Royal Opera's Ring Cycles

[Mandryka]

I tend to agree with Mandryka on the blandness of the production.

Das Rheingold was the best of the cycle, but the many possibilities it presented failed to be converted into coherent themes that informed the later episodes. The most memorable complete performance in the entire cycle was Rosalind Plowright's commanding, elegant yet fragile and sexy Fricka, which shows that something was seriously amiss with the casting. I first saw Terfel in this run and was impressed, but he could not endure the test (Wagner has many similarities with participating in and attending a full Test Match!) Pappano's conducting did not attain that elasticity of time that is the essence of Wagner. I think he finally earned his Wagnerian spurs in last year's revival of Mastersinger's, so I hope that these cycles are not the humdrum renditions witnessed before - the world class ROH orchestra deserves better.

I'm probably alone on these boards in finding the infamous Jones' Ring the most exciting and coherent production I have witnessed. The Friedrich Ring with it's spinning cheeseboard was spectacular and at the cutting edge of what was achievable in the theatre at that that time - but it was thematically vacuous, and Colin Davies was not a natural Wagnerian then. The Warner Ring used extensively the (then) state of the art video projection, maybe too soon for it is rather rudimentary (black and white) and has been thoroughly eclipsed by the full colour developments used in the Met's Ring - another stupendous theatrical spectacle, but with little intellectual substance.

The Jones Ring was 'cheap' but faithful to the text, it had brains rather than monumental sets and, sadly, provided images which were prescient of the following decade. At times it was visually ugly and appallingly violent, but that is the world depicted in The Ring. As others have mentioned, it's cast was the finest that could be assembled and Haitink was in the pit. Plenty of elasticity there!

I declined to attend the present cycle but will listen eagerly to R3 broadcasts commencing on October 16 (and to be repeated over the Xmas break, an act a day, no turkey's please).

More and more, I wish I'd seen the Jones Ring. Having seen most of his subsequent productions, I think he always has a coherent vision for whatever piece he's presenting and he works WITH the score rather than against its spirit.

[David-G]

The Friedrich Ring with it's spinning cheeseboard was spectacular and at the cutting edge of what was achievable in the theatre at that that time - but it was thematically vacuous, and Colin Davies was not a natural Wagnerian then.

Could you explain what you mean by "thematically vacuous"?

The Jones Ring was 'cheap' but faithful to the text, it had brains rather than monumental sets and, sadly, provided images which were prescient of the following decade. At times it was visually ugly and appallingly violent, but that is the world depicted in The Ring. As others have mentioned, it's cast was the finest that could be assembled and Haitink was in the pit. Plenty of elasticity there!

The images may have been prescient of the following decade, but - for me - they destroyed the music.

[Belgrove]

Could you explain what you mean by "thematically vacuous"?

Other than it being some Barbarella-esque sci-fi fantasy (gold-lame jump suits for the gods, ray guns for the giants, Fafner within an armoured vehicle in a be-ribboned forest) it was a concept comprising incidental episodes, subservient to the spinning and bucking platform on which the action was played out. Spectacular, memorable (early examples of laser produced imagery featured large) and making a huge impact at the time, but it failed to address or engage with the universal themes that The Ring contains.

The Jones Ring did attempt to address some of those themes, picking up particularly on Nature - equating this with the strong female characters that populate the work. It provoked, a dangerous thing.

It was not my intention to high-jack this thread into being a discussion on the merits of Ring's past, since it is foremost a discussion of the present production at the ROH, and I am keen to hear what fellow members attending performances think of it. From reading reviews, it would appear that some changes to the production have been made, and I am eager to learn if these have been successful.

Perhaps a comparative analysis of favourite/memorable Ring's will be a good subject for a thread once we have all had the opportunity to either experience or hear the complete cycle.

[kernelbogey]

[...] It was not my intention to high-jack this thread into being a discussion on the merits of Ring's past, since it is foremost a discussion of the present production at the ROH, and I am keen to hear what fellow members attending performances think of it....

Fair enough - but I think it's difficult, given the nature of the Gesamtkunstwerk, not to make such comparisons - they'll be there, whether or not we articulate them.

The Jones Ring did attempt to address some of those themes, picking up particularly on Nature - equating this with the strong female characters that populate the work. It provoked, a dangerous thing.

I'm either unaware of which 'the Jones' production is, or having another senior moment... enlightenment, please!

[kernelbogey]

I'm either unaware of which 'the Jones' production is, or having another senior moment... enlightenment, please!

Hoijotoho!

[Richard Tarleton]

I'm either unaware of which 'the Jones' production is, or having another senior moment... enlightenment, please!

Kernelbogey, the “Jones” production was the Richard Jones cycle in the 1990s. I saw the separate operas as they appeared, and then the final performance of the cycle. It coincided with that disastrous run of fly-on-the-wall documentaries about the ROH. The moment in that which sticks in my mind is Haitink’s lack of enthusiasm, not to say despair, as the set concepts were being explained to him in front of a model. I think he found Fricka’s car (a beat-up pink Ford Capri if memory serves) particularly hard to stomach.

Belgrove, after 15 years my memories of the Richard Jones production are fading. Nature is by way of being my profession, and I’m deeply and widely read on the subject – but it would never have occurred to me, then or now, that nature was a theme in any way of the Jones production. I do remember there were two woodbirds – one a dancer, played by Dee Dee Wells, late of Pan’s People), and an enormous bluebottle in, I think, Gotterdammerung, which had disappeared by the time of the full cycle. The trees in the forest were pink IIRR.

Strong women – well, that’s in the text and the music, and I remember superb performances from Anne Evans and Deborah Polaski. In the final performance of GD, Anne Evans, who had been plagued with ill health during the run, sang the immolation scene alone on stage standing on the prompt box, in front of the wall of cardboard boxes. A maidservant had previously brought on a cardboard cut-out of Grane and propped it against the boxes.

Perhaps I’m just not bright enough to pick up these subliminal themes. What came across was a succession of disparate ideas which collectively diminished or ridiculed Wagner’s conception. The line of blue dancers during the prelude (reduced to one dancer for the cycles) – well, OK (they were booed the first time I saw them). Alberich’s giant hand – amusing. The pneumatic Rhinemaidens – Jeremy Isaacs had to come on stage to apologise for a delay at the start because one of them was having trouble with her costume. (I liked the naked Rhinemaidens in the current production - I do hope they’re still naked ). Siegfried cooked Nothung in a fish kettle. In the last act of Siegfried the gods emerged from a cardboard box and groped their way across the stage – looking for Valhalla apparently. At every turn I was left wondering – why?

Great cast, superb performances – I just felt sorry for Bernard Haitink.

[aeolium]

The moment in that which sticks in my mind is Haitink’s lack of enthusiasm, not to say despair, as the set concepts were being explained to him in front of a model.

I think there was a similar or even stronger reaction in Charles Mackerras to Ruth Berghaus' set for WNO's Don Giovanni in the 1980s - his mouth was said to have dropped open in horror as he saw the clutter in front of him.

What I often think when seeing 'concept' productions is that the director has imprisoned the imagination of the audience by providing only one perspective on the work. If instead the approach were taken to get closer to how the composer/librettist imagined the staging using that as a start point, then it might be easier for audiences to pick up the resonances for later periods, rather than have the imagining done for them.

[underthecountertenor]

Now that Richard Jones is no longer the enfant terrible, but one of the go-to guys (the other being McVicar) for 'bankers' at the ROH and elsewhere, I would be interested to see a new Ring from him. I doubt I ever will, though.

[Flosshilde]

It was announced on Music Matters this afternoon that the cycle of the week beginning 15th October will be broadcast live on Radio 3.

[Flay]

It was announced on Music Matters this afternoon that the cycle of the week beginning 15th October will be broadcast live on Radio 3.

Something to look forward to!

[amateur51]

Something to look forward to!

Yay Flay indeed!

[Roehre]

.....
What I often think when seeing 'concept' productions is that the director has imprisoned the imagination of the audience by providing only one perspective on the work. If instead the approach were taken to get closer to how the composer/librettist imagined the staging using that as a start point, then it might be easier for audiences to pick up the resonances for later periods, rather than have the imagining done for them.

Could someone convincingly explain to me why a director should/must interpret an opera out of its contemporary context? Wagner died in 1883, thus any, and I really mean ANY, pointer at anything happening after 1883 is a superfluous interpretation, a hineininterpretieren as the Germans say, of things/pictures/stages which impossibly could have be imagined by the composer, Wagner in this case.

As I don't want to have my evening been spoilt and my enjoyment of the music destroyed by the IMO really crazy, unmusical and just unnessary staging, I won't pay a penny for such a production.
I am always rather surprised that conductors like Haitink or Mackerras simply seem to accept the crazy ideas of the directors.
What if they decided to take a mickey out of the score and use a rock band or electronics to perform the music then?
What's the difference?
I am happy to listen to R3, and leave the stage to my own, more contemporary interpretation/fantasy in accordance with the stage directions of the score.
I simply don't want cars, toiletpots, pink trees, nazi uniforms or cardboard stage in a nineteenth century opera.
If a composer has instructed such a thing in the score, than I am very happy to oblige.
If not: it is artistic murder.

[Richard Tarleton]

Could someone convincingly explain to me why a director should/must interpret an opera out of its contemporary context? Wagner died in 1883, thus any, and I really mean ANY, pointer at anything happening after 1883 is a superfluous interpretation, a hineininterpretieren as the Germans say, of things/pictures/stages which impossibly could have be imagined by the composer, Wagner in this case.

Roehre I don't know why they should or must, and like you I don't like it - but as to why they do it (different question) it does seem to have started with Wieland Wagner...I wasn't familiar with the term Regietheater until just now, and don't know German so don't know exactly what it means.

As to why Wieland did it (another question again) I understand he was trying to reinvent and de-Nazify Bayreuth after WW2. Unfortunately the idea seems to have caught on and spread to opera production generally

[Flosshilde]

Could someone convincingly explain to me why a director should/must interpret an opera out of its contemporary context? Wagner died in 1883, thus any, and I really mean ANY, pointer at anything happening after 1883 is a superfluous interpretation, a hineininterpretieren as the Germans say, of things/pictures/stages which impossibly could have be imagined by the composer, Wagner in this case.

But that would mean that operas would be simply historical curiosities, with the singing being the only possible reason for bothering about them, whereas the emotions and psychological insights are relevant to any age - ours included, so that it is quite reasonable to set an opera in the present time. This is especially the case for Wagner's operas, & the Ring foremost in that. Wagner of course interpreted myth & early history according to his mid 19th century ideas, & he had far too rich an imagination to say that his works should only be restricted to that period.

[Roehre]

But that would mean that operas would be simply historical curiosities, with the singing being the only possible reason for bothering about them, whereas the emotions and psychological insights are relevant to any age -

-which applies to all music, and therefore we for the same money can straight away abolish all HIP performed music.
It also applies to songs and other vocal works, of which the texts are in need to be interpreted for 21st c public. We don't change a jot of these.

so that it is quite reasonable to set an opera in the present time. This is especially the case for Wagner's operas, & the Ring foremost in that. Wagner of course interpreted myth & early history according to his mid 19th century ideas, & he had far too rich an imagination to say that his works should only be restricted to that period.

I don't say it shouldn't be set in our time. I do like the 1960s Wieland Wagner stagings of the Wagner operas. Very stylized. Very tasteful. I like the Chereau from 1976. I still prefer the old fashioned ones like those in the Met, but these productions in Bayreuth wouldn't stop me enjoying the music and the Gesamtkunstwerk.
I very much love Richard III set in the 20th Century e.g. (o.k. that's Shakespeare, but nevertheless). But a wall of fire is a wall of fire, not a heap or wall of boxes. Trees are green, and a horse is not a pink cadillac.