From the sacred to the profane: the Wagners, Bayreuth and Parsifal

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Glyndebourne to Premiere Wagner's 'Parsifal' Amid Historical Context of Artistic Control"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 7.6
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

Glyndebourne Festival, known for its strong association with Mozart, is set to present Richard Wagner's 'Parsifal' for the first time, fulfilling the long-held wish of its founder, John Christie. Despite his passion for Wagner, Christie faced opposition, particularly from Wagner's widow, Cosima, who sought to maintain strict control over her husband's final opera. Cosima was determined to ensure that 'Parsifal' remained a sacred work, only to be performed at the Bayreuth Festival, a stance she defended fiercely following Wagner's death in 1883. She successfully managed the festival for decades, but her efforts to keep 'Parsifal' exclusive were challenged as copyright laws evolved, ultimately resulting in the opera's public domain status in 1913. This shift allowed opera houses worldwide to stage 'Parsifal' without needing the family's permission, a fact that infuriated Cosima, who viewed the work as a sacred relic deserving of special reverence and presentation.

As Glyndebourne prepares to stage 'Parsifal', the production offers a unique opportunity to reinterpret the opera in a more intimate context. Director Jetske Mijnssen aims to explore the vulnerabilities of the characters, presenting 'Parsifal' as a human drama rather than a ceremonial spectacle. This perspective contrasts sharply with Cosima's vision, which treated the opera as a religious experience. The upcoming productions, including Avner Dorman's 'Wahnfried' at Longborough Festival, further delve into the complex legacy of Wagner, examining the intersections of art, ideology, and history. Dorman's work reflects on the cultural implications of Wagner's influence, attempting to separate the beauty of his music from the darker aspects of his legacy and the cult formed around him, a challenge that continues to resonate in contemporary discussions about Wagner's place in the world of opera and beyond.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article delves into the historical context and significance of Glyndebourne's upcoming performance of Wagner's "Parsifal," illustrating the complex relationship between art, legacy, and cultural heritage. It highlights the long-held aspirations of John Christie, the founder of Glyndebourne, to include Wagner in the festival's repertoire, despite the opposition from Wagner's widow, Cosima. This narrative not only underscores the artistic ambitions of the festival but also reflects broader themes within the cultural landscape.

Cultural Legacy and Historical Context

The piece portrays the struggle between traditional and contemporary interpretations of classical music. Christie's desire to stage "Parsifal" aligns with a growing trend towards embracing diverse operatic works in modern festivals. This performance marks a significant moment for Glyndebourne, bridging the festival's origins with contemporary artistic expression. The historical references to Wagner’s life and his contributions to opera create a layered understanding of the significance of this event.

Public Perception and Engagement

The article seems to aim at generating excitement and curiosity among the audience regarding the performance. By recounting the personal anecdotes related to John Christie and the historical significance of "Parsifal," it seeks to build a narrative that resonates with both opera enthusiasts and the general public. This approach likely intends to enhance community engagement and attendance at the festival.

Possible Omissions and Underlying Narratives

While the focus is on the artistic journey of Glyndebourne and Wagner, the article does not delve into potential criticisms surrounding Wagner's complex legacy, including his controversial views and how they may affect modern interpretations of his works. There might be a conscious effort to sidestep discussions that could detract from the celebratory nature of the upcoming performance.

Manipulative Elements and Reliability

The article does not overtly manipulate facts; however, it frames the narrative in a way that glorifies Wagner and the festival's aspirations. This selective emphasis could lead to a romanticized view of the event. The reliability of the article rests on its factual recounting of historical events but may lack depth in addressing the broader implications of staging a Wagner opera today.

Comparative Context and Broader Implications

In contrast to other cultural news that often critiques historical figures, this article promotes a celebratory view of the past and its influence on contemporary culture. There may be connections to broader discussions within the arts community about the revival of traditional works and their relevance in today's society. The focus on Glyndebourne as a cultural institution reflects ongoing debates about the preservation and evolution of classical arts.

Impact on Society and Economy

The performance of "Parsifal" at Glyndebourne could potentially boost local tourism and the economy, attracting visitors and opera aficionados alike. Additionally, the revival of interest in Wagner's works may influence the opera market, possibly affecting ticket sales and sponsorship dynamics.

Community Reception and Support

This article is likely to resonate with audiences who appreciate classical music and opera, reflecting a community that values cultural heritage and artistic exploration. It may attract support from those who advocate for the arts and the importance of classical performance in enriching cultural discourse.

Market Impact and Financial Considerations

While the article primarily focuses on cultural significance, it could indirectly influence the arts market, particularly for companies involved in opera production and ticket sales. The renewed interest in Wagner could affect investments in related projects and performances, leading to a broader economic impact within the arts sector.

Global Context and Relevance

In the context of global discussions about cultural figures and their legacies, this article touches upon themes relevant to current societal debates. The focus on Wagner and the historical framing may draw parallels to contemporary conversations about art, ethics, and representation.

It is plausible that AI tools could have been utilized in crafting the narrative or organizing the content, particularly in structuring the historical timeline and ensuring clarity in the storytelling. The language used suggests an intent to evoke an emotional response, likely aiming to engage readers with a sense of nostalgia and appreciation for classical music.

In conclusion, the article serves a dual purpose: it celebrates a significant cultural event while also engaging with the complexities of historical legacy. While it offers valuable insights, readers should remain critical of the narrative's framing and consider the broader implications of reviving classical works in contemporary contexts.

Unanalyzed Article Content

WhenGlyndebourneopened its doors for the first time in 1934, the work on the programme was Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro. Mozart was the only music performed throughout Glyndebourne’s first four seasons, and he is still the composer with whom Britain’s first and best-known “country house” opera festival is most associated.

It was on a very different composer, however, that the gaze of the festival’s founder, John Christie, was initially trained. Christie was a Germanophile and obsessed with the work of Richard Wagner. “He was always hankering to do Parsifal at Glyndebourne as an Easter festival,”recalled his son, Sir George, who ran the Sussex festival after John’s death, until his own son,Gus, took over in turn at the start of the millennium. “He was only shut up by my mother.”

Ninety-one years after the festival’s founding, John Christie will finally get his wish as Wagner’s “stage consecration play” (as the composer himself designated it) isperformed at Glyndebourne for the first time. But if it had been left up to Wagner’s widow, Cosima, neither Glyndebourne nor indeed any other theatre would ever have been allowed anywhere near Parsifal, her husband’s final masterpiece.

Cosima came from a glittering artistic lineage: her father was Franz Liszt, her mother the celebrated writer Marie d’Agoult. When Cosima and Wagner began their scandalous affair, producing three children out of wedlock, she was married to Hans von Bülow, one of Germany’s leading conductors. She outlived her second husband by almost half a century (he was 24 years her senior), dying just four years before Christie and his wife Audrey Mildmay first welcomed the public to their new theatre on their Sussex estate.

Wagner himself died in Venice in February 1883, barely six months after the triumphant premiere of Parsifal, the only one of his 13 operas conceived with an understanding of how the innovative auditorium and orchestral pit of his festival theatre in Bayreuth would actually function.

Cosima’s grief initially took the form of paralysis: friends literally had to prise her away from her husband’s corpse. But she soon applied herself with extraordinary tenacity to ensuring that the Bayreuth festival, inaugurated seven years earlier with the first performances of Wagner’s four-part Ring cycle, would remain under the family’s control. She planned to act as regent until the couple’s only son – the auspiciously named Siegfried, just 13 when his father died – was old enough to take charge. Securing Bayreuth’s future required political dexterity: Cosima deftly cultivated Bavarian rulers and German kaisers, emphasising the festival’s importance to kingdom and empire alike.

The Ring and Parsifal were the only works that Wagner himself ever saw in Bayreuth. Cosima broadened the repertoire to include Tristan und Isolde and Die Meistersinger. But Parsifal remained by far the festival’s most frequently performed work: of the 194 festival performances between Wagner’s death and 1900, 91 were of Parsifal. Ironically, given the composer’s well-deserved reputation for antisemitism, the only conductor to make a real success of his final work wasHermann Levi, a rabbi’s son who weathered abuse from Cosima and her coterie of antisemites to return for festival after festival.

Cosima was acutely aware of Bayreuth’s unique selling point: Parsifal was the only work that could be seen solely at the festival. This was what Wagner had always intended: “There alone may Parsifal be presented, now and always,” he wrote to King Ludwig II of Bavaria. He was horrified to think that his Knights of the Grail, their wounded king (Amfortas), the sorcerer who threatens them (Klingsor) and the knight who redeems them (Parsifal) might be represented “in any other theatre as a mere amusement for its audience”.

For his family, Wagner’s decree carried an absolute and everlasting moral force. In the eyes of the rest of the world, it had no legal standing. Wagner’s music would fall out of copyright in 1913, meaning that opera houses across the world would be able to mount Parsifal – and indeed any of his works – without seeking the family’s permission or paying any royalties.

If Cosima wanted to prevent Parsifal from entering the public domain, she needed to be decisive. In 1901, when the Reichstag debated extending copyright from 30 to 50 years from an author or composer’s death, Cosima lobbied vigorously. She wrote to every parliamentarian, extolling Wagner’s legacy to the German nation but the proposal was rejected.

Two years later, in 1903, Cosima received a devastating blow when the incoming director of the MetropolitanOpera, Heinrich Conried, launched his tenure in spectacular style by announcing a production of Parsifal. She was outraged – but legally powerless. The US had not signed the Berne copyright convention, meaning that the restrictions on Wagner performances that still applied in most of Europe did not bind the Met, and Siegfried had carelessly sanctioned a miniature score from which copyists made perfectly legal handwritten parts. The production was a sensation, but, for Cosima, it desecrated her husband’s most sacred work.

As 1913 approached, Cosima’s acolytes made one final push to promote a special law – Lex Parsifal, as it was dubbed – to protect the family’s rights in perpetuity. Resigned to the rest of Wagner’s works entering the public domain, the family sought instead to secure for Parsifal an unprecedented legal status: performances would remain forbidden anywhere other than Bayreuth, in recognition of the unique cultural legacy Wagner had bestowed on Germany and the world with his final work.

The instigator of this final and somewhat desperate move was Houston Stewart Chamberlain, English-born author of infamous racist tracts and son-in-law of Cosima, who enlisted supporters including Richard Strauss and Hans Pfitzner. Their plan foundered, but a decade later, on his first visit to Wahnfried, the Wagner home in Bayreuth, Adolf Hitler undertook that “if I should ever succeed in exerting any influence on Germany’s destiny, I will see that Parsifal is given back to Bayreuth”. Despite his notorious intimacy with Siegfried Wagner’s widow, Winifred, and sons Wieland and Wolfgang, his promise was not kept.

Cosima’s efforts were motivated not just by financial considerations, but also by a sincere if misplaced desire to preserve what she perceived as Parsifal’s unique character. In a letter to Kaiser Wilhelm II, she likened the work to a sacred relic unveiled to pilgrims only on a few special occasions. The productions she supervised retained every detail of Wagner’s increasingly dated staging and movement directions; critics began to describe Bayreuth as a mausoleum.

Cosima’s work cast a long shadow over subsequent interpretations. The tendency to treat Parsifal more like a religious ceremony than a piece of theatre endured well beyond her death. Even in 2020, Roger Scruton defended the convention of refraining from applause after Act I on the grounds that “it shows the incorporation into the Eucharist of a real sacrificial victim”. Many recent productions, however, have distanced the audience from the ceremonies depicted. Ruth Berghaus’s 1982 centenary production for Frankfurt characterised the Grail community as decaying and misogynistic. Stefan Herheim’s 2008 Bayreuth Parsifal linked its story to the festival’s history and that of 20th-century Germany, staging the action in Wahnfried.

The conjunction of Parsifal and Glyndebourne is a fascinating prospect. A relatively small theatre can present it as an intimate human drama rather than a monumental, ceremonial work. In a view resonating intriguingly with current debates,director Jetske Mijnssen interpretsits characters as vulnerable human beings, describing Amfortas as unable to die and Parsifal as someone who can give him “the gift of dying”. Even without Bayreuth’s unique covered pit, meanwhile, Parsifal’s sumptuous score – described by that ambivalent Wagnerian Claude Debussy as “one of the loveliest monuments of sound ever raised to the serene glory of music” – will surely be heard to great advantage in Glyndebourne’s famously warm acoustic.

Ten days after Glyndebourne’s Parsifal opens, Cosima herself will appear on the stage of another of Britain’s leading country house opera festivals, along with Hermann Levi, Siegfried Wagner, Houston Stewart Chamberlain and several other friends and family members. Longborough – founded in 1991, and the brainchild of another passionate Wagnerian,Martin Graham, is often described as the English Bayreuth, thanks both to its Wagnerian track record and to resemblances between the buildings. The Cotswolds festival is a singularly appropriate venue for the UK premiere ofAvner Dorman’s Wahnfried. In Dorman’s telling, the name Wahnfried (“free from delusion”) proves ironic: not only are the house’s inhabitants themselves deluded, they force their delusions on others.

In non-linear and sometimes surreal fashion, and with music that is often funny and only occasionally sounds like Wagner (the sound-world is closer to Weill, Shostakovich, Adams and klezmer), Dorman exposes the thread linking Cosima’s cult of Wagner to the horrors of the Third Reich. The cast includes a character identifiable as Hitler, whose music Dorman evolved by transcribing one of the Führer’s speeches into musical notation, “so that it would sound like him, and also so I didn’t have to write music for him – I just couldn’t do that”. But however baleful Dorman shows Wagner’s legacy to be, his opera does not demonise the composer – although it does Daemon-ise him. Wagner is represented on stage by a “Daemon” (followingPhilip Pullman’s spelling and example) who evokes “perhaps the ghost of Wagner, perhaps what is left of him, when rid of the antisemitic bile”.

Dorman,whose opera premiered in 2016, was attempting to reconcile his fascinated admiration for Wagner with his knowledge of the cult’s consequences: writing the opera was part of this process, but he admits that “it hasn’t solved the problem”. As a musician raised in Israel, where Wagner is effectively banned, and the grandson of a Holocaust survivor, Dorman has more reason than most to feel equivocal. But the challenge he faces is common to all who seek to interpret Wagner: to separate what is beautiful and humane in his work from the ideology surrounding it. Disentangling Wagner from the cult his widow inspired is both difficult and essential.

Parsifal is at Glyndebourne festival from 17 May to 24 June.Wahnfried: the Birth of the Wagner Cultis at Longborough festival from 27 May to 14 June. Michael Downes isdirector of music at the University of St Andrews. His recent book,Story of the Century: Wagner and the Creation of the Ring, is published by Faber.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian