Co-productions are a way for opera companies to do more for less, and they are increasingly popular
By E.H.B.
LATE last month, Bob Holland was in London anxiously monitoring the progress of a lorry making its way from Perm, in central Russia, towards Britain. "There’s a man who knows people at every border crossing," he said. "He told me just to call him if I have any problems." Mr Holland is not in the trucking business, however: he produces operas. And these days, that can mean co-ordinating a global logistics operation involving directors, stage managers and sets.
Welcome to the growing business of opera co-productions. “In the past seven-to-eight years, co-productions have become an intrinsic part of what we do,” says John Berry, the artistic director of the English National Opera (ENO), where Mr Holland works and whose current season features 11 new co-productions. “It’s making it possible to box above our weight because working with partners allows us to do large productions, and more new productions.”
A co-production is essentially a joint venture, where two, three, sometimes four opera companies share the investment and jointly own the sets, costume designs and overall interpretation of the opera. The original stage director will typically direct the production at each stop, and though the opera houses will supply their own singers, if those singers have similar body-shapes the costumes may well be shared too. A generation ago, when opera companies were comparatively well-funded and international shipping was comparatively dear, there was less incentive to co-produce. But today, they are feeling the pinch—last year, Arts Council England cut the ENO’s funding by 29%. “Partnering across the Atlantic is not crazy expensive if you’re not in a hurry," notes David Devan of Opera Philadelphia, whose current season only features co-productions and co-commissions of new operas. Exposure to international audiences, and thus to potential donors, is an added incentive.
After the investor companies have performed the production, it will often be rented by another company, with the owners splitting the proceeds according to their respective investments. In most cases, the investor companies are located in different countries, on different continents even, which results in a constant traffic of humans and containers as the production is planned, performed and then shipped to the next location. The ENO, one of the pioneers of the practice, now produces operas with some 40 other companies including New York’s mighty Metropolitan Opera, Madrid’s Teatro Real, the Wales National Opera, Opera Graz in Austria, Opera Bonn in Germany and the Perm Opera and Ballet Theatre, from where Mr Holland’s anxiously awaited truck was making its way with the sets for the ENO-Perm-Teatro Real co-production of “The Indian Queen” (pictured). His edginess was understandable: the opera opens at the ENO on February 26th.
Mr Berry’s choice of production partners is not as random as it might appear. With the Met, for example, the ENO gets access to money and cachet. Opera Bonn builds the sets and provides most of the investment, and in return gets the sort of directors that the prominent but cash-strapped ENO can attract.
In theory joint productions mean fewer contracts for stage directors. But it may well be the case that single opera houses would not have had the money for a new production anyway. “A co-production can mean the difference between my getting a contract or not,” says Orpha Phelan, an Irish director who recently helmed Vincenzo Bellini’s “I Capuleti e i Montecchi”, a co-production between Opera North in Leeds and Opera Australia in Sydney. And co-productions, she says, give her exposure to other opera houses and thus more contracts.
As far as Mr Devan is concerned, this business model has been proven. “People can fuel their artistry by sharing resources,” he explains. “Sure, if you’re working with the wrong partners, you give something up by doing co-productions, but with the right partners, you gain.” Joint ventures depend on trust as opera directors compromise on their own freedom to increase their artistic offering. The result is an eclectic set of arrangements along the same lines as the ENO’s deal with Bonn. “It used to be equal shares in the investment, but now it’s ‘how much do you have?’” says Mr Devan.
Mr Berry thinks opera globalisation has the potential to go much farther, for example by turning the quintessentially English ENO into an international brand. And he is no longer looking only at other opera houses for his inspiration. “I see a company like Burberry and think, ‘Wow, I’d like a little bit of that success,’” he says. “It has managed to become an international brand while keeping its Britishness.”
UPDATE: The ENO may have more serious problems on its hands than the whereabouts of a prop-laden lorry. Arts Council England has announced that it has "continuing concerns" about the company and intends to place it in special funding measures and remove it from the council's 668-strong national portfolio of organisations. For the two years during which these measures will run, the ENO's business model and governance will be closely monitored and various milestones must be released for its funding to be released.
