It's by Puccini, not Zeffirelli.
Here's another little opera tidbit from Sunday's English Speaking Union speech by Stanley Garner, director of Tulsa Opera's current production of "Lucia di Lammermoor."
Garner had an interesting perspective on his life's work.
He pointed out that you can listen to opera on the radio or on a CD, but he has never heard of anyone putting an opera on their DVD player and muting the sound.
Opera is about music first. The acting, costumes, and staging are all lovely extras.
"What happens visually is extremely important," he said, but it is still "way down the food chain."
Agreed. Opera is about the music. We expect a beautiful visual too, and, increasingly, acceptable acting. But given the choice between a great show with bad music and great music with bad acting, every opera lover would opt for the latter.
This brings to mind the current fuss over the Met's new production of "Tosca," which has been widely panned in New York.
The biggest sin listed in The New Yorker's review -- subtly titled
Fiasco -- was that is wasn't Franco Zeffirelli's production of some 20 years vintage in the Met's rep.
I skipped the movie theater live broadcast of "Tosca" Saturday and, ironically, ended up listening to the free radio broadcast of a San Francisco Opera production of the same opera, which also wasn't the Zeffirelli version.
I couldn't tell if the San Francisco staging was any good, of course, but I could tell that the tenor wasn't.
