Edition: U.S. / Global

Review/Opera; Monteverdi's 'Ritorno d'Ulisse,' in Two Versions

Published: November 19, 1989

Ignorance is at once the most confining and liberating of intellectual states. Produce ''Parsifal'' today and we know a lot to begin with. Wagner's written wishes for his operas - instruments, tempos, tone, stagecraft - speak sternly and specifically. The way is well marked, allowable deviation made minimal.

Anyone faced with the prospect of staging Monteverdi's ''Ritorno d'Ulisse in Patria,'' on the other hand, knows not much at all. Monteverdi's first stage work for his Venetian public, written in 1640, comes to us in the form of historical scraps and oblique clues. Indeed, even its authorship has been in question. So which of our two producers, I wonder, is the more fortunate: the more liberated or the more constrained?

''Il Ritorno'' has been placed in two sets of modern hands this month -once bythe Waverly Consort, which played the opera three times at the Kathryn Bache Miller Theater of Columbia University last weekend, and again by the Opera Ensemble of New York, which gave the first of six performances on Wednesday night. Prepared to envy each company their interpretive leeway, one came away from both productions with feelings of commiseration. A little freedom can be a fearful thing.

Monteverdi, the score writer, largely lets musicians do what they like. Like the popular musicians of our day, he specified musical outlines but left matters of detail (what instrument to use, how fast, how loud, what music to play for accompaniments and during scene changes) in good part to the performer. Dealing with the work of contemporary colleagues, a Stevie Wonder or a Miles Davis handles such omissions with confidence. Unwritten conventions are shared and understood.

But 350 years after the fact, modern interpreters of Monteverdi have no such common ground. How, for instance, should we handle language today? Early opera celebrated poetry first, using music to enhance it. Monteverdi's melodic line is created in the service of words - Italian words. Do translations thwart his wishes? The Waverly Consort production adheres to the original text; the version conceived by Paul C. Echols for the Opera Ensemble offers ''Il Ritorno'' in English. The latter does its important job of storytelling directly, but it does it gracelessly. The English syllables bump awkwardly against Monteverdi's graceful melodic writing.

The Waverly Consort's Italian is more musical, but its period rhetoric poses obstacles even for the modern Italian-speaker. Few cast members, moreover, truly hear the richness of the original vowels or feel comfortable about how the stresses fall on Monteverdi's music. How are we to choose?

Infinitely more important is how we make ''Il Ritorno d'Ulisse in Patria'' - so inherently vital and alive - seem that way to audiences now. Certain moments are potent enough to overcome the miscalculations in each of these productions: Penelope's opening lament, her presentation of Ulysses' bow, her angry denial that her husband has actually returned, the tenderness of their reunion. This is powerful stuff.

The Waverly Consort wants very much to take ''Il Ritorno'' seriously, but too often it simply gives up. The great moments are honored; the rest drifts off into camp. It is, after all, the simplest solution when one is confused by a historical artifact: hold it at arm's length and create a period piece, one to be viewed with forgiving irony and mild amusement.

''Il Ritorno'' has its clowns (Irus, the prime example), but when the director, Philip Minor, adds to their ranks the three suitors, their violent deaths jar the symmetries of Classical dramatic proportion. Charles Garth's dancing evokes justifiable laughter, but the audience merriment has still not died down when Eumaeus arrives to express nobly his elation over Ulysses's return. The moment, like so many, has been torpedoed by whimsy.

The Opera Ensemble and its director, John Sheehan, trust more in the dramatic power of ''Il Ritorno,'' but their production wears its awkwardnesses almost as a badge. Set changes for both companies are clumsy: the Waverly's creaks and bangs, the Opera Ensemble's is all confusion. The miniaturized sinking of the Phaeacian ship evokes a few nice titters for both audiences but sends them mixed signals. When are we to care and when are we to smile with benign condescension? We never know.

Laura Pudwell (Waverly Consort) and Jennifer Lane (Opera Ensemble) are strong presences as Penelope. Miss Pudwell, heard last Friday, is vocally the more commanding. Her Ulysses, Paul Rowe, is gentle and sweet-voiced to a fault. The Opera Ensemble offers Nathaniel Watson, vocally firm and appropriately assertive, though prone to arm-waving as a metaphor for emotion.

Many of the singers from both camps (the casts are large) demonstrated acute discomfort with Monteverdi's light, agile style. Roulades and ornaments too often had the consistency of oatmeal. Perhaps John Olund's Eumaeus (Waverly Consort) found the best middleground between elegance and passion. Patrick Romano (Opera Ensemble) was a lean, clear-sounding Telemachus, while Rebecca Mercer-White's Ericlea was also cleanly done.

Of the two period-instrument pit bands, the Opera Ensemble's, directed by Mr. Echols, was the creakier in ensemble and intonation, though things tightened up later in the evening. In both cases, brass playing was sadly distressed. Seven names appeared in both orchestra lists.

Further performances by the Opera Ensemble of New York (45 East 81st Street) are tonight and next Sunday at 7 o'clock and Wednesday and Friday at 8.

Jennifer Lane as Penelope in ''Il Ritorno d'Ulisse in Patria.'' (Beatriz Schiller)