The Death of Klinghoffer opens tonight....- Page 3

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/20/14 at 10:49pm

I think PJ's point is there are no first amendment "issues" here since no one's first amendment rights are being violated. If everyone is freely exercising the first amendment, then all is as it should be... and no point to debate the first amendment angle.

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 10/20/14 at 10:55pm

All right, sounds good haterobics.

And this is really cool (from the NYT's article Pal Joey posted):

"Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg attended the opera, Met officials said."

[AC126748]

Posted: 10/20/14 at 11:27pm

PalJoey, I know you like to play "wise older sage" on this board, but I don't actually need you to explain anything to me. Sinister Teacup's post illuminates how this can be interpreted exactly through the lens of the first amendment, from all sides.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 10/20/14 at 11:44pm

So, of course the controversy ends up doing a big brouhaha over nothing. The piece is gorgeous, moving, at times scary, and ultimately very sympathetic to the Klinghoffer family. That didn't prevent the performance from being interrupted twice by the vocal protesters, and there was enough security and police all over the building that you would have thought Obama was in attendance. But it's all theater, as they say, and I thought it added up to something exciting and dangerous, which is of course what we all go to the theater hoping to experience.

Ridiculous that they canceled the telecast of this.

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:01am

Couldn't agree more. It is indeed powerful, and INCREDIBLY sympathetic to the Klinghoffer family. I personally found the terrorists to be repulsive and even more one-dimensional than I expected.

The protestors have clearly not read the libretto or seen it. They are clueless.

On my way in, I was called a Nazi skinhead. And on my way out was called an Aryan pig. Simply mindblowing...

The mid-performance interruptions were classless. As were the people who wore protesting tee-shirts to the performance. Especially considering those shirts called it a "terrorist-funded production". WHY BUY A TICKET THEN? So hypocritical.

PLEASE go see this. I urge you all to make it happen. It is incredibly theatrical and deeply moving. Not to mention FASCINATING.

(P.S. Michaela Martens is astonishing as Marilyn Klinghoffer.)

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:16am

Sinister Teacup's post illuminates how this can be interpreted exactly through the lens of the first amendment, from all sides.

No, it doesn't. Every example in Sinster Teacup's post involved the right of citizens to assemble, speak, publish and worship without government restraint.

There was absolutely no issue of government restraint involved in either the presentation of the opera or the protests against it.

Back to the opera.

Michael Bennett--I think the reason for the cancellation of the telecast was that the protests would not be merely the problem of the Met and the NYPD, but every single movie theater that showed it would have to anticipate protests and pay for extra security. The logistics and liability of that were too difficult to calculate, and there would probably have been cancellations by the movie theaters.

I think Gelb's solution was Solomonic.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:29am

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a well known lover of opera, as is Antonin Scalia (personal note: the last time I was at the Santa Fe Opera. she was at all three of my performances and sat a few rows away from me!!! I studied abroad with Scalia...but that wasn't as cool.)

I just wrote a longer piece on Parterre.com, so I'll just post it again below: but the long and short of it is this was simply a remarkable night of opera. I have often been very critical of the Gelb era, but this was a high point of his tenure.

---

Just back from the house and settling in with a nice glass of bourbon…and yet I can’t stop thinking about tonight’s performance. Such a fantastic night of music and elegant stage craftsmanship: this production is going to be hard to top this season and a rare artistic triumph for Peter Gelb.

As expected: kudos to the Met Orchestra and the Met Chorus for performing John Adam’s hypnotic music with such skill and clarity (more impressive that this was the first performance of “Kilinghoffer” at the Met) and to David Robertson for keeping it all together. There were so many fantastic movements throughout the evening -- both prologues and the act I finale Night Chorus in particular -- but I was most impressed with the collective’s ability not let the (incredibly inappropriate and often crass) comments coming from the audience affect the performance.

At the moment a protester started repeatedly screaming “The Murder of Klinghoffer will not be Forgiven!”, it seemed as though the show was about to come to a scratching halt. But Robertson kept the orchestra playing and signaled to the performers on stage that the show was absolutely not stopping. Perhaps there may have been a hiccup in the tempi at that point -- impossible to be sure as the screaming jackass was distracting everyone but the performers -- but once the histrionic outburst was over (and apparently, was followed by an arrest), the orchestra continued performing the delicate, haunting, passage of music.

I am one of the few people I knew that did not care for “War Horse” so I was concerned that Tom Morris’ production might be bombastic and showy. I could not have been more wrong. This production of “Klinghoffer” (my first) was somehow subtle and, at the same time, expressionistic. Morris’ production depicted two distinct ethos for both the Palestinians and the Jews (/passengers) framed by concrete walls that served a duel purpose as projection screens. The walls were evocative of the Israeli West Bank barrier but also served as a literal representation of the Achille Lauro. Morris’ work with his principal singers was equally impressive: particularly Michaela Martens’ incredible performance at the finale. Often, directors new to opera don't know what or how to direct their singers on stage (this is likely a problem caused more by singer than director…but whatever): Morris had no such shortcomings with his cast.

One quick point about the politics of the opera. As much as I listen to its music and now having finally seen the opera, I simply do not understand how this piece can be viewed as anti-Semitic. Yes, perhaps there exists a certain amount of cultural equivalence and relativism that some might find offense (and others might find fair), but I never felt as though Adams nor Goodman were trying to be so…predictable. Neither artist, set out to say “hey…they’re both kinda the same…see it??? See it?????” If that was their goal -- in my case anyway -- both failed miserably as the disgusting acts presented on stage were not made blunt by music or libretto.

I feel as though we Parterrians have been inundated with “Klinghoffer” articles for the past few month now. And yet, I really look forward to reading more about people’s reactions to this incredibly thoughtful and moving production. This isn’t said often about Gelb on these pages (nor is it generally deserved…), but he has done a very wonderful thing bringing “The Death of Klinghoffer” to the Met, particularly this production.



Updated On: 10/21/14 at 12:29 AM

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:32am

Kudos for that lovely review. My rant was far less eloquent. My brain is mush from that wonderful evening.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 1:08am

Thanks for your thoughts, Play Esq. I'd much rather read them here than on parterre ;-}

The Adam Langer article from the Forward that I posted earlier gives a rundown of the moments in the show that the protesters are saying are anti-Semitic...well, at least the protesters who actually know the show.

Here are some from that article:

---

The Palestinians sing hauntingly of being displaced from their homes and seeking revenge (“My father’s house was razed in 1948”); the Jews’ words are considerably more elliptical (“Let us, when our lust is exhausted for the day, recount to each other all we endured since we parted”).
...

Much attention has been paid to individual lines in the opera, such as one uttered by a hijacker nicknamed Rambo: “Wherever poor men are gathered, they can find Jews growing fat.” But attributing authorial intention to vile words spoken by a psychotic character seems specious at best.

...

The estimable professor and writer Phyllis Chesler, author of the Jewish Book Award-winning memoir “An American Bride in Kabul” and a self-proclaimed opera fan, suggests that it’s peculiar for Adams and Goodman to have written nuanced characterizations in an opera, a genre not known for its subtlety. And she further asserts that the weight of “Klinghoffer” is tipped unfairly towards the terrorists: Twelve arias are sung by the victimizers; their victims sing only five. The opera is “not even-handed,” Chesler says. “The villains have more lines.”

...

Does the opera, as some protesters have contended, idealize terrorism or condone murder? Of course not. If anything, it seems to be an impassioned and perhaps naive plea for dialogue and mutual understanding. “I think if you could talk like this sitting among your enemies, peace would come,” the captain tells one of the hijackers, who responds: “The day that I and my enemy sit peacefully, each putting his case and working towards peace, that day our hope dies. And I shall die, too.”

...

In the end, it comes to the amount of stage time and the language used. And its pretty clear that the authors shared the facile anti-Zionism that is ripe in academia today, and were therefore careful to be what they considered "open-minded."

Langer gives the final word to Marilyn Maris, the astonishing actreen who played Marilyn Klinghoffer:

"I don’t think that Leon Klinghoffer’s death is something that should be forgotten, and it’s not pleasant to revisit it, and yet I think his death should not have been in vain,” Martens told me. “When this opera comes up every two or three years, this discussion needs to happen. This man died a horrific death, and we need to remember this person. At the end of the opera, the whole audience is sobbing. You cry for the Klinghoffers, you cry for the whole situation. The opera gives us permission to grieve.”

[Theater'sBestFriend]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 8:43am

I do understand the First Amendment is not involved in that the parties debating are not part of the government. But constitutionally protected free speech and assembly are very much an issue in this debate.

The police barricades in front of Lincoln Center, the permits that regulated where the protesters could stand, the arrest of those who tried to interrupt the performance and how they will be handled, the unfettered press coverage -- indeed, this chat board -- can all thank the first amendment. It not only regulates the government; it reflects and reinforces a culture of civic discourse that promotes free exchange of ideas. It is good for the arts.

How many countries have a functioning first amendment? The UK doesn't, and look what happened to the Israeli troupe in Edinburgh last summer: unlike at Lincoln Center last night, their performance was cancelled; here, the performance went on.

I found it chilling last summer that posters on this board defended and advocated shutting down the Israeli troupe in Edinburgh, and doing the same to other artists and academics. We should be grateful that this controversy has been handled with open debate and protection of artists. Just try to imagine these events in Teheran. We become cavalier about the right to speak freely at our peril.



Updated On: 10/21/14 at 08:43 AM

[Theater'sBestFriend]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 8:47am

Here are the Met Opera's program notes. At the bottom is the open letter by Lisa and Ilsa Klinghoffer, Leon's daughters, that the Met agreed to include in the program.
Met program notes with Klinghoffer daughters' open letter

[Brian07663NJ]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 10:10am

Anyone going on Friday, October 24th?

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 10:50am

The First Amendment is involved. The First Amendment protects freedom of expression. Both the freedom of expression of Adams, Goodman and the Met and the freedom of expression of those who find grave and hurtful faults with the opera and wish to voice their findings.

The First Amendment protects both sides from governmental interference.

The First Amendment is involved but is not the issue. The issue is the subject of the debate. Is The Death of Klinghoffer guilty as charged?

No, it's not.

(Of course that's just my opinion here freely expressed.)




Updated On: 10/21/14 at 10:50 AM

[Kad]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 11:37am

I'm a bit confused as to why the First Amendment is being brought up here. No one has argued that either side should be silenced.

I'm also confused by Theatre'sBestFriend bringing up the Edinburgh incident from August- or at least his recollection of member's reaction to it. No one "lauded" the cancellation of the events. Here's a link to that thread.
Israeli Show Banned By Edinburgh Fringe

[dreaming]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 11:38am

Scotland's laws aren't America's, either. (I don't remember too much about that cancellation.)

On the other board, they are saying that the show is somewhat questionable.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 11:41am

I can honestly say that this was one of the most riveting opera experiences I have had. I have read so many complaints about the opera from people who have not seen or heard it stating many "problems". Contrary to what they say, the opera is not from the point of view from the terrorists and it never legitimizes them or their actions. What it does is make the terrorists human and by doing this it makes their decisions and actions horrifying at first, sometimes sad but in the end disgusting. If the opera were to simply make them monsters then you can fully write off what happens. By making them human, their inhumanity is both unsettling and sickening. The last scene between Mrs Klinghoffer and the Captain left me and the rest of the audience devastated.

It was interesting seeing this only days after being completely shaken by the play "Disgraced". It's an amazing piece and I am so glad the Met did not cave in to the protestors and cancel it. I'm just sorry that their won't be a HD transmission. This really does need to be seen.

I'm in town for two months getting my radiation treatment for cancer. My husband has to work most of that time in DC. But I will return to "Klinghoffer" when he visits. He needs to see this and I really want to experience it again.

Updated On: 10/21/14 at 11:41 AM

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:28pm

"I'm a bit confused as to why the First Amendment is being brought up here."

In typical BWW fashion, it started with a random comment where someone said they would be exercising their first amendment right and attending the show, and someone correctly stating that attending a show was not exercising one's first amendment rights, which then escalated to an unnecessary legal and constitutional discussion, about which no one is really in disagreement.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:37pm

Exactly.

Well, no one except some people.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:40pm

Thanks Pal Joey.

I actually read the article you posted before I went into the theater (thanks to you). I found it to be very fair and balanced and accurately reflects the two extreme, opposite, positions people are taking with with this piece.

I simply cannot stop thinking about the performance...I may have to go in November, if only to hear the marvelous Met Orchestra and Chorus under the brilliant David Robertson.

Aside: why the hate on Parterre? :-p

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 12:44pm

And one last nail in the coffin on the 1st Amendment issue: a poorly written (but fair on the First Amendment issue) op-ed from the WSJ.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/floyd-abrams-klinghoffer-and-the-two-sides-of-terrorism-1413414330

[Theater'sBestFriend]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 1:10pm

The thread is about the opening. It has sparked protests calling for silencing of the work. That's central to the discussion. A very smilier controversy arose about a very similar topic recently. Boycotting of artists was indeed raised and endorsed here then -- check the thread carefully. I was comparing and contrasting the way this controversy was treated to a similar one, and suggesting uniformity.

The way the protests were handled in the two situations did involve regulation of protest and assembly. With all due respect to the WSJ, that is a first amendment issue. It worked in this case. As a result, I've heard some interesting things about the work, both for and against, including interesting critiques of the libretto. I'm glad for that. It did not work in the other case, in which the protesters were allowed to shut down a performance. I think that's a legitimate concern, and germane.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 2:19pm

"Would the Metropolitan Opera offer a work called ‘The Death of Martin Luther King Jr.’ with racist views in support of the assassination?"

Sure, why not if someone wrote a great opera about that with characters expressing those racist views.

Actually, Sondheim has already written a musical about the assassination of, inter alia, Lincoln, in which a character, John Wilkes Booth, offers a racist view in support of the assassination.

As for the First Amendment it is being discussed in connection to the Met and Klinghoffer. Mayor de Blasio, in a rather dumb move, implicitly injected it into the discussion in criticizing Giuliani's being part of the demonstration as unAmerican. Mind you I don't share Giuliani's criticism of Klinghoffer. But I think de Blasio was wrong to say:

“The former mayor had a history of challenging cultural institutions when he disagreed with their content. I don’t think that’s the American way. The American way is to respect freedom of speech. Simple as that,” de Blasio said at an unrelated press conference."

It is the American way to criticize cultural institutions when one disagrees with their content. That is the flip side of the First Amendment. Just as the institution has the right to present what it wants to present, Americans have the right to criticize the institutions for their choice, including on political grounds. Those grounds can take many forms from all over the political spectrum.


Updated On: 10/21/14 at 02:19 PM

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 3:29pm

haterobics, someone said the protesters were exercising their First Amendment right by protesting which is correct. And then Pal Joey responded that this is not a First Amendment issue because the government is not involved which is not correct. The First Amendment and the way it has been interpreted by the Judiciary is what protects those protesters free speech and their right to assembly.

Does Broadway World need a civics class?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 4:02pm

No, we do not.

[sinister teashop]

Posted: 10/21/14 at 4:16pm

Pal Joey, do you understand how First Amendment cases are argued in the United States?

They rarely start with the Federal Government's involvement. They're usually about things like the right of students to wear anti-war armbands in high school. Or the right to protest in a small town square.

Those cases then go to district courts and then later to the court of appeals and then finally to the Supreme Court where a precedence is established. Those precedences are what makes a First Amendment issue and what protects our right to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.

The Judiciary interprets the Constitution. The executive branch executes the powers of the Constitution. And the legislative branch makes laws within the framework of the Constitution.
Updated On: 10/21/14 at 04:16 PM