Here's a somewhat famous opera I'd never seen, so I thought, why not? Probably everyone basically knows the story of Samson and Delilah: he's a tough Israelite warrior fighting the Philistines, until Delilah (who--I'm not a Biblical expert--I think is supposed to be another Israelite who betrays him in the original story, but in the opera she's clearly a Philistine herself) seduces him and gets him to reveal the secret of his strength, which is his hair; she has it cut and he's turned over to the Philistines but then, for his final attack, he knocks down the temple's pillars and everyone dies. Extremely edifying.
Here's my main question about this story: why would everyone just assume that he has some special secret to his strength that can be learned and used to defeat him? Sure they turn out to be right, but doesn't it make more intuitive sense that, welp, he's just tough because God gave him superpowers; there's nothing you can do about it. Sorry. Or maybe: yeah, but God revokes these powers when he gives into temptation with Delilah. That would make sense too. But no; turns out he just has a weak point like a videogame boss. I find this whole thing very theologically dubious.
As an opera, the thing I found striking about this--because it's so unusual, when you think about it--is that there's no romance here: he's in love with her, he says, whatever that may actually mean, but we're never meant to believe that she feels anything for him; that her motive are not purely mercenary. And...you don't see that much in opera. Think about it. I mean, sure, there are operas that aren't about romance at all, but if they are, you kind of expect there to be something there. I mean, I think that even Pinkerton feels more for Butterfly than Delilah does in this, and it's not like you get the impression that Samson's feelings go much beyond sheer lust (if there's a difference). I have to admit, it leaves the story here feeling a bit thin,even by operatic standards.
I still liked it, though! Saint-Saëns is fun. I especially liked the "Bacchanale" ballet sequence where the Philistines are celebrating Samson's subjugation. Super-Orientalist, but hey, also super-great. And are those "Eastern" motifs that you hear everywhere from here specifically, or is it a matter of a common ancestor? Either way, I LOVE IT. I watched this version, which is mostly quite good. Frankly, I'm not sure it's even theoretically possible for any singer to be magnetic enough as Delilah to make the story actually believable, but Marianna Tarasova does about as reasonable a job as you'd expect. Nikola Mijailovic is also very good as the sinister Philistine priest of Dagon. Torsten Kerl as Samson looks the part, but I can't help feel he's a bit acting-challenged, which doesn't help. The more or less modern-dress production is actually very effective, mostly. The one part that they really botch is the ending, where--SIGH--as opposed to just knocking down the temple, Samson is shown about to set off a suicide vest. For fuck's sake, people. You can't just throw in such a loaded signifier with absolutely no logic to it. It's just the laziest possible effort to be "transgressive," and in a very stupid way. Don't be dumb. Dammit. OH WELL. Still a good performance, and a good opera.
No comments:
Post a Comment