Thread: A Great Opera Is Ignored. But Why?

This past June the Zurich Opera House staged Hindemith’s great work Mathis der Maler. There were 7 performances. The title role was sung by Thomas Hampson (his debut) and Daniele Gatti conducted. A real highlight on the opera calendar for sure and yet it received depressingly little coverage.

There was nothing in any of the main broadsheets (Guardian, Times, Telegraph, Herald Tribune). Not even the opera forums made note of the omission. But what is truly inexplicable to me is the fact that the 4 leading magazines -- Opera News, Opera Now, Opera Brittania and the venerable Opera UK also chose to ignore it. There is not A SINGLE WORD on this major and rarely performed masterpiece or its star cast.

The website OperaCritic.com which usually provides about 10 reviews on average for each opera posted only 4 (yes 4!) entries. And these were mostly by freelance critics.

http://theoperacritic.com/reviewsa.p...=zrhmathis0612

Any idea on why editors and critics seemingly have no affection for Hindemith’s great opera?

How much does the British newspapers generally cover foreign opera?

But I agree, it's weird that the big opera magazines didn't cover something like this.

Sometimes it happens.

I've always considered La fanciulla del West one of the best works from Puccini (the music, not the libretto) but i has been somehow into oblivion.

Originally Posted by dionisio

Sometimes it happens.

I've always considered La fanciulla del West one of the best works from Puccini (the music, not the libretto) but i has been somehow into oblivion.

Ah yes, my favourite Puccini opera. I woudn't say oblivion though, I have 5 different productions on DVD so it's still well in the repertoire.

Does anyone think that a factor for the lack of recognition &/or popularity of the opera version of 'mathis' is that the symphony (a spin off of the opera) kind of steals its thunder?

I mean do people think something like they've heard the symphony and that's it, they don't venture further into the opera. I know the symphony is among Hindemith's most recorded and popular orchestral works.

We could maybe ask for a show of hands as to who has heard the symphony and who has heard the opera. Anyone know them both? I only know the symphony, I've had it on cd for almost 20 years. I like it, but not being an opera fan, I have not ventured so far to actively seek out the opera.

This kind of thing could explain it a bit, I would guess most people on this forum (certainly those into 20th century music) would have heard the symphony, definitely (people have posted it on 'current listening' from time to time).

Richard Gill (Australian conductor, was artistic director of Victorian Opera until a little while ago) says that opera audiences are the most conservative of them all, so I'm not surprised that it's been ignored. I'm probably going to see an opera by Astor Piazzolla next year, even more obscure than Mathis der Maler and I doubt there would be much of a spotlight on that production either.

Originally Posted by ComposerOfAvantGarde

Richard Gill (Australian conductor, was artistic director of Victorian Opera until a little while ago) says that opera audiences are the most conservative of them all, so I'm not surprised that it's been ignored. I'm probably going to see an opera by Astor Piazzolla next year, even more obscure than Mathis der Maler and I doubt there would be much of a spotlight on that production either.

Which one? I saw "Maria de Buenos Aires" some years ago. But i think it was more of a picture with words and music rather than an opera.

Originally Posted by mamascarlatti

Ah yes, my favourite Puccini opera. I woudn't say oblivion though, I have 5 different productions on DVD so it's still well in the repertoire.

You're right, i didtn't express myself right. It seems more like an opera in no man's land. Not good enough to stay in the italian romantic opera side and not good enough to stay on the post-romantic/modernism/expressionism/20th century side.

Originally Posted by Xavier

This past June the Zurich Opera House staged Hindemith’s great work Mathis der Maler. There were 7 performances. The title role was sung by Thomas Hampson (his debut) and Daniele Gatti conducted. A real highlight on the opera calendar for sure and yet it received depressingly little coverage.

There was nothing in any of the main broadsheets (Guardian, Times, Telegraph, Herald Tribune). Not even the opera forums made note of the omission. But what is truly inexplicable to me is the fact that the 4 leading magazines -- Opera News, Opera Now, Opera Brittania and the venerable Opera UK also chose to ignore it. There is not A SINGLE WORD on this major and rarely performed masterpiece or its star cast.

The website OperaCritic.com which usually provides about 10 reviews on average for each opera posted only 4 (yes 4!) entries. And these were mostly by freelance critics.

http://theoperacritic.com/reviewsa.p...=zrhmathis0612

Any idea on why editors and critics seemingly have no affection for Hindemith’s great opera?

There may not have been any reviews -- yet -- in the English-language publications, but that's not the case for at least one of the German-language publications. Das Opernglas has a short review in its September issue. The September/October issue of Opernwelt is focused almost entirely on reviews of festival performances, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a review of the Zürich Mathis der Maler in this magazine's November issue. As for Opera News, the European performance reviews always lag months behind. We may find a review of the Zürich performance in a December or January issue.

Originally Posted by dionisio

You're right, i didtn't express myself right. It seems more like an opera in no man's land. Not good enough to stay in the italian romantic opera side and not good enough to stay on the post-romantic/modernism/expressionism/20th century side.

Aah yes, I see what you mean. I wouldn't say not good enough, but the problem is that on one hand it's through composed in quite a modern way, with some interesting harmonies, but on the other hand the music is wildly and gloriously romantic.

Originally Posted by MAuer

There may not have been any reviews -- yet -- in the English-language publications. As for Opera News, the European performance reviews always lag months behind

Yes that's true but I carefully checked the international section the other day and it's full of performances from June and even July. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the 'lag' is never more than 3 months... ?

Das Opernglas has a short review in its September issue.

But you see it's only a 'short' review....

Originally Posted by dionisio

Which one? I saw "Maria de Buenos Aires" some years ago. But i think it was more of a picture with words and music rather than an opera.

That one. Not an opera? Oh well, but anyway Victorian Opera does stuff like that sometimes.

English language journals, none with their base on the European Continent? Sounds like a simple case of parochialism / Jingoism, etc.

I wonder how much press this got in the nation in which it was performed, of course that press, journals or papers, zines and blogs, in German????

Some operas have great music and a terrible or ridiculous book, which fails them as stage works while their music is more than wonderful.... I've never read about Hindemith's tremendous stage / theatrical sense.... and that could be another reason for this opera's infrequent performance.

Thanks again folks.

I really can't understand why it remains largely unknown not just with regular opera goers but among academics and opera scholars as well. And I have no idea why it inspires so little affection from the few who do intimately know it.

I do know that Mathis der Maler is perceived as “untrendy or “unglamorous” when set beside the operas of Strauss, Berg, Stravinsky, Messiaen, Shostakovich, Schoenberg and Janacek. And of course it is radically different — in aesthetic and technique — compared to the tightly packed Cardillac. It also lasts over 3 hours (without the intermissions). And yes it probably is less innately ‘theatrical’ than, say, Berg or Britten but this is never an issue for me since I adore the entire score (with the exception of Regina’s music in the First Tableaux which I find musically inane. Thankfully her role here is small. And when she does reappear in the Sixth Tableaux it’s with a nice lament)

The mostly lukewarm to negative assessment by professional critics over the past 74 years doesn’t seem to be changing. Here for example are two recent comments on the 2010 Paris production:

“Mathis der Maler” is not an easy work to hear. The austere, almost academic passages, the skewed fugues and quirky counterpoint, can sound more like arguments than like opera”

– (Opera News)

“The best music in the score is undoubtedly in the opening prelude (Concert of Angels), the orchestral interludes and the final 20 minutes (Seventh Tableaux) of the opera. The rest of the piece is discursive and drab. It outstays its welcome because Hindemith was not an instinctive musical dramatist. I won’t feel deprived if I don’t see it again for another 20 years.

– (Opera UK)


Oh well… I have given up trying to persuade those who resist this incredible opera.

As an aside: it completely baffles me that Ursula’s big, gorgeous aria in the Fifth Tableaux — “Verdammt Mich fur Niedriges” (Condemn me for a base action that I did unwittingly) followed by the great quartet between Cardinal Albrecht, Ursula, Capito and Riedinger – has never been excerpted.

Maybe in some ways Mathis der Maler really is meant for a select subculture of connoisseurs.

You should not be surprised Xavier. Even the best scores (orchestral and chamber music included) of Hindemith struggle to be performed, let alone to be recognized, for their real musical merits.
Mathis der Maler is a sort of difficult to penetrate work . In any way, it can never be the sort of cup of tea of Opera goers, producers, singers, performers even conductors. It's a masterpiece for the few "cognocescenti". (I say that while I have been in listening and following Opera for more than 30 years).

Principe