Brigitte Fassbänder: Placido Domingo came after me
mainThe wonderful German mezzo-soprano has written about some of her stage partners in an autobigraphy that has just hit the shops.
She describes Domingo as a persistent womaniser who came on to every woman within reach.
They performed together in Werther in 1978. ‘His fruitless approaches to me during rehearsals must have been exhausting for him,’ she writes.
‘Domingo war verschrien als unermüdlicher Frauenheld, er flirtete mit jedem weiblichen Wesen, das ihm unter die Finger kam. Vor seinen Avancen war keine sicher… Seine fruchtlosen Bemühungen um mich während der Proben müssen für ihn, den in jeder Beziehung Erfolg Gewohnten, ziemlich anstrengend gewesen sein.’
She adds that she was in love at the time with the stage director, Kurt Horres.
Her reminiscences were written before the recent Domingo uproar.
This sounds pretty damning. I’ve been taking the view of “innocent until proven guilty” thus far, but I’m beginning to feel that the burden of proof is close to being met.
Especially if he came onto every woman within reach.
What is ” damning” about courting a woman in an unproper way? Did he break any law?
Yeah, what’s improper about acting in an improper way? Guess we’ll never know.
If they were his coworkers, he may very well have, depending on where he did it. At the very least he was predatory, immoral and unethical.
And, by the sound of it, rather desperate and pathetic.
Why always the same discussion? This is not about breaking the law. If Domingo had broken the law he would be accused of a crime, he would face a criminal trial (the only sphere in which the presumption of innocence applies) and if he was found guilty he would go to prison.
But this was never a criminal matter. It is about the fact that he behaved as a pig towards women and did things that back then were not illegal. He harassed them after they’d clearly indicated they were not interested. He kissed and touched them without their consent. Just because in his pathetic little head he thought that he was irresistible.
Men like him (at least back then) were not breaking the law. But that doesn’t mean they didn’t hurt women. And that definitely doesn’t mean that it’s wrong to reveal their behaviour and to make sure everyone knows they are pigs.
If he did the same today, some of his actions would be criminal. Just now, in the UK, a former footballer is on trial because he thought he was entitled to kiss a complete stranger on the mouth. I consider Domingo lucky. It seems he stayed under the threshold of criminality and at least he has his freedom.
What? You gave him a presumption of innocence when the dozens of others blew the whistle, and now that Brigitte says something . . . .
Dozens of women don’t come forward with an intent to lie.
No doubt some ignoramus victim-blaming trolls will say that she is doing this to attract attention. There’s plenty of these dinosaurs here.
Defending the greatest tenor to ever live is “victim blaming trolling”? Fascinating how just hatched velociraptors will redefine words on the fly to suit their biases.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.” — Hannah Arendt, Political Theorist, Author “The Origins of Totalitarianism” (1951)
Even living legends are entitled to defend themselves with the truth, regardless of your ability or willingness to believe them.
Let’s see how the Torpedoes Be Damned Domingo Defenders will attack Ms Fassbänder.
This is dynamite. Thanks for sharing
No it’s not.
There is a thin red line still.
It is not a crime to be a pestering, annoying, self-indulged, finding himself irresistible, womanizer with a heavy Don Juan syndrome.
It would be, however, a crime, to assault women sexually.
Brigitte Fassbaender describes a person in the first category, not the second.
I find it scary, that so many people do not seem to understand the difference and its legal implications.
She confirms that he backed-off / remained unsuccessful.
So what’s the fuss about Fassbänder?
It does not sound as if he backed off, quite the opposite.
“Seine fruchtlosen Bemühungen um mich während der Proben müssen für ihn, den in jeder Beziehung Erfolg Gewohnten, ziemlich anstrengend gewesen sein.”
This sounds like incessant pestering when it was obvious that there was no interest from her side. Ok so perhaps he stopped short of doing anything unlawful, but that doesn’t make it right.
This sounds like overestimation of one’s own sexual attractiveness.
Could also be wishful thinking – who knows?
No, it may not be sexual assault, but it *is* sexual harassment. And that is unacceptable in the workplace.
It is not necessarily harassment. This is subjective and a slippery slope. Andvances in the workplace might be unpleasant, unprofessional also, but it is unrealistic to label them unacceptable altogether. There is such a wide spectrum how it can play out. It is so dependent on cultural norms, and those are also changing over time. Here we talk about reports from the 1970s and 80s. Bottomline men and women get to know each other some way, and someone usually makes an advancement, a first step, crossing a line. Both for for short term erotic encounters or for long term relationships. Otherwise none of us would be talking here. Evidently a lot of people got to know each other in the workplace, ending up in intimate relationships of variable duration. It seems just normal to me, how can it then be unacceptable, unless there is some other factor that makes it so?
As I said above, no one is accusing him of committing a crime. But there is damning evidence that he behaved as a pig towards women. The stuff he is accused of doing was not illegal back then. But that doesn’t mean women were not harassed and assaulted, and it’s great that now everyone knows what kind of person he is.
There is zero evidence he was anything of the sort. There are allegations, that’s it. But what we do have is proof of your gullibility.
You’d think that after Jussie Smollet, Covington Kids and Dreadlocks Girl, just a few of the most recent hoaxes aided and abetted by a craven press, and the continuing problem media has with alleged journalists who not only get it wrong, but outright lie (Dan Rather, Jayson Blair, Brian Williams, Claas Relotius), that fewer members of the court of public opinion would be so quick to judge, convict and burn at the stake.
Especially of a man who has delivered so much beauty and joy to the entire planet. For over six decades. And helped so many others achieve their dream of being an artist in opera, too. And raised so much money for so many charities. And stopped earning money for himself and his family for an entire year so he could fund raise for Tlatelolco, Mexico, the town where four members of his own family were killed by the 1985 Mexico earthquake. A town that he adopted as his charge, becoming its godfather, and caretakes to this day.
All of that is meaningless to the Lynne’s and Emil’s of the world. No, the mere appearance of allegations in print by 18 unknown accusers is enough to throw all of that away. Allegations of acts 20-30 years ago. With no proof. With no asking any critical questions about the contributing behaviour of the accusers. Without regarding the mountainous documentation of the great man’s life on film, in print, and in the memories of the many thousands of people who have personal experience of him and readily vouch for his character. No, none of that counts to them.
Well just to put a finer point on it, let me end on this note:
Placido Domingo is worth more than 20,000 commenters who think far too highly of themselves and pass judgment on him based on just words. He’s value added, you’re not.
And: he’s not guilty of the allegations. Guaranteed. How can I be so damn sure? Because of the allegations themselves and how they’ve been made.
No one seems to be proposing that Domingo be jailed for his behavior. It seems that they do recognize the difference between criminal and otherwise reprehensible behavior,
How is this dynamite? Guys come onto women all the time, even at the workplace. It is not against the law to come onto women or even harrassment. If she said no and he continued, then well… And if we shame all womenizers then I would dare say that eliminates 80% of the famous men I can think of.
For the record, I cannot stand men like that.
And what’s wrong with eliminating 80% of the famous men you can think of?
Let’s eliminate anyone we don’t like. Right?
Hmmm, where did I hear that before?
Yes, blaming Placido in any way is just like what you are referring to.
People continue to conflate criminal behavior that could result in jail time vs. unprofessional conduct that will rightfully get you fired and could result in civil damages.
Being a “persistent womaniser who came on to every woman within reach” won’t land you in jail, but it’s a fireable offense and if employers let the behavior go unchecked, they could face a civil suit over creating a hostile workplace environment.
You may think that’s unfair, but I’m sure there are plenty of women who don’t want to have to say “no” more than once.
I don’t see that anyone has sued him so I think you are also exaggerating.
It would not be Domingo who would be sued, but the company that allowed the behavior (especially if they allowed it to continue after complaints were made). That’s why companies like L.A. and the Met are backing away from him so fast.
ok, there are no lawsuits to back up the statements above. They can’t back away from any liability for something that has already happened.
Monsoon writes: “if employers let the behavior go unchecked, they could face a civil suit over creating a hostile workplace environment”
Actually, depending on what action the firm took, and its knowledge of the incidents, the firm could face a criminal suit.
She calls him a Frauenheld.
This means “ladies’ man” (charmer; no hurt) rather than “womanizer” (Don Giovanni; hurt; “to pursue casual sexual relationships with multiple women,” Merriam-Webster).
Wow, what next ? She has no need for attention, she’s had a brilliant and successful career.
(We never had a following up as to where the Mahler 2 manuscript went, exactly, after the auction. Is it being looked after properly?)
Maybe she is trying to make the point that there was a time that she was desirable. She wouldn’t be the first old woman to do that.
But lots of older women remain desirable throughout their whole lives…..
…if only that were true, son
Saying that about Brigitte Fassbaender is a joke. I can imagine that she laughed to his face when he made his advances.
As a participant in the international opera scene since the later 80s, the talk inside our intimate world included wagging tongues about the lascivious prowess of certain folks like Levine and Domingo, etc. Depending on one’s own proclivities, this information was received with a range from jealousy to admiration to disgust, but always with a good share of snickering. Times change as have clearly contemporary mores regarding the artistic community, an historic haven for the human oddities who so often brought abnormal yet illuminating genius to their contributions….
‘Genius’ is never an excuse for bad behavior. This seems to be a ‘new discovery’ after a very long time of hero worship, thanks to women who finally speak-up.
The bad behavior of geniuses should never be excused, but if we refused to honor the *works* of brutish geniuses, our culture would be much impoverished. Think, for just a few examples, of Beethoven’s treatment of his nephew, or Caravaggio’s and Cellini’s violent behavior, or the anti-Semitism of Wagner (and many other composers)…
There is a distinction between the work and its maker. The makers remain human, in spite of the qualities of their work. For every ‘bad’ genius there is a ‘good’ one.
“‘Genius’ is never an excuse for bad behavior.”
Why do people keep telling me that? 😀
“This seems to be a ‘new discovery’ after a very long time of hero worship, thanks to women who finally speak-up.”
The “Geniuses” are just a small part of the problem, but you’re right, of course.
Apparently it is, because full grown women agreed to a quid pro quo that they later regretted, and now mischaracterize as assaults of varying degrees, with the help of a manipulative activist feminist attorney, Debra Katz. Situationally aware adults know fully well that anyone can turn out to be something else, more or less, especially alone behind closed doors. And some hope for it to be so.
What everyone is talking about here is what happened with Harvey Weinstein, not Placido Domingo. Guaranteed.
The Werther was in 1977.
… and it didn’t stop her working with him in Aida (1979, Muti) or Il trovatore (1984, Giulini).
She should have given up work in order to avoid him?
Why yes, Lynne, she should have, *if* being exposed to his advances were so onerous, so vile, so objectionable, or even so dangerous, as is suggested or alleged. Either you have the courage of your convictions, or you don’t. If you choose to keep dealing with someone you object to, then that is a choice you made for your own reasons. If you’re a female, if you’re a feminist, then you’re all about demanding, getting and using with iron-willed ruthlessness your right to choose X. Ok then. Be happy with the choices you make, or make different choices. Just don’t forget: men have the right to choose, too.
I have a gal pal who back in the day was quite the hot honey. We both lived in LA at the time, both married to other people, so we became friends by virtue of working in the same industry. When we’d meet at a restaurant near the studios for lunch, she’d routinely get the looks, the appreciative smiles and even get requests for her autograph (she wasn’t famous). One day I asked her why she wasn’t an actress, for clearly, plenty deemed her worthy of film fame. I’ve never forgotten her answer.
“Because I value my privacy, for one, and because I know the first thing I’ll be expected to do is take my clothes off. Yeah, I could bank on my looks, but I just know I’d have to make too many deals with too many devils.”
Life is a series of trade-offs. No one gets a pass from the School of Hard Knocks. Not even you.
Totally clueless and morally numb comment from Olassus. So she continued to work with the lecher. What’s your point? That’s enough to excuse his behavior. You are disgusting.
Just stating facts. But if you want a point it is this: she managed the advances.
Here’s another: Latin men probably nudge a little more, and Latin women probably expect this — even to the extent that a lack of effort is seen as “ungalant,” to use Orlofsky’s word.
Ah, she managed the advances, that’s perfectly fine then!
Also, it must have been so easy to reject opportunities to work with Nobody Placido Domingo in the 1980s.
No one should have to “manage advances” to simply do their job.
And, no, not all Latin men are predators. And the ones who are to not get a pass because they are Latin.
Lynne, she calls him a “ladies’ man” who “flirted with every womanly being,” and she surely is telling the truth. Her meaning, though, is a mile from “predator.”
And if it was at work, that behavior was unethical at best. If he even gave the appearance of coercion, he opened up his employers to a world of problems, and they were right to fire him.
“Lynne, she calls him a “ladies’ man” who “flirted with every womanly being,” and she surely is telling the truth. Her meaning, though, is a mile from “predator.””
Let’s see:
“Domingo war verschrien als unermüdlicher Frauenheld”
“Domingo was ill-reputed as a
unremitting lady-killer”
Sounds nice!
No. The point is this: Unless you’re someone of her stature, your career might go into the toilet if you don’t acquiesce. Many of his victims were in this position.
Yet can you name one actual victim who suffered such consequences?
…
Anyone who thought someone who was sexually inappropriate with women only carried on in the US was living in Cloud Cuckoo Land.
I would classify someone whose advances were so unwanted and relentless as to have to be “managed” as a predator.
The late great Elena Obraztsova remembered with a smile how he fell in love with her during rehearsals of Carmen in Vienna. He was too plump for her taste at that time and she brushed him off. This was told as an anecdote by her, no screams of sexual harassment, no ruined lives or careers, no hard feelings, just a different attitude. They went on to make a lot of fabulous music together.
The fact that Obraztsova was able to brush it off does not invalidate what others have claimed
Breaking news: not all people have identical experiences.
To Emil’s point — if Obraztsova didn’t also claim Domingo was grabbing her breast hard enough to hurt her, sticking his hand down her skirt, or using key codes to enter her dressing room unannounced and uninvited, then there’s a difference between her experience and that alleged by some women in the AP articles.
I’ll also note that Obraztsova was not a young up-and-coming singer in a company at which Domingo called the shots. Both she and Fassbaender were established stars a little older than Domingo, exactly Domingo’s age, or a little younger than Domingo, depending on whose birth date you believe. So their dealings with his advances would have taken place with a different power dynamic.
Also Breaking News: not all claims are legitimate. One of the metrics being used by the court of public opinion is the alleged number of accusers, the more there are, then what they allege must be true. In which case, the exact same metric must be used by said court to weigh the number of defenders. The more of them there are, what they allege must be true.
Guess what.
And his defenders are not hiding their names and faces, afraid of risking their careers, either.
I wonder if she added to her reminiscences about Kurt Horres filing a sexual Harry suit against her. And also, if she thought there was anything inappropriate or unethical for her to be in love with the stage director. Did she get more work and roles by being emotionally attached to the stage director? Is there a double standard?
Is there any indication that she acted inappropriately because she was in love with the stage director? Have you never been in love and not acted on it? Is in your opinion being in love already sexual harrassment? That is very sad.
Hope he gets the help he needs. Such a waste of the gift God gave him. Will he face the music or go the way of coward, Jeffrey Epstein?
Of the gift god gave him, he did make a little bit methinks.
The man is and has been for a long time sick, enabled, and disgusting.
But on this blog at least, Domingo has a few Opera ostriches.
And this lot, a handful of half-baked snobs, who think their Opera hero is more important than human decency or even the law.
This is about molesting and harassing women.
This is about having enough power to think you can get away with it. This is about having no respect for women.
Art has nothing to do with it.
Oh come on, everybody knows he was a womanizer. I bet any man with Domingo’s looks, voice, charme and testosterone would take and try out every possible opportunity (and succeed a lot of times).
“Infidelity is not a question of character but a question of opportunity.” A quote by Udo Jürgens.
It’s a sin but not a crime. Thank God we are all morally perfect people acting up to the highest standards.
And again, this is not a story about a man cheating on his wife.
Emil, what is your problem? You have no idea what went on behind closed doors. If his wife accepted his infidelities, it is not for you nor anyone to judge. He would not be the first, nor will he be the last man to cheat.
Having said that, his talent and philanthropy should never be questioned. He has brought and continues to bring joy to millions of people around the world, myself and my family included.
It is unfortunate the USA is so hypocritical, taking into consideration who is living in the White House.
Marel, that’s exactly my point. I do not care at all about Domingo’s marital arrangements and/or infidelities. I do care about his harassing and assaulting coworkers.
The actions he is accused of are illegal now, thankfully.
How would you feel of someone who you are not attracted to gave you a wet kiss on the lips or put their hand in your pants? Would you think they are just trying out an opportunity? I am guessing you wouldn’t. You would react, either physically or verbally, and you might even make a legal case out of it.
But the thing about little men like you, George, is that you believe that women do not have the same rights as you. You really think Domingo’s victims should have been grateful that he was harassing or assaulting them.
Actually, despite what George says, most men given the opportunity would not behave like Domingo. It is only a small proportion of men who behave like that although they don’t seem to understand that they are in the minority.
IS that book going to be available in English – does anyone know?
Does anyone care?
Rather have the one on Haitink translated.
Expose all who are this way !!! I can’t wait till they start exposing the upper teer of the opera business ! especially the GAY CLUB… not for trying to get those they could not but for black listeing them after they could not get them. So much talent gone because of this bunch.
This will never happen, as it doesn’t help to advance the “cause” and it’s not PC. The gay mafia remains unchallenged ruining opera…and society.
Gay Mafia? How scary for Tony. Tony wants to bring back the Pink Triangles I bet. Tony needs a good history lesson.
Pray tell us how the supposed gay mafia is ruining opera. How unfortunate for the oppressed heteros that so many talented gays are in the business.
Btw, she’s writing some pretty strong stuff about Solti, and that he abused his power.
It’s Fassbaender (yes no ä in her name, even in German) and she has nothing new to say. He flirted with everybody, he flirted with her. Flirting is not forbidden (yet). She sounds more bored and annoyed than harassed.
Sure, she is gay and he probably had no clue! and if he did he thought he could turn her… you know like the gay club likes to do !
Yes he may have had no clue as hetero males are often remarkably dense about other orientations.
She likes to dress-up in men’s clothing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fz-zQBvTbiU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU3KaheqrR0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR70LPN8Y0k
She was in love with a man, director Kurt Horres, at the time.
This is what I don’t understand: How is it helpful to women today to persecute bad behavior that occurred 30 years ago? I think society would be better served if we concentrate on current bad/unprofessional/criminal behaviors. I think men, especially younger men, will more likely be influenced in a positive manner if we take this direction. Isn’t that what this whole movement is supposed to be about?
Because he is still working. Because he did it. Doesn’t matter how long ago. Also, by holding someone as powerful as him accountable for his behavior, it serves as an example to those who might do the same thing, and encouragement to victims who may be more willing to speak up if they think they will be heard.
The main reason women do not report unwanted sexual advance by men is the fear that they will not be believed. Which often translates into a sort of self-blame. Outing people who have done this for many years shows them that they are not alone, that it was not just them, and that something is finally being done about it.
To say nothing of possibly finally achieving a kind of justice, if only in terms of release from the same doubts and self-blame, for the women abused in the past.
Would you prefer the same sort of “what-did-you-do-to-me-yesterday” approach to priests and music teachers? WHY IS A STAR EXEMPT?
Assuming you are asking out of sincerity and not cynicism, here’s my opinion. For decades, centuries even, many women took sexual abuse, violence and other forms of abuse in silence. The #MeToo movement has changed that because seeing that some women find the courage to speak out about past abuse gives other victims the determination to speak out too.
This is exactly what happened with Larry Nassar, the doctor for the US Olympic gymnastics team, who abused dozens of girls. None of them had ever said anything. They were terrified that no one would believe them. One girl finally spoke out. Then another. And then dozens more. Over 150 girls and women finally came forward. Because of that, this monster is now doing 60 years in federal prison; and if he survives that sentence, her’s facing another 300 years in Michigan state prison. That’s would not have happened without #MeToo.
There is no suggestion that Fassbaender is ‘persecuting’ anything. She has written a book containing anecdotes from her professional life, and that’s what this is. Are you suggesting she should have kept quiet about it? Why?
And Fassbender was in love with Kurt Horres at the time. Was that before or after her marriage to Gerhard Weitzel?
An article about abuse at a music school, some of it sexual, on children receives 9 comments.
An article about an adult man, Placido Domingo, unsuccessfully trying to come on to an adult woman, Brigitte Fassbander receives. 49 comments.
Does this tell us something about the priorities of the contributors to Slippedisc?
This is easily explained.
The abuse of children is abhorrent, period. I should think that everyone here agrees on this, and if anyone doesn’t they will at least be sensible enough to keep quiet about it. So what’s the point of commenting? Do you want to see 50 people chip in with “disgraceful!”, “horrible!”, “disgusting!”?
The reason why Domingo continues to attract so many comments is precisely because he falls into a grey area where different opinions and perspectives collide.
It seems the time is ripe for a new term for male libidinous problems: the Placido Effect.
Always with the inappropriate jokes. I really hope you are great as a composer, because as a comedian – and a human being – you really are not very good.
He is an even worse composer than he is a comedian.
What a pity that other victims couldn’t have adopted the same strategy as Fassbänder.
She was a major star…the others weren’t.
She said exactly the same thing about Carlos Kleiber!!
There’s a very old saying; ‘if it’s working for you, keep doing it”.
Placido Domingo showed really bad taste going after Brigitte-Hosenrolle-Fassbaender.
Boy, he must have had it bad.
Is that your best contribution?
Yes, one for your grey area.
Oh, this is all ridiculous on behalf of Fassbänder. Why would she even care! She’s a known lesbian. It’s a fact that Domingo has made advances on countless women over the decades. Now he’s 78 and his career is ending ! Everyone happy ?? Let’s see who’s next in the persecution game…..Hampson, Alagna, Ramey, and the list can go on. I was advanced upon by several male teachers, but they’re dead now. Deal with it and move on already. Life’s too short.
1978 !!!!!!
Klingt ziemlich unwahrscheinlich, es war immer vermutet ,dass Fr. F. eher zum eigenen Geschlecht tendierte PD war das sicher bekannt.
Und ist oft noch ein größerer Anreiz.
The assertion that he “came on to every woman within reach” is a gross exaggeration and is simply untrue.
The following is a statement made the day after Placido Domingo withdrew from Metropolitan Opera’s Macbeth, by a female friend of ours – a NY-based pianist – who knows him personally. She put it on her social media page which is why I allow myself to share it.
I have been silent on the subject of Placido Domingo for many reasons but today I can’t be silent any longer. Today is a sad day… it is a sad day for justice, for the world of opera and for all decent people… A great man and artist has been publicly destroyed… Destroyed by the court of public opinion forced on us by press with no scruples and only interested in damaging him, social media at its worst and a politician who doesn’t know what “innocent until proven guilty” means…
As usual Domingo took a high road and said : “I believe that my appearance in this production of Macbeth would distract from the hard work of my colleagues both on stage and behind the scenes”… I have no doubt that he wanted to spare his colleagues… This is a man I know…
20 years ago I had the honor of teaching Placido Domingo the part of Ghermann in Tchaikovsky’s “The Queen of Spades”. It was an extraordinary time in my professional life. I have spent many hours working with him alone, in my apartment… Nobody will ever convince me that he is what he has been called in press and on social media. On the opening night of that production I wrote a letter to Placido. Today I want to post it on my page to celebrate an amazing person. Today I feel exactly the same way…
“March 15, 1999
Dearest Placido,
There are no words profound enough to tell you what an honor, privilege and extraordinary joy it has been for me to work with you. It is without any doubt the happiest and most important accomplishment of my professional life but even more importantly, knowing you has been a great revelation to me personally. There are people who are meant to give to others because something was given to them in abundance. You have been blessed with not only a glorious voice and talent but that rare and most precious gift of giving and sharing your love for music, people and life with everyone around you.
You have become an amazing example and inspiration for me in so many ways. Your dedication, patience, concentration, commitment, discipline don’t cease to fascinate me but even more so the respect and consideration with which you treat others, and your incredible grace and kindness in every circumstance. You may not realize it but every hour we spent working meant not only a great deal to me but eventually to everyone else I worked with because of the joy you brought into my life.
I can not ever thank you enough for letting me become part of this fantastic experience.
I know that your Ghermann will be the best one ever, as it is for me, and a great success.
With much love, respect and admiration,
Yelena Kurdina”
Thank you M2, and please extend my thanks to your friend Ms Kurdina, for sharing this lovely letter with us, and especially so the childish haters and judgmental neo puritans can see that the great man is no villain, no two dimensional nobody who should be torn apart based on some anonymous written words. He is not guilty of the accusations.
Every woman can, when young, expect to have men come on to her. It’s hardly newsworthy. Fassbänder was no great beauty, any more than the other two who have come out publicly to accuse Domingo, so why now? Is this just to regain a flicker of the glamorous life they once had but which is now only a distant memory? It’s pathetic and shows no class.
In his heyday, and even much later, Domingo was besieged by hordes of female fans who wouldn’t have turned down an opportunity even with their husbands in tow. I have seen this myself.
Personally he will always remain the greatest Otello I shall ever have the privilege of hearing, the most dramatic and a superb actor. Pavarotti, or Fat Lucy as he was often called, couldn’t hold a candle, as he just stood there belting out the high “cs” (when he could manage it in later life) and waving a handkerchief.
Give it a rest. LA opera would have remained a provincial backwater establishment had it not been for Domingo’s presence. It remains to be seen how it fares without him.
The need to keep Domingo at arms length or better has been career long. Why it matters more now is that he is in management not just a tenor onstage.