Christopher Webber, commenting on VW's Sir John, Verdi's Falstaff, and here,
reacting to Steve's comments on Block's Macbeth

>>and Bloch's Macbeth, according to Andrew Porter, THE greatest opera
>>based on a Shakespearean play.  I finally heard it on CD (and will
>>review it).  While I have problems assigning "the greatest" to
>>anything, I wouldn't be outraged at Porter's opinion either.
>
>I'd be inclined to think that opinion one of Porter's rare lapses.
>Bloch's version (unlike Verdi's "Macbeth", his second greatest Shakespeare
>opera after "Falstaff"!) has always left me sadly disappointed, for its
>tame musical inspiration and empty rhetoric.  Atmospheric, sure, but not
>really memorable or engaging.  I'd like to be persuaded otherwise, though,
>and look forward to reading Steve's passionate case for it!

I reviewed Bloch's Macbeth in the Jan/Feb 2003 American Record Guide.
I began the review not opining on the quality of the opera so much as
describing it as best as I could. I then moved on to the recording under
review, the Capriccio reproduction of a German production, which I compared
at length with the French production on Actes Sud.

One thing I must point out.  The Capriccio makes several cuts throughout
the opera.  The Actes Sud cuts one major scene.  Both cuts are bothersome,
particularly Capriccio's.

Far more serious is the supplied libretto situation.  Capriccio
supplied none, at least in the US.  Actes Sud provides one in French only.
Fortunately, I was able to obtain a score of Bloch's English language
version, which helped immensely.  The lack of an English translation is
a major impediment for us English monolinguals.

As to the opera, I can understand your feelings, but confess I love it.
Here's hoping Steve will convince you to give it another shot.

Roger Hecht <[log in to unmask]>