More stories

  • in

    A New Opera Mashes Up Monteverdi and W.E.B. Du Bois

    “The Comet/Poppea” radically pares down a classic and blends it with a premiere by George E. Lewis for an original show that will travel widely.Morality takes a hike in Claudio Monteverdi’s final opera, “L’Incoronazione di Poppea.” Bold in its satire and explicit in its sensuality, even more than 350 years after its creation, the work gives its ruthless lovers, Nero and Poppea, everything they desire.A decadent exploration of Nero’s Rome, “Poppea” might seem to share little with “The Comet,” a W.E.B. Du Bois short story from 1920. Using tropes of sci-fi catastrophe, Du Bois, the famous Black sociologist, asks what it would take for a racially equitable civilization to emerge. But, like Monteverdi’s opera, it has an amoral, ice-cold finish: After the merest possibility of interracial love, the status quo of segregation returns.On Friday, both the opera and the story will be brought together, united by their common denominator of jaundiced cynicism, in “The Comet/Poppea,” which is premiering at Geffen Contemporary, a warehouse-style space at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles. (There are already plans for it to travel to Philadelphia this fall, to New York next year and to the Schwarzman Center at Yale University in 2026.)Yuval Sharon, center, the director, with the singers Joelle Lamarre, left and Davóne Tines.Jeenah Moon for The New York TimesAmanda Lynn Bottoms, seated, and Nardus Williams, lying on the floor, during a rehearsal for the show, which adapts a W.E.B. Du Bois story from 1920.Jeenah Moon for The New York TimesePresented in Los Angeles by MOCA and the director Yuval Sharon’s company of operatic experimenters, the Industry, “The Comet/Poppea” was commissioned by the American Modern Opera Company. Over a 90-minute run time, it alternates between a radically pared-down “Poppea” and an adaptation of Du Bois’s story by the librettist Douglas Kearney and the composer George E. Lewis, for a mash-up featuring stark transitions — and superimpositions — between Monteverdi’s Baroque style and Lewis’s high-modernist states of frenzy.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ‘As Living as Opera Can Get’: John Cage’s Anarchic Anti-Canon

    In his “Europeras,” Cage dismantled centuries of tradition and expectations, for musicians and audiences alike. A rare revival is coming to Detroit.The start was typical: Oper Frankfurt in Germany asked John Cage to write an opera.But the premiere, in 1987, was unlike anything in opera up to that point. Cage, an American maverick whose philosophical, socially conscious works at the time were based on chance, mapped out an elaborate scheme for a show that would bring the entirety of European opera onto the same stage — at the same time.It was called “Europeras 1 & 2,” an enormous undertaking of controlled chaos, engineered with an eye toward history and populist reclamation, hence the title that implies both “Euro operas” and “your operas.” Each element, its rollout determined by the I Ching, unfolded independently from all others: Singers performed arias unrelated to the instrumental accompaniment, which was unrelated to the scenic and lighting design, as well as stage directions. (Audience members also received varied plot synopses that read like opera Mad Libs.)The public wasn’t exactly equipped to receive what Cage had served them. Laura Kuhn, who runs the John Cage Trust and worked with him as he prepared “Europeras 1 & 2,” wrote in her dissertation on the piece that the reception in Frankfurt varied from “overt enthusiasm to no less overt bewilderment or disdain.”But Cage kept going. At the Almeida Festival in 1990, he premiered “Europeras 3 & 4,” which will receive a rare revival this week at Detroit Opera, in a production directed by Yuval Sharon. In Cage’s series of works, which concluded with “Europera 5” in 1991, the whole became greater than its parts, with affection alongside the anarchy, and the feeling, Sharon said, that “this is as living as opera can get.”Yuval Sharon, left, the director of “Europeras 3 & 4” in Detroit, with the associate director, Alexander Gedeon.Brittany Greeson for The New York TimesIn Cage’s time, there were those who appreciated what Cage was doing. As “Europeras 1 & 2” was arriving in the United States, the artist and critic Richard Kostelanetz wrote that “by running innocently amok in European culture, Cage has come as close as anyone to writing the Great American Opera, which is to say, a great opera that only an American could make.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Seeing ‘L’Orfeo’ in Santa Fe

    Among the company’s annual summer offerings, Monteverdi’s “L’Orfeo,” from 1607 but newly reorchestrated and imaginatively staged, stands out.It’s a change so small, you might not even notice it. But the posters and playbills around the campus of Santa Fe Opera in New Mexico have given Monteverdi a makeover: Gone is the article from “L’Orfeo,” which is being styled this summer as simply “Orfeo.”Few are likely to, and shouldn’t be, bothered by a shift so innocuous. And you could say the same for how the work, premiered in 1607 and the oldest surviving opera still regularly performed, is being presented here: with a deferential new orchestration by Nico Muhly for modern instruments, and a myth-free yet no less magical staging by Yuval Sharon.This “Orfeo,” which premiered on July 29, was the last of Santa Fe Opera’s five productions to open during its annual summer season. A newcomer, having never been staged there before, it is also the highlight of the company’s current offerings, which I saw over the past week.I started with opening night of “Orfeo,” in which the baritone Luke Sutliff jumped in to perform the title role — heroic not just given the circumstances, but also because of his thoroughly assured interpretation and stage presence, and, most impressively, the ability on short notice to pull off the complicated movement of Sharon’s production. (The intended star, the tenor Rolando Villazón, had been injured during the final dress rehearsal but was back by the second show.)Audience members got a taste of Monteverdi’s score before many of them had taken their seats; at different corners of the Crosby Theater campus, in the tree-dappled desert hills outside Santa Fe, small brass ensembles sounded the opening Toccata of the opera, in a touch from the playbook of Wagner’s Bayreuth Festival in Germany.But once the show began properly, Monteverdi’s music took shape anew in Muhly’s treatment. Not so noticeably, though; each performance of “L’Orfeo” involves choices about instrumentation and articulation, work that has long been the territory of historically informed performance specialists like John Eliot Gardiner. Here, though, Muhly has written an indisputably clear, easy-to-replicate version of the score for modern orchestras, with enough lushness to satisfy a large opera house in future productions.An injury kept Villazón out of the opening-night performance of “Orfeo,” but he was back for the second show.Curtis BrownMuhly’s version of the score is most remarkable for how unremarkable it seems on the surface. Often, it sounds like “L’Orfeo” as we know it — opera’s foundational tale, of Orpheus and Eurydice — with small adjustments like a string line moved to the winds and more deeply fleshed-out harmonies. Occasionally, though, Muhly adds a flourish and a touch of his own idiom: tremolos of shivering tension; glassy violins giving way to arpeggiated textures; dirgelike calls from low brasses; fluttering winds.He creates, in the end, a personal love letter to Monteverdi that relishes not just a musical conversation, but the making of music itself, which is in the spirit of both the piece and Sharon’s production.Sharon, the artistic director of Detroit Opera and the founder of the enterprising company the Industry in Los Angeles, is the most imaginative opera director in the United States, one who works in a collaborative spirit, across disciplines, sometimes to build a world premiere from scratch. This “Orfeo,” though, joins his Bayreuth “Lohengrin” as one of his tamer productions; there’s no headline-making concept, like the four acts of “La Bohème” performed in reverse or “Götterdämmerung” reduced to a one-hour drive through a parking garage. But here, he achieves a complex, deceptive sleekness while teasing out a single, timeless idea from the tale.His production takes place on an AstroTurf-covered dome, a small, artificial hill among the natural, immense ones seen through the open back of the stage. At the start, a white bed fit for a sanitarium sits on top, occupied by someone visibly sick and dressed in white; it’s La Musica (the pure-voiced soprano Lauren Snouffer), who, after picking up a lyre, is suddenly animated with the potential of music. The stage is then populated with a chorus of singers, who are dressed as if presenting a capsule collection in oranges and magentas in Carlos J. Soto’s characteristically stylish costumes.Orfeo’s story unfolds as a celebration of music and its meaning, its uses in moments of happiness and sadness alike. After the protagonist’s journey to the Underworld — in Alex Schweder and Matthew Johnson’s design, the dome opens to reveal a dark, misty grotto animated by light projections — and after Euridice dies a second, permanent death, her voice (the soprano Amber Norelai) is heard through a gramophone that Orfeo holds closely. Who among us hasn’t done something similar, listening to a song we know will amplify our pain?There are comedic touches as well, and joyous appreciations of community and music in an Arcadian ur-society absent of ideology. During the second performance, on Wednesday, that spirit turned from exuberant to assertive as the theater’s surroundings rumbled with thunder, and as the sunset was obscured by brush-stroke streaks of rain in the distance.That night, as Villazón belatedly stepped into the role, he did so with noticeably altered, muted blocking, and his voice was as uncooperative as it has been in recent years. He remains a charismatic presence — funny, touching, magnetic — but his tenor can shift suddenly from smooth, with a warm vibrato, to raw, with a hard edge that doesn’t befit a character whose musical beauty moves the gatekeepers of the Underworld.The mezzo-soprano Samantha Hankey’s performance was a high point of “Pelléas et Mélisande.”Curtis BrownThe Santa Fe Opera Orchestra — a group in nimble, lively and consistently excellent form throughout the week — took up “Orfeo” with brisk, dancing energy under Harry Bicket’s baton, and, promisingly, settled more into the score during the Wednesday performance.This season, Bicket is doing double duty, also leading Debussy’s “Pelléas et Mélisande,” in an appropriately enigmatic yet frustratingly obtuse production by Netia Jones. Seen on Thursday, his conducting produced something like the opposite of “Orfeo”: an atmosphere that moved almost imperceptibly forward, with flashes of color and sensuality.In that production, the mezzo-soprano Samantha Hankey sang Mélisande with a weighty lower range and a mixture of chilliness and seeping passion. Another commanding stage presence — whether here, or earlier this season as Octavian in “Der Rosenkavalier” at the Metropolitan Opera — she is emerging as a major artist of her generation.There were other vocal standouts elsewhere throughout the week. That “Pelléas” also included a frighteningly resonant Zachary Nelson as Golaud; his fellow baritone Huw Montague Rendall as Pelléas, often warm and achingly tender, strained only at the top of his role’s range; and the great mezzo-soprano Susan Graham, who had the opposite trouble, plush but diminished at the bottom.Two singers in other productions were even more memorable: the bass-baritone Nicholas Brownlee and the soprano Ailyn Pérez.Nicholas Brownlee’s Dutchman seemed to preview a promising Wagnerian future.Curtis BrownAs the title character in Wagner’s “The Flying Dutchman,” Brownlee — often working against a clumsy staging by David Alden, but supported throughout by the energetic, detail-oriented baton of Thomas Guggeis — projected agony and careworn bitterness throughout the theater, even as he was made, strangely, to sing lying down or on his side. (That was among many baffling directorial choices, including a “Spinning Chorus,” performed by Minion look-alikes in Oompa-Loompa choreography.) Brownlee’s enunciation was clear, his voice booming and blending well with the soprano Elza van den Heever’s mighty and ardent Senta. You could sense a fruitful Wagnerian future unfolding before him.And in “Rusalka,” Pérez has found in the title role a part that rewards the richness of her sound. David Pountney’s elegant production, which treated the “Little Mermaid”-like story as the metaphor it always has been, has her rarely leaving the stage, crossing paths with the likes of Raehann Bryce-Davis’s playfully vicious Jezibaba and Mary Elizabeth Williams’s ferociously alluring foreign princess. At times Pérez was athletic, singing the “Song to the Moon” while climbing suspended chairs as if they were a jungle gym, projecting her longing as she leaned back, holding onto the furniture by a single hand. Through it all, her phrasing remained shapely, controlled and actorly, erupting in agony or passion but just as quickly retreating to a quiet, floating soprano, while in the pit Lidiya Yankovskaya teased out the Romantic elements of Dvorak’s score.In Rusalka, the soprano Ailyn Pérez has found a role that rewards her rich sound.Curtis BrownInevitably in a densely packed series of performances, not everything lands. Santa Fe’s “Tosca,” with de Chirico-inspired sets by Ashley Martin-Davis, propelled with inevitability under John Fiore in the pit. But onstage, the baritone Reginald Smith Jr.’s Scarpia was a villain deprived of nuance; and while there was promise in the tenor Joshua Guerrero’s passionately Italianate Cavaradossi and the soprano Leah Hawkins’s sumptuous Tosca, a bit of vocal unwieldiness betrayed works in progress.Keith Warner’s production had a few novel touches — including a jump scare better seen live than described here — but is mostly a dressed-up version of the familiar tragedy. And he seemed aware of his lineage in the opera’s history as, in the final moments, Tosca shot herself while a doppelgänger, dressed in a costume redolent of Maria Callas’s famous red gown and tiara, walked slowly offstage.It’s a confusing, if unnecessary punctuation that isn’t set up by the staging. But Warner’s heart is in the right place: It is possible to present opera with reverence and a bit of fresh style at the same time. For an example, you need only look to “Orfeo.” More

  • in

    Nico Muhly Modernizes Monteverdi With ‘Irreverent Veneration’

    When a new production of Monteverdi’s “L’Orfeo” premieres at Santa Fe Opera on July 29, something about it might seem slightly odd.Sure, there will be the usual Orfeo, in this case the tenor Rolando Villazón, and a familiar sight at the podium in the conductor Harry Bicket. If the staging by Yuval Sharon, one of the most creative opera directors at work today, provokes a thought or two — well, that is only to be expected by now.No, what might surprise people most is the sound emerging from the orchestra pit. This will not be Monteverdi as we have heard him; there will be nary a period instrument in sight, neither a harpsichord nor a sackbut, a theorbo nor a cornett. It will be, rather, Monteverdi as newly orchestrated by Nico Muhly and brought right into the contemporary.“It’s a piece of music I’ve always loved, and I love Monteverdi,” said Muhly, a composer whose opera credits include “Marnie” and “Two Boys.” Accepting the Santa Fe commission, to him, “seemed like a really easy ‘yes.’”Santa Fe’s production, titled “Orfeo,” is not intended as a grand revanchist blow against the period-instrument movement that has claimed early music as its own for decades. Bicket, after all, is the music director of the English Concert, once in the vanguard of that movement and still one of its eminent groups. And Muhly was offered the assignment because his love for Byrd, Tallis and the like is not just avowed, but audibly present in much of his own music.Yuval Sharon, left, the director of Santa Fe’s “Orfeo,” and Muhly.Brad Trone for The New York TimesWhat Santa Fe’s “Orfeo” does speak to, though, are the artistic opportunities that are starting to open up as the first generation of period-instrument pioneers pass from the scene, the early-music movement confronts an uncertain future and all the old polemics about how works ought to be performed start to seem passé.At any rate, doing “Orfeo” in the way that Nikolaus Harnoncourt, John Eliot Gardiner and Jordi Savall have would be impossible at Santa Fe. The company has a resident orchestra that uses modern instruments, and even if period instruments could be brought to the desert for the summer, “the size of the building,” Bicket said, “means we would probably have to have, like, five theorbos and three harps and all these harpsichords, which in an open-air theater is not really practical.”Typical repertory companies, too, aren’t able to present the work as it has come to be heard — which is not just a shame, but also a detriment to our collective understanding of opera itself.“It’s not appropriate to call it the first opera, because we know it was not the first opera,” Sharon said of “Orfeo.” “Opera was not a genre at this point, when this piece was created. But in many respects, I think it makes perfect sense to call it the first opera, because it set the benchmark for what we look to opera to create for us.”This orchestration, Muhly explained, therefore aims to make the work more practical to perform in standard houses, beyond Santa Fe. “I’m not doing anything crazy to it,” he said. “It’s just about it not being this unwieldy thing.”COMPOSERS HAVE LONG been interested in reorchestrating “Orfeo” for contemporary ears; in its treatment of the Orpheus myth, it is, fundamentally, an opera about the power of music.Sharon said of “Orfeo” that “it set the benchmark for what we look to opera to create for us.”Brad Trone for The New York TimesThe conductor Henry Bicket, who said that in preparing this new production, “We agreed that it would be Monteverdi’s ‘Orfeo.’”Brad Trone for The New York TimesThe work, with a libretto by Alessandro Striggio, premiered in 1607. But, according to the musicologist Nigel Fortune, it was largely forgotten after Monteverdi’s death, in 1643, until the late 19th century. Then, Vincent d’Indy, Carl Orff, Ottorino Respighi and Bruno Maderna all tried their hand at a reorchestration. For the Maggio Musicale in Florence in 1984, Luciano Berio convened a quintet of young composers — Betty Olivero and Luca Francesconi among them — to rewrite “Orfeo,” employing electronic tapes and even a rock band. By then, however, the period-instrument revolution was in full flow; when Paul Hindemith presented a scholarly “attempt to reconstruct the premiere” in Vienna in 1954, Harnoncourt and other members of his recently formed Concentus Musicus Wien played in the ensemble.To Bicket, none of those versions, or others, seemed appropriate for use at Santa Fe; they involved cuts, or were too of their own time. But since Santa Fe has had a tradition of presenting a premiere each year, he explained, a new production seemed an ideal opportunity to commission “a young, contemporary composer to say what this century has to say about this music.”And Muhly is an admirer of “Orfeo.” “There are so many moments of slyness, where what you’re getting in terms of plot and what you’re getting in terms of emotional content is coming from literally one tiny little harmonic move, like one strange flat,” he said. “Also, there’s very traditional word painting. You go up to heaven, and he goes up the scale. It’s this wonderful combination of trickery and things that are quite obvious and theatrical.”A rendering of Sharon’s production for Santa Fe.Matthew Johnson & Alex Schweder, visual environment designersOne of the reasons that so many composers have felt able to try their hand at orchestrating or adapting “Orfeo” is that Monteverdi left them the opportunity. Even the most conscientious, scholarly performer of “Orfeo” has to make choices about how to play it, because scores that were published early in the 17th century omit crucial details, especially in the continuo parts that comprise so much of the work.“All of it is a sketch, because there was no international music scene,” Bicket said. “Composers did not have to write information into the score, apart from a vocal line and a bass line and maybe a bit of harmony here or there, because there was an understanding, a style, which was part of being a musician in those days.”“When I do this with my own players in the English Concert,” Bicket added, “we do read the notes, but we are actually reading the rhetoric — and the heart of it is finding the rhetorical gesture.”Many of the conductors who have performed or recorded “Orfeo” have chosen to create their own editions; listen to some of the historically informed recordings of the work, Muhly pointed out, and you can hear divergences far more marked than in period accounts of, say, Beethoven symphonies, sometimes on matters as fundamental as cadences.Bicket leading a rehearsal of “Orfeo.”Brad Trone for The New York TimesThere is therefore no one, true “Orfeo” that anybody can be faithful to, and that invites creativity. For Sharon, a production of it can sit easily within his interest in how operas from the past can be recreated today. It’s an urge that — beyond his lauded work with the Detroit Opera and the Industry, the company he founded in Los Angeles — has seen him stage parts of “Götterdämmerung” as a drive-through and led him to present the four acts of “La Bohème” in reverse.“We’re all making a guess as to what it must have been like to have done this piece,” Sharon said of the Monteverdi. “We have to interpret it; we have to decide. What instruments are going to play this? What is the proper performance style for this? There’s no such thing, there’s just the humans that are bringing it to life at that particular moment in time, needing to take this blueprint that Monteverdi and Striggio left us and interpret it in our own way, and for our own time. So I think that makes it eternally an opportunity for constant reimagination.”Even so, Muhly asked for, and Bicket laid down, some ground rules. “We agreed that it would be Monteverdi’s ‘Orfeo,’” Bicket said, and it was stipulated that the vocal and the bass lines should remain unchanged from the primary source. Bicket wrote out a vocal score, filling in the harmonies that Monteverdi left out, noting where chords could be restated or shift in other ways.Otherwise, though, Muhly was left to translate the material into his own compositional language, which he had come to in dialogue with early music and even early instruments; among his published scores is a “Berceuse With Seven Variations” for solo theorbo.“I think because music of the past features so heavily in my own, original music,” he said, “I stepped to this with a form of irreverent veneration.”Muhly described Monteverdi’s score as “this wonderful combination of trickery and things that are quite obvious and theatrical.”Brad Trone for The New York TimesThat’s not to say the process was easy. While it was in some ways simpler than writing another opera of his own, Muhly said, in others it was harder, requiring him to innovate and defer at the same time. He has adapted the continuo part mostly for a small ensemble of alto flute, English horn, clarinet, bass clarinet and harp, and voiced the figured bass in octaves far higher and lower than tradition would suggest. Some of the trickier problems involved echoing the way in which Monteverdi shrinks and expands his orchestration, and making the underworld distinct, yet not “cartoonishly evil.”But what Muhly argues against, and confesses to being “a little bristly about,” is the perception that “a new take or a new interpretation of something in some way erases, or is in conflict, with the previous interpretation.” His version of “Orfeo” is not intended to supplant those that have come before it, still less to render early-music takes on the material redundant. Far from it.“You know what would be great, literally what would be fantastic?” Muhly said. “Let’s just say someone saw this thing and was like, ‘Wow, I’m totally fascinated by this piece,’ goes back and gets any of the period recordings, and it’s a gateway drug that way. Similarly, if someone hears it and is like, ‘I hated that so much, I really want to hear the original again,’ and then they go to the original again, that’s also good. I think that’s just fine.”The more Monteverdi, in the view of Muhly and his collaborators, the better.“It’s really not about me; it’s about you having a great night at the theater,” Muhly said. “I want the music to serve the drama. And that’s always how it should be.” More

  • in

    Review: In Chicago, an Opera Triptych Reaches for Connection

    Lyric Opera of Chicago follows a recent world premiere with yet another: “Proximity,” a set of works by three librettist-composer pairs.CHICAGO — Major opera companies used to put on new or recent works once in a blue moon. But, astonishingly, pieces by living composers make up about a third of the Metropolitan Opera’s coming season. And on Friday, Lyric Opera of Chicago, just a month after one world premiere, presented another.Houses like these have been spurred by a hunger for fresh audiences that don’t have any particular devotion to “Aida” or “La Traviata.” But it hasn’t always been smooth sailing. Creaking into development mode is a huge shift for institutions that have, for decades, almost solely done works from the distant past.And in Lyric’s premiere here on Friday, “Proximity,” the company gave itself an even more ambitious assignment than one new commission: three of them, by three composer-librettist pairs, sharing a single evening. Moreover, each opera takes on a different capital-I Issue, dealing with our closeness to and dependence on others: gun violence in Chicago; the difficulty of connection in a world mediated by technology; and the threat we pose to our planet.That this unwieldy idea ended up being stageworthy — sober, often blunt, sometimes meditative, sometimes listless, sometimes aggressively affecting — is largely because of the production’s ingenious director, Yuval Sharon.In shows like his “La Bohème,” which presented the opera’s four acts in reverse, Sharon has proved himself adept at executing thorny, even silly-sounding concepts in ways that end up being surprisingly clever and moving. With “Proximity,” he avoided the obvious decision to play the three pieces one after the other, à la Puccini’s “Il Trittico.”Instead, Sharon showed them off to better effect by putting them in closer, well, proximity: weaving them together, alternating scenes from the operas in a two-act evening. So, for example, the final half-hour of Act I brings the audience from a stylized Chicago L ride in “Four Portraits” (music by Caroline Shaw; text by Shaw and Jocelyn Clarke) to a realistic funeral in “The Walkers” (Daniel Bernard Roumain; Anna Deavere Smith), to the abstract poetry of “Night” (John Luther Adams; John Haines).Caroline Shaw and Jocelyn Clarke’s “Four Portraits” features a stylized ride on Chicago’s elevated train system.Todd RosenbergWith the edges of the scores smoothed by the conductor, Kazem Abdullah, and Lyric’s excellent orchestra, the three sound worlds play nicely together, with a shared grounding in repeating, minimal motifs, steady tonality and sensible, self-effacing lyricism — no earworm melodies, but no harshness, either, and hardly any look-at-me virtuosity.For a flexible set, the production designers Jason H. Thompson and Kaitlyn Pietras have stretched an LED screen across the stage floor and, halfpipe-style, up the backdrop. The screen is filled with spiffy and colorful imagery: slowly panning Chicago streetscapes seen from above; vast vistas of outer space; pulsating visualizations of communications networks. Without unwieldy scene changes, the three operas blend into a single performance with impressive seamlessness.It helps that Sharon, the artistic director of Detroit Opera, is experienced with collaborations (and logistics) even more complicated than this. For “Hopscotch” — presented in 2015 by the Industry, the experimental company he founded in California — audience members got into cars that drove around Los Angeles, and six composers and six writers shared billing.And his job is made easier here in Chicago by the fact that these are not three roughly equal installments, like the ones in “Il Trittico.” “The Walkers,” at an hour, is longer than “Four Portraits” and “Night” combined, so those shorter pieces naturally feel like interludes, breaking up a work that would otherwise dominate the threesome.And none of the three tells a story so realistic or sustained that it feels jolting to interrupt. The libretto of “The Walkers” is the latest in Smith’s long career of creating politically charged dramatic texts drawn from interviews she has conducted — in this case, with people she was introduced to through Chicago CRED and Choose to Change, organizations devoted to addressing gun violence in the city.Some passages from the interviews are sung as lamenting monologues, in the style of TED Talks; some remain spoken, with light underscoring. Quirks of speech — “you know,” “uh” — are preserved in a bit of naturalism that, especially when sung, is also endearingly strange.But some confusion is introduced because Smith and Roumain have, alongside these somber, stand-alone statements, embedded a loosely developed, difficult-to-follow plot about a gang rivalry, formed from composites of interview subjects. However impassioned the soprano Kearstin Piper Brown may be, it’s hard to make the plight of her roughly sketched character — who is targeted for killing after she is wrongly assumed to have shot a child — as clear or compelling as the plain-spoken truth of the longer monologues.The score is least convincing in slouchily rhythmic, singsong passages with drum kit. But Roumain pulls his orchestra back to a mellow steady-state undercurrent for the monologues, emphasizing the clarity of the text above all.And the funeral scene near the end of Act I is a persuasive Requiem, with lightly neo-Baroque solemnity and some stirring arias, including ones for the noble-toned baritone Norman Garrett and the shining tenor Issachah Savage as two of the figures who “walk” among vulnerable youth and attempt to guide them.The first of Shaw’s “Four Portraits” conveys a relationship between characters named only A (the countertenor John Holiday) and B (the baritone Lucia Lucas) that is stymied by an inability to connect: The call literally won’t go through.Shaw’s instrumental textures — ethereal strings; pricks of brasses and winds; sprightly pizzicato plucking; Minimalism-derived repetitions, more tentative than relentless — support a babble of fractured voices representing the technological ether, a conceit Nico Muhly explored in his 2011 opera “Two Boys.” Here and in the second section, that crowded L ride, the dramaturgy is hazy, the music bland.The last two sections are more interesting and beautiful, with troubled darknesses under the surface serenity. Shaw renders a car’s GPS as an electronically processed voice that veers from turn-left instructions to poetic flights, yielding to an introspective aria just right for Lucas’s tender voice.And in the final “portrait,” Lucas and Holiday, his tone floating into a soar, at last encounter each other without barriers, the music grandly building as a choir makes a trademark Shaw sound: a kind of modest, sliding low hum. (While Carlos J. Soto’s street clothes in “The Walkers” are an agile mixture of everyday and fanciful, the shapeless gray robes in “Four Portraits” do neither singer any favors.)Zoie Reams as the Erda-like narrator of John Luther Adams and John Haines’s “Night.”Todd RosenbergThe most disappointing of the three pieces is the 12-minute “Night,” a monotonous and clotted score from Adams, a usually inventive composer whose sonic depictions of ocean depths and parched, flickering deserts have been uncannily evocative. Here, his mezzo-soprano Sibyl (Katherine DeYoung, filling in for an ill Zoie Reams), like Erda in Wagner’s “Ring,” is a kind of earth goddess offering gnomic warning about a coming reckoning. Lowered from the flies and walking amid images of planets and stars, she is interrupted for stretches by a stentorian chorus.It’s a dreary way to end the first act. The second comes to a close in more powerful, if also emotionally manipulative, fashion, with the last scene of “The Walkers.” Singing the first-person account of Yasmine Miller, whose 20-month-old baby was killed in a 2020 shooting, Whitney Morrison’s gentle soprano is a little timid and tremulous. But the story is so obviously heartbreaking, and her performance so sincere, that criticizing her feels like actually criticizing a grieving mother.Mustering a warmly supportive chorus and a clichéd, echoey faux-choral keyboard effect, this finale is almost orgiastically sentimental, down to Miller’s smiling story about the new child she’s pregnant with and a quotation ascribed to Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey emblazoned on the screen: “For Black people, hope has to be resurrected every day.”Treacle is, of course, hardly foreign to opera. But bending real tragedy into thin uplift is.ProximityThrough April 8 at the Lyric Opera House, Chicago; lyricopera.org. More

  • in

    America’s Most Interesting Opera Destination? The Midwest.

    Barrie Kosky and Yuval Sharon, two of opera’s finest directors, open new productions in Chicago and Detroit.New York City, despite its bona fides as a cultural capital, can be surprisingly provincial when it comes to opera.As ever-fewer international directors pass through with their productions — events that, once upon a time, could reliably be found at Lincoln Center’s festivals or the Brooklyn Academy of Music — and New York City Opera exists as a shell of its former self, the only major player left in town is the Metropolitan Opera, an increasingly adventurous if still conservative house.It’s a different story elsewhere in the United States. While the Met prepares to start its season next week, two other companies opened new productions on Saturday, with imaginative directors who won’t grace the Met stage any time soon but should: at the Lyric Opera of Chicago, a “Fiddler on the Roof” by Barrie Kosky, and at Detroit Opera, a version of “Die Walküre” by Yuval Sharon.I saw both over the weekend, which made for an unlikely pairing: “Fiddler,” Bock and Harnick’s golden-age musical, on Saturday, and the third act of “Walküre,” from Wagner’s “Ring,” on Sunday. But while there were subtle thematic connections between the two, they were more notable for simply happening — the latest examples of conceptual daring and directorial promise beyond New York City limits (among others this season, like productions of Ethel Smyth’s “The Wreckers” in Houston and Dylan Mattingly’s “Stranger Love” in Los Angeles).Kosky’s “Fiddler” staging reveals the musical as the masterpiece that it is: perennially relevant, smartly constructed and richly complicated.Todd RosenbergKosky’s “Fiddler” is an import from the Komische Oper in Berlin, the house he ran for a decade before stepping down this year. It’s both a preview — he will direct one musical each of the next five seasons — and a glimpse at his range as one of Europe’s leading directors, an artist capable of shattering minimalism, in productions like “Kat’a Kabanova” at the Salzburg Festival in August, and archaeological curiosity, in the obscure operettas he has reintroduced to Germany.There are hallmarks of his showman style throughout this “Fiddler,” but perhaps the most Koskyesque accomplishment here is his revealing of the musical as the masterpiece that it is — perennially relevant, smartly constructed and richly complicated — rather than what many critics have seen as borscht belt kitsch. His staging, in which no emotion is ever forced, is funny only in the way that life can be: dark humor in the face of absurdity, joy at a harmless misunderstanding.Most natural, perhaps, is the way in which Kosky’s take on the musical — unaltered, but for welcome Yiddish additions — unfolds as an act of memory, at once melancholy and warm. It begins with something like a summoning of the past: A child (Drake Wunderlich) rolls across the stage on a scooter, beats emanating from his headphones. At the center is a wardrobe; and inside is a violin, on which the boy begins to play the show’s opening theme. He pauses, and the tune continues with a whistle from within.Out from the wardrobe steps Tevye — Steven Skybell, who played the role in the recent Yiddish-language “Fiddler” Off Broadway and who again lends the character the sculptural dimensions of a Shakespeare protagonist — then the rest of the villagers from Anatevka. Among them are a wealth of sympathetic, skilled performers: Debbie Gravitte as a resilient Golde; Lauren Marcus, Austen Danielle Bohmer and Maya Jacobson as her and Tevye’s pathbreaking daughters; Drew Redington as a meek then audacious Motel; Adam Kaplan as a brazen yet desperate Perchik; Michael Nigro as a honeyed Fyedka; and more.Many more: This is a “Fiddler” beyond Broadway proportions, with a cast large enough to fill out a shtetl and a full orchestra, conducted with committed enthusiasm and dancelike flexibility by Kimberly Grigsby. Yet while the forces were operatic, the scenic design, by Rufus Didwiszus, wasn’t; the first act sprang out of and around a unit set of wardrobes and dressers stacked like a barricade, some of their doors and drawers opened to reveal lingering clothes, as if they had been hastily emptied and gathered in a public square. You could imagine it as a memorial.To what? Take your pick. “Fiddler” is specific, a tale of change coming rapidly to the traditions of Anatevka in the early 20th century; yet it has resonated time and again, whether for its themes of rigidity amid progress or for its depictions of intolerance and exile. The last Broadway revival, in 2015, was haunted by the Syrian refugee crisis. This year, it’s impossible to see the show’s characters — inhabitants of present-day Ukraine — haphazardly packing up their lives for an unknown future and not think of the war there.Yuval Sharon’s “The Valkyries,” at Detroit Opera, is presented on a bifurcated stage in which singers perform in front of a green screen, below a video produced live.Mary Jaglowski/Detroit OperaAnd yet Kosky’s staging is also entertaining. Otto Pichler’s choreography, a nod to and break from Jerome Robbins’s original, left the audience on Saturday roaring. And the production’s nearly three hours breeze by. It is the finest “Fiddler” I’ve seen, one that could be adapted with ease and success on Broadway — where, in addition to the Met, Kosky belongs.Sharon is also woefully absent from New York’s stages. The brightest director in the United States, he put on a drive-through “Götterdämmerung” in a Detroit parking garage when live performance was virtually nonexistent during the pandemic and, as artistic director of Detroit Opera, has made that city an opera destination — along with Los Angeles, where his company the Industry has created the most innovative, original productions of recent years.His excerpt from “Die Walküre” — the 85-minute third act, called here “The Valkyries” — reflects Wagner’s ambitions for the work’s stage magic, but also the state of opera performance in our time, by presenting it as a sci-fi movie filmed against a green screen and rendered live with the help of Kaitlyn Pietras and Jason H. Thompson from PXT Studio. Yet a casual audience member could also enjoy it at face value, a self-contained drama with the subtlety and punch of short fiction.The production places the “Ring” in the metaverse, with Valhalla as a digital creation whose back story is recounted by Sigourney Weaver in a video introduction. Having a queen of sci-fi make this cameo is among the show’s campy touches, like Carlos J. Soto’s winking costumes, which suggest “Tron” and its low-budget cousins of the 1970s and ’80s.On the bifurcated stage, singers (accompanied by Andrew Davis leading a reduced but undiminished orchestration by David Carp, to accommodate the theater’s smaller pit) perform in front of the green screen — on green props, and supported by stage hands in green body suits, who, for example, wave capes during the “Ride of the Valkyries.” At the same time, the film, which reflects changes in scale and placement on a digital landscape, is shown above. The singers, especially the soprano Christine Goerke, still earning her title as a reigning Brünnhilde, rise to the challenge of the close-ups with actorly delivery; she, facing an indefinite slumber atop a mountain as punishment, sobs with audibly shallow breathing.At quick glance, Sharon’s production has the appearance of window dressing; the action ultimately unfolds in a conventional way. But, as ever, the medium is the message.“The Valkyries” could be seen as a meditation on opera in the 21st century: the proliferation of video in stagings, as well as pandemic-era livestreams and the genre of studio productions that grew out of them. What, now, is a live performance? Sharon provokes a tension of perception, with the eye and ear unsure of whether to focus on the singers or the screen. What is lost, and gained, in their interplay? He doesn’t offer an answer so much as lay out a balance sheet that the audience is left to settle.If Sharon does make a case, it’s for the durability of an opera’s essence. No matter the format, “Walküre” is a rending portrait of love, family and regret; Sunday’s performance wasn’t any different. And, as in “Fiddler,” the emotional core of “The Valkyries” was drawn out in a way that was unforced and honest, yet stylistically distinct. New York would be lucky to have either show. More

  • in

    Is the Future of American Opera Unfolding in Detroit?

    Listen to This ArticleAudio Recording by AudmTo hear more audio stories from publications like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.Last September, as cultural organizations began their fall seasons in a state of crisis, unsure if audiences would venture from their homes in the midst of a pandemic, Yuval Sharon, the artistic director of the Michigan Opera Theater, decided to mount a show called “Bliss.” A restaging of a marathon piece by the Icelandic performance artist Ragnar Kjartansson, “Bliss” requires its performers to replay the final three minutes of Mozart’s “The Marriage of Figaro” without pause for 12 hours. Sharon’s production took place in what was once the Michigan Building Theater, a former Detroit movie palace that closed in 1976; infamously, when architects determined that demolishing the theater would make an adjoining office building structurally unsound, the interior was gutted and transformed into a multilevel garage. The sight of cars parked beneath moldering Renaissance-style plasterwork and traces of long-gone balconies has long proved irresistible to Detroit ruin photographers, but no one before Sharon had ever staged a live performance among them. The production was pay-what-you-like, and those of us in the audience reached the performance space by walking up a ramp. Looking over its edge, I spotted a dusty Jeep parked on a lower level with the words LIONS SUCK traced on the windshield. A pair of low stages, minimally dressed to set a banquet scene, had been assembled, and the rest of the space was hauntingly lit, with an orchestra on the same level as the audience, whose members were free to sit or orbit at their leisure, entering or leaving at any part of the show, which began at noon and ended at midnight. Sharon paced the perimeter in a bow tie, a colorful jacket and yellow sneakers. Now 42, Sharon is the most visionary opera director of his generation. He founded an experimental company, cheekily named the Industry, in Los Angeles in 2012, and was met with near-immediate acclaim for stagings so wildly inventive they often dispensed with stages altogether. A 2013 production of “Invisible Cities,” the composer Christopher Cerrone’s adaptation of Italo Calvino’s imaginary travelogue, took place in Los Angeles’s Union Station, one of the busiest passenger railroad terminals in the country; performers moved around the space as concertgoers listened on wireless headphones (and commuters raced for their trains). A 2015 opera inspired by Julio Cortázar’s “Hopscotch” — a novel whose chapters can be read sequentially or by “hopscotching” around the book — recreated the format in Los Angeles traffic: Audience members would enter one of 24 limousines, each of which also contained performers, and proceed along one of three routes, occasionally changing cars or stopping at key landmarks to witness vignettes. Other Sharon productions have combined live singers with green screens and digital animation, stuck performers inside a giant glass vitrine and redeployed defunct air-raid sirens to broadcast music onto city streets. In 2017, Sharon was awarded a MacArthur Foundation “genius” grant; the following year, he became the first American to direct at Bayreuth, the Wagnerian opera festival founded by Richard Wagner himself in 1876. The conductor Gustavo Dudamel — the music and artistic director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic, where Sharon served a three-year residency as artist-collaborator — told me in an email that Sharon was a “creative genius” who “understands the heart of every piece and takes us there through a vision that is incomparable.” And yet Sharon’s boldest venture may have been the announcement, in 2020, that he would be accepting a position as artistic director of the Michigan Opera Theater — since renamed, at Sharon’s insistence, Detroit Opera. It’s hard to overstate the unlikelihood of a director as innovative and internationally celebrated as Sharon taking the reins of a decidedly regional (and in certain respects conservative) opera company like Detroit’s. But today, nearly two years into his five-year contract, Sharon has already radically elevated Detroit Opera’s status in the larger cultural ecosystem. His first production in Detroit — a drive-through, socially distant version of Wagner’s “Götterdämmerung” in a downtown parking structure — received a rave from Alex Ross in The New Yorker: The piece “would have been a triumph in any season,” Ross wrote, but it “felt borderline miraculous” in 2020, during the first wave of the pandemic. Sharon went on to commission a revival of the Pulitzer Prize-winning composer Anthony Davis’s “X: The Life and Times of Malcolm X,” which had never received a full revival since its premiere at New York City Opera in 1986. Davis told me he’d taken meetings at the Metropolitan Opera over the years to discuss possible productions, but nothing had ever come of the talks; after the Detroit production was announced, though, “Yuval said the Met called him,” and arranged to bring the production to New York in 2023. I came early to “Bliss,” then returned again closer to the finish, grabbing a chair near Corey McKern, the baritone playing the philandering Count Almaviva. For the last 11 hours or so, the count had been begging forgiveness from his wife, and now McKern sat slumped on some steps at the edge of the stage. Kjartansson originally staged “Bliss” in 2011, but a decade later, its purgatorial repetition had become a perfect metaphor for our daily lives during the pandemic; the endless loop of penitent toxic maleness also had an amusing new resonance. On a personal level, more than whatever conceptual power the piece held, more than the ways in which repetition deepened and complicated the beauty of Mozart’s music, even more than the athleticism of the singers or the novelty of hearing them, unamplified, from only a few feet away, I was struck by the space itself. I’m a former resident of the city, and Detroit’s ruins were not new to me; to be frank, I’d been skeptical of the decision to stage the performance in the former Michigan Building Theater at all. So I was surprised to find myself tearing up during the final burst of applause at midnight. Had it been the amazing feat of endurance I’d just witnessed? The fact that this was one of the first live musical performances I’d seen in over a year? Or was it because we hadn’t been invited into this space simply to gawk at a memento mori, but rather to transform it into something transcendent, or at least to try?Mark Williams, the chief executive of the Toronto Symphony Orchestra, told me that when he heard about Sharon’s move to Detroit, he was not surprised. He and Sharon had worked together at the Cleveland Orchestra, where Sharon directed a pair of acclaimed opera productions. But Sharon’s ambitions, Williams said, were bigger than guest directing; he was “the sort of person who would want to come into a space where he could really effect change, rather than going into a more established space and becoming more of a caretaker. So when he told me about Detroit, I thought, Gosh, that makes perfect sense. I believe that Yuval and Detroit Opera could really become the company that is showing America what opera can be.” As a deep partisan of the city, I say with all fondness: The future of American opera unfolding in Detroit was not a plot twist I saw coming. And yet, Sharon countered, Detroit might actually be “the perfect place to really push for what the future of opera can be.” He is not interested in a universalist, one-size-fits-all approach, where “La Bohème” ends up the same in Detroit as it does everywhere else: “No, it’s got to be totally of Detroit in the end. That, to me, is the path forward.” Couldn’t — shouldn’t, Sharon insisted — opera in Detroit look and feel and sound like nothing else in the country?In person, Sharon has the air of a convivial host. Boyish and elfin, with a slight frame and probing blue eyes, he’s a hugger, an easy laugher, a hoarder of both apt quotes by heavyweight European thinkers (Brecht, Barthes, Adorno, Kierkegaard, Peter Sloterdijk) and gossipy anecdotes (e.g. the one about the famous opera diva who phoned her agent in Europe so he could call the driver of her limo and have him lower the air-conditioning) — someone who “knows what he wants but is very polite, the opposite of an authoritarian director,” according to Matthias Schulz, the director of the Berlin State Opera, who sounded, when we talked, at once impressed and slightly puzzled by this approach.Earlier this year, Schulz invited Sharon to Berlin to revive his production of Mozart’s “The Magic Flute,” which he first presented in 2019. “The Magic Flute” is Sharon’s favorite opera, and in his staging the singers are puppets dangling from strings in a children’s theater, with Tamino, the hero, costumed to resemble the manga character Astro Boy. (“The original version had tons of flying,” Sharon says. “We’re cutting that back.”) A few days before that revival opened, I met Sharon in front of Berlin’s KW Institute for Contemporary Art, where he arrived on a lime-green rental bicycle. He spent time in the city in the early aughts, when the KW, housed in an abandoned margarine factory, was among his favorite haunts. “I didn’t even check what was on,” he said as we entered, pulling a black N95 mask from the pocket of a sharp coat assembled from expensive-looking shingles of rough-hewed wool. “I always love what they do here.” It turned out that in the first gallery we were greeted by a quartet of stylized marionettes by the Austrian artist Peter Friedl. “Wow,” Sharon said. He pulled out his phone and snapped a photograph. Critics of his “Magic Flute,” he noted, didn’t like the marionette concept. He chuckled. “They thought of it as childish. I think it’s childlike. There’s a distinction!”Sharon’s 2019 production of ‘‘The Magic Flute’’ at Berlin State Opera.Monika RittershausThe original 2019 production was plagued with difficulties. The flying devices barely worked, and the original conductor, Franz Welser-Möst, dropped out three weeks before the opening for an emergency knee surgery. Audience members booed at the premiere. A zero-star review in The Financial Times began: “There are natural catastrophes, such as floods and earthquakes. And then there are man-made catastrophes, such as Yuval Sharon’s new production of Die Zauberflöte at Berlin’s Staatsoper.” Sharon has since acknowledged that the opening was “a disaster” — but the production did find its footing, and actually became popular, hence Schulz’s desire for the streamlined revival, which has become part of the Staatsoper’s repertory. “Matthias told me it became a cult favorite,” Sharon said, “which I think is a nice way of saying critics hated it but audiences like it.”I’d been scheduled to attend a rehearsal two nights earlier, but just before I left my hotel, I received an apologetic email saying one of the cast members felt uncomfortable having a journalist in the house. I would only be allowed to watch an hour of the proceedings from high in a balcony, far from everyone. Later I learned the context of my banishment from Sharon, who arrived in Berlin the day before: After a quick stop at his hotel he headed straight to the opera house, where the first thing he heard, from the same cast member who objected to my presence, was: This production is [expletive]. What are we doing? Sharon recounted the story with good humor, but he was obviously annoyed. “I was like, OK, you go sing your part, and I’ll deal with people who want to be here,” Sharon said. He sighed. “You can’t win ’em all. A big part of being a director is realizing that. And you know, watching it again? I thought, I still like all of this! If you asked me to do ‘The Magic Flute’ today, this is the production I’d do.”On opening night, I sat next to a girl who couldn’t have been older than 10 and had brought along a pair of opera glasses. The technical and conceptual audacity of Sharon’s productions tend to reap the most attention, but I’ve often come away from his work remembering smaller moments, funny or surreal, that grasp the emotional heart of the operas he’s deconstructing. In the case of “The Magic Flute,” one such moment came near the end, after Tamino rescues Pamina — and then, suddenly, the pair re-emerge in modern dress, the setting having shifted to a pristine replica of a 1960s suburban kitchen, jarringly rerouting the lovers’ fable-like quest narrative into a scene from a David Lynch movie, a version of Ever After both sinister and deflatingly mundane.The tenor George Shirley in rehearsal for ‘‘La Bohème.’’Dan Winters for The New York TimesThe standing ovation the show received would seem to justify Sharon’s self-confidence. But the skeptical cast member’s question gets at a nagging tension that hovers in the background whenever a provocateur like Sharon enters a more tradition-bound establishment — and there are few arts establishments more tradition-bound than opera, an endeavor that, perhaps for this very reason, seems perpetually in crisis. Devotees fret about aging audiences (the average Metropolitan Opera subscriber in the last season before Covid-19 was 65), cultural irrelevance, overdependence on wealthy donors, elitism, lack of diversity and of course the challenges of presenting what’s known as the “inherited repertoire,” which can make major opera houses feel more like museums displaying beautifully lit but familiar versions of beloved masterpieces. According to Marc Scorca, president of Opera America, many opera houses are financially healthy at the moment, thanks to recent federal stimulus packages — but “underneath that,” he says, “is huge concern about how the audience will rematerialize once Covid is behind us.” Sharon recognizes these challenges as being even more fraught in Detroit, where an already lean budget became leaner during the pandemic — and where, he told me, “the old metrics were, you have a 90-percent-white audience in a city that’s 80 percent Black.” He went on: “They lured me in with the sentiment that said, ‘We absolutely need to change.’ And I said, ‘Well, if change is really what you’re interested in, then, I mean — continuation is not what I’m here to do.’” Detroit Opera’s “Bliss” in the former Michigan Building Theater, which is now a parking garage.Noah Elliot MorrisonThe job in Detroit has been a return of sorts for Sharon, who grew up nearby, in Chicago. His parents, both Israeli, came to the United States when his father, Ariel, a nuclear engineer, attended Northwestern University. After Chernobyl, Ariel started a company that made nuclear-plant emergency simulators, a job that kept him on the road — often to Germany, where, “kind of the way American businessmen would go golfing together, clients there would take him to the opera,” Yuval told me. Ariel had always been an amateur music lover, noodling around on the family’s piano and insisting that Yuval (but, for some reason, neither of his siblings) stick with lessons. The pattern repeated itself with opera: As Ariel became more of a buff, his son, who thought the swords and dragons in Wagner were cool, would become his regular companion at the Lyric Opera of Chicago.The first opera Yuval saw, a production of “La Traviata” on a visit to Germany when he was 12 or 13, didn’t speak to him, but he still remembers a single, dreamlike moment from the otherwise traditional staging. In the final act, as Violetta lay dying in bed while a chorus sang offstage — party music, Sharon says, the moment where the woman realizes the world outside doesn’t care — a clown holding a balloon emerged from beneath her bed and sneaked out a window. “It was the only moment in which the reality of what was happening onstage was broken,” he says. The rest of the production rapidly faded, leaving little impression. But the image of the clown stuck in his mind. By middle school he’d become a self-described “loner kid”; by high school he was watching Bergman’s “Persona” for pleasure. He attended the University of California at Berkeley, majoring in literature but hoping to get into film or theater directing. After graduating he moved to Berlin, living in a flat with a coal stove and teaching English part-time. Living in the city was so cheap that he could afford to go out to plays, concerts and operas. Opera had never struck him as the sort of endeavor in which he could play a part; it felt fixed, like going to a museum or reading the Great Books. But in Berlin he saw opera directors with the freedom, thanks in part to state funding, to be wildly experimental, and realized an opera production could be more than a re-creation of something from the past.Sharon moved to New York in 2002. He helped found an experimental theater company, but he soon realized that all of his shows had musical elements. He was becoming more excited about his day job at New York City Opera, where he would eventually run a new-music program called Vox. Meeting composers and workshopping their operas with the orchestra, he found himself most enthusiastic about the pieces that didn’t feel as if they would make sense framed in a normal theater — those composed specifically for amplified voices, say, or incorporating electronic components. But starting a company to produce new opera seemed impossible in New York, and none of the cramped black-box theaters he could afford to rent felt like exciting visual spaces. In 2008 he began spending time in Los Angeles, working as an assistant director to Achim Freyer, a student of Bertolt Brecht’s and one of the avant-garde directors whose work he found inspiring in Berlin. Sharon says he got the job, working on a monumental staging of Wagner’s “Ring” cycle, because “they needed someone who could speak German and who loved Wagner enough to make a two-year commitment.” Scorca, of Opera America, remembers the transplanted Easterner raving about how Los Angeles had a special freshness, an absence of cynicism and an openness to the arts. The Los Angeles Opera had been around only since 1986; Freyer’s production was to be the first complete “Ring” cycle ever performed in the city. “There was a whole arts infrastructure really being birthed,” Scorca says. “The Broad Museum hadn’t been built yet. Disney Hall was still relatively new. Something very special was happening, and there was a receptivity to the new that Yuval liked.” And unlike New York, Los Angeles had space to accommodate the scale of Sharon’s creative vision.“We were the new New York,” chuckles Cedric Berry, a bass-baritone who performed in the Industry’s first production, “Crescent City.” Set in a fictional city based on New Orleans after Katrina, the opera, by the Louisiana native Anne LeBaron, had been a favorite of Sharon’s since it was workshopped at Vox, and in some ways became his impetus for starting the Industry. He raised $250,000 from donors and grants and rented a warehouse in the Atwater Village neighborhood. “The music was the hardest piece I’ve ever done,” Berry told me. “But in addition to being an opera, it was an art installation” — Sharon had invited local visual artists to design immersive sets — “so the audience was on the stage, around the stage, you walked through them. My character was building a house. And they had cameras in your face, projecting video onto screens, so you had to be a smart actor, period.” The dancer and choreographer Benjamin Millepied, who was starting the LA Dance Project around the same time, recalls looking at a synopsis of the show “and thinking, This is the sort of thing very unlikely to work.” But by all accounts it did. The staging was high-concept; “I never make things easier, I make them more complicated,” Sharon admitted to me, while Berry says that “if it’s not something anyone in their right mind thinks is impossible, Yuval wouldn’t want to do it.” But Sharon remained laser-focused on performance and traditional technique, rooting out what Berry called “ ‘smacting,’ a kind of mock-acting, what people think of when they think of musical theater.” In a rapturous review, the Los Angeles Times classical-music critic Mark Swed described the Industry as “potentially groundbreaking” for the city. Millepied came away such a convert that the LA Dance Project collaborated with the Industry on its next project, “Invisible Cities.” For Sharon, Wagner’s theory of Gesamtkunstwerk, a “total work of art,” makes opera the “ultimate collaborative art form and the ultimate multimedia art form” — even if for Wagner himself the term “meant ‘everything comes from my brain, and it’s all unified.’” Sharon’s own concept for a 21st-century Gesamtkunstwerk is “multivoiced, a polyphony rather than a monotony.” The 2020 Industry production “Sweet Land,” for instance, had two directors, two composers and two librettists. And the polyphony of public space came into play during site-specific Industry productions like “Hopscotch,” injecting some degree of anarchy into the pieces. Berry, who performed the role of Kublai Khan in “Invisible Cities” in street clothes and a wheelchair, told me he was often mistaken by commuters at Union Station for “some random homeless person” who happened to be singing; during one performance, when Berry paused during one of his arias, a woman who had been listening took the opportunity to start belting her own song.Sharon’s “Lohengrin” at the 2018 Bayreuth Festival in Germany.Enrico NawrathOne of the composers for “Sweet Land,” the Pulitzer Prize winner Du Yun, told me that Sharon, from the outset of their unorthodox collaboration, encouraged the artists to let their imaginations run wild “as if there were no financial concerns.” Normally, she said, the artistic director of an opera company would be the one raising practical questions: “They’ll say, ‘We can’t do this, and here are a hundred reasons why.’ At the early meetings for ‘Sweet Land,’ that was me. It’s the first time I thought, Wait, am I conservative?” There’s an element of directing that’s practical, Sharon told me — “basically, managing time. But then you need another level, where you’re tapping into the realm of the impossible, what can barely be imagined. Sing in a moving car! Play violin while crossing a busy street!” In “Hopscotch,” an actor on a motorcycle pulled alongside the limousines in moving traffic to deliver lines sent to the vehicles’ speakers via wireless mics — after which, Sharon said, audience members would “start to wonder what else might be part of the show. A helicopter flew by and they assumed that was us!” Bringing the fictional into the everyday world highlights, for Sharon, the porousness of those boundaries, allowing witnesses to imagine transformative change in what might have seemed like an immutable reality. The space housing the Detroit Opera celebrates its 100th birthday this year. Originally called the Capitol Theater, it operated as a movie palace and live venue — Louis Armstrong, Will Rogers and Duke Ellington all performed there in its heyday — until 1985, when it was closed and left abandoned and unguarded for four years, with homeless people taking up residence inside and looters carting off one of the crystal chandeliers. When the Michigan Opera Theater purchased the building for $600,000 in 1989, its section of downtown Detroit had become so ruinous that “everybody thought we were really insane,” the company’s charismatic founder, David DiChiera, told The Times in 1999. But DiChiera started the company only four years after the 1967 Detroit riot, when businesses and residents were fleeing to the suburbs, and he’d made sustaining an opera company in a blue-collar town his life’s work. He cannily tapped automakers, among others, for funding, including for the restoration of what became the Detroit Opera House, which reopened in 1996 with a performance featuring Luciano Pavarotti. His programming leaned to the classical, but he also worked to reflect the demographics of the city, becoming an early advocate of colorblind casting (Kathleen Battle made her professional operatic debut at M.O.T.) and helping commission the 2005 premiere of “Margaret Garner,” an opera with a libretto by Toni Morrison based on the true story that inspired her novel “Beloved.” DiChiera stepped away from the institution in 2017 and died the following year, leaving the company in what the critic Mark Stryker described in The Detroit Free Press as an “artistic holding pattern.” In 2019, Stephen Lord, the principal conductor, resigned following allegations of sexual harassment at other companies. (Lord denied the accusations at the time.) Sharon, meanwhile, was planning to use a portion of his MacArthur grant to take a yearlong sabbatical in Japan; he’d been studying Japanese and had purchased a plane ticket for April 1, 2020. (“I know,” he said, after telling me the date. “It’s funny. It was like, April Fools!”)Gary Wasserman, a Detroit philanthropist and longtime supporter of the Michigan Opera Theater, had been following Sharon’s career for years; he told me he considered “Hopscotch” one of the most memorable theatrical experiences he’d ever had, comparing its intricacy to a fine watch. He caught a performance of “Sweet Land” before the pandemic, hoping he could lure Sharon to bring it to Michigan. After the pandemic arrived and the possibility of upcoming productions vanished, an M.O.T. board member asked him if Sharon might consider coming on as artistic director. Sharon flew to Detroit in June. He knew that if he accepted the job, he wanted to announce a fall production immediately — but performing inside the theater remained impossible. It was only when Sharon asked about the company’s other assets that he was told about the parking structure across the street. “Twilight: Gods,” mounted that fall, was Sharon’s drive-through abridgment of the final opera in Wagner’s Ring cycle — normally five or six hours, pared by Sharon to a slim 65 minutes or so, with groups of eight cars at a time moving from level to level to watch different scenes unfold while listening to the music via FM radio. It was an unambiguous triumph. “The last part of the Ring cycle is about a world order that’s collapsing, and the need, in a way, for it to collapse,” Sharon told me. Brünnhilde throws fire into her father’s hall “to literally burn it down, with the hope that a future humanity will arise that will be better. It’s, on one hand, pessimistic. On the other hand, I felt like it was what we were living through anyway.” The great dramatic soprano Christine Goerke came onboard to sing Brünnhilde; her steed, appropriately enough, became a Ford Mustang. Sharon and M.O.T.’s chief executive, Wayne Brown, personally greeted each car. Some theatergoers arrived in jeans or sweats, others in evening attire. Brown told me one group of attendees hung a chandelier in their car and brought flutes of Champagne. The meeting point for “Hopscotch,” a mobile opera directed by Sharon in 2015, in which 24 cars carried audience members throughout Los Angeles.Joshua LiptonOne thing that made Sharon’s work at the Industry so exciting was the way in which it seemed to exist in dialogue with the sprawling, messy history of the city around it. It’s still too early to say how Sharon’s vision will intersect with Detroit, but there have been strong hints. He tapped a local writer, Marsha Music, to narrate “Twilight: Gods” and give the story a Detroit voice. The production of “X,” of course, had resonance thanks to Malcolm (a.k.a. Detroit Red) and the Nation of Islam’s Michigan roots. “Blue,” a 2019 opera by the composer Jeanine Tesori and the librettist Tazewell Thompson about police violence, was performed last year at the riverfront Aretha Franklin Amphitheater, which Marsha Music called “historically a Black performance space,” marveling that, at least on the night she attended, “When the people walked up in there, it looked like Ebony Fashion Fair.” The nearly sold-out run of “X” was especially popular; three-quarters of its single-ticket sales were to new audience members, with more than double the usual number coming from Detroit residents.In April, Sharon directed the company’s first show back in the Detroit Opera House since the start of the pandemic: the inherited-repertoire favorite “La Bohème.” Sharon being Sharon, his version unfolded in reverse order, opening with Act IV, in which Mimì dies, and ending with Act I, in which she and her lover, Rodolfo, first meet. Detroit has died and been reborn so many times that Sharon’s reworking of the classic felt like an oblique nod to the city. Beginning with the sorrow that would befall these young people created a fantastic dramatic tension as the story proceeded, but an odd feeling of hope persisted as the story moved from the end of the affair to its blooming: Tragedy may be inevitable, but the lovers’ time together felt entirely worthwhile. The final scene from Sharon’s production of “La Bohème.”Andrea Stinson Photography/Detroit OperaNot everyone loved the idea. Sharon, when I saw him at the dress rehearsal, was delighted by a write-up on the website of The Daily Mail, the British tabloid, bearing the headline, “Detroit gives tragic classic opera La Bohème a woke reboot: City will stage production in REVERSE order to avoid ending where main character dies so audience leaves feeling ‘hopeful and optimistic.’” He began reciting various angry comments to me (“Excellent idea by the woke left”), cackling so loudly that a tech guy preparing to film the rehearsal shushed us. Taking a seat in the mostly empty house, Sharon leaned back to watch the run-through while an assistant director typed his murmured notes into a laptop: His beard looks too trim, make it messier. A couple of words in this supertitle are wrong. Move that stool out of the shadow or it’ll be too dark. And, when one of the characters stood in a particular position with his arm raised: Oh, no — that looks like the poster from “Hamilton!”At the gala opening two days later, a string quartet played songs by Taylor Swift and Daft Punk. The opera itself flew by, per Sharon’s design: “I wanted it to feel like Japanese calligraphy, where you can’t remove your brush from the page,” he said in a talk before the show. “That’s what I’d like this production to feel like: one brush stroke, quick. Like being young.” The minimalist set, by John Conklin, allowed Sharon to eliminate intermissions, which are usually necessary for scene changes, and the relative simplicity of the staging gave him time to focus on the performers, who now had to be prepared to sing the most difficult arias at the end of the evening; Edward Parks and Brandie Inez Sutton, playing the comic-relief lovebirds Marcello and Musetta, stole the show.“The challenge, when we do ‘La Bohème’ and more standard repertoire,” Sharon told me last fall, “will be, how do we bring an improvisatory spirit into something that feels more fixed?” — a spirit closer to that of “Bliss,” wherein the discipline required of the performers also came with enormous freedom. “For me, that’s one of the big experiments of coming into an environment like an opera house, and why ‘La Bohème,’ for me, is one of my biggest experiments.” Not merely doing it backward, he went on, but trying to figure out how to make an opera written in the 19th century feel as if it were being invented right there on the spot. “That discovery, in each and every repetition,” Sharon said. “That’s what you want to try and find a way to capture.” As his production neared its finish (technically the start), even throwaway lines accrued unexpected weight, landing sudden, sharp blows. In the conclusion of Act I, Mimì agrees to join Rodolfo at the Café Momus: “E al ritorno?” he asks. And when we come back? “Curioso,” she replies. Let’s see.Mark Binelli is a contributing writer for the magazine. He last wrote a feature about a biker shootout in Waco, Texas. More

  • in

    Rhiannon Giddens’s ‘Omar’ Premieres at the Spoleto Festival

    Three productions, including the premiere of Rhiannon Giddens and Michael Abels’s “Omar,” distort time in approachable yet provocative ways.CHARLESTON, S.C. — Wander the streets of this Southern city, and you might notice a warping of time and place: a Porsche parked in the driveway of a fastidiously preserved antebellum mansion; a memorial to the American Revolution neighboring one to the secession that spurred the Civil War; a horse-drawn carriage taking tourists past cobblestone streets on their way back to a Carnival cruise ship.Time is no more stable among the three opera productions at the Spoleto Festival USA, which continues here through June 12. A world premiere, “Omar,” is both specific to history and freely anachronistic; while, on another stage, a classic love story, “La Bohème,” is told in reverse; and, nearby, the Crusades are given a modern critique by way of the Baroque in “Unholy Wars.”In all, opera is treated as an act of liberation — a fitting debut for Mena Mark Hanna, the festival’s new general director, who comes from a scholarly background that involved interrogating colonialism’s legacy in classical music. He inherited “Omar,” by Rhiannon Giddens and Michael Abels, but he made it this year’s centerpiece, and surrounded it with works that, like it, are approachable yet refuse to accept or adhere to convention.“Omar” is a homecoming of sorts for Giddens, a conservatory-trained singer who made her reputation as a folk musician of omnivorous inspiration. This project, she recently told The New York Times, is “a return to opera, but on my own terms.”She wasn’t kidding. Only a musician like Giddens could have created “Omar,” for which she wrote the libretto and composed in recorded drafts — she sang and accompanied herself — that were then orchestrated by Abels, with an ear for subtle connections and propulsive drama. Their score, nimbly handled by the conductor John Kennedy and the Spoleto Festival USA Orchestra, is a melting pot inspired by bluegrass, hymns, spirituals and more, with nods to traditions from Africa and Islam. It’s an unforced ideal of American sound: expansive and ever-changing.Giddens and Abels’s sweeping achievement is all the more remarkable because of the intimate story it tells: of Omar Ibn Said, a Muslim scholar who was captured in what is now Senegal and sold into slavery at a market in Charleston — a history he later documented in an autobiographical essay while living in North Carolina, still as property but with relative peace.A rich American portrait emerges from Said’s life, in Giddens’s interpretation of that essay. He bore witness to the dangerous Middle Passage of the slave trade and represented a largely unacknowledged community of Muslims brought to the United States. Giddens imagines him on the sidelines of a family being torn apart at the slave market. And, in a tribute to a pillar of Black American life, he is often surrounded by a chorus.That ensemble — tireless members of the Spoleto Festival USA Chorus — carries this opera, in a way that inevitably recalls Gershwin’s “Porgy and Bess,” which is set in Charleston and is often spoken of as the Great American Opera, despite its complicated legacy as the work of white men who long provided crucial work for Black singers. Works like “Omar” — such as Anthony Davis’s recently revived “X: The Life and Times of Malcolm X” and Terence Blanchard’s “Fire Shut Up in My Bones” — offer an alternative: fresher, more honest depictions of Black life on an operatic scale.Although “Porgy” is firmly in the repertory, “Omar” at least has the opportunity to stake a claim alongside it: Next season, the opera will travel to Los Angeles and Boston, then San Francisco, Chicago and, appropriately, North Carolina. Moving, joyous and in its final moments intensely spiritual, it should not have trouble winning over audiences, as it did on Friday.Kaneza Schaal’s production is as plain-spoken as the libretto, yet absorbingly vivid in Christopher Myers’s scenic design, for which he made prints from Said’s manuscripts in English and Arabic, as well as from woodcuts of slavery documents and runaway ads. Characters wear language on their clothing, and words cover walls; the look of the show propels the story as much as the score does toward the climax of Said’s burning need to write.Language is crucial to the plot as well. Said, sung by the tenor Jamez McCorkle with delicate lyricism in prayer and steely power in adversity, arrives in Charleston unable to understand anyone. Giddens cleverly renders his first owner’s text as Said would have heard it; he and the slaver, Johnson, sing discrete lines in counterpoint, never in the same language, until, under the threat of violence, Said lets out an acquiescent phrase, his first words in English.Johnson is sung by the baritone Malcolm MacKenzie, who returns — after Said escapes his cruel plantation — in Act II as the more benevolent owner Owens. He respects Said’s passionate faith but all but forces him to convert to Christianity. This casting decision makes a clear point: Kind or not, a slaver is still a slaver.Those two men may be in control of Said’s life, but he is more guided by dreams of his mother, Fatima (the mezzo-soprano Cheryse McLeod Lewis), who was killed in the raid that led to his kidnapping; and Julie (the soprano Laquita Mitchell, a smooth-voiced and soothing presence), who escapes from the slave market in Charleston but urges Said to meet her in Fayetteville, N.C., at Owen’s property. When they reunite there, she explains why she was helping him to begin with, in the opera’s finest aria, which begins with the line “My daddy wore a cap like yours.”When she gives Said a new head wrap, to replace the one that had been ripped off his head at the slave market, he realizes that he must reconcile his religious devotion with the existence he is bound to, and tell his story in writing. The opera then ends with a long choral meditation, with singers spread throughout the auditorium, conducted by McCorkle from the stage. When the curtain — which before the show had been decorated with a projection of Said’s face — comes down, his likeness is joined by a dense collage reflecting the accumulation of his experience, with images that resonate across time to the present.George Shirley was the Wanderer, a new character created for Yuval Sharon’s staging of “La Bohème.”Leigh Webber/Spoleto Festival USAIf “Omar” looks forward, then Yuval Sharon’s staging of “La Bohème,” which opened on Saturday, does the opposite, presenting the opera’s four acts in reverse. (The production, which premiered at Detroit Opera last month, will travel next to Boston and Philadelphia.) With no intermission and small cuts to streamline it for a brisk hour and 45 minutes, it was moved along by Kensho Watanabe’s lush yet flowing music direction and John Conklin’s minimal, quickly adaptive set design.To help situate the audience, Sharon introduces the Wanderer, a spoken role played by the 88-year-old George Shirley, the first Black tenor to perform in a leading role with the Metropolitan Opera. As the acts rewind, he stops the action to ask questions that make Puccini’s tragedy more about the why than the what of it all. Rodolfo could have gone back inside in Act III; Musetta could have remained silent at Café Momus; Mimì could have just left Rodolfo’s apartment. This is a production of decisive moments.More than ever, “La Bohème” was also an opera of objects. A bonnet, a muff, a coat — these things are so crucial to the tragic climax that when they are introduced earlier in the story, they too begin to feel like turning points. And, in Sharon’s reading, amid the stormy lovers — Rodolfo (Matthew White) and Mimì (an aching Lauren Michelle); Marcello (Troy Cook) and Musetta (Brandie Sutton) — there is one steady relationship: Colline (Calvin Griffin) and Schaunard (Benjamin Taylor), playful companions who here might be a little something more.Raha Mirzadegan, Coral Dolphin, Karim Sulayman and John Taylor Ward in “Unholy Wars,” a staged program created by Sulayman. Leigh Webber/Spoleto Festival USA“Unholy Wars,” a staged program created by the tenor Karim Sulayman that opened on Sunday, also recasts the familiar. A child of Lebanese immigrants, Sulayman is interested in how Europe has historically decided what constitutes the Middle East, and how it is depicted in Western art. To examine the Crusades, he has turned to Baroque music, with new, mostly prerecorded interludes composed by Mary Kouyoumdjian.The production — directed by Kevin Newbury, and incorporating dance (performed by Coral Dolphin and choreographed by Ebony Williams) and animated projections (by the artist Kevork Mourad) — unfolds in effectively three parts: an exploration of the Middle Eastern “other” in Western works; a dramatic account of Monteverdi’s “Il Combattimento di Tancredi e Clorinda”; and a mournful denouement that attempts to make peace with a musical tradition both violent and sublime.Sulayman performs throughout, joined by the bass-baritone John Taylor Ward and the soprano Raha Mirzadegan, who embody the doomed lovers in “Combattimento,” a story Sulayman recounted with gripping fervor and expressivity that rendered surtitles unnecessary. He ends the evening — at just 70 minutes, still a song too long — with what seem a tired choice: Handel’s “Lascia ch’io pianga.” But here, at the end of a personal journey through lyrics like “She is Black but beautiful,” the aria feels like an urgent plea from Sulayman to be left alone to reflect.Reflect and, perhaps, break free from the long, knotty tendrils of history. It’s a struggle that would have been familiar to Omar Ibn Said, one that plays out in the streets of this city — even throughout this country, in our or any time. More