Opera Philadelphia's Rigoletto: Follow Up Comments from Director Lindy Hume

This report is a follow up to the preceding report on Opera Philadelphia’s current production of Rigoletto using a version originated by Director Lindy Hume in 2012, previously performed in New Zealand, Australia, and Seattle. She updates the setting to modern day and molds her version to remove the glamorous veneer of the Duke of Mantua and his courtiers to shine the spotlight more directly at their sinister nature. After seeing the opera, I posed two questions to Frank Luzi , OP’s Vice President of Marketing and Communications, who forwarded my questions to Director Hume. It will be helpful to read the previous report if you have not done so. My questions and her responses follow:

Ques: Was the ballroom set hung above the other scenes a logistical issue or to make a point by the director?  If so, what was it meant to represent?

Ans: The court of the Duke of Mantua is recognizably a society in which those with great wealth and power are oblivious to their oppression of others. The lives and relationships of people without power, like Rigoletto/Gilda, the older nobleman Monterone and even the criminal underclass represented by Sparafucile/Maddalena, are shaped, corrupted, and even bonded, by their impotence. In the drama (and as Rigoletto explicitly states in his monologue 'pari siamo') they are continually overshadowed by the presence of the all-powerful Duke, his court, and its influence. The Ducal palace looming over the action is a constant reminder that, for these underclasses, there is no escape from its power.

Ques: Do we know why Lindy Hume ended Rigoletto with Maddelena, not Sparafucile, killing Gilda?  It caught me by surprise.

Ans: I'm delighted that Maddalena murdering Gilda came as a surprise - that's exactly what I wanted. It's one of my favourite moments in the production, and in New Zealand, Australia and in Seattle there have been audible gasps in the audience when she stabs her. But it seems logical to me as well as being a dramatically exciting twist. It's very clear in the libretto and dramaturgy of the storm scene that the murder of a substitute victim is Maddalena's idea, that she drives the plan and stands to benefit from it. The minute that Gilda walks into the inn they both see their victim is a teenage kid. At that point, I wondered what would happen if Sparafucile (who we know has professional scruples) hesitated? Maddalena is in a desperately emotional state, she sees him hesitate, so she just grabs the knife and... it's over. 

I like doing the scene this way partly because theatrically it's an unexpected jolt to people who know the opera well, partly because it brilliantly finishes off Maddalena's extreme journey in Act 3, giving her character a more impactful arc rather than just "the hooker", and partly because there's something even more tragic - one woman killing another over the same, completely unworthy, man. The result is the same, Gilda's murder is as much the result of the actions of her father, the Duke, her abductors, and her corrupt companion Giovanna, as it is her encounter with Sparafucile and Maddalena. 

I am appreciative for Mr. Luzi’s assistance and for Director Hume’s substantive responses.