Opera review: 'Götterdämmerung' -- a new beginning at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion

The End.

Saturday afternoon, a bit before twilight, “Götterdämmerung” (“The Twilight of the Gods”) reached its final, transcendental moments at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion. The multitudes of singers, musicians and stagehands passed their endurance tests. Breathlessly conducting nearly five hours' worth of music, the energetic James Conlon never flagged. With the last and longest opera of Wagner’s tetralogy, Los Angeles Opera proved it could complete a “Ring” cycle.

That the company had the artistic capability to mount this Everest of the opera world it had for so long strived to conquer was never in any doubt. Far lesser operatic outfits put on the “Ring” cycle all the time. That L.A. had the vision to produce a unique “Ring” had been clear for quite a while, once Achim Freyer’s provocative but singular concept began unfolding in the earlier operas last season.

You never know whether all the singers will come through, but they did. Freyer’s production has not been universally loved, but Wagnerites love to complain, so this wasn’t about to keep them away. Even the scary challenge of raising the money -- and keeping within the multi-million-dollar budget -- was, in the end, nothing to worry about. Los Angeles’ first “Ring” cycle was too big to fail, as Los Angeles County, with a bailout loan last fall, acknowledged.

What could not be anticipated before Saturday’s final curtain (a term I use metaphorically, because there is no curtain in Freyer’s fanciful staging) was just how much this “Ring” might matter. Wagnerism operates on a sliding scale, measured, in part, by how much in this epic work -- in which greedy gods, greedy dwarfs and greedy giants destroy themselves so that mankind can have a crack at ruining things -- that you don’t object to.   

Yet in one of the most glorious and moving instances of stagecraft I have ever witnessed, Freyer in the final scene of his “Ring” strips away all theatrical illusion. He had plenty to strip away, given the radiantly goofy globe he had created. In doing so, he destroyed innocence and simultaneously demanded it. “Götterdämmerung,” I thought, never had it so good. Not everyone -- given a beet red-faced, vein-popping booer near me – necessarily agreed.

Most opera goers brace themselves for “Götterdämmerung.”  It typically begins in late afternoon with a dinner break after the two-hour prologue and first act. L.A. Opera took but two short intermissions, and Conlon moved things along, which meant a mere (everything in Wagner is relative) commitment of five and a quarter hours in the theater.

Still, a lot can happen in that time and does. I won’t bother you with most of the plot. Siegfried and Brünnhilde having met on a fire-surrounded rock in the previous opera, “Siegfried,” now make their way in the treacherous land of the Gibichungs and come to grief.

Norns warn us of the fate of the gods and recall what you may have missed in the earlier operas (and if you miss that, other characters chime in with their own recalling), and Freyer sets this scene with the women coming out of globulous skirts, yet another glimpse into the German director and artist’s gloriously odd-ball painterly universe.

That opening notwithstanding, Freyer’s “Götterdämmerung,” at least until its unforgettable “Immolation” scene, is more conventional (everything is relative with Freyer as well) than had been the case in the earlier operas. But Wagner’s libretto (which was written first, he then worked backward on the first three operas) is the most narrative-driven (and poetically ham-fisted) of the cycle. Everyone may be once more funny-looking, but Freyer does not abstract himself from the plot and uses masks with less abandon.

Eric Halfvarson’s deliciously evil Hagen, the son of Alberich (who stole the Rhinemaiden’s gold and forged a magic ring three operas earlier), comes close to stealing this show, as did his throne made in part of a kneeling, red-shod nude. His ineffectual half brother and sister, Gunther and Gutrune, convincingly portrayed by Alan Held and Jennifer Wilson, were masked throughout, yet their singing created the striking illusion of facial expression.

The opera is played out on a postmodern parquet floor, crisscrossed with the light tubes that Freyer so enjoys. Symbols from earlier operas hang from the ceiling. The lighting is elaborate and arresting.  Alberich (Richard Paul Fink) as the nasty, crusty financier hangs around even more than Wagner’s libretto suggests.

The L.A. Opera budget, however, may have prevented a couple of big scenes from being properly staged. Siegfried’s “Rhine Journey,” for instance, is no more than a slow, murkily lit set change.  Then again, maybe this is just part of Freyer’s anti-establishmentarian way of doing things.

John Treleaven (Siegfried) and Linda Watson (Brünnhilde) were uneven earlier in the cycle, but here they rose to the occasion. Their first duet was vocally underpowered, as if they were saving themselves (they were also placed on an acoustically dead spot of the stage). Treleaven’s voice is not large, but he compensated with expressivity, overcoming even his comic-book costume to reveal himself as a cartoon character who can feel.  His death, minimally and powerfully staged, felt profound.

Watson also gradually built in power and stature, in her case becoming a towering Brünnhilde by the end.  Her coolness also served as perfect foil for the effusive Michelle DeYoung when, as Waltraute, she tried to persuade Brünnhilde to give up the ring and save gods, as well as take another opportunity to tell of the back story.

The chorus of Gibichungs, masked men with Freyer's light sabers, looked and sounded impressive. A few of the funny people who have paraded through the previous operas return to parade a final time through this one, enthralling and inexplicable as ever.

In “Götterdämmerung," Freyer might have been expected to sensibly tie all these images together, but his  genius is to do what you least expect. So at the end, he robs images of meaning on his path to ultimate disillusionment. Props are set into unsettling, swirling motion. Light fixtures come down, blinding the audience and revealing the backstage. Cut-out figures of ravens "fly" away revealing prompters at their desks cuing singers.

Conlon, who received the evening’s loudest ovation, conducted in service of the drama. But he became expansive at the end, and the orchestra, fine all night, turned resplendent. No set, I suspect, has ever been torn down more memorably or movingly.

And now we start all over again. Ring Festival LA is gearing up and the first of three full cycles, presumably full of Freyer refinements, begins at the end of May. With Wagner, all endings are beginnings.

-- Mark Swed

“Götterdämmerung," Los Angeles Opera, Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, 135 N. Grand Ave., downtown L.A. 1 p.m.  April 11, 17 and 25 and 5:30 April 21. See www.laopera.com for casts. $20 to $260. (213) 972-8001. Running time: 5 hours, 15 minutes.

Related stories

Viral outbreak of Wagner fever

Opera review: 'Siegfried' at Los Angeles Opera

Opera review: 'Die Walkure' at Los Angeles Opera

Opera review: 'Das Rheingold' at Los Angeles Opera

Photo: The final scene from Achim Freyer's production of Wagner's “Götterdämmerung.” Credit: Lawrence K. Ho/Los Angeles Times

[For the record: An early version of this review misidentified Waltraute as Flosshilde.]

Comments

[fan of Wagner's Works]

There is nothing new for me to say. The music is sublime; that is undeniable. I have come to realize the reason why opinions are split so strongly about the Freyer production. It simply has to do with whether one prefers Wagner’s or Freyer’s vision of the work. My guess is that those who support Freyer’s work are those who would normally have been quite bored attending a traditional production. For these people, Wagners music-drama is not enough to entertain them`; they need Freyer’s visual commentary to keep from falling asleep. It is sad, but largely true.

[Matt]

"Yet in one of the most glorious and moving instances of stagecraft I have ever witnessed, Freyer in the final scene of his “Ring” strips away all theatrical illusion."

Yes, yes, yes! As the Sopranos' ending reminded us that it was, after all, television art and artifice, Freyer reminded us this was stagecraft. In this case, however, the bringing down of the set happened also to make sense, the occasion being, after all, the end of the order of the gods. Just astonishing.

[Argonaut]

I think that was Waltraute sung by Ms. de Young, not Flosshilde. Small point. Bigger point - this was the least obnoxious of the four Achimopaloozas. He had some good touches - I liked Hagen's costume - and some typically childish ones - Siegfried ripping off Gutrune's fake bodice revealing fake breasts got a laugh. Both times. That's not a good sign. The bad touches outnumbered the good ones by a mile, and that's still better than the first three operas.

But beyond that, in spite of the valiant singers and orchestra members, the Pavilion swallowed the sound (we're in the 7th row). The orchestra is in another room and sounded like it. I don't know if there is anything LA Opera can do, but this is a millstone around its neck. If they ever sell tickets in the orchestra pit, I'll be first in line. I'd really like to hear The Ring.

[Silverlakejim]

I find "fan of Wagner's Works" interesting. I love Fryer's ring. One of the things I find interesting about it is that I have never seen a ring where just about everything that is stated in the libretto is in fact on stage. In many ways this is the most traditional ring I have seen. Clearly Fryer's ring does not look like what Wagner had in mind in the 19th century.

It's not so much that I oppose Wagner's vision as that most traditional Rings tend to have no direction or point of view and are boring. They tend to be pretty, and that's about it. The Met Ring is a case in point. I find it almost unwatchable. People are just walking around the stage and striking poses. Pretty pictures without purpose become tiresome after 19 hours.

I very much look forward to seeing the very traditional Ring staged in Seattle the next time it is revived. Steven Wadsworth is an intelligent director and I look forward to his thoughtful vision of a very traditional ring. I have seen a few of his productions; they are always traditional in setting, but keen in insight. Given his track record, I'm fairly certain that his Ring will be imaginative and thoughtful.

I really don't care what a Ring looks like, I just want a Ring directed by someone who has ideas. You must admit Fryer is not bereft when it comes to ideas or imagination.

[Clayton Masters]

Mr. Swed,
This was a pretentious production aimed at an audience that doesn't understand or appreciate art as envisioned by the artist. This is typical of American taste or lack thereof.
I was amazed by the folks that pretended to enjoy this mockery and by those that decided to stay till the bitter end of this nonsense. Siegfried should not look like Harpo Marx on steroids.
Sincerely,
Clayton Masters

[charles bogle]

Swed writes that people did not stay away from this opera. Hardly the case. The balcony, where I was sitting, had scores, if not a couple hundred empty seats. With more and more as the afternoon wore on. It's strange that Swed did not report the mighty, repeat, mighty, chorus of angry boos reserved exclusively for Freyer at the production's end---and how Freyer stepped forward for a solo bow as if to challenge the booing, which then grew louder. Swed dismisses the disapproval of Freyer's "Ring" as coming from disgruntled Wagnerites. How does he know? Has he interviewed the booers? I'm not a "Wagnerite," and I booed. I could not make a bit of sense out of the production. All the staging and costuming had nothing to do with the story or music. It was transparently ridiculous. And contrary to Swed's assertion that L.A. Opera can finish a "Ring," the real question here is whether this $37 million "Ring" has finished L.A. Opera.

[Michael Freed]

"Comic book" was Freyer's basic approach, and it didn't work. "Stand and sing" has been out of fashion for decades, but he brought it back with the flimsy-looking cardboard podia crafted for the main characters. No story telling, no acting. It looked like a mediocre high school production with three zeros added to the budget. The vaunted 'special effects' were cheesy at best, and the rotating lighting of symbols was quite distracting. The performance was musically enjoyable but mostly swallowed by the insurmountable DCP lack of acoustics. I was ready to energetically 'boo' Freyer, but he, perhaps wisely, chose not to take a curtain call at the dress rehearsal.

[BT]

I have seen the three earlier component's of Fryer's cycle, and am looking forward to seeing Gotterdammerung in a couple of weeks. Normally, it wouldn't occur to me to weigh in on a thread about a production I have yet to see, but the vitriol aimed not only at Freyer's direction but also at those who appreciate it merits an objection. Mark Swed, Alan Rich and the many audience members who admire this production are not "bored" by Wagner, nor are they "pretending to enjoy" it. If Mr. Bogle truly believes that "all the staging and costuming had nothing to do with the story or music," I submit that he wasn't paying attention or he lacks basic competence as a viewer. Fryer's production is certainly not above criticism, but it is entirely unreasonable to dismiss it as "nonsense."

[charles bogle]

The rush of defensive comments here is a wee bit suspicious, given that no such thing occurred in the predominantly negative comments sections following "Rheingold," "Walkure," and "Siegfried." One must wonder about L.A. Opera plants. You know, like Mark Swed.

[Bettie]

All I can say is, God save us from theatrical "art as envisioned by the artist."

Having been bored to tears by two of L.A. Opera's previous theatrical presentations of recital singing passing for theatrical opera as envisioned by the artist, this production held my interest almost from start to finish. It's a wonderful new visual take on a oft-told, and oft-boring, theater piece.

Congrats to all concerned.

[Pachecosita]

It was amazing! I have seen them all and I am very impress with the director's style and the whole assemble put the artistic touch...BRAVO!

[MarK]

To keep putting on the same tired old productions with horned helmets is definitely not the ideal solution. For me, an interesting new staging that finds new meanings in a great work is usually preferable to another "traditional" production, no matter how pretty and "realistic" the latter may look on stage.
Unfortunately, Achim Freyer's visualization is not satisfactory for me on a very basic level. My main objection to it is that, as i see it, Freyer has created an outstanding production of the Ring's libretto. Take the music out of the equation - and then Freyer has done a marvelous job of making this convoluted and occasionally silly story look entertaining and at times even spectacularly beautiful. The problem is - music is not out of the equation. In fact, Ring's music is precisely the main reason we are talking about this being one the greatest masterpieces of Western civilization in nineteenth century, if not ever.
The cycle keeps being staged all over the world for nearly 140 years because of its music - not because of the text. Ask Anna Russell! (Sorry, too late for that; but one can still listen to her brilliant retelling of the story - on recordings or on YouTube.) That truth seemed to escape Freyer's attention, and it is amazing how many of his visual tricks in this production have absolutely no basis and/or justification whatsoever in the music. It looks to me as if he read the libretto and thought to himself: "What a ridiculous bunch of nonsense - let's make it at least fun to look at!" And that is precisely what he has done, completely forgetting that that darn pesky music will still be there during all those 18 hours or so.
Yes, libretto was written by the same guy who wrote the music - but so what? He also wrote some of the most disgusting anti-Semitic rants before Mein Kampf. So, i personally do not have very much respect for Richard Wagner's words - he was not particularly good or wise with them. However, i do have utmost respect for his music which in the four operas of the cycle is, for the most part, sublime. That's why any production that does not share that respect cannot possibly be interesting or satisfying to me.

[charlie]

“Götterdämmerung” is the weakest opera of the whole Ring cycle - Siegfried Rhine Journey, the final scene, and maybe the 3 Norms are musical highlights. This production is horrible - the Star Wars/X files light tubes a distraction. 30 million dollar disaster in difficult times. Stay away! Better off going to the Met HD productions - recent Hamlet was nice, fairly low cost in terms of sets, not performed at the Met for 100 years. Emphasis on staging instead of singing (the Met has this problem too). I like Conlon - praise the recent "Forgotten" series - but this is a disaster.

[Joe]

Clayton Masters, I am offended that you claim this poor production of the Ring Cycle was due to American bad taste. Freyer is not an American: he is an European, and his production was pure Eurotrash, where symbolism, even silly symbolism, becomes more important and than drama. Domingo is the artistic director who bet millions on Freyer, and Domingo is also European. Regietheater thrives in Europe. Americans stayed away from this post modern Eurotrash in droves: I've never seen the opera house so empty. This kind of trash is done all over Europe regularly, and now seems to be infecting America.

Silverlakejim, the old Met Ring was wonderful. I think it is rather ironic that a Freyer fan can criticize any production for having people “walking around the stage and striking poses. Pretty pictures.” Most of what Freyer does on stage is static posing, inspired by his static paintings (although Freyer’s static staging is ugly, not pretty)--his characters hardly even walk or look at each other. In many cases his actors/singers can’t move or show emotions because they are hobbled and upstaged by static costumes and masks. The Met production had movement, drama, acting, emotions. Also, the Met's Ring was Wagner’s Ring, not an upstaging of Wagner’s art by some hack director.

To be fair, this was the best of Freyer's Ring productions, and that is not saying much. He didn't upstage as many of his principle actor/singers with masks this time, although he did upstage a few of them, and though Freyer seems obsessed with static painting, he didn't kill all the drama in this production, although he did keep it static on stage. Unlike the previous three, this production was watchable.

I can't understand how anyone enjoyed Freyer's Ring Cycle. So Freyer showed the prompters and was able to work it into the plot, so what? Post modernism is nothing new or innovative.

[Fred]

I so much wanted to like Freyer's Ring, but I can't. While taking Wagner's work and making it more accessible or meaningful is one thing, tearing it apart by making it a mockery is quite another. It started with Das Reingold's foolishness, but just got worse as the Ring wore on. Take, for example, the fascination with breasts. I'm no prude, but after a bit, it becomes distracting. And there is so little action going on stage, it is difficult to stay awake at times. Also, am I the only one to think that portraying Siegfried as a clown is just plain wrong?
I'm glad I went to see what the "hype" is all about, but I will never go again. I just hope this doesn't destroy LA Opera financially. Better to see Tristan und Isolde properly staged and performed.

[Joe from Ventura]

I think this Ring debacle has hurt LA Opera terribly. From time to time, LAO has elevated itself above second rate status with some glorious productions, but the last three seasons under Domingo have gone downhill. This Ring is the last insult. After being a subscriber for almost 20 years, waiting for LA to do the ring, then this mess? This ring is a production that would make a high school drama student snicker. After the dreadful Robert Wilson trashing of Parsifal, then this horrible, mocking, trivialization of the Ring, we quit. From what we hear, we are appearently not alone in not renewing our subscription.

Maybe we'll go to Seattle, New York, or even Arizona with the confidence we won't be subjected to this second rate stuff, at $245 per ticket.

I strongly reccommend the San Diego Opera as a very worthwhile alternative!!

[brian]

Joe's insightful artistic commentary notwithstanding, The Freyer Ring production we have been lucky enough to have in LA is far from second-rate. It's insightful, original, and perhaps more true to Wagner's music and words than any production in the last three decades. If LAO has been burdened by anything, its with too many subscribers with such poor taste and so many preconceived notions about what everything is "supposed" to look like that prior seasons can be weighed down with too much kitsch to be taken seriously.

The Ring has inspired me economically as well. I've more than tripled my contributions to the opera over the last year to support this kind of work and I can name several people who have become first-time subscribers this year. Too bad the likes of Joe will be leaving us for quickly-sinking San Diego, operating at barely half its size from a year ago. And if you think New York is a refuge for your middlebrow love of European fantasia, you'd best hurry. The garbage on the East Coast is actively being weeded out as we speak by the likes of Peter Gelb.

So good luck and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[CAM]

Brian, you call that insightful artistic commentary? There was nothing in your nasty little post that explained why you liked Freyer's dreck and poor taste. How can any sane person claim that Freyer is more true to Wagner's music and words than any production in the last three decades?

[Andrew Martin]

The best singer in the cast is Jennifer Wilson, the best dramatic soprano right now. I really don't understand how she is not singing Brünnhilde instead of Linda Watson.

[Charles Bogle]

"Brian" and many others in the comments section and media have depicted the debate over Freyer as being between those "savvy" enough to "understand" Freyer, and those inflexible old-school types who want Wagner's "Ring" Cycle realized literally. Not so. Not so at all. This is not "progressive" vs. "stodgy." So-called Wagnerites and less ardent appreciators of the "Ring" travel the world to enjoy all manner of "Ring" treatments. I'm no Wagnerite, whatever that is, and I enjoy productions that are novel, imaginative, even drastic reworkings. The Patrice Chereau "Ring" is the most prominent case in point, in which everything was adapted to the Industrial Age. It was splendid. What "Brian" and others fail to (refuse to?) understand is that the objections to Freyer center around the senselessness of his imagery, and how it is totally at odds with the music. Freyer has created a magnificent burlesque of the "Ring" (and contrary to "Brian's" assertion, one that Wagner would most certainly have found horrifying.) If "Brian" and others of his mind wish to enjoy the Freyer "Ring," bon apetit. But that does not make this a triumph of innovation, and it does not make the likes of me defenders of tradition.