A dramatised reading of The Ring, in English

[Bert Coules]

The British Library paid host yesterday to what was described - probably
accurately, I suspect - as a unique event. A semi-staged dramatic reading
of the complete Ring, in English. A large cast of young actors from the
Central School was accompanied by John Tomlinson no less as narrator: which
is to say he read, with enormous presence and power, a slightly edited
version of the stage directions.

It was something of a success: I heard several people using the word
"revelatory". Certainly anyone with little or no German, accustomed only to
surtitles or following a translated libretto, would have found the direct
experience of hearing the dialogue in English quite new. The staging was
minimal, but clever: no scenery, no props (everything was mimed) and
unobtrusively appropriate modern dress: the gods formal, the giants in
jeans, Alberich and Mime racially linked by the simple expedient of giving
them both woolly hats. Personally, I could have done without the projected
images (from Rackham and others).

Unison passages, which I expected to be problematical, weren't. The ride of
the Valkyries and the summoning of the Gibichung vassals were both done
exactly as if sung, with unison lines, overlapping delivery, simultaneous
different words and all.

The weakest point of the whole thing for me was, unfortunately, a central
element: the translation. After considering various alternatives they
decided to use Stewart Spencer's which is undeniably clever at maintaining
the Stabreim (and in other variously scholarly ways) but to my mind is
absolutely hopeless for performance (for which I presume it was never
intended) . It varies widely in tone (and not just where Wagner's original
does the same) but more crucially, it isn't rhythmic: in sticking close to
one aspect of the German text, Spencer has completely abandoned another -
and in this instance, one that's vastly more important: the unmetrical
delivery sounded not poetic but hopelessly stilted and unnatural. The text
was also full of pitfalls for the cast with even Tomlinson stumbling once or
twice.

The performances were full of interest. There could have been stronger
overall direction (we heard several different pronunciations of key words,
especially names) but what was fascinating was that most of the cast were
new to Wagner in general and the Ring in particular, which lead to some
markedly unexpected moments . Too many to mention in detail, but for
instance the Wotan completely threw away "One freer than I - the god" and
gave a fascinating reading of another key line: "I cannot destroy him! He
*found* my sword!" (as opposed to being given it).

Did it work as a play? Not for me, but that wasn't the fault of the
players. If they'd gone for a singing translation - and they could have
used an early one, Jameson say, or Newman, if they wanted a period feel -
things could have been very different. But my word, I'm glad I was there.

[Mike Scott Rohan]

On Monday, June 10, 2013 4:26:04 PM UTC+1, Bert Coules wrote:
{snip}

> Did it work as a play? Not for me, but that wasn't the fault of the
>
> players. If they'd gone for a singing translation - and they could have
>
> used an early one, Jameson say, or Newman, if they wanted a period feel -
>
> things could have been very different. But my word, I'm glad I was there.

Very interesting, Bert, and thanks for posting this. When I was at college I took part in an acted Ring, using that odd American translation -- was it Stewart Robb? It worked not too badly, although you could always tell who knew the music and who didn't -- they were instinctively following the rhythms in their heads, whereas the pure actors looked for the internal rhythm of the English lines. We wore costumes filched from our current production of the Yeats Cucchullain plays, itchy black sackcloth -- Hagen's spear was my long army knife on a broomstick, and a danger to all concerned. Yet something of it all survived...

Cheers,

Mike

[@zonnet.nl Herman van der Woude]

Mike Scott Rohan schreef op 13-6-2013 het volgende:

I would have liked this, probably still do!

--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Cheers!
Herman van der Woude

[Bert Coules]

Mike Scott Rohan wrote:

> ...that odd American translation -- was it Stewart Robb?

It could well have been . Robb's version was written (or at least
published) in 1960 and, as far as I know, was the very first attempt at a
singing translation in clear and direct modern English. Or perhaps
American:

I thank you, numbskull,
your work is tried and true!

says Alberich to Mime in one of many such instances. But in general, this
is good work and it would be interesting to hear it sung: I've no knowledge
of it ever being used in performance, in the USA or anywhere else, and I'd
be interested to know if it has.

Robb translates some of the names: Siegfried forges Needful, Fafner lives in
Hate-Cave, and Siegmund's inappropriate name possibilities are Peaceful and
Joyful. His actual alias becomes, distinctly oddly for English ears,
Woe-king. Next stop Basingtoke, as Andrew Porter once good-naturedly
remarked.

It was published in paperback by Dutton & Co with an excellent introduction
focussing on Wagner's text written by Edward Downes (presumably the American
musicologist rather than the English conductor) and two others by Stewart
Robb. These latter conclude with this note on his version: "...it does not
sound like a translation, but as though originally written in English. A
reading aloud will show this". Modest chap.

Mike, John Tomlinson, in his introduction to the British Library
performance, said that as far as any of the people responsible for it knew
it was a world first. Interesting that they were mistaken. And you went
one better, with costumes and props. Are there any pictures?

Bert

[Bert Coules]

It appears that I owe Mr Robb an apology: "numbskull" is English through and
through and of ancient lineage to boot: it's not the American slang I took
it for.

[Mike Scott Rohan]

I have the Robb paperback somewhere in the depths of my library, but haven't seen it for about twenty years -- hence my uncertainty. No, there were no pictures, and it was probably just as well, it must have looked pretty shambolic. There were two perfomances, which took place in the Old Dining Hall of St.Edmund Hall, which functions very well as a galleried theatre. We put on everything there from recitals to Edward Bond and, memorably, Jarry's Ubu plays, with Gillian Greenwood, later BBC producer and editor of Literary Review as (among other things) a busty ship's figurehead (and myself playing everything from the Tsar to a lecherous singing statue of Memnon). Many of these were directed by Wilf Judd, later of Covent Garden and Wexford (and younger bro of conductor James Judd). I don't remember Wilf had to do with the Ring performances, though; there were a lot of performers I didn't know so well, from the University Wagner Society. The only one I remember by name was Steve Bryant, later a BBC archivist and Dr.Who episode hunter.

But I don't think even we were the first -- I'm sure we got the idea from somewhere else, a US college perhaps. There was quite a lot of that sort of thing going on at that time. The Glasgow Citizens' Theatre, then very go-ahead, staged Rosenkavalier and (I think) the Figaro libretto (not Beaumarchais).

Cheers,

Mike

[Bert Coules]

Mike Scott Rohan wrote:

> But I don't think even we were the first... There was

> quite a lot of that sort of thing going on at that time.

I think I've mentioned before on here the Wagner Society-sponsored stage
performance of Siegfried's Death: another fascinating experience, though I
wasn't the only one in the audience who winced every time a character
referred to "Woe-tan": a rather odd directorial quirk.

One more thought on the British Library show: it's the only Ring I've ever
seen (or heard, I think) where the role of Waltraute was played by the same
performer in both The Valkyrie and The Twilight of the Gods. I suppose it's
just possible that in that at least they did pull off a world first.