PS Un “blogger” non è un oracolo e commette inevitabilmente errori (il minimo possibile..). Ricevo spesso “correzioni” non sempre fondamentali e non sempre precise. Così come io mi sottopongo al giudizio altrui con nome e cognome così chi vorrà avere la bontà di segnalarmi eventuali errori o imprecisioni dovrà farlo unicamente mandando un commento: a ognuno la propria responsabilità. In base alla nuova normativa chi si fosse iscritto e desidera de-iscriversi è sufficiente che mi invii un messaggio e-mail..

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

As always, it would be unfair to point out that what appears in Cammarano’s libretto has very little to do with historical reality. Elizabeth, of course, never abdicated—least of all for a love affair. She died in her bed, and the succession passed to James VI of Scotland (son of her second cousine Mary Stuart, executed for treason), who became James I of England. Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex—more than thirty years younger than Elizabeth—after having been her “favorite” was executed for fomenting an anti‑monarchical revolt, in fact the only one Elizabeth I faced in her forty‑four‑year reign. But so be it: an opera is certainly not judged by its adherence to historical truth (one need only think of Verdi’s Don Carlos). The Bologna production could almost be considered a “provocation,” given its entirely traditional, historically minded staging—especially if one thinks of the “creative” and often tasteless sets (though not all, of course) that infest opera houses today, with Damiano Michieletto as their standard‑bearer. Here, dark colours provide the scenographic “imprint,” at times brightened by the protagonists’ flamboyant costumes. And the choice to introduce a jester wandering onstage from the overture onward is certainly a felicitous one. But it is the overall directorial approach that underscores the tragedy of the opera. Even certain rather “bold” choices—such as portraying a subdued, diminished Elizabeth in the final scene—prove entirely meaningful. Renato Palumbo’s conducting (rightly applauded) was of great quality, drawing from the Teatro Comunale orchestra the very best it has to offer. His nuances never overwhelmed the voices; rather, they supported them—one might even say encouraged them—to express their full potential. It must be said that the orchestra’s overall improvement is remarkable, raising it to a level of excellence that allows it to compete confidently with other Italian ensembles (and not only Italian ones). A more nuanced discussion is needed for the cast. Unfortunately, the replacement of Karen Gardeazabal in the role of Elizabeth (and perhaps, if one announces a replacement, one should also indicate the reason) diminished part of the interest, even though Ekaterina Bakanova did not disappoint. A strong, dramatic voice, not always at her happiest in the high register, but fully capable of conveying the character’s emotional intensity. In the cast, the least convincing voice was perhaps that of Francesco Demuro, who alternated beautiful phrases with others more metallic in timbre, and who had a few lapses in intonation. His role is certainly treacherous (consider the final act and all the solos he must tackle), so his overall performance remains decidedly positive. The most satisfying voice, however, was that of Vladimir Stoyanov, a baritone perfectly suited to the role and entirely without blemish. Excellent. A separate mention goes to Raffaella Lupinacci, who in a smaller role held her own perfectly well alongside the more prominent protagonists. The remaining cast members were solid professionals.  Roberto Devereux was undoubtedly the most successful production of the operatic season so far, rewarded with a great and well‑deserved public triumph.

P.S. I was seated next to two girls in their twenties who spent the entire performance compulsively checking their phones (fortunately with the brightness turned down, unlike another rude spectator three seats away who kept his screen glaringly lit throughout the first act—then left… But what are the ushers there for?). And this wasn’t in response to any notification, but rather a kind of compulsive need to check—an almost addictive digital dependency that made me realize how, for some people, the smartphone has become a vital source of life. What they understood of the opera is unclear; what is clear is that we are facing a serious pathology.

P.P.S. My posts lack the usual historical‑musical introduction to the opera that is standard practice in reviews. It seems pointless to duplicate what can easily be found in newspaper articles: Kurvenal deals only with what is staged, cutting away all the background

PS I would kindly ask the readers of this blog to  register  (which implies nothing) which can be easily made  by “clicking” the black square above each post. By so doing they will receive an e-mail message whenever a new post is published.

PS A “blogger” is not an oracle and inevitably makes errors (the minimum possible..). I often receive “corrections” not always fundamental and not always accurate. Just as I submit myself to the judgement of others with the name and surname so those who want to have the goodness to report errors or inaccuracies will have to do so only by sending a comment: everyone has his own responsibility.

Per un elenco aggiornato di tutti i precedenti  posts di questo blog con i corrispondenti links

PS  Vorrei ringraziare tutti coloro che inseriscono commenti  ai posts utilizzando l’opzione “Lascia un commento”  (o “commenti” se ne sono già stati inseriti) prevista nella sezione sinistra (o prima del testo per schermi ridotti come i tablets) dei posts stessi affinchè tutti possano leggerli.  Il dibattito è sempre interessante per tutti…..grazie (è indispensabile lasciare nome e cognome – i commenti anonimi non saranno pubblicati)!!