|
|
|
|
|
Classical Source |
William Yeoman |
Monteverdi: L'Incoronazione di Poppea, London 2005
|
The Coronation of Poppea – Harnoncourt
|
|
Reviewing René Jacobs’s version of this same
work (as presented at the Barbican Hall in a semi-staged production) in
October of last year, I wrote about the skeletal form of the extant
manuscripts and that there are therefore as many potential realisations as
there are performers. Jacobs’s own is particularly imaginative and was
well-executed on the night; Harnoncourt’s presents a different but no less
elegant solution to the problem of how best to present this masterpiece.
The most significant difference between the two approaches can be simply
stated. Jacobs is the greater colourist: he favours a preponderance of wind
instruments and arranges his orchestra in terms of range (lower instruments
on the right, higher on the left) around three continuo groups (left, right
and centre), forming ‘mixed consorts’ of varying timbres. Harnoncourt is
more analytical: there is a definite string bias (the size of the string
section approaching that of a modern chamber orchestra) and the colours are
carefully separated by forming an arc made up of (from left to right) double
basses, violins, violas, cellos, one dulcian (an early version of the
bassoon), two shawms (ditto of the oboe) and two recorder players behind
whom sit two trumpeters. A chamber organ is situated behind the winds; two
harpsichords sit at opposite ends of the stage; the centre (around
Harnoncourt himself) is occupied by two harpists and two theorbo players
(one of whom, as is the case with Jacobs, doubles as a guitarist).
Paradoxically, Harnoncourt showed more willingness than Jacobs to mix the
continuo instruments according to the dramatic context (indeed this was one
of the most striking aspects of the performance – orchestrating sensitively
according to the text), and quite often both harpsichords would
simultaneously realise a bass part, resulting in a much richer texture and
attractive spatial sonority.
A paradox, too, that despite Jacobs being a singer himself, this performance
was both vocally and dramatically superior to that given by Concerto Vocale.
Whether due to a greater breadth of operatic experience across all periods
or willingness on Harnoncourt’s part to adapt authentic performance practice
to the exigencies of contemporary requirements, Zürich Opera delivered what
was for me an unforgettable musical experience. All the principals were
near-flawless: Vesselina Kasarova’s Poppea and Jonas Kaufmann’s Nerone (a
tenor in contrast to Zoryana Kushpler’s soprano for Jacobs) were perfectly
matched – witness the sheer sensual beauty of the final love duet (coloured
by alto recorders and harp); Francesca Provvisionato’s soprano-ish mezzo
made a fragile yet vindictive Ottavia (although her “Addio” was perhaps a
little overdone); Franco Fagioli’s Ottone had a real heroic edge thanks to a
particularly rich countertenor voice; László Polgár was magnificent, playing
Seneca with gentle pathos – his is an expansive stage presence capable of
great subtlety and with a bass to match (it was he who got the greatest
cheer from the audience at the end).
Mention must also be made of high tenor Jean-Paul Fouchécourt as Poppea’s
nurse Arnalta – her final arrogant aria, perfectly accompanied by mocking
shawms and dulcian, in which she fantasises about his condescension towards
those who will fawn over her was one of the highlights of the evening – and
young treble Tino Canziani, drawn from the ranks of the Zürich Boys Choir to
play Amore (a valiant effort sometimes marred by insecure intonation but
charming nonetheless). For the orchestra’s part, the playing, too, was
beyond reproach, the responsive accompaniments punctuated by wildly ecstatic
dances and revealing an evident sense of enjoyment. Harnoncourt’s conducting
was, like his arrangement, discreet and tasteful while being seasoned with
passionate gestures. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|