Last week, Indiana University was thrown into a minor turmoil by this wholeCleveland Orchestra scandal.  Essentially what happened is that the Cleveland Orchestra (which is apparently available for your next residency, wedding or bar mitzvah) was scheduled to come to the Jacobs School of Music to perform a series of workshops and side-by-side rehearsals and to give a concert, along with their dreamy Austrian music director, Franz Welser-Möst
The problem was that the Cleveland players had been playing without a contract for several months and they had set a strike date at 12 midnight last Sunday, leaving us trying to guess whether or not they would in fact go on strike, and whether or not they would travel to our campus.
Well, if you read the NYT article at the top, you know that they did in fact go on strike, and that they did NOT come to IU.  BUT, the strike only lasted for only ~12 hours — just enough time for them not to come to Bloomington, but safely in time to make it to their highly lucrative residency in Miami, FL.
A little suspicious, wouldn’t you agree? Â I say it smells – rotten.
Well OK, I wouldn’t actively accuse the entire orchestra of welching on their promise to the poor students of this fair institution just for kicks, or laziness or whatever. Â The strike date was set months ago, but in all fairness to us (Bloomingtonians), isn’t it possible that the orchestra’s union could have handled this matter in a slightly classier fashion, so that the only ones who got screwed weren’t the aspiring young music students?
Some other people here in Bloomington had the same question. Â Enter the fabulous, Inaesque personality of a certain former concertmistress of the Minnesota Orchestra, one Jorja Fleezanis, currently a faculty member at IU, who decided to organize a little forum to talk about this very question and others.
The thing I liked most about Ms. Fleezanis’ little powow was that she wasn’t afraid to expose the faulty logic of Cleveland’s Musicians’ Union for what it was, though she did it with real panache. If I had been running it, I probably would have pointed out that these musicians come off as rather naïve in their understanding of the current economy. OK, let’s just say downright stupid. People are losing their jobs left and right, the classical music industry is nothing more than a glowing ember (outside of China, that is), and they are seriously going to argue over a few thousand dollars a year when the current minimum salary is already $115K?? [Median is $140K and the top players make over $500K, btw… not to mention the fact that many if not most of these musicians pad their incomes with highly lucrative professorships at CIM and Case Western.]
The Cleveland musicians claim that if they aren’t paid at parity with the other “Big Five” American Orchestras, their quality will go down. I was very glad to hear Ms. Fleezanis agree with me that this perspective simply doesn’t jive with the reality of supply and demand in the classical music business. Our conservatories churn out highly, highly qualified candidates on an annual basis, such that even tiny regional orchestras have huge turnouts for their auditions. Add to these freshly minted young people the denizens of older musicians who have way more experience but are out of jobs right now, and it should be obvious that there are far too many people chasing way too few jobs in the “industry”. It’s a buyers’ market. I would argue that Cleveland could get itself at least as good an orchestra for about half the price.
[Oh, and about that “Big Five” thing… isn’t it a shame that they’re always the last to know? Yikes. It’s no wonder that anyone who’s still latching onto that old trope would find themselves following the above “logic”.]
Herr Welser-Möst (which is not his real name, according to this gossipy little article from a certain “Wikipedia”) did end up coming to Bloomington nonetheless, and I did get the chance to work with him. He’s an absolute gentleman and had some really lovely and helpful things to say about music. If only he could have convinced his colleagues in Cleveland that it was worth their while to quit squabbling for a few hours and come share a bit of that beauty with us.
And I’m still pissed that I didn’t get to hear the goddamn Adès Violin Concerto!!!!
Some thoughts on Los Abrazos Rotos (“Broken Embraces”) and Nine, two movies that I happen to have seen recently:
I had been wanting to see Los Abrazos since like 2008, or whenever it was listed on Wikipedia as Pedro Almodòvar‘s new project. That little wikiblurb was so enticing, because it promised both an homage to American noir and another start turn for Penelope Cruz. I followed the progressive openings of the film as it made waves in Spain, France, across Europe and seemingly everywhere else except the US, my anticipation mounting and my expectations reaching monumental proportions. By the time I finally got to see it, the movie actual move itself could only be a disappointment because it could never live up to the masterpiece that I had created in my mind.
And yet, it did. This might be my favorite Almodòvar film, but I think I say that after every one that I watch. But seriously, this one has everything you want from the man, from the luscious color palette to the engrossing plot twists and characterization to the near constant dialogue with cinematic history (including the history of Almodòvar’s own films!).
Plus it’s a killer score, which I already mentioned in an earlier post. But now, just for the sake of comparison let’s look at Abrazos v. Inglorious Basterds, the two most recent offerings by two of the cinema world’s supposedly great auteurs. Juxtaposed thus, it just becomes so obvious that Pedro is the way more serious filmmaker than Quentin Tarantino. And I don’t just mean that his films are “serious” and Quentin’s are not – certainly both have aspects of humor and gravitas. What I mean is that for two writer/directors who load their works with cinematic references, Pedro is the one able to seamlessly interweave his commentaries into the structure of the film, whereas Quentin handles the whole meta level with total heavy-handedness.
As for Nine, let’s just say thanks to Maury Yeston and Rob Marshall for making something not only palatable but actually ENTERTAINING out of Fellini’s 8 1/2. Only the most extremely loyal of readers will know that I do not much go in for that particular film. But when you mix in some peppy songs and a little pornographic choreography (,and of course stir,) the whole thing really comes to life! Who knew? Anyway, Penelope Cruz continues to amaze:
PLUS, the editing of Nine by Marshall & co. was featured on a very special episode of Barefoot Contessa. Who wouldn’t like that?
In other news, relating more to me than to Penelope Cruz, rumors are flying that the Cleveland Orchestra, which is (was?) scheduled to come to my school is going on strike. For us students down in Bloomington, this comes as a rather perplexing turn of events, since the general student attitude is that any musician who has a “real job” ought to hold onto it for dear life.
This is just a guess, but I suspect that it’s probably the old-timers in the orchestra who oppose the contract that’s on the table right now (5% salary reduction this year, restored next year, 2.5% increase in two years). Back in the Szell days, Cleveland took an immense civic pride in its orchestra and treated the musicians as minor celebrities, certainly a rare thing for orchestra players. It’s conceivable that anyone who lived through that period might be unwilling to face up to current social and economic realities. But what a shame that they would have to deprive a hard-working bunch of student musicians of their expertise and inspiration.
Supposedly, we’ll find out late tonight or early tomorrow whether or not they actually plan to come (the rumor mill has it that they won’t), but either way, the whole affair leaves me with a sour taste.
PLUS, they’d also be depriving us of a chance to hear Thomas Adès’ Violin Concerto, which is I think one of the greatest pieces of the past decade.
On the respective New Year’s Eve offerings of the Vienna and New York Philharmonics and what they say about art, culture, Alec Baldwin and ball gowns.
Aside from the fact that these were both orchestra concerts played in major cities and broadcast on TV, there’s not many points for comparison between these two concerts. Rather, there are numerous points for contrast, contrasts that illustrate why the NYPhil concert totally sucked donkey and why the Vienna Phil concert, though perhaps not my favorite NYE concert they’ve ever given, was infinitely better in every way. I’d like to look at all aspects of these musical broadcasts to find out why:
1. Repertoire
Everyone (OK, not everyone) knows what to expect from a Vienna Philharmonic NYE concert: a selection of the finest Viennese bonbons, a delightful mix of Struass waltzes, polkas and overtures. More than just owning this music, the musicians have it flowing thick through their veins. They are living, breathing torchbearers of a centuries-old tradition, a particular musical tradition which represents the very best of Austrian culture. The great thing is that this repertoire runs rather deep – every year, there is a healthy mix of favorites (Blue Danube, Radetzky, Fledermaus) and hidden gems (this year, the Wiener bonbons, Die Rheinnixen and the Champagner-galop).
Now let’s contrast that with the New York Phil’s offering: we began with music by Aaron Copland, America’s supposedly great composer with the least to back up that reputation (or, if we consider “The Tender Land”, the most to outright refute that reputation), including the single most overplayed piece of American music, the Suite from Appalachian Spring, which, despite having some very beautiful moments, is hardly a way to start off a festive gala concert!!! Yes, those beautiful moments do exist in the score, but there is SO much drab writing in between. Don’t get me wrong – it’s not that I think it’s a bad piece of music, but I don’t think it quite merits its frequency on programs by American orchestras, and it certainly had no place “kicking off” what should have been a joyous musical occasion.
Then we came to Copland’s “Old American Songs”, of which there are quite a few, and from which certain were chosen. However, whereas Mo. Prêtre chose a splendid assortment of better and lesser known gems from the vast trunk of dances by Herr Strauss Sohn, Mo. Gilbert and Mr. Hampson seemed to choose the lamest songs from Copland’s collection. And that’s really saying something, let me tell you.
Ugh God, then we come to the Cole Porter songs, which nearly brought me to tears of pain and embarrassment. Thomas Hampson is simply wrong when he said in his little interview (on which, more later) that opera singers are enriched by singing classic songs and enrich the world of song by singing them. If anything, it’s a one-sided proposition, and the “world of song” is getting along just fine without the help, thank you very much. TH singing “Night and Day” sounds as stupid, if not way, way stupider, than Sting does singing Dowland. I’m all for artistic versatility, but this does not qualify as such: it is true crossover trash. “Crossover” is really a dirty word as far as I’m concerned, as it nearly always refers to an artist talented in one genre who dabbles in another with inevitably tragic results. Hence, TH and Cole Porter.
Oh! And on another related topic – how about telling us who wrote the orchestrations of the Porter numbers? The announcers made such a big deal about how Copland didn’t write any of the “Old American Songs”, but rather selected and arranged them. Well, Cole Porter sure as hell didn’t arrange his songs, and yet he was given sole writing credit. I’d love to know who provided those arrangements (which, generally, were far superior to any of Mr. Copland’s!) I’m almost positive that “Where is the Life that Late I Led” was the original Broadway orchestration (by RRB).
In all fairness, I do like An American in Paris and I thought it was about the only thing that ought to have been on this concert. See, the big programming problem is, this isn’t really OUR music, not the way that the Strauss waltzes belong to the Viennese. I don’t criticize the NYP for wanting to put on a festive, All-American New Year’s Eve program. But this ain’t it. I think that our closest equivalent of the Viennese dance repertoire is the Great American Songbook, but if you’re going to do that, it would help to get people who can actually sing it. Now, truly, I don’t know how many of those people are really kicking around (they sure as hell aren’t on Broadway), but you could at least look for one.
But really, what is “our American music”? Admittedly, the Strauss dances are really the music of conservative Viennese society. What is the music of our conservative society? I really don’t think there is one. Even the middle-aged generation of our conservative society isn’t uniformly familiar with the Broadway catalog of Porter and Hammerstein. They were all raised on their own regional, vernacular music. As Americans, we don’t really hold on to artistic traditions – we constantly innovate and reconstruct, always chasing the popular taste. Personally, I don’t think that’s a bad or a good thing – it simply is what it is. But just don’t play Appalachian Spring on your NYE concert, please.
2. Conducting
Never having really seen Alan Gilbert conduct much of anything, I’ve given him the benefit of the doubt in the past, since, well, he is the Music Director of the New York Philharmonic. But now I’ve seen him in “action” (really stretching the term) and I’ve got to wonder: WHY?Why in the world did the NYP choose such a dud to head their institution? I am quite positive that I have never seen such a bland podium presence in front of a major orchestra. Speaking of which, the man conducts these players like they’re a bunch of middle schoolers. That being said, he does have about the most perfect technique of any professional conductor I’ve ever seen.
But what’s the point of having a great technique when you’re the conductor of the New York Phil? I am an advocate of conductors having good technique, as I think that most of the big podium stars lack it, but those same men and women prove that it’s not really all that necessary when you stand in front of a fine body of musicians. Take Georges Prêtre. It’s not that he has “bad” technique, it’s just that he uses precious little technique at all. Rather, he exudes charisma, charming the musicians into playing with gobs of style. With subtle looks and gestures, he colors a chord here, turns a corner there, and adds an extra layer of character and refinement to the already splendid playing.
The point is, orchestras at the level of the NY and Vienna Phils will give back what you give to them, and I’m sorry to say, in the case of the NYP on New Year’s Eve, they played just as blandly as Gilbert conducted. Prêtre played old chestnuts and, while thoroughly respecting their many layers of accrued tradition, found new ways of phrasing the music. Take the English Horn theme in the Fledermaus overture, for example. That had some really unexpected little twists and turns. Great for him. Gilbert, on the other hand, simply took worn-out warhorses and walked them around the stable.
3. Direction
OK, so the production style of the Vienna Phil concerts is clearly a matter of taste. BUT, at least they have a style and they stick with it and try to do it at the highest level. I used to really abhor all of the dancing and museums and horses, and even though I don’t really like it now (I would much prefer to just watch the orchestra playing all the time), I do respect the fact that those sequences offer visual variety that probably draws in the average viewer. Although, I do miss the old days when it was really over the top (in the most conservative sense, of course:)
But at least it’s well done. The NYP concert looked so incredibly amateurish. Way too many cuts, WAY too many close-ups. And why is it that every time they cut to a new shot, they seemed to catch some string player making a mistake? Did those players plan it that way, like as a joke? I’m guessing not. Frequently the cameramen couldn’t find their players, etc., etc.
4. Hosts
I know that Alec Baldwin is trying to re-invent himself as this sort of priest of High Culture, hosting classic film programs on TMC and voicing the NYP radio broadcast series, and maybe he’ll finish the job that he started, but for right now, it ain’t working. His interviews with Alan Gilbert and Thomas Hampson were so totally forced and un-edifying (admittedly, once he and TH got warmed up a little and Mr. Baldwin threw in a couple comparisons with acting, the interview gained a slight interest). But honestly, that little pre-filming patter at the beginning about not eating menthol? Come on!! Are you fucking kidding me?? This is supposed to be entertaining?
I’m sure the New York Phil wet their panties when they got Baldwin on their books, but shouldn’t a big Hollywood star actually like exude some glamor and charisma? Lend a desperately needed touch of class? Too bad.
Meanwhile in Austria, we see Julie Andrews, conservatively attired, hanging out at a little Viennese candy shop. What’s not to like? It’s class personified. And in New York, nobody could even get Alec Baldwin’s bow tie on straight??? Which brings me to my next subject…
5. Clothing and Gowns
In a word, the attire of the New York Philharmonic was: trash. It was so inconsistent – half of the men just defaulted to their usual white tie, and the women were split between Board/CEO business suits and Halloween costumes. And Alan Gilbert wore, you guessed it, the most boring outfit he could possibly find. WHY WON’T CONDUCTORS WEAR FUCKING BOW TIES ANYMORE? What is the deal here people?? Would it have killed him to wear some kind of festive, whimsical bow tie and suspenders? I’ve seen Esa-Pekka do it before…
Obviously, the New York Phil was trying to create a casual atmosphere, as all American orchestras are, all the time, and that’s exactly what’s wrong. Look, American musical institutions are simply going in the wrong direction by condoning and encouraging the casualization of their audiences. Great performances of the finest art music ought to merit a little self-respect on the part of the attendees. I know it’s supposed to be about the music, and it is, so why not show the music and yourself a little respect? You know, for institutions that are so desperately trying to attract new audiences, the people at the top might want to take a gander at what new audiences are looking for. Whenever I go to the CSO and I see young people who are clearly not musicians and who are obviously there for the first time, they tend to be young businessmen, out on a date with beautiful young ladies. And they almost always look over-dressed, because they are well dressed. My point is that it’s not their fault — they’re obviously wanting to have a classy night out on the town, to look good and to gain access to a certain slice of society.
Then they show up and they’re surrounded by the so-called “cognoscenti” who dress down in blue jeans and flannel shirts because “it’s all about the music” and they can’t be bothered to put on a tie. Well guess what, it is all about the music, but it’s also about the concert. And a concert is a certain type of experience. Rather than trying to kowtow and capitulate to the increasing casualization of society at large, I guarantee that orchestras would garner more success in attracting new audiences by upholding a certain sense of style and formality. Just look at opera houses!
Or better yet, look at the Vienna Philharmonic. The gentlemen of the orchestra looked just wonderful in their uniform suits. M. Prêtre was the epitome of gentility. The ballerinas were dressed by Valentino for God’s sake!! The only misfire there was the slight brownish hue of the top gauzy layer of the pink dresses, which may have just been the lighting or something.
