events/vanessa/