The direction shared, or caused, some of this sloppiness. In BohËme and Carmen at Glyndebourne, David McVicar has shown himself expert at revitalising repertoire favourites. But Tosca has eluded him. Literal interpretation jostles uneasily with inconsistency. Costumes (by Brigitte Reiffenstuel) return to the Napoleonic period while Michael Vale's sets - big black church (Act I), big black office (Act 2) big black stairs to parapet (Act III) - find inspiration in the Berlin of Albert Speer (Tosca, with its political subtext, tends to attract Nazi/Fascist trappings). The painter Cavaradossi - a lyrical but never ardent John Hudson - doesn't so much as dib-dab a brush. His "blue-eyed" portrait, crucial source of black-eyed Tosca's jealousy, has her eyes shut while the Sacristan skips in from the wings of Iolanthe. At one moment I found myself noting that the most interesting thing on stage was Cavaradossi's coat, a stylish, tapestry affair. Can Puccini's revolutionary masterpiece have come to this?