Any sub-standard works in Britten's operatic output?

[Chris Newman]

"Sub-Standard"? Hmm; whose "standard"? It seems from the above comments that everybody has a different idea what the Britten "standard" is, and we're all just suggesting that the ones we don't like fall below that. Britten was a great composer - his standard is one that many other composers could only achieve in their dreams. The operas we don't like and the ones we adore just tell us something about our own standards - although it's interesting that everybody loves Peter! (Me, too!)

My own favourites? Grimes Rape (because of the MfP LP of extracts with Nancy Evans and Goodall bought for 5p off a market stall in 1975) Screw, Curlew, Death in Venice. There isn't one that I dislike all the way through, but I share the suspicion raised by others that comedy wasn't really his strong point.

Best Wishes.

True. There is no great division here: a few differences of taste about the VERY best and the LESS so.

I agree about the strengths of Goodall Rape of Lucretia. I have always found it more terrifying than other recordings.

[Mandryka]

I find Gloriana in NO WAY inferior to the other operas. In fact, I'd like to see it performed more often - the ROH could definitely do with revisiting it. When you consider the pressure BB was under to come up with an 'event opera' without compromising his standards, his achievement seems all the more impressive: of course, its first night audience of stuffed shirts were never going to like it, but what about posterity?

[EdgeleyRob]

Any sub-standard works in Britten's operatic output? I've no idea as I am not a musician, not a music critic and have had no formal musical training.What I do know is that I like them all!

[hackneyvi]

Personally, I don't like Albert Herring, because I don't think Britten had much sense of comedy, the success of Paul Bunyan notwithstanding.

I think the Act 1 Peter Grimes scenes in the pub have some fine comedy in the music for Balstrode, the landlady ("Young man ...!") and her nieces ("I wouldn't mind if it didn't/I wouldn't mind if it didn't howl/if it didn't howl"). My memory of Albert Herring is that it was rather throttled by Peter Pears' strangulating tendencies.

I can't think of Pears' Peter Grimes without a Karloff-like monster man coming to mind. Too choked a voice for comedy.

[VodkaDilc]

"Sub-Standard"? Hmm; whose "standard"? It seems from the above comments that everybody has a different idea what the Britten "standard" is, and we're all just suggesting that the ones we don't like fall below that. Britten was a great composer - his standard is one that many other composers could only achieve in their dreams. The operas we don't like and the ones we adore just tell us something about our own standards - although it's interesting that everybody loves Peter! (Me, too!).

As the person who asked the original question, I should admit that 'sub-standard' was not a well-chosen expression, though I think most people have got my idea of 'somehow falling below the supreme standard he set himself in his greatest operas'.

I began by identifying a surprisingly dull aspect of MND (to my mind). I can't think of any other Britten operas with extended passages producing this reaction for me.

Some other points of interest have been brought up:

Britten's comparatively small number of comic scenes; Albert Herring certainly has amusing aspects, largely in its characterisation, rather than plot - and Grimes, Venice and several others have amusing moments. Is the comparative rarity of comic elements a reflection of Britten's personality?

A possible falling-off of inspiration after War Requiem was identified (not by me!). If this is the case, how sad that this began to happen at the age of 50; and the final great achievement of Death in Venice, in which he tackled the implications of age and illness (I paraphrase a previous writer), was written by the composer in his late 50s. What might he have achieved if he had had the lifespan of a Verdi! Presumably it's a complete coincidence that this possible decline after War Requiem came at the same time as his change of publisher from B&H to Faber.

[Norfolk Born]

I've never listened to a CD of a Britten opera - but I have most of them on DVD, and MND is among my favourites. Surely an opera has to be watched, as well as heard, if one wishes fully to appreciate its strengths and weaknesses? For example, why try to picture Grimes bursting into the inn at the height of the storm, and the reaction of locals, when you can watch it?

[VodkaDilc]

I've never listened to a CD of a Britten opera - but I have most of them on DVD, and MND is among my favourites. Surely an opera has to be watched, as well as heard, if one wishes fully to appreciate its strengths and weaknesses? For example, why try to picture Grimes bursting into the inn at the height of the storm, and the reaction of locals, when you can watch it?

Listening to a CD allows me to enjoy the production in my head, rather than the one imposed by a director. It's going back to the old quote about radio being superior to television because the pictures are better.

My guess is that Norfolk Born is from a younger generation than this sexagenarian, brought up on the LP! Yes, ideally an opera does need to be watched - but ideally in an opera house.

[Nick Armstrong]

I've never listened to a CD of a Britten opera - but I have most of them on DVD, and MND is among my favourites. Surely an opera has to be watched, as well as heard, if one wishes fully to appreciate its strengths and weaknesses? For example, why try to picture Grimes bursting into the inn at the height of the storm, and the reaction of locals, when you can watch it?

I find opera on DVD virtually unwatchable, most of the time... And indeed, Norfy, even in the opera house, many's the opera I've wished I was just listening to rather than watching: hammy acting, daft productions...(on DVD they are merely closer up, more distracting )... So I often have my eyes closed anyway.

OK sometimes, just sometimes, it works - and then it can be the most overwhelming thing. But the strike rate is so low in my experience, that I cut my losses and tend to stick to 'the pictures in my head' as Vodka says...

That coupled with the remarkable number of singers who to my ears should never be allowed in front of a paying public (the wobbles, the braying... )...

[VodkaDilc]

One problem I find in the opera house these days is the irritating surtitles. It's so easy to spend all the time focussing on them and missing the subtleties of the work. When booking online, I instinctively go towards the seats marked 'surtitles not visible'. (And I don't claim to understand the languages in many cases - or to hear all the words in productions sung in English. I just make sure I know the opera fairly well before going to the theatre.)

[Mary Chambers]

I find Gloriana in NO WAY inferior to the other operas. In fact, I'd like to see it performed more often - the ROH could definitely do with revisiting it. When you consider the pressure BB was under to come up with an 'event opera' without compromising his standards, his achievement seems all the more impressive: of course, its first night audience of stuffed shirts were never going to like it, but what about posterity?

I believe there's going to be a production in the ROH in 2013, which is handily both Britten's centenary year and the 60th anniversary of the Coronation. Let's hope they manage to find a sane director who actually listens to the text and the music.

[Norfolk Born]

My guess is that Norfolk Born is from a younger generation than this sexagenarian, brought up on the LP! Yes, ideally an opera does need to be watched - but ideally in an opera house.

As it happens, I'm well on the way to septuagenarianhood, having been born towards the end of WWII. Lacking any musical training, I find that I can't really appreciate opera at all if I can't see what's going on. Even then, with few exceptions the only operas I really enjoy are those of Britten and Mozart.

[VodkaDilc]

As it happens, I'm well on the way to septuagenarianhood, having been born towards the end of WWII. Lacking any musical training, I find that I can't really appreciate opera at all if I can't see what's going on. Even then, with few exceptions the only operas I really enjoy are those of Britten and Mozart.

My sincere apologies to Norfolk Born for incorrectly suggesting he might be a youngster. You are obviously young at heart - I bet you have got an eye-pod!

[Norfolk Born]

I haven't - but I confess to having a bottom-of-the-range MP3 player which I sometimes find useful on long coach or train journeys.

[johnb]

I have vivid memories of seeing Curlew River in a staged performance in Wells Cathedral as part of the 1986 Bath Festival. (The stage was a raised platform at the crossing.) That was when the Bath Festival was a classical music festival rather than the world/jazz/etc fest that it is these days. It was broadcast on BBC2 two days later (once again - an indication of how things have deteriorated over the years) and I now wish I had video taped it.

Even though I don't really warm to Britten's Church Parables that was an unforgettable event.

[Norfolk Born]

I remember that performance, which was given, I believe, by Nexus Opera. Sadly, I also failed to record it.