The Wall Street Journal takes a long hard look at how the Met spends its production budget - which last year included $169,000 for Dmitri Tcherniakov's hand-made Prince Igor poppy field alone.
Image - The Wall Street Journal
Yes, but think of the revenue from the opium crop.
30 May 2014 at 12:59 PM
You can just picture Gelb, round the back on the aptly-named Amsterdam Avenue, pockets stuffed with little packets, trying to balance the books.
Meanwhile, we get to learn that Tcherniakov thinks nothing of submitting a $5 million budget for a non-repertory opera there's virtually no hope of either reviving or selling on. And that the narratively incomprehensible resultant mess still managed to cost well north of $4. You can't wonder why singers - the raison d'etre of this entire House of Cards - get greedy and resentful....
30 May 2014 at 07:11 PM
Perhaps Tcherniakov wasn't told the budget was limited. If the WSJ info is complete, he wasn't told about the dimensions of the stage or the set transportation issues. It appears time is being wasted as well as money.
inter mezzo |
30 May 2014 at 07:42 PM
What was narratively incomprehensible about it? I found it made a lot more sense and was much tighter than the traditional episodic and unrelated structure of Prince Igor.
30 May 2014 at 11:21 PM
The poppies were okay but the dancing between and among them was ridiculous. I'm sure the dancers did not appreciate the poppies much. So arguably, if there had been fewer poppies, everyone would have been happier. Even me.
04 June 2014 at 02:44 AM
I agree. I'm no fan of Tcherniakov but this was the first time the opera made much sense to me, my only other experience of "Prince Igor" being Soviet-style productions with the chorus standing in serried ranks!
04 June 2014 at 02:14 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
daddy I want a harpsichord