Tristan und Isolde Dream Date Dilemma

Having heard neither, I personally would opt for the Kleiber given the choice. (I've only heard the Solti and the Bohm.)

Either one in your library, and any version recommended here, would be better than a sleeping potion if you're suffering from insomnia.

A live performance can be a very different experience (i.e. even a mediocre performance of this is likely to be riveting), but I can't imagine keeping my eyes open if I were listening to this without the visual stimulus of even slow moving performers (can't imagine quick movements to this story)!

Phil
pheeling contrary just now....

throb,

Both the recordings you have are good. Personally I rate the Furtwangler highly. If this is the dodgy brick wall ENO production, then unfortunately either recording is probably preferable. I've seen four different productions of T&I, and all have been awful - seems to bring out the worst in directors.

David

Kleiber for me. The other dilemma being...

Glyndebourne or Coliseum?

duncan

Email: djcritchley at hotmail.com

Having got my dates wrong [I thought I was seeing it yesterday, but in fact it's next Thursday] I've probably actually got time to listen to both, but so far on your recommedations have just done the Kleiber, which I enjoyed enormously. The thing it most reminded me of was Pelleas, which is probably not an original observation, but the best I can come up with. Pelleas gets on my tits a bit however, which this does not. It seems in some ways the most radical Wagner opera, and the one which I most find it hard understanding how contemporary audiences coped with. Maybe living in a sexually repressed society gives you an empathy denied to us.

In a perfect world I'd be motoring down to Glyndebourne with a hamper. Well, actually, if it was a really perfect world I'd be jetting off to the new Vienna production - however, for me it's the tube and ENO's dodgy brick wall with a couple of Mars bars and an ENO probably equally dodgy prawn cocktail sandwich.

I missed this production on its first outing because I couldn't get anyone to go with, and I hate going to things on my own. I don't know that many people who like opera as much as me, and even the tentative few blanch when faced with the W word which is , as we all know such a stupid preconception. In my limited experience, the hours always fly by and more popular and less worthy operas which take up far fewer real world minutes can last twice as long. Now however, I have found the perfect stooge in a friend who during the first interval of Parsifal, when I, writhing on ENO's nasty turquoise carpet in my own fortunately non-life threatening liebestod asked if he wasn't overcome by the general swooniness of the music, replied that he hadn't actually noticed it, he was too busy listening to the words. Takes all sorts, I suppose.

Reviews have been generally good [apart from the Guardian, which seems to have a bit of a downer on ENO at the moment]and I'll be interested to see how David Alden copes. He is generally a very thoughtful director, but I can see how T&I could stump anybody. I'll let you know.

throb

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross:
I think it is his greatest opera...far better than his four-part Lord of the Rings blockbuster.

---

Better than Parsifal? That I have trouble agreeing with. Your other statement is dead on, though.

After I first listened to Solti's Tristan, I couldn't really understand what all the fuss was about, but after I listened to (and bought) the Bohm I sure could. I'll probably add another set or two to my collection, but in any event, when Tristan is done properly it is magnificent and transcends most other music.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross:
By contrast, the sterile rules of serialism achieve the first objective but in almost all cases fail dismally at the second.

---

You just had to add that, didn't you? You would obviously agree that most serial music is an intellectual exercise first, an aesthetic experiment second. Since I highly value such intellectual exercises I am attracted to much – but by no means all – serial music. Of course there are some wonderful serial achievements.

Finally saw it last night, and am still wallowing in that indescribable post-Wagnerian glow [what must it be like after a week of the Ring at Beyreuth?. I can only imagine].

The 'dodgy brick wall' production I found mostly convincing, in fact a mostly excellent concept. Do we want a manky old ship? Not really. It held up until Act III, when it lost me [and we lost the wall]. Everybody went all existentialist and didn't look at each other, Isolde sang the Liebestod to the audience, and then rather than dying just walked slowly to the back of the stage. Becoming one with the world's breath, or just popping off to Sainsbury's? Hard to tell.
Of course, conceptually I can see what was going on, but I think dramatically it was rather flat. Why sacrifice the only piece of actual physical drama [i.e Isolde & Tristan's corpse] to a concept? Singing competent to good. I would never have marked Susan Bullock out as a Wagnerian, but she did it pretty well. David Rendall as Tristan suffered from looking too much like Bill Bailey after a pie-fest. It's hard to ask for visually convincing Wagnerians, I know, - but on stage at least I always prefer plausibility over vocal talent. Glyndebourne, I hear has both [R3 this Saturday, BTW].

Vocally, the star of the evening for me was Jane Irwin 's Brangane. She was absolutely superb, especially in Act II. Interestingly, I think this was perhaps the best lit opera production I have ever seen. Constantly changing to reflect the music, and using a huge palette of subtle effects, the idea of using light to compenste [?] for lack of onstage movement [although everyone did stomp about a fair bit] was new to me - or at least this was the first time I have noticed it quite so consciously.

Anyway, in spite of any reservations, the evening [and afternoon] has put T&I up there, just nuzzling under Parsifal as my favourite Wagner. [Ross, Parsifal is not a silly opera. It has an infinite number of interpretations which are just as gnomic as T&I - more powerful even, in that Wagner's intentions are less perfectly understood. It also has the advantage of being the work of a genius who is able to use the full range of his experience with ultimate control & restraint. T&I fascinates because conceptions of music are stretched almost to breaking point as new boundaries are discovered and challenged. Parsifal overwhelms by magisterial revelation of conquered technique. Tannhauser is a silly opera. Still like it, though ]

Wagner in performance is like nothing else, is it?

throb

I have the following recordings:
1936: Covent Garden, London, Reiner (live)(Naxos) (probably conducted partly by Reiner and Beecham, which is not mentioned in the booklet of the Naxos edition, but in the one that comes with an E.M.I.-Références edition of the same performance),
1952: Bayreuth, Karajan (live)(Golden Melodram),
1953: Furtwängler (studio)(E.M.I.-Great Recordings of the Century),
1966: Bayreuth, Böhm (live)(Deutsche Grammophon-The Originals),
1972: Karajan (studio)(E.M.I.),
1982: Kleiber (studio)(Deutsche Grammophon).
My absolutely favourites are the Furtwängler and the Böhm recordings, with a slight preference for the Böhm recording because it's live and in stereo.
On Saturday, 7th June 2003, I attended a wonderful performance in Vienna, which was an entirely new production (the premiere was in May this year) and had a great success (with conductor Christian Thielemann and Deborah Voigt as Isolde, Petra Lang as Brangäne, Thomas Moser as Tristan, Peter Weber as Kurwenal and Robert Holl as Marke). Performances of the same production will take place again in September 2003 and in May 2004. (details under: www.wiener-staatsoper.at).
Did I mention that 'Tristan' is one of my absolutely favourite operas.

Christian

throb,

Glad you enjoyed the evening - when I said the production was dodgy, I was referring more to the stage direction rather than the sets. The actual set I thought was OK, but my reservations were pretty similar to yours - it was all the gesticulating in the first act, and the treatment of Act 3 which seemed more like a theoretical study rather than a drama.

Christian,

I'm currently enjoying the 1936 Reiner Naxos version. Certainly Kirsten Flagstad's voice is better suited to the role in 1936 than in the Furtwangler version 16 years later. Melchior is also in wonderful voice. Haven't listened to it enough yet to confirm whether it's my favourite. First impressions are that Reiner's conducting lacks a bit of energy, so probably won't be.

I think you're wrong about the Reiner/Beecham mix. Some years ago there was a EMI edition that comprised a mix of Reiner and Beecham (they both conducted the work in the same season at Covent Garden). The Naxos is taken completely from the Reiner version to my knowledge. There is also available a complete 1936 Beecham recording (also with Flagstad and Melchior) available on the Archipel label which may well be worth investigating.

BTW Tell me more about the 1952 Karajan. I've also recently been listening to the 1951 Karajan Bayreuth Meistersinger and Act 1 Die Walkure, the former a truly great performance, and the latter very good. He was a very different conductor back then.

I've been comparing the Reiner with both the Furtwangler and the Bohm versions. The worse sound of the two mono recordings hardely seems to bother me at all. Makes me wonder why I bother with hifi at all.

David

[This message was edited by David Hobbs-Mallyon on MONDAY 16 June 2003 at 15:06.]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian Reitin:
Did I mention that 'Tristan' is one of my absolutely favourite operas?

---

We'd kind of figured.

The Böhm is a great recording.

Herman

David, checking past reviews, I think I was slightly luckier in the singers this time, although both were far from ideal, both vocally and visually. They still did it for me though, which is what ulimately counts, but I can only imagine what top notch interpretations would be like. Act II was the point when everything really worked, and as I said before, the lighting really came into its own here.

Christian, please tell us more about the new Vienna production. I had heard great things about it, and would be interested in a personal view.

Ross, - where are you? I still want to know why you think Parsifal is silly!

throb

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross Blackman:
some of Wagner's greatest music, but the story is definitely on the silly side.

---

Clearly a lawyer talking. The story isn't too realistic, but it is tremendously affecting, partly due to its -] [ - structure. It starts at an end, and it ends with a beginning. Admittedly the middle is in the middle.

If I may talk lawyerly literalistic, you are talking about Parsifal as an opera, but it doesn't say it's an opera. It a Bühnenweihfestspiel, if memory serves. It has certain oratorio-like qualities.

Herman

What's all of this writing about the relative "realism" or "silliness" of Parsifal? It is definitely not realistic - but then what Wagner opera is? The only one that comes close is Meistersinger.

Parsifal is Wagner's greatest work. Ross, you may continue to hold your misguided opinions; I will just have to remind you that you are wrong.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross Blackman:
After all, if you're interested in realism, opera wouldn't exactly be your first choice of genres.

---

True.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ross Blackman:
Tristan eats Parsifal's lunch.

---

False.

We'll have to agree to disagree, even though I'm right.