Christopher Webber wrote:

>Margaret Mikulska replies to Steve Schwartz:
>
>>>I understand your point.  However, I'm now confused about why you object
>>>to a Trump Tower Le Nozze.  Too real?  Too close to the bone?
>>
>>On the contrary: it's neither here nor there and altogether out of place.
>
>Why?  It's clear from many contributions to the thread, for and against,
>that at the very least Trump Tower succeeded in stirring up large bees
>in most bonnets!  And I don't think this has to do with any sense of
>disengagement, as Margaret seems to imply, rather the reverse.

A lot of people were just upset at such absurd treatment of 18th-century
opera.  The stirring didn't necessarily show that people were engaged
in the issues, that they regarded them as fresh.

>I understand that Margaret would like to see Figaro in "original" settings.
>Does she mean 18th century Spain, or France (which Beaumarchais had in
>mind), or Vienna?

As it was staged in Mozart's Vienna (more or less).

>How would she clarify the distinctions?  How would she make those burning
>issues of that day, which fed Mozart's imagination and informed his
>choices, fresh for today's audiences?

Those issues are not fresh for today's audiences, that's it.  You can't
warm them over, the times have changed.  Write operas about current
issues (Nixon in China, Klinghoffer, Malcolm X, etc.), leave the old
issues alone.  The audiences have to suspend their disbelief and accept
that Figaro et al.  were hot topics 200 years ago.

>The plain fact is that very few indeed possess the scholarly depth of
>knowledge of 18th century mores which allows Margaret to penetrate this
>work from the inside out.  Most people's idea of the late 18th century
>is conditioned by popular films such as "Les Liaisons Dangereuses" and
>"Amadeus".

True, but nobody's prevented from educating oneself about history.

>How - theatrically rather than purely musically or academically - does
>Margaret propose to reach out to this audience?  How does she propose
>to help them 'get' Figaro as something other than yet another pretty,
>diverting little costume drama?

That's up to the audiences.  If some opera goers are happy with Figaro
as a costume comedy, that's fine.  If others are looking for a social
drama (precious little of which could have been preserved in Da Ponte's
libretto), that's fine.  Nowadays we have access to information like no
generation before - whoever wants it, can educate him/herself.

On the other hand, it would be nice if more scholars wrote books for
wider audiences.  Unfortunately the plain fact is that there are no
incentives to write such books, and that's not the scholars' fault.

Personally, what interests me most in Figaro is music.

-Margaret Mikulska