|
|
6/07/2007
MOZART IN THE JUNGLE
 I just finished reading Blair Tindall's book "Mozart in the Jungle: Sex, Drugs, and Classical Music." I remember when this "tell all" book came out the classical music world was abuzz. Everyday for months, it seemed, the orchestra-based internet lists were filled with comments about this book.
Most of the criticism surrounding Tindall's book seems to circulate around her revelations of sexual behavior by prominent classical musicians and how much her career and employment centered around her own sexual relationships with them. I read "Mozart in the Jungle" carefully from cover to cover. Though sex and drugs is integral, the larger content and message deals with the state of classical music and musicians in America.
Such widespread reaction to the "sex scandal" aspect by so many in the orchestral world demonstrates those in the classical music world are no more enlightened than the general population. Like everything else in America, sex sells. Like America, the classical music world is in denial. And when enough people are preoccupied with their own moral superiority and code of ethics regarding sex and/or their infantile curiosity about such scandals, there comes about enough of a diversion to disrupt the focus on what is really plaguing classical music, and in particular orchestral music, in America. Once again, the Monica Lewinsky syndrome.
Quite frankly, I was appalled by the behavior of many of the people in Tindall's book. I was not so much appalled by her behavior, but her role in the classical music machine. Tindall, an oboist with a conservatory "education" knew how to do one thing; to play the oboe. In America, there are far too many in a field far too small. Because of this, winning an orchestra position is like winning the lottery. The only difference is many musicians who win jobs have tremendous egos and think the only reason they won was because they are better than everyone else ... not that they were at the right place at the right time.
 For a majority of classical musicians the only way to make a living playing your instrument is to freelance. There are no formal auditions for freelancing. Because there are so many qualified people, getting gigs can be described euphemistically as networking and basely as cronyism. In essence it is about relationships, be it teacher/student, friendship, sexual or convenience. This is even true at the highest bastion of learning in America, Harvard University. Why is it so surprising this takes place on the substitute list of the New York Philharmonic, the hiring for Orpheus Chamber Orchestra or the pit of an Andrew Lloyd Weber musical?
 If people genuinely cared about these non-profit arts organizations and their purpose, what should offend them most is what is destroying them. It is not sex, but greed and exploitation by many prominent musicians, managements and academic institutions, which Tindall discusses in great detail. Greed and bureaucracy are financially choking and killing our cultural institutions in America. First you have the biggest sharks of all; the superstar soloists. Yo-Yo Ma, Itzak Perlman and other major stars cost orchestras $70,000 for single engagements, while most musicians in those orchestras do not make that amount in a year. Kathleen Battle, well past her prime, demands a limo to drive her across the street and $1,000 a day per diem on top of her already outrageous and undeserving fee. Do these soloists honestly feel they deserve this? Perhaps they are delusional enough to think so because there are organizations willing to pay them, even at the cost of bankrupting themselves.
 It is one thing not to recognize or acknowledge the importance and the dependency you have on a sea of faceless orchestra musicians and think somehow you deserve it. It is another to ignore one who is musically your other half. This is what, according to Tindall, Itzak Perlman did to his accompanist of many years, Samuel Sanders. When Sanders accompanied Perlman for a recital, Perlman received a hefty $35,000 fee and Perlman would pay Sanders $1,000. When Samuel Sanders was in the hospital for a heart transplant, Perlman never visited. Samuel Sanders remained loyal to Perlman and craved to be thought of as a friend and an equal. According to Tindall this never happened. I don't think Perlman or anyone is worth a $35,000 recital fee and certainly not a $70,000 solo fee. I am offended he chose to not at least financially acknowledge the importance of his loyal pianist. Unfortunately, Samuel Sanders exemplifies many classical musicians. They are like loyal dogs ever so grateful to have table scraps thrown at them.
This is a prevailing attitude of most soloists and it will probably not change as long as we have such a convoluted system. It is a system perhaps acceptable in the "for profit" music arena. After all, this is the way of capitalism; each man for himself. It would probably also be somewhat "acceptable" if orchestras were adequately supported, like in Germany. But we are neither. For organizations purportedly operating as non-profits, this should be completely unacceptable ... yet it continues.
 The greed, corruption and bureaucracy that takes place in NPO arts organizations is astronomical. Tindall exposes many guilty culprits and it is high time somebody did. Except for the part about how percussionists are in bed, a metaphor of how they are able to make music out of anything anywhere; my personal and professional life was nothing like Tindall's. I was fortunate to have a university education and to land a full time orchestra job right out of school. Basically, if I wrote a book about these very issues, and included my life, it would be a real snooze. That Tindall was willing to lay out her wild personal life so people would pay attention, well, I say all the power to her. Let's face it, America at large does not give a rat's ass about the arts. Even most people in the arts are not really too concerned until it affects them personally. That it took sex and a beautiful author to lure people into reading a book that deals with very serious issues regarding the survival of arts in America, so be it. Blair Tindall could have sat on her hot ass and done nothing. Instead she used it to get people to look at what was, is, and may be, the future of classical music in America ... unlike Blair, it isn't so pretty.
posted by fong21
7:41 AM
5/16/2007
MINIMAL LIKENESS
Some music works better live. Some music works better on recording.
Though nothing is ever completely tangible in terms of what is "better," I do have strong feelings and opinions about this. I am in no way suggesting certain types of music only be performed live while others only be recorded, for I believe recordings and performances are, in a strange way, mutually dependent on each other.
This opinion has existed in my mind for a number of years, but last month it became much more vivid. The Grand Rapids Symphony performed a concert of Glass's "The Light" and Reich's "Three Movements for Orchestra." It was the first time either composer had been programmed on a major classical concert series here. I am often much more inclined to listen to CDs of Glass's music than Reich's (although ironically, right at the moment I'm listening to Reich).
I think I can honestly assess that both music director David Lockington and the musicians of the Grand Rapids Symphony put forth an earnest effort, however, I feel the lack of programming this type of music in the past was quite evident in the performance. It wasn't an issue of accuracy but that of a missing innate feel for the music. With Glass, I believe there must be an inherent effortlessness for it to sound expressive, whereas the Reich requires intense effort. Glass needs to be played perfectly without effort, whereas Reich needs that extra effort/energy required for perfection. While linguistically this seems like splitting hairs, in execution the two concepts are polar opposites in every respect.
"The Light" is a beautiful piece, especially on recording, but similar to the Bach suites for cello in my opinon. Unless performed nearly perfect, in every respect; and not just mechanics, but also effortlessness, expressiveness, equilibrium and inherent knowledge of the piece, it just does not "come off" live. The beauty is not there. The result is either boring or over the top. The Reich, on the other hand, lacks something on recording. Yet live, even if not perfect, is quite exciting.
One final thought. Musicians, music directors, music historians and critics often lump these 2 composers together as if they are from the same mold. I hope we don't have to wait for a half a century to pass before it is common belief that Glass and Reich are about as different as Stravinsky and Varese.
posted by fong21
7:41 PM
1/24/2007
ARNOLD SCHOENBERG
I have really been delinquent about my blog entries. There is really no good explanation as to why, other than I have nothing really interesting to say about music.
 I recently completed post-production on a recording of 22 yet-to-be-recorded (until now) string works by Arnold Schoenberg and am currently working on 3 Alan Hovhaness concertos. The Schoenberg project is currently in duplication. I loved working on this Schoenberg project in much the same way I loved working on Feldman's complete violin, viola and piano works.
 New York Times writer Bernard Holland once likened performing and recording juvenilia pieces by composers as "child abuse." Of course, he is entitled to his own opinion and I agree there are plenty of composers whose juvenilia pieces are not worth playing, much less recording. What Mr. Holland fails to understand is that in art there is no such thing as an absolute. For me, an unexpurgated showcase of a genius composer like Schoenberg can be most rewarding for all involved. I challenge Mr. Holland to listen to our recording of Schoenberg's 11 Waltzes for String Orchestra with an open ear and review them. In my opinion, everything Schoenberg wrote (all periods and styles) is worth listening to because an imperforate view is often the only way one can discover a true genius in art.
posted by Christina Fong
11:48 AM
9/13/2006
GENIUS
 About 2 weeks ago I took a mini road trip: eight hours alone on the open road. Normally, I listen to NPR while driving alone because talk radio seems to keep me more alert than music. That day I decided to listen to Chopin. Even though part of my CD collection, Chopin is not normally something I gravitate towards. My taste and work lies closer to more current music. In this case, a few nights before my road trip, I watched a very fine film named "Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada". One scene takes place in a bar in Mexico in which a young girl plays Chopin's Opus 10 Etude No. 3 on an out of tune piano. This occurs as a drunk and melancholy Tommy Lee Jones contemplates promises, love, death and life. For some reason that Chopin tune would not leave my mind and I felt the urge to listen to Chopin, especially since I really haven't listened to much of his work in recent years. I pulled out the only recording of Chopin piano works I own: the complete solo piano works as recorded by Vladimir Ashkenazy. This recording is a truly deep, unpretentious, effortless, unaffected object of beauty. I was moved by a perceived perception of "perfection" and "sincerity" on this recording; sentimental but not sappy, technically impressive without ostentatiousness. In spite of how much I enjoy this recording, the next day out of curiosity, I decided to visit iTunes and compare all available recordings of the Op. 10 No. 3 Etude in E Major I could find. Ashkenazy's was still, by far, my favorite one.
 Though I didn't listen to everything on this 10 CD set that day, everything I listened to was as impressive as the next. I got home late that night and thought of how much of a feat it was to not only record ALL of Chopin's works, but to record them so incredibly well. I then looked through my CD collection to see what other Ashkenazy recordings there were ... complete solo Beethoven, solo Prokofiev, etc. etc. etc. I own many of his projects.
 There were, and are, many talented musicians and many interesting ones. I love Glenn Gould; his persona, his ingenuity in overcoming obstacles, his embracing of new music, his attitude towards recording and performance and, of course, his amazing uniqueness. I think the man would have been an interesting painter, philosopher, writer, doctor, plumber, engineer, scientist, etc. I identify with him more than any other performer and perhaps have more respect for him than any other. Yet aside for his Schoenberg, which I think he plays better than anyone else, I don't like most of Gould's recordings. In all honesty I do not think of him as a musical genius, or at least not a natural. If I think of him as a genius at all, it is that he was a genius in solving and overcoming problems, and a real innovator.
 Ashkenazy, someone whom I don't especially identify with, was able to move me and impress me so much with his recordings. It therefore came as a surprise to me, as I sat listening and contemplating the incredible quality and sheer magnanimity of his recording output; only a genius, a natural, could do this.
posted by Christina Fong
5:58 AM
6/24/2006
WORKING WITHIN THE SYSTEM
 Last month I had a contrary experience. I participated in everything I've blogged about, and against ... orchestras, new music, NPR, Clear Channel, pops concerts, stars and live performances ...
What did I do? I "appeared" (you know, Itzhak Perlman, Gidon Kremer, Vanessa Mae ... those types) with the Grand Rapids Symphony Orchestra (GRSO), on a pops concert! I took part in 3 live performances of the final movement of Philip Glass's Violin Concerto and John Williams's Two Pieces from Schindler's List in front of an orchestra, not within it.
It was the first time Philip Glass had ever been programmed by the GRSO. For well over a decade I've lobbied the GRSO to program a Philip Glass piece. I don't know why conductors, orchestra managements and others in the American orchestra world are so reticent about programming Philip Glass. Practically everyone in the classical music world thinks they know a lot about his music and most have dismissed it altogether. Over the years I've conversed with many of these "knowledgeable" people only to find most have never heard any of Glass's orchestral music. Many "professional musicians" have dismissed these recent works due to opinions formed 20-30 years ago. This type of attitude is illogical. Things change, people change and tastes change. Imagine if you lived every aspect of your life, based on opinions formed 2 or 3 decades ago. Sometimes I think the state of American arts organizations, and orchestras in particular, are a lot like Israelis and Palestinians. They just can't seem to move ahead.
About a year ago, GRSO Associate Conductor John Varineau approached me about soloing on a pops concert. One of the most frustrating things about being an orchestral player is the absolute lack of influence on programming, even if one sits on the orchestra's programming committee. Soloists, on the other hand, can have a big role in terms of the repertoire they choose to perform. It's again unfortunate that most of the big name soloists (some mentioned above) and their managers choose to be unadventurous. More on this later.
I would have much rather seen performed, as the GRSO's inaugural Glass piece, one of his symphonies, but then again I would have rather not seen Bush II inaugurated once, let alone twice. Clearly, there are lots of things we would rather see happen in this life that we have no control over. So, when the possibility of programming a Glass piece came along it just so happened I would have to be the soloist. Fortunately, John Varineau was open to the idea, so long as I agreed to play something "really popular" as well ... thus John Williams. And I must admit, I actually enjoyed performing "Schindler's List".
 A bit about the concert. It was billed as "Stars of the Symphony" which is really a euphemism for "members of the Grand Rapids Symphony". Quite honestly, even most of our regular patrons don't know us from Adam, and this is true for most orchestras. This is the nature of being an orchestral musician, versus being a "star". In many ways, it is unfortunate there are so many "stars" in the classical music world. These overpriced prima donnas (not only singers, in this instance) are the cause of so many orchestras going bust and a stagnant mass-market recording industry. More on that later.
So how does one go about marketing "stars" who are not really "stars?" I believe if the performers are not really "stars" then the music itself, or even certain composers, must function as "stars." On the surface, an orchestral pops series would seem an unlikely place to program a piece by Philip Glass. We are taught the most conservative (and rudely vocal) listeners subscribe to pops concerts; if it's new, if it's different, they'll hate it. At one point, we were also taught the world was flat. Although Philip Glass is not yet a household name like John Williams, he is, by classical music standards, extremely popular. A few years ago there was even a mocking of his character, name and music on "South Park". Let's face it, in order to be mocked in popular culture, one needs to be "popular." After the concerts, many audience members and musicians commented to me and others that the Glass piece was noticeably the most well-received work on the program. Needless to say conventional wisdom, once again, proved to be a whole lot of bull.
In addition to innovative programming, the marketing staff at the GRSO arranged for us to co-produce (writing voice overs and choosing background music) public service announcements (audio PSAs) for area National Public Radio and Clear Channel affiliates (most of the stations in our area). For about 2 weeks, whether a news, classical, top-40 or country music listener, West Michigan radio listeners heard my voice (along with 2 other "stars") plugging the concert. You can listen to my two PSAs here and here. This personal marketing approach (come here me play!) is something "stars" like Kathy Battle or Luciano Pavarotti will not "lower" themselves to do, without an even heftier (pun intended) fee.
What can I say? All this extra effort to get Philip Glass, the most popular composer of our time, programmed for the 1st time by an American orchestra ... I guess this is working within the system. But, is working within the system compromising? After all, a Glass piece is more appropriate for a classical series, not pops; I performed John Williams; I went on Clear Channel; yada; yada; yada. Since I would have much rather not done some of these things ... YES ... working within the system is compromising, but I can honestly say I was not compromising THE art, the MUSIC. I was compromising FOR the art/music. As much as I detest corporate culture's influence on art, the reality is that we live in Bush's America. But, no matter what the culture, time or situation arts organizations find themselves in, their job is to present, not compromise, art. American orchestras, large and small, should be programming this music. American musicians, conservative or progressive, can be actively endorsing it, and the American media, commercial or public, should be supporting it.
posted by Christina Fong
2:03 PM
3/30/2006
LOUISVILLE
The Louisville Orchestra is in a financial crisis. The board's solution was to convert some positions to part time and if the musicians did not agree then bankruptcy would be invoked (March 8th Courier-Journal).
With corporate culture overtaking arts organizations in America it is no surprise the board proposed downsizing as the only possible solution. After a highly contentious and public fight the Louisville Orchestra and their board of directors reached a five year agreement. Although the musicians made huge financial concessions in other areas I am glad they had the moral and artistic backbone to stand up against such an atrocious threat.
The Louisville Orchestra is no longer the shining organization it was during the 1950s thru the mid 90s. In 1955 Time magazine dubbed the LO "the world's busiest performer of new music." Indeed, the Louisville Orchestra deserved such a distinction. Not only did they commission and perform works by living composers, they did what no other orchestra had done by establishing their own record label, First Edition Music. The LO recorded a staggering 158 LP and 10 CD releases ... over 400 works by over 250 composers. No other orchestra can match this feat.
But the LO is not what it was. Then again, little is. Believe it or not, there was once a time when the majority of Evangelical Christians weren't heartless, war mongering, SUV driving, gun-toting, mindless right wing Republicans. There was a time when a majority of them voted for Jimmy Carter.
Clearly the mid 50s thru the early 90s represented the LO's "glory days," artistically and financially. The LO has not made a recording since Lawrence Leighton Smith (aka Larry Smith) ceased being their music director. I applaud the musicians for their moral fortitude and spine during these very trying times and also hope the LO will remember what it was that made them such an important orchestra.
posted by Christina Fong
3:22 PM
1/31/2006
NPR CLEAR CHANNEL
I am a big fan of NPR talk shows. Every time I get in the car I turn
on the radio and head straight to Michigan Public Radio. I was also
thrilled when they decided to start airing BBC World Service. In pre-
internet days I was one of those geeks who had a shortwave radio,
mainly for the purpose of listening to the BBC. I also enjoy other
NPR-syndicated programs such as "All Things Considered", "The Diane
Rehm Show", "Talk of the Nation", "Morning Edition", "Car Talk", etc..
Being such a big fan of NPR (except for a few shows such as "Prairie
Home Companion"; Sorry Garrison but I have no nostalgia for small
town life) it was very difficult for me to see that NPR had done to
classical music what Clear Channel had done to popular music. It used
to be that every major and not so major metropolitan area had access
to one or more classical music stations. Each city had a certain
"flavor" of classical music. Growing up in Chicago in the 70s, the
"flavor" was brass. WFMT, the largest classical music station in
Chicago played a glut of baroque brass ensemble pieces. In the late
80s I spent a year in South Florida, the "flavor" there was "lite
classics". WTMI was the largest classical music station in Miami and
featured a request hour. I remember that a request was made to air
ANY piece written in the past 20 years and the only thing they
managed to produce was Corigliano's "Pied Piper Fantasy". Then there
was WVGR, Michigan Public Radio out of Ann Arbor, Michigan, but
broadcasting throughout the state of Michigan. For years, my favorite
DJ was a guy named Gerald Brennan. He played all kinds of new music
from all different genres; classical, jazz, world, etc.. Even if I
did not happen to like the music he played some of the time I would
still listen because what he had to offer was different.
Then came the invasion of Talk Radio. All the sudden, my beloved WVGR
started airing the BBC. Great, I love the BBC. Then they started
airing all kinds of talk shows I liked, which was also great. In fact
I was not really noticing the diminishing music. Then one day Gerald
Brennan was let go. In fact, every DJ on WVGR was let go. Before I
knew it there was no more music. I soon discovered over the course of
several long road trips over the years, what happened at WVGR also
happened to many public radio stations. All those radio stations soon
realized the same people who like listening to classical music also
like NPR programs. And ... purchasing NPR programs is a lot cheaper
than hiring qualified classical music DJs.
What is the result? All NPR affiliates air most of the same shows,
just as Clear Channel stations play the same music. Many NPR
affiliates claim to bring us "information and perspectives we cannot
hear anyplace else." I would agree. But, has attempting to make their
listenership more intellectually informed improved the moral and
intellectual conscience of the USA more than airing classical music?
Definitely NOT. We still elected a delusional president who leads us
into wars for fictitious reasons. Do we really get more perspectives?
After all, many NPR stations' advertisers and underwriters are from
IT - "We help you get IT done", an outsourcing company, Wal-Mart and
Target. Many claim this is not the fault of NPR and the vast majority
of regular NPR listeners did not vote for our current president.
This, of course, is true. But would these same people have voted for
Bush if they did not listen to NPR. I doubt it.
Of the three radio stations mentioned only WFMT remains a classical
music station. WTMI, like the Florida Philharmonic, is now defunct.
After so many years of voting differently, who did Florida clearly
vote for in 2004? There is no doubt in my mind the extreme reduction
of classical music over the airwaves is directly related to dwindling
audiences for live classical music. Being an NPR junkie, I am in no
way suggesting we eliminate NPR programming. Staying informed is
important. But, "killing off" classical music programming for the
benefit of NPR is too high of a price.
posted by Christina Fong
10:28 AM
|
| |
