In the last of the present series of the Lebrecht Interview I am talking to Dame Janet Baker, a singer who used to chill rehearsal rooms with the massive authority that she brought to every role and concert she undertook.

There was some trepidation among my colleagues about me interrogating the daunting Dame, but almost from the moment we shook hands in studio we both started having the time of our lives.

I tried to persuade Dame Janet to pursue the roots of her sense of responsibility in the events of her childhood. What emerged was a series of memories that brought us startlingly close to the forces that motivate her.

The Lebrecht Interview is tomorrow on BBC Radio 3 at 10.15 pm, after the Prom, and streamed online for a week.

Fabio Licitra spoke emotionally about his brother’s near-fatal accident at an awards ceremony in Ragusa. Salvatore is still in a coma in hospital at Catania after coming off his Vespa without wearing head protection. No change has been reported in his condition over recent days.

Fabio said that his brother, more prudent than himself, always wore a helmet. He removed it while looking for a different parking spot outside a restaurant. The tragedy happened over a ride of 200 metres. His girlfriend, riding pillion, was unharmed.

The distinguished cellist Steven Isserlis sent the following letter to the Guardian newspaper after the attack on the Israel Philharmonic at the Proms. It was not published there for almost a week, so we are giving it first airing here:

The protesters who disrupted the Prom by the Israel Philharmonic and Zubin Mehta are not only guilty of cultural hooliganism, but are deeply misguided. As musicians, the Israel Philharmonic and Maestro Mehta are an apolitical ensemble; it is no way comparable to, say, a group from apartheid South Africa, because there is no barrier to members of any race or religion joining the orchestra. Although it would be an exaggeration to say that music and politics are completely separate, there is no way that the orchestra (or the Prom audience) should be made to suffer because of the political actions of their government. As a performing musician, I would find it deeply unfair were my concerts in any country to be disrupted because protesters objected to the British government’s decision to invade Iraq, for instance.

I have played many times with the Israel Philharmonic orchestra, and have found them to be the warmest, most hospitable orchestra I know. Of course, there are a wide range of political opinions within the group, and their attitudes seldom coincide with those over here who condemn Israel, at a safe remove from any threat to their own lives; but on the whole, my friends in the orchestra (and elsewhere in Israel) are united by their desire to lead a peaceful life, their disgust at any disregard of human rights emanating from their own government or from any others in the region, and their belief in the two-state solution as the only possible way forward. To wreck their very rare and special concert over here gives a terrible impression of us all – haven’t the rioters done that already?

A man mounted the stage of the Councertgebouw in Amsterdam last night during a concert attended by Queen Beatrix, seized the microphone and invited the audience to share his faith in Allah. He spoke quietly and declared he was unarmed. Some musicians rose in alarm, as did members of the audience, but the Queen was reported to be undisturbed.

The man was arrested and remains today in police custody. He is described as Amsterdam born, aged 39.

The concert, by the Netherlands Philharmonic, marked the centenary of the Dutch Association of Composers.

Here is a Dutch report of the unfortunate event, with live video. And an eyewitness here.

Nabih Bulos is a Palestinian violinist who grew up in Jordan and has performed with Daniel Barenboim, Ivry Gitlis and Bono, as well as playing in the East-West Diwan Orchestra. In his response to the question raised by Ori Kam of the Jerusalem Quartet as to whether it can ever be right to disrupt a concert for political reasons, he argues that the British protesters damaged the very cause they claim to uphold. Read on, below:

First off, let me say that I have had the pleasure of playing with Mr. Kam on several occasions, and find him to be an artist, as well as a human being, of the first calibre.

With that said, I have two issues with what he said: The first regarding the IPO’s status as a representative of the state of Israel, and the second relates to the issue of the Palestinians in other, neighboring, Arab countries.

The Jerusalem Quartet is a private commercial entity. Its existence does not rely on any state funds from the Israeli government (if one ignores the illogical extreme that its members were perhaps trained in state conservatories (I’m sure Ori can elaborate on that), but this is a separate matter). The Israel Philharmonic is a different thing. Regardless of the amount of funding it receives today, it nevertheless maintains its place as a representative of Israel from the days of Bronislaw Huberman, on to Leonard Bernstein. Can there be any doubt of this when so many great artists played with that orchestra as an act of solidarity with the state of Israel?

Regarding the matter of Palestinians in other Arab countries, as other commentators have said, no action in those countries excuses the Israeli government’s actions towards Palestinians in Israel. This includes the introduction of laws outlawing any economic boycott of goods made in settlements in Israel, as well as attempts to introduce the words “Jewish state” in the constitution, and other more conventional campaigns of violence. Furthermore, I question the idea that any Palestinian refugee, whether in Lebanon or Syria or Jordan today, is suffering the same sort of situation in Gaza, where there is a siege that has lasted for far too long. Whereas no one will pretend that refugees in those countries are living like kings, one cannot equate that to the situation in Israel, where those people were displaced from their own homes or face bureaucratic difficulties for the most basic rights. Also, the refugee problem in Jordan and Syria and Lebanon is a result of the creation of Israel, not the result of any action by its neighbors. Even though I’m a Jordanian of Palestinian origin (one of the lucky people whose parents received citizenship before the Jordanian government stopped this practise) why should those countries take those people in? And before I am told that the reason is because they are Arabs, I would argue that the word “Arab” is a construct that has no basis in any political reality in a post Sykes-Picot world, if it ever did. Whereas it is true that the Arab spring interests me as an Arab, this does not mean that I will take up arms if Somalia or Algeria or Morocco or Yemen, or any of these other supposed Arab hotspots, escalate.

The major point is that the refugee problem in those countries will be dealt with once a lasting and just peace is achieved in Israel, a peace that admits the culpability of Israel in 1948 and offers a right of return or commensurate financial compensation a la the reparations that are still paid by Germany to this day. And as an example of the supposed claims of Jews from Arab countries in their flight to Israel, in the downtown of Beirut there are still buildings that were owned by Jews who emigrated and they are as of yet untouched by the government. Again, I am not claiming that everything is just and glorious in the Arab countries, but let us not lose sight of the original problem.

With all that said, I personally disagree with any sort of disruption of a musical event. It strikes me as a singularly unfair way of protest, and does nothing but cast a negative light on the cause one is trying to uphold. A protest outside of the hall, making people aware of the issues regarding the entity they are dealing with, etc… all this is legitimate, but once people enter into the concert hall, the choice has been made and in a free and open society such choices should be respected. [italics added by site editor]