“Let Rome know that I remain unchanged…” – Milo Rau’s La Clemenza di Tito at Opera Ballet Vlaanderen; or, Birdsong 2

What can we say of a restaging? What does it tell us that we don’t already know? What does a change in context tell us? Does it tell us anything? How do we look at the whole of a society without being seduced by the glitz and glamour of stars and elites?
Milo Rau’s live restaging of The Clemency of Titus at Opera Ballet Vlaanderen in Antwerp

The opera opens where it ends. With the Roman emperor Titus’s titular clemency for Sesto, his attempted assassin and friend, and Vitellia, the mastermind behind the plot, Titus’s would-be bride-to-be, the woman Sesto loves, and daughter of the emperor deposed by Titus’s father.

“Let Rome know that I remain unchanged.”

Milo Rau’s The Clemency of Titus [La Clemenza di Tito]…

a birdsong for the world,

a reflection on history as a Wunderkammer displaying the failures and dire misunderstandings that compose human history (there is something to be said of Rau’s early work in reenactment with this framework)…

but this is a review I’ve already written…

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

In the cold corona winter of 2021, Rau premiered his first attempt at opera with Opera Geneva, La Clemenza di Tito. However, because of a second wave of covid and covid restrictions, the opera had only a digital premiere. The first iteration of Titus sought – in typical Rau fashion – to make the onstage cast representative of the community in which the opera was performed: i.e., Geneva. Although, because we are talking about opera, which has long been considered “high art” (perhaps even some of the highest of high art) in a more antiquated way than even theatre (even the classic city-theatre that Rau works within), it is in some ways more exclusionary and closed in terms of audience access. Who can take three hours off work? Who doesn’t have to work evenings? Who can afford the outrageous prices of tickets? Who feels comfortable in the lush theatre stalls and understands the rituals of watching opera? Considering these questions (which the production comes very close to touching upon), I am hesitant to say that this is a production for the community in which it is performed.

I do not like to repeat myself, but I will run the risk and comment briefly (at least in terms of this blog) on Rau’s restaging of The Clemency of Titus at Opera Ballet Antwerp. However, a more comprehensive reading of the production can be found in the original blog.

Rau’s production of The Clemency of Titus is without question a beautiful evening of opera. The piece is wonderfully performed by its diverse cast of singers made up of international performers (some of whom are familiar faces at Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, having even performed in previous productions of Titus) and local extras from Antwerp. Designer Anton Lukas creates a striking and effective set, illustrating the stark divide between the elites and the common people. Titus’s palace (or perhaps the senate) is a clean, white gallery in which the artist-emperor’s work is exhibited. On the other side of the rotating stage, we see the dirty, burnt-out ruins of a city, littered with garbage and unhappy people.

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

By opening with Mozart’s conclusion, we first the museum full of the images taken during the compelled reenactments of famous paintings composed by the performers in each of the opera’s major interactions (a point I will return to shortly). We thus see how the miscommunications, betrayals, revolutions (both of thought and politic), and mistakes of the characters come to fill this museum, which slowly fills throughout the production. Yet ultimately, these failures are – at least for the named characters of Titus, who are privileged, if not noble, citizens of Rome – essentially inconsequential. Even though The Clemency of Titus is about a revolution, it is revolution instigated by elites (specifically, Vitellia, the daughter of the deposed Emperor Vitellio, and Sesto, a young member of one of Rome’s ruling class families). These already powerful instigators are granted clemency, while the extras already executed for the revolution are given no mercy. They are left unavenged. The instigators remain, at their core, unchanged (as Titus declares himself to be at the production’s opening stage) within the safe, clean walls of the gallery.

Rau presents Titus as an artist. The white, bearded emperor uses the suffering of his people as inspiration for his art: the extras are forced into reenacting classic works of art that eventually come to inhabit his museum: The Raft of the Medusa, Liberty Leading the People, and My God, Help Me Survive This Deadly Love. Titus, according to Rau, reflects on the performative mechanisms through which the powerful retain power. What Rau seems to say is that Titus’s clemency – his mercy – is not grounded in care for those under him, but in concern for himself and his position of power and privilege. Live streams are projected above the stage on a white canvas screen with “Kunst ist Macht” [Art is Power] written across it in red paint. An onstage camera and cameraman follow Titus, Vitellia, and other named characters as they cross the stage to interact with each other and extras. The extras inhabit the burnt-out shanty town on the opposite side of the clean, white, art museum, and they become props for the whims of those in power (or who desire it). After they have been filmed or photographed, the extras are violently dispersed by Titus’s bodyguards and their cellphone videos (which we see them making but never actually see) are blocked by the bodyguards.

We are told in the opening when each of the named performers – Titus/Jeremy Ovenden, Vitellia/Anna Malesza-Kutny, Sesto/Anna Goryachova, Annio/Maria Warenberg, Servilia/Sarah Yang, and Publio/Eugene Richards III – are introduced through the projection that the extras are not important. Yet, as Rau seems to point out, Titus is only powerful because of the support of the unnamed mass of people – his community choir. Ultimately, the powerful only retain their power through the people, a point we are routinely shown throughout the opera in Titus’s overt performativity of acts of “care” for the camera that accompanies him.

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

As Rau explains in the interview printed in the opera’s program:

“It is vital to see Tito as a postmodern man who not only pretends to be powerful, but above all knows that he has lost his power. Only by deploying certain strategies can he continue to hold his power. Presenting yourself as an engaged artist is one such strategy.”

Yet, the opera closes by turning its focus to the extras, thus bridging the gap not only between the elites of the opera and the background characters but also the stars and the extras. Using the massive projection from the beginning of the production to introduce the main singers is now used to introduce extras. It seeks to find commonality. What we find is a mosaic of a contemporary, globalized city, inhabited by people from across the globe. Again, there is a parallel with the operatic institution itself, which, because of the skill and training required of its performers, frequently features international casts. Returning to the program’s interview, Rau explains that the story written into the libretto’s revolution and interpersonal drama is secondary: “The real story is the answer to the questions: who are we? Who are you? Why don’t we look at each other? Why don’t we listen to each other? Why do we not see people in performances, but only extras who are there as decoration?”

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

Fundamentally – with a few adjustments for its new cast – this is the same production as Opera Geneva’s online one in 2021. Both begin with the removal of the heart of “the last real Genevan/Antwerpian”, both feature a large cast of extras who live in and work in the city with different connections to the opera (as an institution, not Mozart’s composition – although some of them also have this connection), and both act as a commentary on political art and artists. Both use the digital apparatus of projection to first introduce the star singers at the beginning of the performance and the extras at the end.

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

In both, Titus – unlike in the original text, where Sesto mistakes someone else for Titus in his attempted murder – is seemingly killed by Sesto and brought back to life by a shaman through… the healing power of clay? Honestly, this is a directorial choice that I don’t really understand … perhaps something about Titus being turned into the bust of a Roman emperor? His reputation as Titus – the wise and merciful ruler of Rome – cemented along with his image? Aesthetically, the ritual is an interesting moment. It shows the audience a totally closed off, private moment outside their field of vision that can only be accessed through the projection. This then throws everything we see in the projection from this moment forward into question: is it live or pre-recorded? From this moment on the clay onstage never quite matches the clay in the projection. But why a shaman and shamanistic ritual? And we have to be a bit suspect of the “shamanistic” here, because – I would argue – that it is Rau’s approximation of what this means.

To a certain extent, I question what this restaging tells us about our current societies?

What does this new context tell us that the original did not?

What do we learn about Antwerp that is different than Geneva?

Why did the context need to be shifted other than Opera Ballet Vlaanderen was a co-producer of the original?

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

And perhaps it is as simple – and for me as unsatisfactory – as that. Opera Ballet Vlaanderen was a coproducer and it economically and ecologically makes more sense to restage such a production with local actors than to drag its actors and its different parts on a tour across Europe. What softly echoes in the back of my head, like a tag on a new shirt that irritates enough to scratch at but not to remove, is that the brush with which Rau paints his image of the globalized cosmopolis is perhaps too broad, too universalizing. We lose the beauty of the specific that can be found in much of Rau’s other work. Yet perhaps this is also the point. The gaps we see between ourselves both within a city – between the rich and the poor, the elites and the citizens, the “locals” and the “migrants” – are not as clear and divisive as we perceive. We are not so different from each other not only within a city, but also between them.

Opera is also a different medium than theatre, which is where I usually work. One in which I find less sure footing. The acting, staging, performance, and mise-en-scène are so differen, and there is less room for Rau to play within the text and insert the socio-political and socio-cultural commentary he is known for. The genre – particularly when we are talking about a classic opera – is more rigid and resistant to the Brechtian alienations, self-reflection, and meta-commentary Rau’s theatre is known for. This is all an extended way of saying – as I think I said in my first review – that I don’t quite have the tools with which to read The Clemency of Titus as a whole.

There are beautiful moments in the production that I love: for example, the use of Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s Landscape of the Fall of Icarus (1560) as a metaphor for the production. Where the painting’s titular fall is only a small part of the whole. The suggestion of an opera that focuses on those who make up the background – the regular people rather than the emperors and elites – where the struggles and conflicts of the main characters make up just one small part of the picture. Yet with the rigidity of the opera form, this aspiration doesn’t quite occur throughout Titus (in either version), only in select moments. We do see snapshots of the plight of the common people in the background, particularly in the second act (which is, in my opinion, the stronger of the two acts) but the production is unable to break away from the original narrative – neither Mozart composed nor Caterino Mazzolà wrote a libretto for the common people of Rome in Titus (those affected by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius or the Burning of Rome) for Rau to draw upon.

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaanderen, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

My final note on the production is with a repetition: The Clemency of Titus is a beautiful opera, a more classic and traditional side of Milo Rau than we usually see. It retains the music and structure of the original source material while infusing the mise-en-scéne with the political undertones one has come to expect of Rau.

La Clemenza di Tito, Opera Ballet Vlaandern, Photo Credit: Annemie Augustijns

In defense of whistleblowing in the face of environmental demise: Vijand van het volk [An Enemy of the People] by Olympique Dramatique

Belgian actor collective Olympique Dramatique takes on Ibsen’s 1883 play “An Enemy of the People” in a visually interesting production about social responsibility, environmental catastrophe, and whistle-blowing.

Olympique Dramatique is an autonomous actors’ collective founded by the Belgian actors Tom Dewispelaere, Ben Segers, Stijn Van Opstal, and Geert Van Rampelberg in 1999 and based out of Antwerp’s Toneelhuis since 2006. Olympique Dramatique productions are imagined and created by the group of actors attached to each project without a formal director. The group’s offering for Toneelhuis’s 22/23 season is Henrik Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People, Vijand van het volk.

From November 24 to 26, 2022, Olympique Dramatique’s Vijand van het volk toured through NTGent for Ghent audiences.

Ensemble of Vijand van het volk by Olympique Dramatique; photo credit: Kurt Van der Elst/Toneelhuis Antwerp

Vijand van het volk is created and performed by Sanne Samina Hanssen, Joeri Happel, Han Kerckhoffs, Lucie Plasschaert, Iris Van Cauwenbergh, and Stijn Van Opstal/Jan Bijvoet/Koen De Sutter. In many ways, it is a fairly straightforward production of Ibsen’s text with relatively few adjustments to text or plot, albeit with some interesting visual textual elements. Ibsen’s play text walks the fine line between drama and comedy, and while billed as a comedy, with Olympique Dramatique’s physicality and staging, the production also struggles to find where it stands on this drama-comedy divide – it seems to want to fall under comedy but doesn’t quite manage. The play, which premiered in 1883, deals with some surprisingly contemporaneous issues: environmental destruction versus economic profit, professional versus public responsibility, social responsibility versus public opinion, the difficulties of whistleblowing and the trap of idealism.

Vijand van het volk by Olympique Dramatique; photo credit: Kurt Van der Elst/Toneelhuis Antwerp

An Enemy of the People presents audiences with the moral and professional dilemma of Dr. Thomas Stockmann. Stockmann is an idealistic young doctor who works at the town’s recently opened spa when, during a dinner party with his brother the mayor and the publisher of the local paper, discovers the spa’s water. Stockmann decides to print an article about the contamination in spite of the danger such an article presents to his professional life and standing in the town as well as the economic well-being of the town itself. The next day, the newspaper chooses not to publish the article, deciding it would only do more harm than good. However, Stockmann pushes forward, electing to take his findings directly to the people. At a town meeting, Stockmann launches into a passionate and insulting oratory about social evaluation and the failed morals of a town that rejects and condemns truth in favour of profit. However, the doctor’s tirade backfires as both the town and Stockmann’s own extended family react negatively and violently towards him and his mission – particularly after Stockmann reveals it is in fact his father-in-law Kiil’s tannery that has been the primary source of contamination. Stockmann’s contract with the spa is terminated, his wife Katrine loses her job, his family is evicted from their house, and Kiil uses the family’s inheritance to buy shares in the spa, putting additional pressure on Stockmann to stop his crusade. Still Stockmann refuses to leave the town or stop his crusade for truth, declaring himself the strongest man in town for his resolve – and here ends both Ibsen’s play and Olympique Dramatique’s interpretation.

It’s an odd play that reads like a parable for the dangers of whistleblowing and idealism.

Vijand van het volk by Olympique Dramatique; photo credit: Kurt Van der Elst/Toneelhuis Antwerp

Olympique Dramatique doesn’t noticeably adjust Ibsen’s text (bear in mind that I’m no means an Ibsen scholar and only passingly familiar with his plays), but they do create a visually interesting production. The actors are all dressed in matching brown, vinyl outfits (oversized pants and button up t-shirts) with tight skin-toned (almost skin-toned, there is something just off about the colour) long-sleeved shirts underneath. Each cast member wears a bizarre rubber mask unique to each character. These uncanny masks that reveal the actors’ real eyes and mouths giving the performers long, wobbly noses, exaggerated cheekbones, ugly cratered skin, loose hanging jowls, and straggly strands of hairs hanging from otherwise bare, malformed skulls. These horrific masks remind the spectator of The Twilight Zone episode “The Masks”, where a wealthy dying man convinces his greedy family to wear Mardi Gras masks only to discover when they take them off their faces have transformed into the horrific shapes of the masks. But within the context of Vijand van het volk, you cannot help but think that the town has been poisoned by the water for a very long time – long before Stockmann noticed.

The large Schouwburg mainstage is empty other than the foldout lawn chairs carried on by the actors at the top of the show. The sides and back of the stage are covered with huge opaque plastic sheets – like the type you would use to cover something toxic or to clean up a toxic spill of sorts. A huge wall with a massive white, glowing screen occasionally crosses the stage (often accompanied by an official announcements), disrupting the actors who are drawn to the wall like moths to a flame.

The set is visually interesting, brilliantly performed, and the production includes many eye-catching visual elements: a strange furry monster that crosses the stage and whose hair is inspected by his bald fellow performers, a portable fire pit that crosses the stage, and the cast emerging from backstage wearing giant papier-mâché heads to watch Dr. Stockmann with frozen disapproval during his rampage. However, it is unclear what these elements say about an active environmental catastrophe and whistleblowing.

Vijand van het volk by Olympique Dramatique; photo credit: Kurt Van der Elst

The most straightforward reading of the performance is that the town has been poisoned for many years – perhaps generations – and the people and government have accepted the destruction and deformation as normal. Ignoring the problem is financially beneficial for the town and an easier solution than changing their life and primary source of income.

The only textual adjustment I could identify is found in the play’s fourth act: Stockmann’s speech. Here, Stockmann directs his anger to the audience, rather than the actors. Perhaps because it is the audience who needs to be confronted with the truth about their complacency in environmental catastrophe.

This scene is staged as a provocation with Stockmann screaming out at the audience – often directly insulting them – while dragging a microphone stand with a tiny gun where the microphone should be (which to me is very Ibsen) around behind him until he jumps off the stage and into the audience to continue his rampage. The outburst is accompanied by a notable sense of hopelessness: A man screaming into a gun in front of a group of people in an act that can only be described as professional suicide. As is often the case with people on proselytizing missions, this particular act lasted a beat too long, particularly in an otherwise fast paced production.

Dr. Stockmann’s tirade in Vijand van het volk by Olympique Dramatique; photo credit: Kurt Van der Elst/Toneelhuis Antwerp

The play offers the company the opportunity to explore a world that feels close to our own, where the concept of truth feels increasingly troubled by a divide between science and politics. Although Olympique Dramatique provides a visually interesting and theatrically entertaining evening, the production doesn’t provide a deeper analysis or interpretation of the text. An Enemy of the People feels like a text with a lot of potential meaning for the present. However, Vijand van het volk feels like a production didn’t quite know what to do with the potentiality of its source material. It lacks a certain depth, which isn’t necessarily a damning critique of the production: it is still a fun two hours of theatre. The production results in a lot of really interesting ideas that never really push beyond either the text or Ibsen.