In France, political instability and budgetary uncertainties, compounded by the recent theft of jewellery from the Galerie d'Apollon at the Louvre, are pushing cultural debate out of the headlines. it must be said that culture (apart from regular appeals – often political in nature – to preserve heritage, as if heritage were the only cultural area worth invoking) is not a concern of our leaders, nor of their opponents.
Elsewhere, there are a few controversies here and there that fuel the news. In Germany, people are enjoying scaring themselves with Bayreuth going bankrupt and closing its doors in 2028, in Austria there is still controversy over the Salzburg Festival and the appointment of a theatre manager, while in Italy the big event has been (and remains) the highly “political” appointment of conductor Beatrice Venezi as musical director of La Fenice in Venice, which has provoked strong opposition from the driving forces behind the famous theatre, from whom the local authorities (mayor and superintendent) do not know how to extricate themselves.
Yet in Italy, the appointment of theatre managers has always been political, for decades. But decades ago, there was a sort of division of roles, with the high-sounding name of “lottizzazione”: a Christian Democrat General Manager, an artistic director supported by the Communist Party and a musical director sympathetic to the Socialists… I am exaggerating, but that was how it worked.
Since Italy has had a stable majority, the process continues to be applied, but in the form of “monolottizzazione”, meaning that the cultural managers appointed – and, as far as we are concerned, the directors of opera houses – all come more or less from the neo-fascist galaxy in the broad sense, whether pure or converted out of “necessity”. This is the case in Venice, which the General Manager promptly appointed Beatrice Venezi as musical director, adding to her talent that of being a good friend of Giorgia Meloni.
The controversy shows no sign of abating, with even the great Riccardo Muti and Fabio Luisi weighing in. Needless to say more.
Equally interesting is the appointment of the new Manager of the San Carlo in Naples, who succeeds Stéphane Lissner, Fulvio Macciardi, appointed after a controversy that pitted the mayor of Naples, Gianfranco Manfredi, against representatives of the Campania Region (centre-left) and the Ministry (far right), objective allies… The new manager, who was previously manager of the Teatro Comunale in Bologna, affirms a sense of innovation that has honoured him since his first interview.
When asked what “his” San Carlo will be like, he replies : “A great theatre where history and tradition will be valued in accordance with classical standards”. He adds, “I am not opposed to experimentation, but in specific places. Some provocations seen in the past required other contexts ”.
With veiled words, he insinuates that Lissner was a provocateur, who nevertheless attracted an audience to this magnificent theatre that had long since abandoned it. But even in this case, regardless of the criticism, in this discourse we find all the conformism that is causing the death of theatre in Italy, in particular the opposition between “classical canons” (who will tell me what they mean?) and “provocations” (who will tell me what they mean and, above all, which shows seen at the San Carlo in recent years they refer to?). To still talk today of “provocations” with regard to the directors who have worked in Naples in recent years (Krzysztof Warlikowski, Dmitri Tcherniakov, Claus Guth, Vasily Barkhatov…) or to define them as “experiments” demonstrates either singular ignorance or a short-sighting vision of a theatre that today permeates the whole of Europe.
Macciardi rightly points out that the San Carlo has been a theatre of creation(s), but he clearly speaks of it in the past tense, as if once again modernity should be the heritage… “It is the oldest theatre in Europe, about to celebrate its 300th anniversary, and my idea is to retrace its history”. Recalling that Lissner himself wanted to immerse himself in this history, but opening it up to today's visions (see the interview he gave us at the time – in French), theatre cannot be made solely the refuge of a centuries-old identity : it is obvious that everyone has their own personality, but not in the conformism of a dusty conservatism asserted here with such naivety.
Now, of course, the best way to keep the San Carlo a theatre of great prestige is to root it in modernity, in line with what made it glorious, a “modern” theatre of “creation” from 1737 (the year of its construction) to the great Romantic period, i.e. more than a century. Turning it into a museum of the modernity of the past is just a way of mummifying it… especially in a city like Naples, where theatre in all its forms is fundamental.
If there is a crisis in opera audiences, it is also because for decades the programmes have revolved around thirty or so standard titles and the smaller theatres, particularly in Italy, but not only there, offer Tosca, Traviata and Pagliacci, which are supposed to attract audiences. But it is simply contemptuous of the audience to believe that they have no curiosity : this is demonstrated by the current success of Baroque forms and pastiches, and also by the programming of certain operas in French regions (Nancy, Rennes…). If there is a crisis in opera, it is primarily because the “education” of the audience has been neglected and they have been considered only as a cash cow good for buying tickets.
Where the public has been accustomed to varied programming and open-minded views (for example in Lyon, but also in Frankfurt and Amsterdam and even Rome in recent years), it remains at an excellent level.
No to conformism and blinders, long live curiosity and open-mindedness !