Michael Tanner

Why imperfect operas like Don Carlo are more interesting than perfect ones

Michael Tanner chooses his favourite recordings of Verdi’s magnificent muddle

Roberto Alagna as Don Carlo and Simon Keenlyside as Rodrigo in a Met production from 2010 – both singers feature in Michael Tanner's favourite recordings of the opera. Image: Mary Altaffer / AP / Shutterstock 
issue 08 August 2020

In the 62 years since I first heard and saw Don Carlo, in the famous and long-lasting production by Visconti at the Royal Opera, my feelings about it have grown ever stronger, both in passionate attachment and in critique. Imperfect operas, like other imperfect phenomena, can be more interesting than perfect ones, because they’re more thought-provoking, more enticing.

The libretto, very freely based on Schiller’s play, was by two Frenchmen, and Verdi, eager to make a bigger splash than he had so far in Paris, made too much of one. The first performance, in 1867, ran so late that the members who lived outside central Paris missed their last trains, which were at 12.35 a.m. (Royal Opera and ENO: please take note).

Verdi returned to Italy, and the opera seems to have been ignored — apart from oddly cut performances — until 1884. Given how great much of it is, and how much effort had gone into it, that is astounding.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in