Berlin opera pulled over Muhammad scene

[im10ashus]

A leading opera house canceled a 3-year-old production of Mozart's "Idomeneo" that included a scene showing the severed head of the Prophet Muhammad, unleashing a furious debate over free speech.

In a statement late Monday, the Deutsche Oper said it decided "with great regret" to cancel the production after Berlin security officials warned of an "incalculable risk" because of the scene.

After its premiere in 2003, the production by Hans Neuenfels drew widespread criticism over the scene in which King Idomeneo presents the severed heads not only of the Greek god of the sea, Poseidon, but also of Muhammad, Jesus and Buddha. The disputed scene is not part of Mozart's original staging of the 225-year-old opera, but was an addition of Neuenfels' production, which was last performed by the company in March 2004.

"We know the consequences of the conflict over the (Muhammad) caricatures," Deutsche Oper said its statement announcing the decision. "We believe that needs to be taken very seriously and hope for your support."

cont'd...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060926/ap_on_en_mu/germany_opera_islam;_ylt=Ai16xpXN5nxyMD70wBLHde.s0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OTB1amhuBHNlYwNtdHM-

[Benhurst]

1. I'm an absolutist when it comes to free speech; but these seem

rather dangerous times to be unnecessarily provocative and confrontational.

The management of the opera house has a responsibility to its patrons not to expose them to danger.

[im10ashus]

2. So true.

But my question is: Who in hell puts Mohammed, let alone a depiction of his severed head, into an opera that takes place in ancient Greece?

[Benhurst]

3. Exactly. It sounds like cheap sensationalism to me. While

the producers have a right to attempt to mount such a production, the Opera House is certainly within its rights to cancel the production to protect its patrons.

[wuushew]

4. We don't even know what the real William Shakespeare looked like

so how can any one one get angry at an artist's interpretation of a most likely fictional character?

Can the Muslim idea of "The Prophet Mohammed" محمد even be universally described or related to in a foreign alphabet other than Arabic?

[Benhurst]

5. It's still gratuitous since the drama predates both Christ and

Mohamed.

Houston, we have some serious time-line problems here.

I find it hard to believe the addition wasn't made in order shock the audience and provide controversy.

While doing so is certainly covered by freedom of speech rights, I still think the theater is within its rights to cancel the performance to protect its patrons.

And with all the serious threats out there to freedom of speech (certainly in this country with its "First Amendment Zones") this seems a rather silly, needlessly-confrontational and potentially dangerous point at which to draw the line.

edited :spank: for sloppy spelling

[Behind the Aegis]

6. I agree with you on some things.

One of the things I noticed, too, was that the setting of the play pre-dates the lives of Jesus and Muhammad. Like you, I agree that the play can be "updated" to meet the likes of the director. I also agree that the playhouse has the right to cancel any production. However, this play has been going on for three years! Why the concern now? I just find that very sad.

I just a read a synopsis of Idomeneo and I am at a loss how the addition of the four heads would even fit into the play! The message of the play seems to be "Love conquers all!" :shrug:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart?

:shrug:

[im10ashus]

10. No.

It's not part of the original. It's the directors right to conceive and present their own interpretation, but WOW. What a leap.

[smirkymonkey]

16. Well, at least he's an equal opportunity god/prophet hater since

he presents the severed heads of Poseidon, Jesus and Buddha, as well as Mohammed.

[im10ashus]

20. Exactly. n/t

[pampango]

7. As an absolutist on free speech, I am sorry that the management

of the opera house has been intimidated.

"The management of the opera house has a responsibility to its patrons not to expose them to danger." What are they afraid of angry Christians, Buddhists, political conservatives railing about "community values"?

There was a day when many liberals supported artistic freedom in principle and in practice, but I guess we now have to be more careful about whom we upset.

[Benhurst]

13. Obviously they are afraid of Islamic terrorists and

perhaps reasonably,if regrettably so, so.

If a director decided to stage a production of Wagner's "Siegfried" where the hero slew not the dragon but a representative figure of "International Jewery," I would maintain he had a right to his opinions; but I would support an opera house's decision not to present it, whether its production presented a physical danger to its audience or not.

While I support free speech, my support does not extend to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

I may be wrong about the production in question. If so,the director is certainly free to search for a receptive venue for his work.

Freedom of speech guarantees expression; but not have to provide a venue.

[pampango]

14. I would agree that the opera house has all the right in the world...

not to present it. If that decision of due to a perceived threat of violence then it is a practical decision, but a lamentable one.

Do we not speak up about Bush, the KKK, the Nazi Party, Timothy McVeigh because there is a perceived threat of violence if we do speak up? Perhaps in any instance we may chose to be quiet, but if it is out of fear, then it is very sad.

[Benhurst]

15. I would hope in the instances you list, we would speak up.

I don't think doing something which is gratuitously insulting to an ethnic or religious group falls under the same umbrella, however.

Granted, it gets a bit complicated at times. Many are categorically opposed to black-face on the stage. However, I can imagine a serious writer using it to make a statement about the racist society which gave it birth. So in that case I would probably support the playwright, while in most I would be opposed to its being used.

The last twenty years of unregulated talk radio (right-wing hate 24 hours a day) has been very damaging to this country. As a supporter of freedom of speech, I believe the venue needs to be regulated to provide differing points of view and would like to see the return of the "fairness doctrine."

[im10ashus]

17. It's a good point you make.

I don't see the Christian and Buddhist folks issuing any threats. Not that I am defending organized religion, mind you. :shrug:

Freedom of speech and artistic freedom are one in the same, IMHO. As an actor, I've been in plays that have been protested due to its content (i.e. homosexuality, male nudity, etc.), and the show went on.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

8. Let me ask just one question:

Does the aforementioned scene appear in Mozart's original script or is it some "der neue art" invention?

[pampango]

11. And if it is not in the original script...

should we not support the artistic freedom of the director or are we on the side now of those who insist that art reflect whatever "community values" will cause the least trouble? Didn't used to be that way on the left.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

18. No, just wanted to determine whether it's a worthless piece of junk or not

Apparently, it is.

Have the freedom to do it ≠ Doing it is a good idea.

[im10ashus]

12. No, it doesn't.

I have several opera friends here in NYC and they are all familiar. Also, they mention it in the article:

After its premiere in 2003, the production by Hans Neuenfels drew widespread criticism over the scene in which King Idomeneo presents the severed heads not only of the Greek god of the sea, Poseidon, but also of Muhammad, Jesus and Buddha. The disputed scene is not part of Mozart's original staging of the 225-year-old opera, but was an addition of Neuenfels' production, which was last performed by the company in March 2004.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

19. As I thought, worthless shock-value junk. -nt