US orchestras are told to change music director role
OrchestrasFrom a seasonal greeting by Simon Woods, president of the League of American Orchestras:
… When the talented conductor becomes a music director of an orchestra, they quickly find that a new and maybe foreign responsibility rests on their shoulders, which is about being a strategic leader in a complex organization during a time of change. Even a great conductor who catches our ears with transcendent music-making needs a different set of skills to be a music director. Ten years ago, I think I would have known how to define what was needed. I would have said that they should come with distinct ideas about repertoire and programming, be willing to take artistic risks, inspire audiences with their musicianship, stand up for artistic integrity and the highest standards, demonstrate impeccable craft, and show up in a human way with the many constituencies that a music director must interact with. Even that was hard to find in one person, but at least we knew what we were looking for.
Today, as we try to find our way in a society that has dramatically evolved in the last few years around expectations of community, inclusion, and audience building, it’s clear that we need music directors who embrace and support orchestras’ full missions, not just the artistic parts of them. At the time of writing, I don’t know of an executive director or board chair of an American orchestra who is not deeply anxious about the future of their audiences. This is not just the normal handwringing about the difficulties of growing audiences that we have discussed for decades; this is something different. The current ticket-sales experience across the field tells the story of an audience that may drift away unless it is renewed. Every orchestra doing a music director search has an opportunity to consider the role of their artistic leader in tackling this challenge.
Read on here.
Simon has identified part of the problem, but where are the solutions?
In short words: Let‘s appoint more women, non-binary transgenders, PoCs and teens.
Oh go away, troll!
I’ve drifted away from my local orchestra – Philadelphia – as they’ve increasingly embraced the expectations Woods cites while letting musical issues that matter more to me slip.
Really? They don’t play well? I have my doubts.
Philly is still my favorite US orchestra, the musicians are just as wonderful as always, but their programming may now be trying hard to check off boxes, that the musical core and backbone of the orchestra may be faltering. I think the same is possibly true of many orchestras.
Many audiences clap for anything. But no one can deny hearing an electric performance, and those are the times when audiences jump off their feet. Consider the difference of an orchestra that gets to play the same Beethoven, Strauss, or Starvinsky every few years. Their performance of that literal masterpiece will be more enticing than their first reading of a piece they have no intention to ever play again even if they put in more time to the new piece. And that electricity in their performance will be palpable to the audience.
Also, the reason I personally am in music is for those rare and important moments when music hits you so hard you feel your hair on end. Or those moments when something inside you feels like you can’t breathe from excitement. Often those moments come from those greatest of pieces and composers. I am not only talking about Bach,Mozart, and Beethoven. Where have the Rossini overtures gone? What about Danse Maccabre?
I personally love getting to explore the idioms of this newer music we are all playing, it certainly keeps chops in shape(!), but not at the expense of the musical health of our orchestras AND AUDIENCES. I speak only for myself, I’d love to know what others think!
Their lineup of guest conductors is pitiful compared both to what it used to be and to their peer orchestras.
If they want to place greater emphasis on the gender and race of their guest artists, good luck to them in filling the seats with people who applaud that approach.
You’re doubts are very well placed.
Philadelphia’s playing rarely if ever ‘slips’ but they have always had repertoire problems. In my 50 years of attending I have never subscribed because there was always a heavy over reliance on the same heavily trodden Germanic territory from Beethoven to Brahms, and later on Mahler. (Ed Arian wrote a book about it decades ago.) In that respect, the occasional appearance of a new work was all the more alienating – one cannot expect an audience who has not even progressed to something like Howard Hanson or William Schuman to grapple with the ensuing generation of academic serialists, aleatorists and beyond.
And the same syndrome continues in other ways – the mainstream of the mid and later 20th century remains missing even when it has a place among the latest trends being pursued. Thus we have the syndrome where cinematic music must be presented, but we get John Williams before Vaughan-Williams, whose 7th Symphony has never been played in Philadelphia, even though the new-ish hall boasts a suoerb organ, and the VW is an important progenitor of much of the symphonic film scores being employed to ‘popularize’ the repertoire.
Unspoken so far is the critical need to make up for the deterioration in music education, largely missing from US schools for decades now, and the mere handful of classical programming left on radio. For that reason as well, orchestras need music directors who know what has been missing, not just what’s ‘hot.’
“Unspoken so far is the critical need to make up for the deterioration in music education, largely missing from US schools for decades now”
Really, that’s a bigger job than an orchestra, even a great one, can do.
Simon Woods can’t seem to see the forest for the trees. Non-subscribers — the folks who buy tickets to concerts here and there — who are the hardest to retain season over season, don’t care who the music director is, what’s their vision, etc. They look for concerts that appeal to them — the music being performed and sometimes the soloist. The unicorn music director is not a panacea to all of their problems
The solution is that marketing departments need to treat each concert like an event — something that people don’t want to risk skipping.
“The solution is that marketing departments need to treat each concert like an event…”
I’m surprised that an opening act/undercard isn’t used to draw larger crowds to the hall. Eclectic nonsense for the hipsters, youth orchestras for the suburbs, etc
“The solution is that marketing departments need to treat each concert like an event — something that people don’t want to risk skipping.”
Not an easy trick to pull off, I’m afraid, when there’s a new program almost every week for half the year. Not many people are likely to believe all of them are unmissable events, no matter how many ads tell them otherwise.
Well maybe you have to be prepared to easily offend some people – but hopefully this remains a place of learning, enlightenment, and healing – where it doesn’t matter what you look like, but that you make music at the highest level.
You can’t be so afraid that you don’t take any risk. This is the arts – anything can go on a canvas, or on a movie screen – and it comes down to weighing the benefit against the risk.
Lots of thoughts pop into my head. The orchestras are NOT primarily societal laboratories. Treating them as such is going to cause problems on various fronts even if some “new” audience members may be reached. Also, there are far too many orchestras (and opera companies) run by people who aren’t necessarily musical but only business oriented (and, you have to question how skilled some are with actual management). They need someone to help them pick up the slack…and are now wanting to hand off other responsibilities as well. The music director needs to have a huge say in programming…but the position’s PRIMARY function must be building the orchestra and presenting music, no matter what it is, to the highest standard possible.
The complete removal of arts education from k-12 education is the real issue here. Small performing arts orgs are expected to take up the slack. Coupled with bloated administration rosters there’s little left for the actual performers. Diversity initiatives are something of a joke in an industry with zero job growth (no new orchestras) and the challenges for anyone to make an actual living.
This is absolutely correct. Teach the young (5 to 8-year olds) about the joys of music, and you have younger audiences, 10 years later. Fail to do this – and NONE o0f the recent experiments (“inclusivity” or “crossover programming” or “hybrid media” etc etc) will improve the situation.
Finally, a true, root of the problem mentioned here. If nothing drastic happens in music education soon, most orchestras will dissappear quickly. But hey, for the adminitrators diversity will solve everything… morons.
Step one of the solution would be to get rid of the League of American Orchestras.
I must say that while reading the article, I was reminded that they were once called the American Symphony Orchestra League, and frequently referred to by their acronym, perhaps with an added voiceless glottal fricative.
Richard, ah, the unfortunate acronym. Back in the 1980’s the then, as you mention, American Symphony Orchestra League sensing a need, began a manager training program. Some of the earliest fellows in that program were actually musicians who took leaves of absence from their respective orchestras to participate. Since they were members of the International Conference of Symphony & Opera Musicians (ICSOM) I produced a faux internal “top secret” memo that this group of musicians was part of a special operations division, “Discreet Infiltration, Covert Kind” (DICK). Their purpose: to penetrate ASOL. I quietly posted it on our orchestra’s musician bulletin board where it remained for while. I don’t know who pulled it down but I have my suspicions.
The managerial class in turn creates more workshops, hosts more conferences, and writes more newsletters all the while remaining perplexed at just why so many seats remain empty.
The problems cited are totally of their own creation and their solutions only create new problems.
Amazing comment. Sums it up perfectly!
Indeed, Simon Woods does not offer solutions. He does, however imply that artistic and creative excellence in the performance of the masterpieces of the symphonic repertoire should not be the central fulcrum around which any other “broader strategic” or whatever “needs” should be turning. I must surely be a “conservative critic” since I really do not think that Mirga Gražinytė-Tyla’s and Klaus Mäkelä’s “every performance is a revelation”. If these conductors are our present day references as to what a music director should be like, then I am really afraid that no amount of forward thinking, new strategic plans, broader public meaning and relevance, collaborative partnerships, audience development, and community engagement will help much in finding the any solution.
Every year now for decades: OMG CLASSICAL MUSIC IS ABOUT TO DIE WE NEED YOUNGER AUDIENCES WE NEED MORE DIVERSITY WE NEED BLIND AUDITIONS, WAIT, BLIND AUDITIONS ARE RACIST, WE NEED WE NEED WE NEED WE NEED WE NEED . . .”
I’m not sure there’s a lot new here.
I worked at a ballet company 30-odd years ago, and one of the things we discussed a lot was that we wanted the audience to trust us – that whatever we presented would be interesting and compelling, such that they would be willing to come out even to see things they don’t know.
When Sir Simon took over in Berlin, he said the players had given him a mandate: To make them an orchestra of the 21st century. It wasn’t enough just to play great Beethoven and Strauss. And during his tenure the BPO did a lot of great things in terms of education programs – nothing better, IMHO, than the schoolkids dancing Rite of Spring; see the film “Rhythm is IT.”
People (esp here) deride “woke,” but whatever you call it, you have to present something that is meaningful to the audience, and gives them a reason to pay their money and come out to the hall. Whether that’s what they play, who plays it, or how they present it.
Frankly if Mozart or Stravinski are not “relevant” to the audience then what can the orchestra do? Orchestras cannot replace a failed education system in the same way that keeping 500 places a Harvard for Affirmative Action will not replace a failed primary and secondary school system for the underprivileged communities.
Very poor analogy. Harvard doesn’t admit anyone who isn’t qualified. They could create four classes as good as the one they actually admit. Even if they “lower standards” a little for certain people (athletes, legacies, etc.) those people are generally perfectly capable of doing the work.
Silly Symphonies…
Glad to see Teddy Abrams is being showcased as the Music Director of the future.
It is my deepest regret that he was not chosen by the Jacksonville Symphony Orchestra to be their Music Director. He electrified the usually lethargic audience!
The Berlin Philharmonic and the Vienna Philharmonic keep doing what they do. I know their funding is different. Just saying.
They’re actually an excellent example of a different business model. The VPO is sort of a private club that’s an offshoot of their day job, but the Berlin Phil is largely self-governed; the musicians run many aspects of the organization – and thanks to the DCH even a lot of the second violinists and a fourth horn are practically household names. And they wouldn’t go on strike, as they’d basically be striking against themselves.
There are many excellent comments here that point to the root of the problem. It has already been shown that trying to homogenize Orchestral entities does not work. No amount of ‘woke’ input, strategic commissions, and hierarchical ‘creative’ plans can replace the need for sensible, well balanced, articulate and up-classed performances led by a conductor of taste, vision, and commitment to the art. The programming and marketing antics are now in both desperation and ridiculous modes. Let tradition rule and let us just embrace the simple and obvious fact that the art was never meant to be nor ever be for everyone.
Completely agree–all this push to grow and be ‘inclusive’ is just smoke and mirrors. We need to embrace the possibilities that many orchestras will have to close if there isn’t interest where they live, but we should never sacrifice the art. I for one will never tire of experiencing the greats.
I thought the whole point of having a general manager, board of directors, fundraising department, &c. was to take primary responsibility for non-artistic operations, leaving the music director free to concentrate on artistic leadership and strategy…
A well-thought out and written article.
Notice, though, how many older white males call for diversity once they have “made it”.
So is all the woke programming have any effect on growing the audience? The problem is that most people go to concerts because of the music, not to indulge someone’s social project. The Eagles were recently in my city….got great reviews….and no one seemed troubled by the fact that they were all white males playing music written by white males. Why is classical music so obsessed with this when it seems to not even be a ripple in all the other genres?
It should always be easy to understand: whatever the mission and values of an American orchestra, those values are directly reflective of their donor class. Non-profit arts organizations in this country have been social change flavored for a long time and orchestras are an obvious choice for many, particularly because of their education initiatives—and that’s good!
Unfortunately with what has been happening with programming, minor side effects of the past have become major features and behind the scenes, most orchestras are actually doubling down instead of easing up.
Financial stability to these organizations is based much more in major donations than ticket sales, so the emptier and emptier halls is just becoming physical evidence of class divides, in my opinion. That image is almost the art itself at this point.
Where has he been?
He thinks it is only recently that MDs needed to be concerned about audience building?
I doubt any of them thought all they had to do was conduct daring concerts with integrity
If they did, their CEOs and Boards have been there to tell them otherwise.
You don’t ‘grow’ audiences. In order to grow something you do nothing and let nature take its course, as with beards and weeds. Everything else that grows physically is nurtured.
That’s easy.
PRIORITIZE MUSIC EDUCATION
Well, that sounds reasonable. But you have to know that when that happens the curriculum will be all about Elvis, Beatles, Hendrix and Ellington etc. etc. That’s how it goes these days so be careful what you wish for.
Glad I’m retiring at my advanced age of 63.
This nonsense is going too far and I want to get off.
When movie scores are programmed as subscription worthy, when wokeness creates terrible programming, and when the public is uninformed in the basics of great music, it’s time to leave.
And it’s all the self-righteousness, too.
Orchestras the world over are dealing with the effects of commercialization and vulgarization. Many spend increasing resources on performing popular music (nothing wrong with popular music, but that’s not what symphonic orchestras are for). That’s the price of democracy, no doubt worth it, but still a heavy price. In a commercialized culture, not least ruled by social media, this is likely to get worse.
And what role can players have? We are not just machines, programmed to obey. We have ideas about programming and how to evolve along with our audiences.
I knew a woman named Ruth Ray here in Chicago. She was around 90 when I met her, and she had had a successful career as a violin soloists back in the 1920s and 30s. She told me that before making her Carnegie debut, she was summoned to the home of Frederick Stock, the long time CSO Music Director. She had no idea that he knew she existed, but apparently Stock considered it his responsibility to attend to the classical music community in Chicago.
He informed the young woman that she could not hope to prepare for a performance in a great concert hall by practicing in her living room. Stock had arranged for her to have access to Orchestra Hall almost daily that coming summer, while the orchestra was not performing. He wanted her to play on the stage and come to understand how to fill a great auditorium with her sound.
Very few contemporary music directors even live in the city where they are employed. They fly in a day or two before rehearsals begin and go home after the last concert in each residency. It is perhaps idealistic, but to have a music director who lives in town and attends to the health of the entire classical music culture of the city is, if anything, needed today even more than it was a century ago.
The problem has been obvious for years. Every orchestra in every town outside the Big 6 or 7 now wants to join the club and think that they have to have more concerts when the demand has NEVER been there. Seasons are expanded, along with administrative bloat and musicians’ salary demands, and for a short time, it works. Until reality sets in. Those few that embrace their true place in a community can thrive. Those that are wannabe N.Y. Phils (most in the US) will continue to struggle.
Most “music directors” are just principal guest conductors. The artistic planning is done by administrative staff. They are not in residence.
The programming philosophy in my city is that the audience must eat its vegetables before having dessert.
For many years, our conductor was from Peru, so we had to suffer some indigenous garbage (never, for good reason, to be performed again,) or some “composition” for the digeridoo, or some contraption with glass plates and water all over the stage, or some other atonal monstrosity. If the introductory piece were brief (in God’s infinite mercy), the conductor, who, like some preachers, was in love with the sound of his voice, would lecture rhapsodically and at length about the piece to be presented in the second half of the program. The concept of “shut up and play” never occurred to him.
Finally, after the interval, the audience was privileged to hear the work it had come for. I’m sure there were many fine performances of Brahms, Rachmaninov, Mahler, and various concertos performed by the Artist in Town That Week, but I never got to hear them, because our wives insisted that we leave at the interval for dinner so we would not be out too late.
If the programming had been reversed, with the work the audience had come to hear performed in the first half, I would bet that not twenty seats would have been occupied in the second half…unless, of course, the MD programmed something for the second half that people wanted to hear.
I do not believe that the purpose of a symphony orchestra is to punish, or even educate, its listeners. The canon of great Western symphonic and concertante music is not so small that orchestras are required to inflict ugly works on their audiences just to signal their self-identified virtue or sophistication.
I love how these younger people now have such big egos — and such a lack of historical knowledge — that they honestly think they discovered these issues of “community, inclusion, and audience-building.”
It’s so annoying to keep hearing this over and over again now, as if us older people from the 60s and 70s were just unenlightened schlugs who had no idea that there might be some problems there.