THE BARBER OF SEVILLE @ English National Opera, London

THE BARBER OF SEVILLE
ENO at The London Coliseum
Music: Gioachino Rossini
Libretto: Cesare Sterbini
English Translation: Amanda Holden and Anthony Holden
Original Director: Jonathan Miller
Revial Director: Ian Rutherford
Conductor: Rory Macdonald
Original Designer: Tanya McCallin
Original Lighting Designer: Tom Mannings
Revival Lighting: Martin Doone
PSM: Alex Hayesmore
With: Julian Hubbard, John Tessier, Garry Magee, Anna Grevelius, Andrew Shore, Jennifer Rhys-Davies, Peter Kerr, Brindley Sherratt, Geraint Hylton

Let's start out with a compliment, shall we? The Barber of Seville is a lovely evening at the ENO. The acting is spot on, the slapstick as sticky and joyous as toffee and the comedic timing and vocals both pitch-perfect.

Now a question: Why did you revive this production?

Let me expound a bit. I do not think that "Because it's fun" is a good enough reason to revive a less than perfect production. There is always room for a jolly evening spent enjoying Rossini's opera. But why this production? Or to phrase the question in another way....Or 7...

• Why did you use so much plexi glass in the set that I could see all the lamps reflected back into my eyes and had to stop looking at the stage?
• Why was there no front light?
• Why did you only use dramatic cuing at the end of Act 1?
• Why didn't anyone know what to do when the automation didn't work? Surely you're prepared for this?
• Why were some of the costumes sumptuous creme puffs of goodness and others walking yawns?
• Why was there lightning inside the house during the thunderstorm? (Lighting Designers! We do notice where you place your strobes!)
• And most importantly--- Why was my bed sheet hug across the stage like a giant sail? You don't think this play takes place on a boat....do you?

I would like say that I loved the direction, but that is only true as far as staging goes. Beyond that, I got the feeling that the director and the designers never spent time in the same room, let alone teched the same piece. So, may I ask why we feel the need to revisit this production? Clearly the talent is in the world to perfect this piece. Why not explore new territory within the context of a classic?

Also a note: This is the first translation I have seen of this piece into English. It was clearly very English, but I'm not sure that it was terribly good. I would love to hear from anyone who has worked with this or another translation if you have thoughts on either. I suspect that the idea of the ENO needing pieces to be in English has become obsolete now that we have the technology to so easily display subtitles. There is a wealth in the original language that I lost at several turns over the course of this evening.

I left this production with a general feeling of homey happy cuddliness, but with a good dose of bewilderment thrown in for good measure.
Mostly, it makes me want to find a good Gilbert and Sullivan operetta in town. Anyone?