Thanks for the perspective.

I’m quoting the NYCO website when I say they “premiered” 28 new American operas. (http://www.nycopera.com/about/history/) You’ll see there that they’re qualifying this as “world premieres,” so perhaps there are many productions in the NYCO rep that, while not being world premieres, may still be new to New York audiences.

And while I suspect your right, that the failures of NYCO seem largely to have been administrative (I include the board of directors there), there are still things NYCO could do to improve their overall programmatic direction, which would include, under my administration, fostering a bold and diverse culture of contemporary opera.

xoxo.C.C.

Yes NYCO has done well with Barber, but that has nothing to do with Susan Baker, that was the vision of Robin Thompson who is also producing “Anthony and Cleopatra”, produced “Garner” (after seeing it out of town) and bought the Dallas production of “Vanessa” because they were going to throw it out. Add the american premier of “Semele” (also his production) and you have to conclude the problems at NYCO are not artistic.

Kudos for trying to save NYCO but the only thing that can save NYCO is a big check in 15-20 million dollar range. In the end, I don’t think the opera company failed, I think the board failed.

Second, Manahan’s artistic management may not equal James Levine’s but I’m familiar with orchestral and choral standards before his advent and he has done wonders, besides being an excellent conductor of a huge repertoire. If you can get Carlos Kleiber to come back from the dead, by all means…

You make some good points. And my administration certainly won’t be casting anyone aside. (Remember, it was because of readers like you that I amended the original moratorium on Bel Canto.)

I think a lot of the new opera I see doesn’t really connect to what makes great opera great theater. I saw a few minutes of Dr. Atomic on TV, and nothing happened in those few minutes. By that I mean, there was no drama, no situation. It was all poetry and blocking. The great operas I have seen–with one or maybe two exceptions–all have a kind of forward propulsion that, when combined with the music, carry the viewer along with it.

But I think there are composers out there–I haven’t been shy about nominating myself–that understand the theatrical needs of opera. And I just don’t believe that opera can be a truly vital art if we never allow living composers to write them. It doesn’t make sense. Opera, then, becomes a mausoleum. An often beautiful mausoleum, but a mausoleum nonetheless.

The problem, I presume, is in the curating. I intend to remedy this with a curatorial system that maintains the highest standards, while being open to a variety of styles, and trying to find composers who want to write opera, and who know how to write opera. It may not be easy, but it can be done, and I intend to do it.

I’m sure some of our readers may be dying to chime in about new operas they have enjoyed.

I enjoyed Margaret Garner. It didn’t necessarily blow me away, but it was a successful piece, and, in the end, worthy of being on stage.

But, as I have said in my proposal, I intend to keep the classics of opera alive, and also to seek out some overlooked ones.

I think New York City Opera, to truly be “the people’s opera,” has to take into account the broad spectrum of opera, which includes the tried and true, and the brand spanking new.

xoxoC.C.