 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2010-08-07 11:50
You may remember that a couple of years ago, the Cleveland Plain Dealer music critic was reassigned after the orchestra complained about negative reviews, particularly about the conductor, Franz Welser-Möst.
The critic sued, and a jury has now rejected his claims. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/07/arts/music/07critic.html?_r=1.
I'm of two minds about this. Many years ago, Claudia Cassidy, the critic for the Chicago Tribune, and the only critic taken seriously in Chicago, drove away Rafael Kubelick, a truly great conductor, with a relentless series of negative reviews.
I've spoken with a couple of Cleveland players, who say that the orchestra likes and respects Welser-Möst, but other people whose opinions I respect don't care for him. Still, I wonder how much influence the orchestra should have over the tenure of a newspaper critic, even if his reviews are unfair.
Ken Shaw
Post Edited (2010-08-07 11:54)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. J.
Date: 2010-08-07 13:48
You have to wonder about the insecurity of a music director that would be driven away by a music critic. If the critic is way off, then the director and people in the know should know better than to listen to biased reviews.
In this case, the Cleveland Plain Dealer should re-evaluate who needs to be protected here. This seems like another example of music directors not being challenged for their position and the job they do.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2010-08-07 17:02
Ken, thanks for sharing this with us. I don't know much about Donald Rosenberg and his writing, so it's hard for me to comment on his situation.
He might have been accurate with his observations. Is anyone from Cleveland
reading this?
A journalist is supposed to be objective. This doesn't always happen, but it's the goal. A critic (food, music, drama, etc.) is also supposed to be objective, but we all know that this is next to impossible. It's fair to say that everyone hears music slightly differently, and an excellent performance for one person might only be a fair or good performance for someone else. It reminds me of high school bands and orchestras that go to adjudicated festivals where there are multiple adjudicators. It's very common for one judge to praise a group highly and give it top scores, while another adjudicator isn't as impressed.
This reminds me of the juries I played in college. We had to play for the woodwind faculty, and all of them were usually there. On a couple occasions they gave me their individual written comments, and this sure made for some interesting reading! The comments were all quite different, and I'd wonder how all of them could hear the same music so differently.
I was once at a symphony concert conducted by Itzhak Perlman, and one of the selections was the Symphony Fantastique. This isn't a "little" work, and one might think of a dynamic conductor standing on the podium, madly waving his/her arms with a lot of drama. Because Perlman isn't able to stand and conduct, he did the job seated on the podium. I've heard Symphony Fantastique many times, I know what a good performance sounds like, and this was one of them. The newspaper critic, though, wasn't impressed. He made a lot of silly comments with no substance. I think he expected to see a "dynamic" conductor on the podium, and since it was Perlman, it was automatically lacking.
It's always amusing to read the comments of multiple critics (in multiple newspapers) about the same concert. Sometimes you begin to wonder if the various critics actually attended the same concert!
Here's an intersting site about music criticism: http://www.artsjournal.com/critics/
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: elmo lewis
Date: 2010-08-07 22:53
IMO Rosenberg is a very knowledgeable. honest and fair critic. It appears that the orchestra management would rather have a cheerleader than a critic. (btw, I believe the Plain Dealer's publisher is a member of the orchestra's board). Rosenberg's replacement doesn't seem to know much about music. When F W-M said some unkind things about Cleveland in a European interview, Rosenberg translated his comments and published them in the PD. This was the major problem for Rosenberg, not so much his criticisms.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetguy ★2017
Date: 2010-08-08 01:06
Elmo, thanks for the info. I seem to recall reading this a while back.
Are there any German speakers/experts reading this? Is the term "inflated farmer's village" (referring to Cleveland) really an insult, or was Weller-Moest correct when he said:
"It means in size it is bigger than the essence of it. If you look at the other 'Big Five' (orchestras), Cleveland is a very small city."
I also wonder about Weller-Moest's comment in German about the orchestra counting on money from aging "blue-hair ladies" who attend matinees because they are too tired to go out at night." I'm not sure this is exactly an insult, but he really shouldn't have said it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DougR
Date: 2010-08-08 14:36
Thanks, Elmo, for the additional information.
This is a complex story that gores a couple of my oxes: untrammeled press freedom vs. the economic survival of large, high quality orchestras.
It's tough enough for orchestras to survive these days without having to face a barrage of negative critical analysis. But, what if the critics are right? Or, what if the conductor in question is competent enough but not really star quality (whatever that might mean), and slightly arrogant to boot, and manages to insult his host city in a rather public way? (And yeah, I'd say "blue-haired ladies too tired to go out at night" doesn't exactly demonstrate either gratitude or appreciation, two qualities one in such a figurehead position would want to exhibit toward one's benefactors, whether one believes it or not!)
Newspaper managements frequently behave in cowardly ways regarding the work of the reporters and writers they employ; it seems pretty clear to me that the PD did so here as well--thereby adding to the pall cast over the Cleveland Orchestra by the whole affair, rather than diminishing it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: elmo lewis
Date: 2010-08-08 16:56
This brouhaha makes it sound like Rosenberg was savagely attacking the orchestra and W-M but that is not the case. His criticisms were mild. He would often criticize only one piece on the program, or say something lacked excitement or was not up to the CO standard. He held the CO to a high standard but why shouldn't he-they are one of the best in the world. Rosenberg has been reviewing the CO for decades (he also reviewed them for the Akron Beacon Journal before he joined the Pee-Dee). If anyone knows the orchestra it is him. Lastly, if the PD thinks that Rosenberg has an axe to grind why didn't they take him off only W-M's concerts? W-M is only there 15 or so weeks a year and we could be enjoying Rosenberg's reviews of the guest conductors.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2010-08-08 18:24
Some orchestra patrons are highly musical and have a sophisticated ability to distinguish good from bad in music and performance. However, there are also many "blue haired ladies" who have no understanding whatever, but have money and spend it on people who flatter them. Alas, the arts have always been supported by both sorts and cannot afford to drive away or fail to bring in both sorts.
Thus incompetent musicians have reached high positions because they have been able to please patrons (and critics) who had little or no ability to evaluate musical performance. For example, I've spoken to and read memoirs by many top orchestral players who played under Malcolm Sargent, and they universally say that he was a total incompetent. Good Sargent performances happened only when the performers ignored him and played as a conductorless ensemble. Nevertheless, even today, he is described as "Britain's leading conductor of choral works." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Sargent
Boston Pops players universally say that if you watched Arthur Fiedler for anything except the downbeat, you were dead. You took the first beat, buried your head in the music and listened to the rest of the players. Seiji Ozawa is for me (and most professional musicians) technically competent but a musical zero.
Cleveland Orchestra members for whom I have the utmost respect have told me that Franz Welser-Möst is a highly professional conductor, respected and liked by the orchestra. They have also told me that Donald Rosenberg is a competent music critic, but prone to ranting.
The outcome is purely a clash of wealthy and entrenched power players. It's inevitable when flattery and musicality are on opposite sides.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: S.H.J.
Date: 2010-08-09 03:46
Ken, could you please elaborate on what makes Ozawa musically incompetent?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Shaw ★2017
Date: 2010-08-09 11:56
S.H.J. -
When I listen to an Ozawa recording, I do not hear what I want from a conductor, which is something more than unanimity. The Boston Symphony could certainly play the most difficult passages easily without a conductor.
What a conductor should add is personality -- something the orchestra could not do alone. The conductor's personality should result in phrasing and emotional content that is unique. I want to hear interesting music-making. For example, I grew up listening to the Toscanini/NBC Symphony recording of the Beethoven 6th. While there is some out of tune playing (particularly from the principal oboe), the intensity of the tone-painting more than makes up for any problems. The storm scene is startling, and even frightening. The lightning strikes, the thunder, the swirling downpour, and the fading away to an occasional final droplet -- and the smiling shepherd's call at the opening of the final movement -- all are uniquely Toscanini.
In the Toscanini Pines of Rome, I can feel the hypnotic beauty of the garden where the nightingale sings and feel the tramp of the Roman legions. With Ozawa, I just hear a superb orchestra, playing all the notes beautifully.
When I listen to Szell's Mozart, I hear Mozart (and Szell) speaking. Ozawa's Mozart is, for me, just uninflected notes, well played but boring.
I've heard the same from other musicians I respect, so I don't think it's just me. But at any rate, I don't respond to Ozawa the way I do to other conductors.
Ken Shaw
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetist04
Date: 2010-08-10 01:49
Interesting thread. In fact, within the Cleveland classical music scene, this was a really big deal.
Welser-Most is a fantastic composer as Ken said, and well liked by not only the musicians, but the patrons-at-large as well. I had the wonderful opportunity to see him conduct this past weekend (the CO did a little-known piece by Ives for Chimes, trumpet and trombone, Berg's Symphonic Suite from Lulu, Brahms 2, and a wonderful overture from Korngold's Die Tote Stadt as an encore). I've never seen W-M conduct before and I can say that he, honestly, was a very dynamic conductor. He made the Brahms very enjoyable to listen to, bringing out subtle melodies and harmonies that I feign to hear from other conductors. I'm not just saying this to defend him, but I rather truly feel that he was able to bring a new feel to Brahms, at least for me! He had passion while he conducted.
Rosenberg got the short end of the stick but in this particular circumstance, Ken's hit it right on the doornail. It's kind of silly when you step back and take in the broader picture, but hey, that's life. He took the fall for what appears to be his own personal distaste for the conductor. I wouldn't be surprised if the Beacon-Journal picks him up or some other media outlet.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bubalooy
Date: 2010-08-12 18:51
I'm jumping in here with a comment that admittedly has nothing to do with the CO. But, I must say that I'm particularly fond of the Boston Symphony under Ozawa. He is a very different conductor than Toscanini . He is perhaps not as dramatic, but , he is a master at bringing the different textures out of the orchestra. I love his Music for Strings , Percussion, and Celeste. Recently, I acquired the BO under Ozawa playing Mahler's 1st. I had thought nothing could beat Tenstadt with Mahler, but, I find the playing wonderful. With some composers (Tenstadt) I sit on the edge of the chair holding your breath for what comes next. With Ozawa, I basque in the moment fearing it will somehow be destroyed. I find both approaches enjoyable.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
