It’s curtains now for opera in English
OperaWhatever happens to English National Opera after 2024 – and that’s an open question – there is little doubt that its founding purpose of performing opera in English is over.
It was Lilian Baylis’s dream – her religion, almost – that opera should be sung in the language of the land, so that everyone could understand.
This was a worthy and viable ambition on the original small stage at Sadlers Wells, but once ENO moved to the huge Coliseum the words emerged as a general blur, especially when sung by imported soloists from the Baltic Sea. The advent of above-stage surtitles killed off the rest of the need for English yet ENO persisted with singing in the vernacular as if its life depended on it, as in some sense it did. Singing in English was its last USP. How ironic that a Brexit regime should make that its death sentence.
ENO cannot survive in London without state funding. Its plan to move to Manchester is flimsy, to say the least. The next year may be the last for ENO. It is certainly the end of the line for singing in English such immortal lines (from Onegin) as ‘balls in the country/make us very jolly’.
The old Sadlers Wells Opera, later ENO, had a wonderful sense of camaraderie which has now almost completely evaporated. The Board and their appalling management appointments over the past decade have finally killed off a once great institution. One can only feel the deepest sympathy for the orchestra, chorus and everyone else at ENO whose lives have been thrown into chaos and uncertainty.
I don’t suppose any of those idiots at ACE voted Leave, so leave the anti-Brexit rhetoric where it belongs: in the dustbin.
Where would you say the pro-Brexit rhetoric belongs?
Never mind singing in English, my Chartered Accountant friend did a rough estimate showing that redundancy payments alone will eat up at least half of £17 Million that ACE say may be available over the next three years. So tell me, how will they set up essentially a new company in Manchester or wherever? As to turning the Coliseum into a cash cow – they might net after costs £1.5/£2 Million in a good year but it’s by no means certain. That won’t go far at their rate of spending.
IMO, the Arts Council just wants ENO gone but wants to shift the blame.
It suggests a move elsewhere, offers a “generous” £17m in assistance, knowing that if ENO fails to find a home in Wetwang or Heckmondwike, it can credibly blame ENO’s poor management.
I can hear it now: “We listened to the Government and did all we could. Sorry and all that”.
Well, Richard Morrison in The Times said that it they went private, they’d easily raise sponsorship and donations to enable them to carry on at the Coli. What a nutter.
If no viable buyer comes forward they can sell to the government/ACE for £1. I would imagine that’s been the strategy all along, so they can sell it for high-spec apartments
I took redundancy in 1999 from ENO when back then they where trying to make savings as Price Waterhouse had assessed the dire finances of ENO, productions regulary went over budget, use of freelancers was suppose to keep costs down but sadly, i think the arts council are fed up with supporting a company that doesn’t learn from the past. Still it was a fabulous creative family and im sad that it will be leaving London, hoping somehow someone can save it and keep it at the coliseum.
Some of the earlier stalwarts of ENO could make themselves heard and understood in English, in the large Coliseum, perfectly well – but it is not easy, and requires training. Easier, too, for native speakers, naturally.
They can be understood now for the most part in my experience. Personally I find the surtitles useful if I miss the odd word – you certainly don’t need to glue your eyes to the screen all night to understand as Norman suggests.
In my experience as a performer, what you mostly see from the stage is a see of heads angled upward towards the surtitles. Because they’re there, people look at them even when not required. Try turning on subtitles on your telly and see how easy it is to not to look at them.
I worry also that sub-conciously at least, singers don’t feel they have to work as hard at their diction when they know the text is all there above them.
If it weren’t for Brexit, surely we would be experiencing a golden summer of English diction in opera singing, and indeed everything else would be tickety-boo too?
Didn’t Parsifal also sing to the Flower Maidens “I’ve come to penetrate your tiny bushes”?
Even at the Coli, I understood a great deal of the English in the 70s/early 80s. It varied by singer, of course, but the general standard was pretty good.
The downward spiral started. Diction became a lower priority. Surtitles became necessary and diction then became less important still.
I greatly regretted the introduction of surtitles, but it never occured to me that it would become a factor in the termination of ENO.
Who said it was (apart from in this article??)
When the LSO played the Jedi soundtrack to the film at the RAH recently, the film had subtitles. They were presumably there to help people with hearing problems and to refer to if you miss the odd word. I don’t recall anyone complaining about that – so what’s the difference between that and the surtitles at the Coli?
Very simple. Before surtitles, the singers paid a lot of attention to diction. That fell away afterwards. To develop your own analogy, surely you would object to a film with a flawed audio track and not be satisfied with the response “What are you complaining about – the surtitles are there?”
Yes of course. Just saying that personally I find the diction perfectly understandable in the majority of cases and see the surtitles as being there as something to refer to if necessary and as an aid to people with hearing difficulties.
I certainly don’t agree at all that singers approach their diction in a different way because of the surtitles – I would imagine that they are barely aware of their existence. The assertion that the introduction of surtitles was the beginning of the end of ENO is, in my opinion, plain wrong.
I too was a regular at the Coli in the 70s and 80s and agree that the standards of diction and musicality were generally high. One of my favourite singers was John Brecknock whose every word was clearly audible.
The sheer arrogance of the London cultural set is astounding. No wonder this country is in a mess. Of course a move to Manchester can be both a positive and a new inspiration for the ENO. Civilisation does not end at the Watford gap.
Straw man argument.
“Of course” implies certainty. Many informed comments here suggest otherwise, with sound reasons and concerns.
Lose the chip.
Actually much of the criticism is that Manchester already has a thriving classical scene and doesn’t need ENO.
Tell that to Opera North, who must now be extremely worried about competition in a market in which they already struggle with audience numbers. ENO’s audience numbers at the coli are decent and growing.
Agreed.
‘Check your privilege’ is a common call nowadays. London Arts really needs to check its own.
Ask anyone on the street if a London opera company should relocate to give another city the rewards and I think most would see this as a positive move. Then why do London opera goers not?
People gush about modest cities in Germany and Austria having opera houses, (cue snobbish comments about uncultured Brits, Strictly and football) yet an ENO move is completely out of the question. ‘But Manchester has gets touring companies’ they cry. ‘Opera North can’t fill the Lowry’ is just a thinly disguised way of them saying opera isn’t really very…you know…Manchester.
If the ‘Touring opera should be enough for them’ point is valid, then why can’t it work both ways with London audiences have the ROH, with the new ENO and other companies touring to the capital? If the honest answer (and I think people aren’t being honest to themselves or their social media pals) is just ‘that’s not how it’s done/it’s always been this/National institutions should in London etc…then it’s time to be checking on your privilege again. These aren’t good enough reasons why things shouldn’t change.
The London bias is so strong, reaping decades and decades of extra Arts funding. Better distribution should have happened years ago. Many are blind to this privilege or are choosing to ignore it. A Northerner points this out and they are quickly accused of having a chip on their shoulder. Charming.
To paraphrase a recent Telegraph article; ‘Strong Arts in London is good for Arts in the rest of the country’. Nonsense. Only a few months ago, ‘trickle-down economics’ was being laughed at, so why trickle-down Arts? Where is the evidence for this? Does the Liverpool Phil. play better or have bigger audiences because the LPO/RPO/LSO are going through a good patch? Of course it doesn’t.
An ENO move is potentially an excellent long-term opportunity to set up afresh, to plant roots in communities and develop new audiences. I’d argue it has much more potential to truely engage than in Central London.
A touring company being parachuted into a city for a few weeks a year caters mostly only current opera fans, but what about bigger ambitions and goals to create something long lasting? If we all truly believe in the power of the Arts then how can one doubt this move? Not relocating because some Opera fans won’t be able to see ENO as regularly, cheaply and conveniently, just isn’t worthy argument.
The pearl clutching/hash tags are well under way. Carefully crafted social media posts (only to rattle around in echo chambers) with a predictable combination of virtue signalling, nostalgia and bragging, ‘I fell in love with opera at the Coli’ to ‘I was #blessed to make my debut there…’. That’s all very lovely for you, but how about people in another area experience the same or potentially even better opportunity?
The main loss (and a very human one) is the orchestra and chorus with their staff and crew. Redundancy is grim and relocation complex and life changing. Plenty of firms with many more employees, relocate regularly though. Move or leave is their staff’s choice. This is how the general working world thinks. The Arts aren’t immune to this, however special we think we are.
What a boost to the music profession outside of London this would be. From setting up a new orchestra, using Northern freelancers to getting the Liverpool, Newcastle and Manchester orchestras involved, are all real possibilities.
For the record, I live in London.
Followers of SD who are shocked at some of the more philistine comments here are advised to stay well away from below-the-line comments in the press.
The lack of interest in, or concern for, the wellbeing of some of our greater achievements which have evolved over hundreds of years, is alarming.
The arts, and opera in particular (in the Anglosphere at least), appear to be caught between a rock and a hard place. The Right is opposed to subsidy on principle and believes in sink or swim, and the Left sees rich, elitist, white snobs everywhere. Accessibility to people on modest incomes, which is what subsidy is supposed to achieve, is ignored. There’s a strange lack of consistency in approach by both sides. They would be appalled (presumably) if York Minster or the contents of a major art gallery were allowed to disappear, but the performing arts can be dispensed with. Just “entertainment”, no great loss.
Both sides are conspicuously hypocritical in this approach – both have favoured causes and interests which should be granted immunity from attack. They want to pick and choose when subsidy is withdrawn, or want subsidy extended to endeavours that don’t need it because it is somehow “fairer”.
The arts are up against it. Supporters should avoid squabbles wherever possible and try to unite in opposition to what is coming. At the risk of sounding like a tabloid headline: “There’ll be nothing left”.
and the Left sees rich, elitist, white snobs everywhere.
So people just like them, then.
Very good post, btw.
As with non-profit orchestras, London may have too many non-profit singing/opera entities too?
Just about any major cultural institution in Europe, North America, Asia, etc, depends on philanthropy and donations, much less subsidies from government (which is a “donation” from taxes). Revenues from ticket sales, broadcast rights, PR promotions, etc, alone are rarely enough to cover overhead-operating expenses.
In the age of the internet, streaming services and nouveau tastes, things are changing even a bit faster.
I have a seriously, silly “off the wall” suggestion.
ENO approaches Andrew Lloyd Webber and offers to swap the Coliseum for one of ALW’s smaller theatres. No money changes hands in spite of the value difference but ALW is required to increase the size of the smaller theatre’s orchestra pit. Say, around 70-80.
The outcome? ALW gets a 2,000+ theatre which would be ideal for one of his profitable blockbusters. ENO gets a sensible theatre with reduced overheads.
There, I said it was silly.
The last three times I went to ENO since 2021, travelling down for the occasion from Leeds, were all on Sundays at 3pm, and the Coliseum was amazingly full. Now Sunday mattinees are off the menu again – why?
Probably because of the cost of having to pay employees double time.
It wouldn’t be double time – certainly for the orchestra and chorus. That went a long time ago.
Theres no double time on Sunday, renegotiations included Sunday as part of a normal working week.
ALW doesn’t have profitable blockbusters any more. Look at the Cinderella debacle.
As someone whose tastes range from the ROH to popular musicals I enjoyed Cinderella. I think ALW made a rod for his own back in calling it Cinderella rather than “Bad Cinders” in the first place. There were an awful lot of little girls running around in party dresses whose parents probably had to do quite a lot of explaining after the show.
‘Balls in the country’ went so many years ago with the advent of David Lloyd Jones’s wonderful translation. It then became ‘Down on the country where no one can find us!’ Scottish Opera at the time in 1980 would not have done Eugene Onegin, or Janacek, or similar as all the rehearsal time we had would have been taken up with language coaching for British singers, and still possibly sounding like foreigners. Bringing in Russians for Russian and the Czechs for Czech was simply not affordable so as to sing to predominantly UK, minus Wales, audiences. As it happens, Opera North is doing Vixen this season in English – probably for the same good reasons and certainly in Leeds and Manchester, the language of the majority of the audience.
This is levelling down
17 million will be barely enough to pay their Covid debt, redundancy to staff, AND to maintain yearly Coliseum maintenance needs. Nor will they be popping by for a little opera season – that venue will hunts for sit down musical for years to come. Naturally. I agree that the ACE and even Stuart Murphy are using Manchester as a decoy. Bottom line is, Murphy failed epically over 4 years to create ANY art of international value. Everything tumbled into artistic mediocrity. (Richard Jones second failed RING – The Met must be so happy that silly deal falls apart on its own). The ROH and ENO have both been claiming/exploring Manchester for years to no avail – we all know MIF and the Lowry struggle to sell tickets as is – nevermind the new Factory which is not hunting for a failed opera house to join it‘s new brand – as if. Murphy knew all of this two weeks ago, which is why he resigned before the announcement. Before it all became his fault. But how unjust that he now stays and appoints some poor desperate AD and another green CEO to close it down slowly over three years. They can‘t even apply for NEW funding until the next round. Anyone in the business knows this is the end. 17 million is a polite payout to diffuse immediate anger at three men together: Serota, Brunjes and Murphy. Congrats, Harry Brunjes, on your disastrous 8 year tenure of mistake after mistake. Perhaps the ACE need to look closer at how THEY allowed such unfit CEO‘s and Chairman to handle such public money for 8 years of mistake after mistakes. Harry Brunjes is the primary tiny man to blame here. It‘s all under HIS unqualified Chairman’s watch.
Whilst I agree about the broader point re mismanagement I cannot agree that nothing of value has been produced at ENO in the last 4 years.
They have just finished a superb Tosca, proving that the most ubiquitous of operas can remain fresh and relevant in the right hands, and the incredible recent production of Handmaid’s Tale showed their ability to reach out to new audiences with ground breaking contemporary opera (although the management did not have the guts to give it a decent run).
The free tickets for under 21 scheme has also been a huge success and whilst this costs money what better way to nurture audiences for the future and make this incredible artform accessible to all?
To me the USP of ENO is that it provides an accessible point of entry to those who might not feel comfortable in the more traditional setting of Covent Garden and the work they have done in this respect should not go unnoticed. Opera will undoubtedly suffer as a result of ACE’s indefensible decision.
Where the management has failed in my opinion is in under-using their resources and running down the opera schedule in favour of west end style shows and renting out the coli for increasingly long periods – put on good productions of good opera and the audience will come.
And (to finish on a note of agreement with Bob), the fact that they are now willing to let this amazing legacy disappear down the plughole without so much as a whimper is utterly disgraceful and suggests to me that this move may have been in the pipeline for longer than is being claimed….
Your point about accessibility is spot on. I saw my first opera (and it was indeed Eugene Onegin) there in 1997.
That Tosca was a pathetic remount of a safe piece of crap. Whatever her name is who is planning – she is the epitome of boring taste. Just look at her own work. Yawn. Good riddance to a c list company.
The ‘safe crap’, as you call it, keeps opera companies in business. If you’re bored with it, too bad.
Most people – people whose taxes support opera companies – are not even familiar with the ‘safe crap’, let alone anything more esoteric.
Crude arrogance of this type doesn’t benefit opera, or anybody associated with it.
I’ll be sorry to see ENO go.
The idea that ENO is unique or even unusual in performing opera in English is bizarre and inaccurate – in fact every major subsidised UK company (ETO, WNO, Opera North, ENO, Scottish Opera, BOC) does so regularly, as do many of the smaller unsubsidised companies and summer festivals. Covent Garden is the outlier, performing even comedies in the original language – very unusual elsewhere. ENO’s role as a flagship and trailblazer for this practice is another reason why it is so vital to our operatic economy.
Despite all of the gloom and doom, major government subsidies tend to allow arts organizations to be complacent. In America, the Federal government hand out small subsidies. Cities and States contribute, but also in a small way, not enough to keep any going. It is all done by fund raising and putting productions on that fill houses. While it does stifle some creativity as you actually have to run a business and put butts in seats and therefore produce those productions that will do so, it does not end companies. Michael Kaiser taught Covent Garden how to fund raise American style and it became an important aspect of their operation while he was there. It is now incumbent for the ENO to stand on its’ own two feet. Perhaps even walk away from government subsidies so they can run the company where they choose to operate. I would think it is important to hire an American who had a proven track record in this style of fund raising to get the company going in that direction. By the way, another operation that has successfully operated this way is in Paris, the Musee D’Orsay has an out fit called, “The American Friends of the Musee D’Orsay which is made up of millionaires and billionaires who provide a huge amount of their operating budget via their cash infusions to the museum every year. Opera in English is very important to the UK, as well as the US and I could easily see a similar off shoot of the ENO, American Friends of the Eno, or International Friends of the ENO helping to add to whatever fundraising they do in Britain.
What is the matter with this country, its an outrage that the ENO should be dust–bined. Not only is the theatre one of the oldest in England, it’s internal fixtures are magnificent, it has encouraged young artists a site more than other companies have done. It is a disgrace to close it down, how many of the “powers” that be have even been to listen to the best opera singers bar none. What will happen to the orchestra, chorus, and theatre. Going forward consider again your decision and keep this truly ENGLISH INSTITUTION. As you see I am incensed at the thought of closure of this English institution.
‘Not only is the theatre one of the oldest in England’
It isn’t, not even close. And the theatre is not being closed down.
Curtains for opera in English could be an opportunity. Consider the operas of Sir Michael Tippett — worthy music shackled with clumsy texts. They might find more admirers if translated FROM English….perhaps into Finnish or Pashto.
Do you realise how self-centred and condescending most of these comments sound to those of us who live outside of the centre of the universe you call London? You may be talking about English National Opera but what you seem to mean is London National Opera. Professional singers and players do exist in Birmingham, Manchester and other parts of England. In fact, the international reputation of orchestras such as the CBSO far exceeds that of many in our capital.
Move ENO to Birmingham and then you can journey here to see what you are missing.