I've seen the marking "senza ripieni" in Handel's string parts in his oratorios, and had always imagined (?) that this referred exactly to this practice of removing the back desks from particular numbers?  Here's an example - I imagine that marking is in the original, because Chrysander was reasonably scrupulous about separating his own editorial work from the original.

EDIT - another factor, although banal but possibly of relevance, is that the economics of Handel's oratorio-giving were by no means the rosy picture of comfy profits often mentioned in more simplistic music-histories (with the subtext that doing God's work brings blessings upon the hard-up opera composer).  In fact following the opening of DEBORAH (early months of 1745) Handel was forced to announce that he was cancelling the rest of the performances in a letter of 17 Jan in the DAILY ADVERTISER:



Rehearsing works with smaller forces for  large body of the solo arias (which were, for many of his subscribers, the main box-office draw) would have made economic as well as musical sense - the larger body of players to add substance to the tuttis and choruses could have been rehearsed separately, and more cheaply.

One thing that struck some of us there, was what Sir Charles was wearing.  Over his white tie and cummerbund he seemed to have a black zipped fleece.  The other gents were in tail coats.

I would agree these are reasonable comments generally, but they are not the reasons Sir C gave for his decision to cut the numbers (nor did he go into the hall at any point to listen - though I'm sure some would argue that at 82 he's had enough experience not to have to?).

There were no "senza ripieno" markings in Belshazzar, and we used an edition that would have had them had they been there I think.  (Actually I've never seen those markings in anything but the Messiah, though I'll cheerfully admit I've probably only played about 0.0001% of Handel's oratorio ouput.)

We would start rehearsing an aria, not exactly sight-reading but certainly coming to it as a group for the first time, with little idea of the character, situation or text, playing vaguely "normale," when Sir C would stop us and say something about it being too loud and that he'd like to reduce the numbers.  There wouldn't even be an attempt to get everyone to play more quietly/softly/airily/gently - rather unfair, I think, not to give everyone that chance.  If he was after a change in timbre, it would have been better psychology to say so.  As it was, some of the back desk players ended up feeling neglected and undervalued, and all of us felt as if he didn't believe we could play with proper dynamics and expression - that changes in colour can only be achieved by changing the bulk.

I'm a bit reluctant to post this, as Sir C is revered in many quarters - but this is the third time I've done a project with him and been frustrated, despite his charisma, by the mentality that seems to think neither interpretation nor levels of playing in "early music" have moved on since 1987.  Maybe this does him a disservice, maybe he has given a great deal of consideration to recent developments only to reject them - but if so he pretty much fails to convey that to his players.  There's a great deal of affection for him, but it's mostly among the people who knew him "back in the day."  He probably doesn't care much whether he gains the "respect" of irritating young(ish) upstarts like me and some of my younger colleagues, but it makes for a slightly frustrating experience.

A very enjoyable prom: I was engrossed for 3 hours.  The band were excellent of course and I enjoyed the performances of all the singers.  Paul Groves had a different approach to the others, but I thought it rather suited the blustering title character.  Enunciation was mostly very clear from where I was standing: I could follow the performance with only an occasional glance at the libretto for reassurance.  Bejun Mehta was sometimes less clear. 

The cuts were mentioned in the programme, which nails any conspiracy theories.


A fashion correspondent writes...
Sir Charles' jacket was a blouson of some kind of silky material.  Very 1987  .  It really needed a pair of stone-washed jeans and Big Hair.

Not a terribly elegant look, but probably considerably more comfortable than a DJ  if you've got a dodgy shoulder.  What else should he wear?  Shirt only is unacceptable and I don't see CM in Issey Miyake, which seems to be a popular alternative to the penguin suit.

 

He seemed much more comfortable after the interval (he had been wearing a tailcoat in the first half).  I'm sure there's a thread somewhere about concert dress.  We females have to cope with an ambiguously wide range of possibilities ("concert black" can come out as trousers+tee-shirt sitting next to enormous ballgown).  But men have the opposite problem, with extremely limited (non-existent) options.  I always like to see the men trying something new sartorially, even if it is a micro-fibre blouson elasticated-hemmed jacket.  At least it was black.

Surely a costume for conducting Die Fledermaus rather than Belshazzar, martle?

I'll get my coat (cape?)

Come now, Don B, there's only ever been one e(a)rnest choirboy:

It could be worse.