Dispatch from the Met: Doctor Atomic
Concerning the quality of John Adams’s Doctor Atomic, currently playing at the Metropolitan Opera through November 13, I am of many minds. This may be due in no small part to the opera being of many minds itself. Doctor Atomic is about as good as any opera could be given that its creators do not seem to have a cogent idea of what drama is.
At first a documentary-style perspective on the events leading to the first atomic bomb test holds sway. In the first scene, the chorus and characters sing lines containing all the poetry of a Pentagon press briefing. (Adams’s program notes describe his and Peter Sellars’s scrupulousness in basing the libretto on language from primary sources.) But after the initial oddness, one gets used to hearing the chorus describe the structure of the bomb’s core and so forth. Then scene two arrives, and we’re in Puccini-land. Robert and Kitty Oppenheimer, in the intimacy of their bedroom, rhapsodize in florid soliloquies about their infinite, cosmic love for one another. In scene three, the opera begins to hit its stride by coming to favor panoramic montages over dramatic scenes. After intermission, Act II increases this trend: characters more often speak to us (or to no one) than to each other, and we wait and wait for the bomb to drop.
With so many different dramatic angles rubbing elbows–the documentary, the lyrical, the montage (and the first two do not disappear entirely in Act II)–awkward moments abound in Doctor Atomic. The beginning of the second scene is needlessly jarring; the discussion of General Groves’s diet in scene three does not belong here; the “earth-mother” lullaby (sung by the Oppenheimers’ Native-American nanny, Pasqualita) is portentous; after an inert debate about the possibility the bomb might ignite the atmosphere, Edward Teller, one of the scientists, offers everyone sun screen. The entire second act fails to establish a common consciousness from which characters’ lines can emerge logically: instead, these lines often sound arbitrary and pretentious. Kitty Oppenheimer is a character almost entirely without dramatic support from her surroundings: she seems out of place, despite some ravishing music; and even Doctor Atomic himself, despite his riveting John Donne aria that closes the first act, ends up being a weak center for the action.
But in the end Doctor Atomic is saved by the sheer talent of its composer. Adams’s score is absolutely fantastic. The tonality roves from chromatic to triadic with discretion and power; Adams’s command of rhythmic contrast–especially in how well the wildly exciting concluding countdown is prepared–is masterful; the orchestration is luscious and fluent; the vocal writing maneuvers deftly between the florid and the declamatory; the strident choral writing packs a wallop, especially in the Bhagavad Gita settings in the second act. And the entire musical component of the production, already at a high level, benefits from the inspired, committed conducting of Alan Gilbert, whose approaching tenure at the New York Philharmonic must be more eagerly anticipated than ever before.
Doctor Atomic‘s flaws are serious, and the second act in particular breaks down badly. But Adams’s power is at its zenith, and one continues to look forward to his coming creations.
Alice Goodman’s libretto to “Nixon in China”is brilliant, and the opersstands as the best writtrn id the late decades of the thentieth century. I thnk “The Death of Klinghoffer” also stands as a coherent, poetic work of art.
I think “Dr.Atomic” is less successful, but certainly not without some lovely musical highlights; and “A Flowering Tree” is lovely. Incidentally, Nonesuch has just sent me a corrected libretto in response to my complaint about the inexplicable bungle, so I suggest writing to them if you have not received yours.
There is little doubt that Adams and Glass have both produced breathtaking work for the opera stage, so calls for them to leave opera alone merely amount to the usual anti-modernist philistinism.
Saw the Met relay of Doctor Atomic on Saturday. The libretto is indeed a disaster; the opera strangles on its own good intentions. Delighted to read Robert Baker’s commendation of L’amour de loin and agree that it’s a masterpiece. Why is it easier to believe in this medieval troubadour and his distant princess than
in Robert and Kitty Oppenheimer? Perhaps because from the first moments of the opera,Saariaho and her librettist (Amin Malouf) set about bringing them to life with all the considerable means at their disposal. The surface nervousness (and splendour) of Doctor Atomic does not manage to camouflage an underlying lack of conviction. And if opera is going to preach to us, it has to do so much more subtly and insidiously.
http://www.aminmaalouf.org/english/
comparing the libretti of puccini and verdi to sellar’s doctor atomic is really like apples and oranges. the sellar’s libretto is more in the philip glass/robert wilson tradition of a non-narrative to semi-narrative oblique subject drama which was heavily influenced by the virgil thomson/gertrude stein collaborations. (four saints in three acts, mother of us all) and maybe a little of satie’s theatre works (uspud)
i’m also in agreement that the libretto’s have been the weakest elements in the adams/sellars collaborations. i wonder what mr. adams would do with a much better source material.
I agree with David Toub’s comment:”it’s what a composer does with it, not something inherent in a style or technique.” as to whether a composer should/should not compose opera.
I need to echo Joey’s comment:
“I don’t think that modern composers are able to exert the kind of control that Verdi and Puccini had over their librettists, especially when dealing with someone as highly regarded as Sellars. It’s a different era.”
As for Joey’s question, “Is there anyone who can bring a sense of poetry and lyricism to modern opera?”, I thought of Saariaho’s L’amour de loin for the following reason:
I believe it to be a modern masterpiece, not because she writes quasi-spectral music (which might lead some to say, therefore it must be a great opera since spectralism is arguably the most recent and distinct approach to composition), but because it is rich in lyricism and definitely overflowing in poetry (musically and textually).
Interestingly, Sellars was involved but not as librettist, as producer (apologies to the librettist, I forget his name at this moment!).
So if anyone should avoid something, perhpas it’s Sellars who should avoid writing libretti and stick to what he does best: production.
(Although, it might be a good idea for Adams to take a break too! (hehe))
🙂
Personally, I’ve only heard the 50-minute suite, and was totally underwhelmed.
That said, I don’t at all agree that “minimalists” should leave opera alone. For starters, Adams is as much a minimalist these days as I’m a neoclassicist or Schoenberg was an aleatoric composer. And Glass’s initial operas were, and are, amazing. His later stuff is not compelling to my ears, but whatever. It has nothing to do with the style or technique, but everything to do with the individual composer’s artistry. The original 12-tone composers didn’t think opera would work for them, yet Schoenberg, Berg and Dallapiccola wrote amazing operatic works. Some other 12-tone composers wrote stuff that is not as appealing to me. So again, it’s what a composer does with it, not something inherent in a style or technique.
I have to agree with most of the reviews on this sight that Doctor Atomic was a complete let down.
In my opinion, this “opera” seemed like a lackluster attemp to out-do Philip Glass’ “Plutonium Ode”. Coincedence that Mr. Adams chose to set the poetic lines of John Donne to music as Glass did with Allen Ginsberg? The subject matter is also all to familiar.
This piece can’t even hold a candle to how Glass deftly integrates Ginsberg’s text into his score.
I honestly believe that these modern composers should stick to what they do best and leave Opera alone.
For opera goers who enjoy this type of minimalist style, I would recommend Richard Rodney Bennett’s ” The Mines of Sulfur” which is much more tastefully done than Doctor Atomic.
“Is there anyone who can bring a sense of poetry and lyricism to modern opera?”
Joey, did you catch Bill Bolcom’s “A View From The Bridge” at the MET? (The libretto was by Arthur Miller and Arnold Weinstein. My wife, whose first language is not English, thought the libretto quite poetic.)
Any opinions out there on Alice Goodman’s libretto to John Adams’s ‘Nixon in China’, William Hoffman’s libretto to John Corigliano’s ‘The Ghosts of Versailles’, the libretto to John Harbison’s ‘The Great Gatsby’, Gene Scheer’s libretto to Tobias Picker’s ‘An American Tragedy’, Christopher Hampton’s libretto to Philip Glass’s ‘Appomattox’, or Amy Tan’s libretto to Stewart Wallace’s ‘The Bonesetter’s Daughter’?
My husband and I attended last night, we love opera but agreed this was terrible. The lyrics were stilted, meaningless, and worst of all pretentious. Huge mistakes were present as to how energy functions (all those funds and you can’t pay a fact checker??) There’s not one melody I can remember, which has never happened to me before.
Joey I agree the libretto was atrocious…the worst part in my opinion. Full disclosure: We left at intermission and weren’t the only ones. First time we have ever done that by the way……
I don’t think that modern composers are able to exert the kind of control that Verdi and Puccini had over their librettists, especially when dealing with someone as highly regarded as Sellars. It’s a different era.
The libretto was atrocious. What’s up with this hair obsession?
The music was breathtaking, but the vocal line was in a three-hour death match with the orchestra. It’s a very common flaw in modern opera. The First Emperor suffers from the same sin.
Is there anyone who can bring a sense of poetry and lyricism to modern opera?
The libretto and dramatic flow of Nixon in China are much better than Dr. Atomic. The cut and paste technique of gathering a disparate number of sources and combining it into a libretto just doesn’t work for opera. It works better with El Nino though–since it’s not written as an opera.
Again briefly, and for the sake of extending the interesting conversation a bit without being critical (I don’t do reviews) — David (and others) I’d suggest you all listen to Death of Klinghoffer for its music (before you listen to The Flowering Tree).
The libretto and alleged ‘anti-Semitism’ issue aside, I recall enjoying the music highly, and I have listened to the work four or five times quite carefully.
Also, a friend is hosting Mr Adams at his bookstore next Wednesday and while preparing a listening package for him, I relistened to Harmonium, Harmonielehre, Vln Concerto, and especially Naive and Sentimental Music.
From my admittedly hurried perspective, the sound worlds of El Nino and Doctor Atomic are quite a bit more anxious (and rythmically irregular for very large spans) than the lusher, more Wagnerian/Brucknerian sound worlds of long spans of Harmonielehre, Vln Concerto, and especially Naive and Sentimental Music.
Maybe Doctor Atomic will come to be considered a very special and anxious musical masterpiece like Janacek’s From the House of the Dead (or B.A. Zimmermann’s Die Soldaten) — libretto issues aside.
Sorry for the delay, all. This big, enthralling event just took place…
I was tempted to give the piece the benefit of the doubt and argue it’s a music-drama–as in Wagner’s “musical deeds made visible.” (Or something like that.) But then I thought: the work just isn’t integrated enough, and Adams and Sellars don’t get near the cosmic-supra-consciousness of a work like Parsifal or Tristan. If it’s a music-drama, Doctor Atomic is pretty bad. And I honestly did enjoy much of it.
I’m not ready to pass judgement on Adams as an opera composer in general; my familiarity with Nixon is spotty, and I have never heard Klinghoffer or The Flowering Tree. But Doctor Atomic is enough to make me wonder…
I’m also not sure one can entirely separate musical and dramatic achievements in opera. But I decided to just go with my gut without diving into those labyrinths for now.
And thanks for the kind words.
Briefly, I would have been interested in Alice Goodman’s libretto on this subject. She was “not available” and is out of the country, to my understanding. [I heard a broadcast of the Chicago production, and am awaiting the DVD; which is reported to feature predominantly ‘close-up’ shots at Mr Sellars suggestion. … I think that Eric is right about the Japanese ending .]
*
(I have listened to The Flowering Tree twice now and I hear alot of El Nino in it. Reviews had led me to expect a bit more Magic Flute. I am still trying to wade through/overcome Nonesuch’s libretto problem to the work.)
The Japenese fragments thing is actually a recycling on the same effect from ON the Transmigration of Souls.
There were brilliant moments in the opera…as a coherent and effective dramatic work? I’m not quite sure what I think.
David-
I agree with just about everything you’ve said in this review. With a few notable exceptions, the opera was burdened by too much dialogue accompanied by a same-same nervy accompaniment. As for the dramatic flaws, I couldn’t agree more, Kitty Oppenheimer has no dramatic purpose, the entire character could be eliminated without much loss except for the laughs provided by some truly bad poetry – something like “your hair is like a scented handkerchief” – in the bedroom scene. As for the character of Pasqualita, whose aria you aptly called “portentious,” this trite caricature of the Native American with vision and bad rhymes – “crashing”/”clashing” – smacks of a pandering exoticism.
On the bright side, the set pieces are special. The baroque elegance of “Batter my Heart” with its agitated ritornello and Orfeic elegance is memorably compelling and matched by a staging of stylized gestures. Also of note is the Gita chorus with its punchy rhythms and spectacular timpani writing and to a lesser extent the quintet(?) of the second act accompanied by some blood-rushing inversions by the dancers. It’s worth pointing out the glorious stage pictures, particularly that amazing image at the end. As regards the end – spoiler alert – I’m curious your take on the Japanese fragments.
FYI, there’s a DVD out now of the original production if you all want to hear/see it.
Great review. It’s the most complete analysis I’ve read.
That being said, I have to echo Bob’s comment (I can call you Bob, can’t I?). You close by saying ‘Adam’s power is at its zenith’, but that doesn’t seem to square with the rest of your review. If the opera is such a mess (and it does sound like a mess), isn’t that on Adams?
The music may be great, but if it all adds up to a flawed opera, can he really be at his zenith? Especially with other less flawed works under his belt?
I’m intrigued by your comments, and it’s not the first time I have heard/read this sort of response to an opera. First, I should say that I haven’t seen a production or heard a recording of this work, so my comment is soley in reaction to your review, not the work itself.
My question is, given your belief that Dr. Atomic is dramatically flawed, even to the point where, as you say, “the second act in particular breaks down badly”, yet you feel Adams’ music is by contrast excellent, could it be that he is not a great opera composer, and that his music really should have been offered as concert music (with or without voice)?
I do realise that Sellars wrote the libretto not Adams, but a composer can’t simply say “I didn’t write the words” and accept no responsibility for the whole work. After all, he did set the text. All due respect to Adams, and not to state the obvious, but opera isn’t just music. I have on several occasions been let down by a music-dramatic work that I felt contained simply too many awkward lines of text, or superfluous action, etc., that even great music couldn’t save. After which, I couldn’t help but consider the composers somehow less highly as I had before …
I don’t mean to trash Adams, but … what do you think about this?