Wednesday, December 19, 2007

More thoughts on Doctor Atomic

As I said in an earlier post, I wasn't quite sure what to expect going in to Doctor Atomic on Monday. It had gotten some really good reviews (which means nothing. I mean, the reviewers in the Trib and Sun Times both loved Frau, which, I may have mentioned, was a major suckfest). But I was intrigued by the reviews and so went in looking forward to the evening.

We happened into a pre-performance lecture and later learned that the enthusiastic, articulate gentleman speaking was Peter Sellars (the director and librettist for Doctor Atomic. I also quoted his speech to the American Symphony Orchestra League in my now completed thesis project.) I think a post-performance lecture might have been better(although it would have been at 11:30 at night! Past my bedtime!) because I was listening to him, but, not knowing the piece, didn't really connect a lot of what he said to the opera. It was more like "What? They read Baudelaire? Or What? There's a corn dance?" There were a few "Aha!" moments though, so I guess I picked up a few things.

Lights went down and my friend Jack made usual "Ladies and Gentlemen, please be sure to silence your cell phones and pagers. Thank you!" speech and we waited in the darkness for the entrance of the conductor (Robert Spano, who I also mentioned in my thesis. Ahhh, synergy!) but the music just started. We sat up in our collective seats. This - frantic, layered, electronic music - was not what we were expecting. This was something completely different.

The story of Doctor Atomic, what was depicted on stage, was not a textbook rendering of the building of the atomic bomb. So while I had thought the opera would have contained arias like "Oppenheimer's Lament: I am split like the atom" (for example) and "How do you solve a problem like cold fusion" would, alas, have not been included. Rather it was an attempt to put a human face on those scientists working on the project. As Peter Sellars explained in the lecture (see? An "Aha!" moment!) while the audience knew the outcome of the story, that the test of the bomb at Los Alamos, had been successful and the US went on to use these very first WMDs to end WWII, the characters on stage (and of course, at the time) didn't know what would happen. The opera was successful in pulling the audience in to their world of uncertainty. They didn't know that this thing they called "the gadget" (that loomed like a malevolent creepy christmas ornament above the stage) could do. They were taking bets on whether or not the thing would cause a chain reaction and burn through the earth's crust. They didn't know if the fallout from the bomb would travel and kill them all. We saw Robert Oppenheimer (the excellent Gerald Finley), Dr. Atomic himself, create this weapon, which, let's admit, is a very cool bit of science put out to do horrible things, calmly discuss potential targets that would cause the biggest psychological impact, and thus cause Japan to surrender - and then go home to his wife and kids. The images of death and destruction were balanced by images of life and the future generation (Oppenheimer's children), and the story happening concurrently - Kitty Oppenheimer, hundreds of miles away from the test site, waiting at home.

One of the interesting things about the piece is the source material. The libretto was not "written" but compiled from a number of different sources - declassified documents from the Manhattan Project, other government documents, notes and papers from Oppenheimer, and poetry. The real Oppenheimer read Baudelaire, and a few of his and Kitty's arias were drawn from stanzas of his poetry. Because we don't know much of Kitty Oppenheimer and what she thought, said or felt, a lot of her arias are taken from poetry by Muriel Rukeyser. At times, this made her seem a little detached from the rest of the action (especially in Act 2, which kind of dragged), but Jessica Alvarez sang gorgeously and had some real vocal fireworks.

The ending was powerful. I won't spoil it here. But I was on the edge of my seat the whole time - commpletely immersed in the action. The orchestra was really working in those final moments too - I leaned forward as much as I dared, lest I trouble the ladies behind me - to watch the conductor. The characters didn't know what was going to happen - they couldn't even really tell when the bomb was going to be detonated - and in those final moments, we didn't know what was going to happen either, what musical surprises John Adams had in store for us.

Did I mention Gerald Finley? He was magnificent as Oppenheimer. His Act I closing aria, based on a poem by John Donne (the poem that led him to name the test site "Trinity") was amazing.

The end of the opera brought mostly stunned applause. Peter Sellars and John Adams both joined the cast on stage and yes, we gave them standing ovations, much to the consternation of the blue haired biddys behind me (get OVER it already!).

So. This isn't necessarily an opera where I will be running out to buy the cd and listening to it constantly. Musically, it's interesting, striking, evocative. It mirrors the action on stage, it reflects the emotions and the mood of the action. It's not one where you'll leave the theater humming - but you'll leave it thinking... and for an opera geek and history geek like me, it's a perfect evening.

No comments: