Peter Grimes was an almost unqualified success at its 1945 première at Sadler’s Wells, and within a few years it had been performed throughout Europe and the USA. But for Britten this success still left an unpleasant taste behind it. There had been much unpleasantness with the management at Sadler’s Wells, which left Britten unwilling to continue to work in the opera house, or indeed any opera house. Which is how we go from Grimes, with its enormous orchestra, twelve solo roles, and large chorus, to Lucretia, with its orchestra of just 13 players, eight solo roles and no chorus at all.
The Rape of Lucretia is a retelling of the classical myth, based on André Obey’s Le Viol de Lucrèce, which in turn was already an attempt to pare down the traditional, large-scale French theatrical tradition. Fiona Shaw’s staging, already unveiled by Glyndebourne on Tour, brings this into the 21st century with little set, and equally few props. The military camp is merely a large sheet with two poles supporting it, while Lucretia’s Roman villa is represented by light grey stone outlines on the black, dirt-covered floor of the theatre. This simple representation of architectural structure combines black box theatre techniques with a reference to the story’s classical origins, the structure being excavated like an archaeological site by stage hands from underneath the camp of the opening scene. It also creates an additional dimension. The living characters move around the house, navigating through doors and along corridors, while the chorus are able to move through the walls, positioning them in a spirit world beyond the drama. Following her rape, Lucretia also starts to move through the walls, and not along the corridors. It’s as if she’s already dead, long before she falls on the knife.
Shaw’s production is also marked by an incredible attention to detail, with great attention paid to the music and to the characterisation of the singers. Every movement, every vocal colour change, every explosive consonant adds to the characterisation, and what’s more, all of this is supported and perfectly matched to the music. Duncan’s libretto is not the best one that Britten had the pleasure of working with, and there are many occasions where it falls into chains of abstruse metaphors or trite similes, and others where the meaning is wholly unclear. This production overcomes these inadequacies; every moment of potential confusion is given unambiguous meaning, as if it could never have possibly meant anything else.