Anyone know what’s up with the Metropolitan Opera’s “Death of Klinghoffer?” Anyone seen it? Is it as anti-Semitic as the New York Post tells me it is?
I haven’t seen it, to my regret. It was in St. Louis a couple of years ago, but I just couldn’t work it into my schedule. I have, however, been following the thing fairly closely, and know people involved in the New York production (specifically the singer portraying one of the terrorists).
From what I understand, it’s not really anti-Semitic so much as it isn’t pro-Israel. Basically, I don’t think it takes a stand on the issue. More, it allows the Palestinians to express their own anti-Semitism, as well as give them voice to their own frustrations. Rather than reduce them to caricatures or the “EEEEEVIL TERRORIST”, the Palestinians tell the stories of how they came to believe what they do, including such things as Israeli attacks on their childhood villages.
That said, the actual murder of Leon Klinghoffer is never presented as anything other than unmitigated evil. The terrorists aren’t presented sympathetically, they’re just not watered down to mere tropes.
The opera certainly has its flaws; Klinghoffer’s daughters have criticized it for "romanticizing’ their father’s death, and it has issues with historical accuracy. It is telling, however, that Klinghoffer’s own family hasn’t accused it of anti-Semitism, and indeed there has been a lot of recent commentary from Jewish audience members who went to the show with the expectation of being offended and came out realizing that the rumored anti-Semitism wasn’t really there. Most of the fuss is being generated by people who haven’t seen it.
)Of course, I also understand the irony of commenting equally forcefully having also not seen it.)
For another media perspective (other than the Post), here is a discussion of the production by four New Yorkers, including one Orthodox Jew, who attended opening night. Note that no one who actually saw the thing thinks it anti-Semitic.
Thanks for weighing in. It does seem to me a little tasteless to put on a musical about some private person’s murder, but that’s clearly not the specific charge that the NY Post is making. And for good reason, given their record in tastelessly publicizing private citizens’ tragic deaths.
As for the stuff about anti-Semitism in the musical, considering the NY Post accuses anyone to the left of Ariel Sharon of anti-Semitism, I guess I’m not surprised to learn that there’s nothing really there.
I wonder why it’s only getting such attention now as it was first produced in 1991.
Here’s a great epistolary op-ed from Aussie soprano Kate Miller Heidke. Fascinating glimpses behind the scenes.
I did some research about this when I heard about all the protests, which happened to be during Banned Books Week. It looks like there are three problems people have:
- It is anti-Semitic because the hijackers are given lovely music;
- It is anti-Semitic because stereoscopically Jewish things are criticized by the hijackers; or,
- It is anti-Semitic because the hijackers give their point of view.
Hwever, the libretto makes Klinghoffer the best person in the opera, and the most lovely piece of music is considered to be Mrs. Klinghoffer’s aria at the end.
Almost 100% of the people I have come across who said it was anti-Semitic were relying on a couple of reports. One of the big reports was put out by an extremely anti-Palestinian talking head, David Horowitz.
I think that it could definitely be a problem for Klinghoffer’s family. It does seem to be “too soon” for them, and I completely understand their pain. So I could agree that the opera might be a little tasteless when looked at through that lens, but it is not really accepted to be anti-Semitic.
I think it’s the first time the Metropolitan Opera is putting it on.
It’s been controversial since the beginning and had always drawn protests. In this case it’s particularly notable because it’s the first time it’s been produced at the Met, the largest opera house in the US in the largest city.
And with by far the largest Jewish population.
It seems more like diary entries than epistles, but I surely did enjoy it.
Wiki sez: An epistolary novel is a novel written as a series of documents. The usual form is letters, although diary entries, newspaper clippings and other documents are sometimes used.
The words “musical” and “opera” should not be used interchangeably like you are using them here.
There are technical distinctions. Opera are completely sung while musicals have a mix of singing and talking. But the word “musical” has a connotation of “light heartedness” that makes the piece seem inappropriate from the get go.
Opera’s can be light hearted and musicals can certainly be ‘serious’ but be careful how you use the terms.
Generally, you’re probably right that the connotation of “musical” isn’t quite right here.
But there really isn’t a bright-line distinction between the two. While there are certainly things that everyone would agree are “operas” and others that are undeniably not, there is a huge middle gray area.
Some operas have spoken dialogue. Some musicals are sung straight through. I’ve never heard, nor been able to come up with, any distinction between the two that’s not totally contextual; it’s an opera if people call it an opera, and a musical if people call it a musical.
Probably a discussion that belongs to another thread.