Denis Fodor writes:

>When you take into account the programming at the bigger houses I think
>you'll find that the taste of "culinary-minded consumers" largely
>prevails.

Quite true - but the problem is that even "Tosca" and "Carmen" need
directors, and it's the indignities visited on these dear old warhorses
(rather than on such mettlesome colts as "Death in Venice" or "Nixon in
China") that cause stampedes in the culinary stables!

To extrapolate a little, Denis is right to suggest that 'Culinary
consumers' fill many of the subscription stalls and circle seats in the
larger houses, which gives them financial clout. Frankly, the stalls at
London's Covent Garden are a demoralising place for music (and especially
theatre) lovers to watch opera, inhabited as they so often are by
somnolent, corporate bean-feasters who offer convincing evidence for
life after death. The Consumers tend to give place higher up the house
to a more vibrant crowd, far less tolerant of Old (or New) Hat!

Certainly the "cheeky, provocative" directors and designers tend to be
more at ease as well as better appreciated in those higher echelons.

The divide lies in the semantic shading of "cheeky" and "provocative".
Now, many of us relish provocation and like cheek. They speak of energy,
enthusiasm, irreverence and a passion for novelty rather than institutional
art which is both healthy and desirable. Many others feel otherwise:
cheek and provocation are anathema to temple guardians of "Die heilige
Kunst". The Consumers come to The House to seek solace, to commune with
the familiar, and they do not want their ideas - or any others - subjected
to testing or exploration. The Holy Canon is fixed; and they are often
alienated by the very idea of 'Opera as Drama'.

In other words, there always has been and always will be a tension. No
problem there - we are all free to take what we want from the opera
experience. Where I take issue with Denis is his implicit suggestion
that theatrical types and composers should be false to their own lights,
should pander to accepted taste rather than seek to extend it. Cheek and
Provocation are very potent weapons in this eternal holding war of Art
v. Talking Money, and we'd all - on both sides of the divide - be very
poorly off without them.

Christopher Webber,  Blackheath, London,  UK.
http://www.nashwan.demon.co.uk/zarzuela.htm
"ZARZUELA!"