Christ, what an asshole
Lyric's Rigoletto was a happy family. The only weak voice was Monterone, but, hey, Silvastrelli can't be in every production of theirs. We knew Kelsey could sing from past seasons but he still impressed us; I actually got shivers at one point. Polenzani was excellent but the real revelation was Rose Feola as Gilda. I know encores aren't a thing any more, but I seriously considered shouting for one after she sang "Caro Nome".
Nuphy pronounced it the best production of the opera he's seen, so it probably is for me, too, since I haven't seen any he hasn't. I want to say this is my fourth at the Lyric so I might have to review my reviews to be sure. For sure it's better than the incoherent staging of a few years back where they set it in a gentleman's club for no good reason.
Given how many times I've seen it, I was surprised I'd forgotten how much of a dick Rigoletto is. At intermission, our professor friend asked if this was a tragedy in the classic sense. Obviously there are no gods, so I took this as meaning is what happens an inevitable result of the shitty hand Rigoletto has been dealt by life? And I can't agree.
For starters, his possessiveness of his daughter is creepy and self-defeating. If he really wants to keep her safe in that kind of predatory environment, he should be marrying her off to someone substantial with the position and resources to defend her as staunchly as he wishes he could. But that would mean sharing the affections which he calls the only joy in his life. He also doesn't have to be as cruel to the courtiers as he is. Yeah, they're awful to him, but they're awful to everybody. Without them around, he'd be begging in the streets.
He also asked us, "Is the curse even necessary?" I thought it a fair question since--unlike in Tristan und Isolde or Siegfried--it doesn't set anything in motion. The chain of events can be completely explained by the personalities involved with no need for external forces. Moreover, the Duke dodges its effects entirely, since his charms are enough to get a poor innocent to take the bullet (or, rather, knife blade) for him.
And it really is amazingly tightly plotted for a grand opera. When Nuphy reminded me that it was only about two-and-a-half hours including intermission I was like, "But so much happens!" There's just not time to get bored--though of course that's hard to do anyway with so many great tunes.
They also gave us a lot to look at. The use of colours was so bold that during Act Two I kept shutting my eyes just so I could enjoy the afterimages. At first having the colonnade descend seemed gratuitous (I often feel like Lyric productions get show-offy with the stage machinery) but it later made sense. We were struck with what an effective job they did of simulating water in the last act when the river takes up centre stage. The designers cited de Chirico as a primary influence but the odd angles give the production a very expressionist feel which terrifically compliments the dramatic themes.
We had only tiny quibbles on the set direction. Nuphy pointed out that they left out the crucial flash of lightening which allows Rigoletto to recognise his dead daughter and, in the previous scene, he's standing downstage centre and looking directly into the audience with her well upstage of him as she sings about seeing "gioia feroce" flashing in his eyes. Most everything else they got right. There's dynamism to the crowd scenes and the action is all very legible.
For such a strong production there were a surprising number of empty seats. We asked Nuphs if the reviews had been bad and he said he didn't recall any. We eventually figured out this was opening night which explained why everyone was so dressy. It caught us by surprise because our last performance was opening night and we usually only have two at most in our subscription so it's odd to have them back-to-back.
That opera, btw, was Gluck's Eurydice et Orphée, which was beautiful to listen to but I felt like the drama got smothered under all the ballet. The prof characterised the dancing as "decorative" which is to say it wasn't working much to reinforce let alone further the narrative themes and sometimes even seemed to be at odds with them. (There's a lot of scenery moving around the stage which does more to confuse the action than clarify it.) It felt like something of a chore to get through.
There was also the awkwardness that Nuphy apparently failed to foresee the effect that a dramatisation of following your recently-departed spouse down to Hades in an attempt to bring them back would have on me. I kept the sobbing quiet enough not to disturb anyone yet he still noticed and offered me some comfort. It's funny: 28 years of watching operas and only now am I beginning to understand why people cry at them.
Nuphy pronounced it the best production of the opera he's seen, so it probably is for me, too, since I haven't seen any he hasn't. I want to say this is my fourth at the Lyric so I might have to review my reviews to be sure. For sure it's better than the incoherent staging of a few years back where they set it in a gentleman's club for no good reason.
Given how many times I've seen it, I was surprised I'd forgotten how much of a dick Rigoletto is. At intermission, our professor friend asked if this was a tragedy in the classic sense. Obviously there are no gods, so I took this as meaning is what happens an inevitable result of the shitty hand Rigoletto has been dealt by life? And I can't agree.
For starters, his possessiveness of his daughter is creepy and self-defeating. If he really wants to keep her safe in that kind of predatory environment, he should be marrying her off to someone substantial with the position and resources to defend her as staunchly as he wishes he could. But that would mean sharing the affections which he calls the only joy in his life. He also doesn't have to be as cruel to the courtiers as he is. Yeah, they're awful to him, but they're awful to everybody. Without them around, he'd be begging in the streets.
He also asked us, "Is the curse even necessary?" I thought it a fair question since--unlike in Tristan und Isolde or Siegfried--it doesn't set anything in motion. The chain of events can be completely explained by the personalities involved with no need for external forces. Moreover, the Duke dodges its effects entirely, since his charms are enough to get a poor innocent to take the bullet (or, rather, knife blade) for him.
And it really is amazingly tightly plotted for a grand opera. When Nuphy reminded me that it was only about two-and-a-half hours including intermission I was like, "But so much happens!" There's just not time to get bored--though of course that's hard to do anyway with so many great tunes.
They also gave us a lot to look at. The use of colours was so bold that during Act Two I kept shutting my eyes just so I could enjoy the afterimages. At first having the colonnade descend seemed gratuitous (I often feel like Lyric productions get show-offy with the stage machinery) but it later made sense. We were struck with what an effective job they did of simulating water in the last act when the river takes up centre stage. The designers cited de Chirico as a primary influence but the odd angles give the production a very expressionist feel which terrifically compliments the dramatic themes.
We had only tiny quibbles on the set direction. Nuphy pointed out that they left out the crucial flash of lightening which allows Rigoletto to recognise his dead daughter and, in the previous scene, he's standing downstage centre and looking directly into the audience with her well upstage of him as she sings about seeing "gioia feroce" flashing in his eyes. Most everything else they got right. There's dynamism to the crowd scenes and the action is all very legible.
For such a strong production there were a surprising number of empty seats. We asked Nuphs if the reviews had been bad and he said he didn't recall any. We eventually figured out this was opening night which explained why everyone was so dressy. It caught us by surprise because our last performance was opening night and we usually only have two at most in our subscription so it's odd to have them back-to-back.
That opera, btw, was Gluck's Eurydice et Orphée, which was beautiful to listen to but I felt like the drama got smothered under all the ballet. The prof characterised the dancing as "decorative" which is to say it wasn't working much to reinforce let alone further the narrative themes and sometimes even seemed to be at odds with them. (There's a lot of scenery moving around the stage which does more to confuse the action than clarify it.) It felt like something of a chore to get through.
There was also the awkwardness that Nuphy apparently failed to foresee the effect that a dramatisation of following your recently-departed spouse down to Hades in an attempt to bring them back would have on me. I kept the sobbing quiet enough not to disturb anyone yet he still noticed and offered me some comfort. It's funny: 28 years of watching operas and only now am I beginning to understand why people cry at them.