Denis Fodor writes:

>Nozze in this our age is cherished for its Mozart rather than its
>Beaumarchais and, for it, more enjoyable as a diversion from today's
>forced feedings of sotchial signifikanz and politikal korrektness.

In "our age" people have many and varied reasons for cherishing Mozart.
Certainly not everyone feels this need to exorcise Beaumarchais and turn
'Marriage of Figaro' into "a diversion".  If Mozart's passionate and
complex exploration of social mobility and political tensions is not to
our taste, maybe we'd be better going to Rossini's "Barber of Seville"
for our pleasure instead.

>If we want an evening of What Makes Sammy Run, the we go to the library
>and draw it from there.

Possibly.  But for some of us it may have greater impact in the theatre,
acted out in front of our eyes, by our fellow human beings.

>Let Mozart do his own thing.  (And let Sellars try his hand at something
>contemporary, like the Danse Macabre, whuich he's done, and done rather
>well.)

I'm sure he'd love the chance to do more contemporary work.  The storms
of rage engendered by classic operas, in productions which - had they
been of classic 'straight' plays - would have scarcely raised a gentle
zephyr, is instructive.

Some of this has to do with the difficulty of getting contemporary
work staged at all in large opera houses, most of which were built with
the 19th century repertoire in mind (so they're not really suitable for
Mozart either).  Compare this against the healthy situation for contemporary
plays - and, I'd add, small-scale chamber opera!

One of the sad things about our current operatic debate is that we are
forced to expend so much energy raking over the few, venerable 'classics'
rather than being able to discuss the work of our own time.  The days
when a new opera could cause a national revolution (Auber's "Masaniello"
in Belgium!) seem alas to be long gone.

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