Talk:Regietheater

Don Carlos or Un ballo in maschera?

"British production of Verdi's 'Don Carlos' that at one point imported toilet cubicles"

Is this not the famous ENO production of Un ballo in maschera??

Vivaverdi 01:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think so. I will change it. Kleinzach 10:15, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The production is by the Spanish director Calixto Bieito and was originally produced by the Liceu, Barcelona, in 2000. It has since been revived at ENO and Copenhagen. TFM04 (talk) 11:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doubts about the title of this article

We are discussing the title on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera. - Kleinzach 10:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As there have been no objections posted I have changed the title to Regietheater. This term may not be familiar to many English readers but it is explained in the article. - Kleinzach 09:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup tag removed

I have removed the cleanup tag after wikifying, cleaning up and renaming the article. I hope that is acceptable to all. - Kleinzach 09:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV?

I'll admit I'd never heard this term before I came across this article...but I was a little taken aback at how POV it sounded. I seriously doubt that this would ever be in an encyclopedia: "Stories also circulate of 'celebrity' producers who, though they cheerfully impose their 'interpretations' upon other people's operatic masterworks, are not actually able to follow musical scores and are observed in the theatre to be working from CD booklets in which the composer's original stage-directions are not reproduced." This is completely anecdotal and unsourced, and the use of cutesy little quote marks doesn't make it any better. It sounds like some sort of witty columnist, not a work of scholarship. The use of adverb phrases like "flatly disregarded" and "cheerfully impose" are inherently POV. Now, if there were any sources, at all, it would be much better. -Randomglitter 09:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I had never seen such a 'blatant' (to quote an original author here) example of POV on Wikipedia before. Completely unscientific hatespeak. Since this IS indeed an encyclopedia and not a dicussion forum, we must maintain a neutral scientific behaviour. I have carefully tried to disarm some of the mines buried here. -- megA 17:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMO the definition at the beginning of the article is still problematic: "refers to the modern (mainly post-World War II) practice of allowing a director or producer such freedom in devising the way a given opera is staged that not only may the composer's specific stage directions (where supplied) be disregarded, but also major elements of geographical location, chronological situation, casting and plot." .

My own definition of Regietheater would be simply be 'director-oriented' or 'director-dominated' (i.e.rather than conductor, singer or administrator dominated). Some directors, such as Kupfer or Götz Friedrich have been meticulous in their attention to the original text while being original and inventive in their staging. -- Kleinzach 00:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, it is a co-operation between conductor and director. What I also miss is that "Regietheater" is not limited to opera. In spoken theater, it has become so customary that it is already taken as granted and no longer mentioned at all. (Has anyone seen a recent production of "Romeo and Juliet" that is not staged as a rock musical?) -- megA 10:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Regietheater" does refer primarily to opera, rather than spoken theatre, since the term is specifically intended to define an interpretative process which is led more by a director than a conductor. As such, the term "producer's theatre" is inherently pejorative, as it is based an opinion that the word "director", as it is meant in spoken theatre, can only refer to conductors in the world of opera because it is the word used to describe them in most European languages other than English. From thereon, this article is filled with bias: it is an emotive topic for many but the contents of this article are not only expressed in subjective manner but also implicitly critical of the sort of work this process has produced, since the term is usually intended to be derogative. In my opinion, the article should be rewritten to include an opposing view. -- TFM04 (talk) 12:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the first part of your post is plainly wrong, at least in Germany, where the term originates. Regietheater actually was used first for plays and later for opera, since "re-interpreting" plays started earlier than the same processes in opera. Nowadays, there is only less discussion about it when referring to the staging of plays, since, as the article already mentions, it has become so commonplace to "update" a play that the term is almost tautological.
"Producer", in British theater, means "director". Nobody usually mistakes "director" for "conductor". "Producer's opera" is just the British language version of the (American) "director's theater". It wouldn't make sense otherwise, since an actual producer (in the sense of theater financier) usually tries to tone down a director's too exorbitant ideas.
I however agree on you seeing the bias, but it appears impossible to write a POV-free article on this heavily and emotionally debated topic. I just removed a link to a blatantly cliché-ridden newspaper article reworking the usual generalizations of "European 'Regietheater' now comes to rear it's ugly head in our beloved Metropolitan Opera". This newspaper article had been hailed as "academic insight" in the Wikipedia aricle... -- megA (talk) 09:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of Walter Felsenstein?

The other main problem with this article is the absence of important information on the development of opera direction in Germany. Walter Felsenstein, rather than Wieland Wagner was really the father of Regietheater. Incidentally the Felsenstein article defines Regietheater as " productions in which drama values come before musical ones" -- Kleinzach 03:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Felsenstein is rather credited as father of "Musiktheater" (which fits the description in his article better that "Regietheater"). He usually left the opera in the original setting and historical context, but emphasized the importance of psychological and dramatic staging over pure musical performance. Later, his students Götz Friedrich and Harry Kupfer took directing to a new level by bringing the historical drama into a modern context. So he might be called "Father of Musiktheater" or "Forefather of Regietheater". Actually, it's a long developement that started with abstract stagings in the 1920/30es. -- megA 10:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the Musiktheater article in the German Wiki would be worth translating. -- Kleinzach 13:27, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

German article

I'm posting my version of the German WP article below, seeing as how we've been invited to discuss. I think it has some good discussion points, & in some ways is better than the current article. Why not replace the current article with this? Well, ideally I'd like to see an article with more citations. And understandably the German article is very centered in the world of German culture.

I do like the fact that this one attempts NPOV (most of the time).Herbivore (talk) 00:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regietheater is a widely-used term in theater criticism, first used in the 1970s. A production may be described as belonging to Regietheater when, in the critic’s opinion, the ideas of the director play too great a role (as opposed to those of the playwright, actors, composer, singers, conductor, etc.)

Use of the term Regietheater suggests incorrectly that it describes a single cohesive movement in theater. But there are two arguments against adopting the word as a descriptive term: 1) the term has no precise definition, and is thus applied by various writers to directors whose work has little in common; and 2) at least originally, it was used with negative connotations, and so lacks objectivity.

Regietheater as a Negative Criticism

These are the most common negative criticisms of productions labeled as Regietheater:

That they betray the intentions of the author (or in music theater, the composer), e.g. by gratuitous additions or cuts, or moving the action to a different time or place

That they distract attention from the real content of the work--usually in music theater, where directors are accused of taking attention away from the music, but also in the spoken theater, e.g. when scenes supposedly unrelated to the work itself are inserted.

That they contain additions which are not essential to the work at hand, e.g. scenes of nudity or excessive violence for their own sake.

At least originally, use of the word Regietheater was connected with the criticism that the growing number of such productions was leading to a decline in quality in the German-speaking theater. One spokesman for this view is the German director Peter Stein: “In the theater, people are free to do as they wish, but meanwhile German Regietheater is a laughing-stock throughout the world.”

History and Change

Recently, the word Regietheater has been used more and more often in a positive sense. Directors who use the word to describe their own work emphasize the need to give new interpretations to works from the past, since today’s audiences have had different experiences than those of earlier times, and accordingly must be addressed differently if the same effect is to be achieved. From this point of view, things like additions, cuts, change in time and place, etc ., are not things to be criticized, but are imperative to attain this goal.

This conscious assumption of the Regietheater label, and the attempt to rescue it from its negative associations, is found predominantly in German-speaking countries. Among leading directors in this movement are Hans Neuenfels and Peter Konwitschny—which in itself suggests that Regietheater is hardly a single unified trend.

Regietheater a Misnomer

Regietheater (literally, “directors’ theater”) is a misnomer to the extent that even the most vehement critics are not opposed to the existence of directors per se, and virtually no one today believes that a valid interpretation of a work can be staged without a director’s supervision. In this sense, Regietheater is a tautology.

Regietheater in Opera

Until about 1800, the opera world revolved around new operas. Composers inhabited the same time and culture as their audiences, and held generally the same views of the conventions and “rules” of theater. The 19th century saw the rise of repertoire theater, in which new works were performed side by side with older operas that had been successful in their day. This meant that older works were performed in a style different from that of their first performances, since views of subjects, themes and motives had changed over time, as had the technological resources of the theater, including the design of musical instruments themselves. The works of Mozart (Cosi fan tutte, for example) were much romanticized and misrepresented in the 19th century. The longer the time between a work’s premiere and its revival, the greater the need for interpretation. Thus the director came into being—the leader who, collaborating with a conductor, would give an opera production its staging and artistic form.

“Regietheater” and another word, “Werktreue” (fidelity to the work) may be used to designate two contrasting positions as to opera production today; there has been fierce debate between adherents of the two positions.

Werktreue: Those who believe than an opera can be staged in a “werktreu” manner advance the view that the intention of its creators has a validity which should be respected in performance. Since these creators are often no longer living, and no visual or sound records from their time exist, it is not always easy to say what their intention was. Thus the concept of Werktreue often has to rely on a certain performing tradition, namely that of the first half of the 20th century, with costuming and set design almost always the main criteria. Certainly, the approach to an opera can begin with the work itself and the analysis of it. The goal of a production is then above all the performance of the work itself and of its contents in the spirit of the work. Thus perhaps it is more accurate to speak of Werkgerechtigkeit (doing justice to the work) than Werktreue (fidelity to the work).

Regietheater: For many directors of opera, a production must above all connect with contemporary life and society or with their own personality. Often their interpretations will have a clear visual link to contemporary life. Aspects of the work that were clear only when the work was new will be interpreted, or re-interpreted. These productions may have the character of adaptations, in which the work is enveloped by the director’s personal interpretations. This has come to be called Regietheater. In the last half-century, when directors trained in the spoken-word theater have worked in the opera house more and more often, the practical necessities of musical theater have sometimes played a secondary role.

Every modern opera production may be located somewhere between these two extremes. But most operatic artists feel that they must do justice both to the work and to contemporary reality. Thus the director Adolf Dresen has stated, “Faithfulness to the work is just as bad for an opera as muddling through the work.” According to another widely quoted formulation on the same theme, “Tradition means passing on the torch, not worshiping the ashes.”

One recurrent challenge for directors is the Wagner festival at Bayreuth. Since the festival has been limited to the same ten Wagner operas for more than a century, it is natural that regular new interpretations of these works should be a prominent feature at the “Bayreuth workshop.”

Herbivore (talk) 00:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for doing this. I agree the text above is better than the present article. I know it's a lot of work but would it be possible to make this the basis of the article (adding whatever can be salvaged from the present version) suitably crediting the source of the information? It would be great if you have time to do this. Best regards. --Klein zach 00:46, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section

I have re-deleted he controversy section, not because there is no criticism, but because what was there had been a tagged, uncited and opinionated set of text for several years. The one source didn't make the distinction between "proper" and improper regietheatre as claimed, just criticized one bad production.

I am not an opera enthusiast, and this will be my last contribution on the subject, but I would welcome a calmly written and well-sourced coverage if any controversies, of someone would choose to write one. The deleted text was not it. Pmyteh (talk) 12:07, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]