Factors in
the decision—the season opens this year with a performance of Eugene Onegin, by
Peter Ilyich
Tchaikovsky. Right, so would dedicating the gala to the LGBT be a sharp
stick in the eye for Vladimir
Putin and the 430 legislators of the Duma who passed a draconian law
outlawing even talking about homosexuality, much less getting down and…well,
getting down? Somehow I don’t see it.
Nor is the
Met’s choice of a Russian opera an endorsement of Putin and his law, given that
the law is three months old, and the Met undoubtedly scheduled this years ago.
You don’t run out and ask Anna
Netrebko, whom the Associated Press called
“the reigning new diva of the early 21st century,” if she’s up for
singing next week.
However,
there is the fact that Netrebko is Russian, as is the conductor, Valery Gergiev. However,
Netrebko came out on Facebook—that’s how it’s done, these degenerate days—with
this statement: “As an artist, it is my great joy to collaborate with all of my
wonderful colleagues — regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, gender,
or sexual orientation. I have never and will never discriminate against anyone.”
Well, good
to know! It may not be a ringing denunciation of Putin and the wretched law,
but it’s something.
Both
Gergiev and Netrebko supported Putin in the past, but there’s no indication
that they support the antigay legislation.
OK—but
consider the fact that Tchaikovsky was homosexual, despite a
two-and-a-half-month attempt at marriage—which left him drained and unable to
compose. And though the Russian government is trying to deny that fact,
Tchaikovsky mentions the fact himself in his letters. Here’s
Wikipedia on the subject:
In any
case, Tchaikovsky chose not to neglect social convention and stayed
conservative by nature.[100] His love life
remained complicated. A combination of upbringing, timidity and deep commitment
to relatives precluded his living openly with a male lover.[101] A similar blend of personal inclination and
period decorum kept him from having sexual relations with those in his social
circle.[102] He regularly sought out
anonymous encounters, many of which he reported to Modest; at times, these
brought feelings of remorse.[103] He also
attempted to be discreet and adjust his tastes to the conventions of Russian
society.[104] Nevertheless, many of his
colleagues, especially those closest to him, may have either known or guessed
his true sexual nature.[105] Tchaikovsky's
decision to enter into a heterosexual union and try to lead a double life was
prompted by several factors—the possibility of exposure, the willingness to
please his father, his own desire for a permanent home and his love of children
and family. There is no reason however to suppose that these personal travails
impacted negatively on the quality of his musical inspiration or capacity.
Well, we
have a sad story, here—a gay man living in a troubled time. Russia then, and
perhaps now, ran on “understandings,” according to one writer. The laws were on
the books, but were they enforced? Well, you came to an “understanding” with
whatever authorities you needed to and you were OK—until the winds blew in an
unpleasant direction.
Another
factor in the decision: the Met is not going onto Russian soil to do this
gala—it’s taking place, of course, right at home in Lincoln Center. So it’s
not quite like the Olympics, which will be taking place in Sochi, and which is expected to
cost 12 billion.
There’s
also the question of politics in art. It’s all very well to say that politics
and music don’t mix, but in the past they certainly have, at least in some
cases. Casals wouldn’t
play in Spain for years, in protest
of Franco. No
one dared to play Wagner in
Israel, until Barenboim
did
it—and he barely got away with it.
Well, the
Met is in an uncomfortable position. Prepare to be stunned, Readers, but opera
is to gay men what softball is to lesbians. The LBT community might safely be
snubbed, but the G? Tread carefully.
The good
news? I’ve decided, no, I won’t sign the petition. But I have listened to the
opera, and it’s a knockout….
