Breaking: Concertgebouw settles Daniele Gatti case

The Amsterdam orchestra has issued a statement, declaring that it has settled its differences with the maestro it dismissed for alleged sexual misconduct.  Here’s the text:

 
Concertgebouworkest and Daniele Gatti close a chapter

After constructive consultations the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra and its former chief conductor Daniele Gatti have agreed to issue the statement below. The original decision has thereby become final and irreversible for both parties. Now both parties can and will focus completely on the future.

Statement of the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra
The Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra and Maestro Daniele Gatti are pleased to announce that matters between the two parties have been resolved following extensive discussions. The Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra would like to take this opportunity to thank Maestro Daniele Gatti for his artistic leadership during his time as the chief conductor of the orchestra and the contribution he has made to its position in the world of classical music.

The Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra wishes Maestro Daniele Gatti well, both personally and professionally. He will always remain an important part of the artistic legacy of the orchestra and he will always be remembered as its seventh chief conductor.

As a token of appreciation, the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra will release three special recordings conducted by Daniele Gatti: Richard Strauss’s Salome, Gustav Mahler’s Symphony No. 1 on cd and dvd and Bruckner’s Symphony No. 9 on cd.

The Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra and Maestro Daniele Gatti have agreed that no further announcements will be made.

 

share this

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on google
  • John Smith says:

    Ridiculous.

  • Alan says:

    That announcement smacks of an orchestra that appears to have totally over reacted to whatever allegations were made. I wonder has Gatti been compensated?

  • anon says:

    Hmm. No apology. But the aggrieved party thinks 3 recordings will undo the harm to his reputation. He is correct: Music history judges recordings, not sexual reputations (hell, music history doesn’t even judge Nazi reputations).

  • Robert Groen says:

    Scandalous! But that’s Amsterdam for you.

  • BP says:

    Poor Concertgebouw groveling to avoid being taken to court. This is at least some measure of justice for Gatti.

  • BP says:

    “The Concertgebouw has also decided to engrave Daniele Gatti’s name on the hall’s balcony. He will be the only non-composer to be thus celebrated, a recognition his wonderful artistry so richly merits.”

  • Karl says:

    They must know they were wrong to fire him because they didn’t try to erase him from history. I hope he got a big payout.

    • “following extensive discussions” 🙂 … about what, you think? 🙂

      • Karl says:

        About how many allegations are false. I bet everyone knows someone who has been falsely accused. I was by 2 women at my last job. I have a friend whose husband was falsely accused. I know men who were falsely accused of domestic abuse and rape too.

  • Simon says:

    I think you’re all way off beam: Gatti has got virtually nothing out of this announcement. He’s settled and the Orchestra is shot of him with barely a ripple

  • Karl says:

    I wish Gatti well and hope he can leave behind this terrible injustice without further injury.

  • trivisani simone says:

    I express my complete solidarity to Daniele Gatti, who was the victim of a scandalous treatment by Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra Amsterdam.
    After this statement, may this terrible injustice have no more consequences for his personal and professional life.

    • John Borstlap says:

      I express my complete solidarity with the young female players who had to endure inappropriate behavior and felt utterly uncomfortable at Gatti’s rehearsels, contributing to exaggerated tremolos in the strings and breathless phrasing in the winds.

      • Barry Guerrero says:

        In other words, musically speaking, he made them work. That’s what truly didn’t set well with them.

        • Bruce says:

          Right. The women of the RCO are such a bunch of lazy cows…

          /eyeroll

          • Barry Guerrero says:

            “Them” means the orchestra in general. No, not lazy, but they often times play with a distinct lack of intensity and tend to ‘play it safe’ i.e. not take risks. You can hear that difference in the Gatti recordings vs. the Jansons ones (who sounds like an entirely different conductor in Munich, go figure!).

          • Barry Guerrero says:

            Thumbs down all you want. Take Jansons Concertgebouw Mahler 7 and compare it to his BRSO one (Munich). There’s a world of difference in terms of intensity. Jansons in Munich sounds more like Gatti in Amsterdam. As I said, go figure!

      • Alain Louy says:

        Encore un qui croit savoir.
        Qu’il témoigne alors!

      • Malcom Tunbridge says:

        John, sexual harassment and abuse of all kinds at these places are serious issues. I have experienced it myself. Your flip comment makes me puke. P-U-K-E. It’s not 1960 anymore. You are entitled to make stupid and insensitive comments, but your comments demonstrate your worth and humanity.

      • Robert Groen says:

        Is there a joke in there, John? 🙂

        • John Borstlap says:

          It seems to be difficult for some people….. the first half of my comment was indeed meant seriously. The second half is supposed to indicate that such things can be blown-up out of proportion. For instance, there has never been a clear description of what really happened, in which context, with which reactions. There has not been unanimity among the players, and I know from reliable sources that there were female players who strongly resented the resentment of other female players who were bothered by Gatti. Then there are the factors of cultural differences, like Italian way of male behavior towards women and the combinations of Dutch calvinistic prudery and liberal carelessness.

  • Barry Guerrero says:

    They want to issue a Mahler 1. I wish they would issue the Mahler 3 that I have on a ‘pirate’ recording (broadcast) instead. It’s among the very best in my collection – definitely superior to their commercial recording with Jansons (which isn’t bad).

  • Jack says:

    So many ‘experts’ on the details of this agreement. I’m amused.

  • Pedro says:

    For me this means that Gatti will be invited back soon to conduct the orchestra. I hope so having attended three splendid concerts by them at the Concertgebouw – and Salome at the Nederlandse Opera.

    • Saxon Broken says:

      There is absolutely no chance that Gatti will be invited back anytime soon. He has been told to “get lost”, and he has accepted this outcome so that the full details of his behaviour do not become public.

  • Mark says:

    I don’t know anything about Dutch defamation law or civil procedure rules, but had such statement been issued in the US, it would have meant that the party issuing it has no case and is politely surrendering. I assume that any financial arrangement is confidential.
    Good for Maestro Gatti !

  • Malcom Tunbridge says:

    This is disgusting, but par for the course. The people who come forward and report misconduct are always ALWAYS the ones left holding the bag, abandoned, exiled, and blackballed. This settlement nullifies the charges. They aren’t important. Take out the trash time for the accusers. The organization and the monster eventually make up like nothing every happened. The monster goes on. It’s probably only a matter of time before he is back on the podium there and elsewhere. Perhaps they will build a statue of him or give him some other stupid meaningless title in the name of peace and love and all that good stuff. Celebrate the monster. Celebrate and dance! It happened to me. And it probably happened to Barbara Stanwyck!

    • Barry Guerrero says:

      What DIDN’T happen to Barbara Stanwyck. She was a hard worker and tough gal. In short, she could take care of herself.

  • Edgar says:

    Reading the statement and the comments, I am afraid that nothing is resolved at all.

    Instead, fertile ground has been prepared and made available for anyone who so desires to disseminate all kinds of conspiracy theories and whatnot. Rather than telling the truth, both parties now close the curtain, which all too many want to lift.

    Meanwhile, Gatti has moved on to Rome Opera, and Amsterdam, covering the searing blisters with bandaids in the form of three cd/dvd releases, still searches for a new chief. Maybe there will be announcement on the occasion of the Mahler Fest next year? Who knows.

    The only truth we have is this: Nobody has come out of this unscathed.

    • John Borstlap says:

      Indeed. But the one who started all of this, was Gatti, in an apparently thoughtless fit of Italian erotopaea.

  • Rgiarola says:

    At the end the fear to loose in the court by Concertgebouw, lead to this agreement. It is well know by many ones in the internacional legal metier.

  • Simon says:

    The commenters below display, beside their usual pomposity and jumping to conclusions, a staggering ignorance of Dutch law. First, defamation lawsuits are not nearly as lucrative as in the United States; it is unlikely Gatti would have received much, if at all. Second, more importantly, Gatti was not an employee of the RCO but had a freelance agreement (source: https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/vertrouwen-in-dirigent-gatti-na-aanrandingen-snel-weg~ae9ef3e2/); hence, Gatti wasn’t “fired” and his case for financial compensation is therefore very flimsy.
    This statement seems more designed to close the case respectfully for both parties, rather than to avoid financial payouts or something.

    People in the comments would do well to read and think more before they start showcasing their self-important nonsense.

    • Rgiarola says:

      Who told you this contract selected Netherlands as the jurisdiction base for this expecific contract? That’s what you already said It’s a civil law contracts, but not labor.
      It could and was stablished in another country as jurisdiction. I will give you a chance to guess: it is probably the country law that Gatti was due to receive the payments for his services to CGebouw. Something that even a traineer should know if of a international law bureau, that had already deal with such thing in showbusiness. Specially in Europe under the same currency and monetary control.

  • Saxon Broken says:

    Some people here have completely misunderstood what happened.

    Gatti has accepted that he has been fired, and the Concertgebouw have not had to say the firing was incorrect. Gatti has completely lost his case. In legal-speak, he was fired with just cause. He has not been compensated.

    “He will be remembered as the 7th chief conductor”.
    Well, he was this, but he will be remembered for being fired. Releasing the recordings really mean F-all.

  • >