Parsifal Deutsche Oper Berlin
April 19th 2019
If Rienzi can be rather a challenging opera to stage and perform well, then Parsifal is in a different league. I freely admit that it has taken me a very long time to even begin to fully appreciate this work – and even now I still at times have my doubts. However, if a performance achieves transcendence musically and/or is an amazing staging then it is quite extraordinary – as with the Herheim Bayreuth production which (online) was one of the most extraordinary have ever seen. I have not (yet) experienced that in the opera house (although have seen it very few times) but I will be interested to see what the Hungarian State opera version is like – a new production next season as part of their ‘Christian’ theme. (See an earlier posting by me on this matter…)
With this production I did not have a sense of an over-riding vision that drove the staging – this is not to say that it was bad or even indifferent – just that it did not have that over-arching idea that pulled together all the elements – set, lighting, design etc. etc. There was (essentially) one set – a ‘stony place’, Golgotha-like with massive brown-yellow rock formations being the main visual element. This changed slightly between the three acts and which was visible from the opening of the prelude which had a depiction of the Crucifixion and Deposition from the cross. This appropriately suggested both physically and spiritually deprived place – Dry Salvages was the phrase that came to mind.
Another problem is that the titular character is a very passive one – he reacts to (or sometimes doesn’t as at the end of Act 1) to events around him and only rarely is he the catalyst for action. Our Parsifal Brandon Jovanovich had both power and a degree of sweetness in his tone and effectively conveyed the characters baffling naivety in the first act. As Gurnemanz (by reputation the biggest n-bore in opera) Gunther Groissbock did very well in holding our interest in his lengthy narratives with a rich and varied tonal palette while as Kindry Elena Pankratova gave promise of a fine and powerful voice that was proven in the second act. The chorus (vital) were excellent – sonorous and powerful. I was somewhat puzzled by the appearance of flagellants amongst them unless this was to suggest that the knights of the grail are a broken group with no spiritual leadership and so the flagellants suggest that they need to punish themselves; but I am unsure about this and I wonder if the director was too. It seemed to be an aspect that was in the production for no real and validly-made reason. It was a slow performance – well, in one sense the entire opera is a paean to the art of the slow – but it did not drag which is a very considerable feat for this work and kudos to the conductor (the great Runnicles) for this achievement.
Act 2 was, again, sound, but did not really take fire Jovanovich and Pankratova interacted very well and there was some real connection between the two of them, musically and dramatically with a fine sense of passion. The set was very similar to Act 1 which did not really help the drama as surely Klingsor’s castle should be in every was the opposite of the world of the Grail – although as an outcast member of the group a case could be made for a degree of similarity. Here though it seemed somewhat cursory and, as with much else with the visuals of the production, I thought that much ore thought should have been given to all details and overall look so that there was a dramatic and logical reason for everything that we saw on stage. Just as in a film or stage set, ideally, every little last detail should be there for a reason and helping to advance the story, the character development, and the main themes of the work. This I think was the biggest overall weakness of this production – this overarching sense of what the work was about was not there. Herheims’s Bayreuth version, on the other hand, had all of that and more which I think is why it was so astonishing.
The Flower Maidens should surely have been far more different to anything we had seen before on the stage and while there was a degree of this with the costume and movement, it was not nearly as dramatic and marked as was suggested by the music which is very different to anything we have heard up until that point. Once again, an overarching sense of the drama and major themes was lacking. The scene lacked magic which was a pretty significant lack. Perhaps this was the key to the essential weakness of the production; that there was a lack of dramatic contrast in all aspects. It was there to a degree but not intensely enough and not to the extent that it was reflected n the music. If the musical score was technicolour, the visual and staging were, well if not black and white, in somewhat faded and muted colours that did not match the soundscape.
I hope I have managed to convey what I want; I am not sure so if anyone wants to comment or criticise then please do so. I welcome responses to these reviews!
Act 3 continued in a similar vein – sound, decent but with a certain lack of dramatic urgency – until the final 20-30 minutes when something happened and the performance, almost suddenly, went into transcendent mode. I got the authentic goose bumps and shivers down my spine – and I still wonder why. Something suddenly seemed to happen with all the performers and the ending was gloriously and passionately magical. One could almost say it was worth it for just those few moments. Almost.