I am a little bit annoyed. At newspapers critics. I have come home from this and I am thinking what is all the fuss about? Musically, a solid if unspectacular performance. Good orchestra - at times the recitative sounded Baroque, which I have never noticed before in this. Good singing, little of it great, but definitely serviceable, and definitely worth going to hear.
The critics have gone on and on about the production, both now, and when it was originally staged in 2001. I have to say - I was underwhelmed. Critics talked of masturbation - well, some lary lads with too much beer inside them clutching their clothed-crotches; they mentioned urination - Leporello was standing against a wall his back to the audience, obviously he was peeing, but it wasn't, you know, in yer face; and Don Giovanni stood behind a sofa and a stream of water appeared.
Apparently there was 'singing with genitals in mouth'. That must have been when Donna Elvira stuck her head up Leporello's t-shirt. Of course it was meant to be a blow job, but if people are shocked by the acted simulation of something that appears to be a blow-job, purlease...It's called acting: it's what happens in theatres. Frankly, if I had had a small kid with me who had asked 'what's that lady doing to that man?' I would have said - she's putting her head up his t-shirt.
Oh and there was blood and violence - firstly when the Commendatore got brutally murdered - as written by Mozart/Da Ponte; then when Masetto got brutally beaten by Don Giovanni, as written by Mozart and Da Ponte.
So, the music was the beautiful score as written by Mozart. The narrative of the story was exactly as written by Da Ponte. Except at the very end, the story is that the Commendatore's statue comes to life and speaks to Don Giovanni, and then invites himself to dinner before dragging DG down into hell. In this production, it was the vodka bottle that spoke to DG (Oh how unreal, unlikely, ridiculous, unlike the statue of a dead man coming to dinner and dragging someone to hell...).
The settings and scenery were not as one would expect in a traditional production. Instead, the party at the end of Act 1 was held in a bar, as was the bit where DG and Leporello exchanged clothes, so that Leporello could seduce Donna Elvira; then Leporello (dressed as DG) was confronted by Donna Anna, Don Octavo, Zerlina and Masetto in the bar, which eventually morphed into DG's living room. Purists wouldn't approve, but I think it worked.
So, the shocking bits - Zerlina being so easily seduced by DG on her wedding day; DG and Leporello removing their clothes to change them in order to masquerade as each other. Come on, they didn't get naked, they had perfectly voluminous boxer shorts. But both of those are as written. I was trying to understand the deep meaning of the mobile phone going off, then I realised it was some arsehole in the audience.
There were bits that were disappointing - Leporello was portrayed as a fool, whereas I have seen productions where he manages to give the impression that he knows he's being used, he resents it but understands that he and DG have a symbiotic relationship. There are some who think that DG is a lech, a rapist and an all-round baddie; there are others who believe him to be one of those irresistible rogues who uses and discards women. I felt he was neither, just a young man from a posh school with a nihilist hedonistic self-centred attitude to life. Relevance to modern life? Of course - Don Giovanni can be seen down Clapham every Friday and Saturday night; Zerlina and Masetto's wedding party are usually hanging round Croydon Town centre.
About opera in general, a lot of people like traditional productions, because it's all nice costumes and lovely music, and there's no need to think too deeply, because the deeper message lies underneath. So many directors modernise a production in order to remind the audience that the creator of the opera - or the writer of the original novel - was saying something important about society, or history, or psychology. Unfortunately, despite the attempts of the programme notes to create a universal philosophical message, this didn't come out in the production. Basically, it was about some people being hedonistic, and others not. Which is fine. The music is fabulous.
Mark Stone as Don Giovanni took a while to warm up, and then he sang excellently. The portrayal was a bit two-dimensional I would concur with the Observer's he "reminded me of one of our young princelings out binge- drinking". Nice voice. I did like his La ci darem le mano, with Mary Plazas as an adequate Donna Elvira. It is one of my most favourite duets and I have exceedingly high-standards. Those standards weren't met, per se, but I was not disappointed. And his other showpiece arias, notably the Champagne Aria and Deh, vieni alla finestra were memorable
Linda Richardson also took a while to warm up as Donna Anna, but she was, eventually, possibly the best singer. Her coloratura was especially fine especially in Troppo mi...Non mi dir, the bit where I most immersed myself in the music rather than in all the action going on.
Leporello was disappointing in the Madamina, il catalogo � questo, but otherwise was adequate. I felt that William Berger was weak as Don Ottavio, not that great a part anyway, but he clearly reserved his best for Il mio tesoro.
