Archive for August 22nd, 2012

Mostly Mozart’s Genial Firebrand

Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012

by Sedgwick Clark

I ran into Mostly Mozart’s music director, Louis Langrée, prior to Yannick Nézet-Séguin’s concert that I reviewed last week, and told him how much I was looking forward to hearing the Lutosławski and Bartók works he was conducting a week later. His eyes widened and he smiled broadly, saying how much he loved their music. New Yorkers are used to this genial maestro’s elegant performances of baroque and classical repertoire, but now I suspect that Langrée’s restrictive MM connection has caused us to lose out on a more well-rounded musician than we realized.

The conductor’s demonic fervor in Lutosławski’s Bartók-flavored Musique funèbre (1958) was palpable. No less so was the surprisingly rich tone that he drew from the MM Festival Orchestra strings – no non-vibrato nonsense here! Equally stirring was Bartók’s Piano Concerto No. 3 (1945), with Jean-Efflam Bavouzet in the solo seat. The Third was once thought inferior to the composer’s more aggressive First and Second; program annotator Paul Schiavo’s descriptive weasel words are “user-friendly,” placed in quotes so we won’t accuse him personally of condescension. True, Bartók was dying of leukemia and tailored the concerto for his wife to play when he was gone. But its standing in the composer’s oeuvre is no less distinguished than the first two: It’s just different.

György Kroó, in his insightful A Guide to Bartók, refers to the “free, airy atmosphere of morning” in the concerto and “the chattering chirping birds, meadows and fields seen in the bright spring sunlight” – a change from the characteristically Bartókian “night music” slow movements of many earlier works. Kroó draws an analogy “to the work of the greatest of geniuses, the graceful lightness of the work composed by Mozart on his death-bed.” Continuing his Mozart analogy, he compares the finales of both Mozart’s and Bartók’s final piano concertos: “Both works seem to dance and soar in a strange state of euphoria towards eternity. . . .” 

The Bartók certainly did under Bavouzet and Langrée, zipping along joyously with breathless delight – certainly more vivace than the last two performances I’ve heard in concert, by the mummified Radu Lupu and anemic András Schiff, and equaling my favorite recording, by Julius Katchen and István Kertész. Only the cackling woodwinds seemed underplayed. The composer did not live to orchestrate the last 17 bars of the Third, leaving the task to his student, Tibor Serly. Perhaps for this reason, Langrée felt free to add a bass drum to the final chord, à la Ravel’s Piano Concerto in G. Very effective.

Following intermission, the maestro turned in an impeccable Mozart 39th. Makes me look forward to the coming season.

Can I Cancel If They Perform In My Backyard?

Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

Dear Law & Disorder:

After we booked an artist, the artist’s agent booked them to perform two weeks later at another venue 25 miles away from us. It’s a smaller venue that charges less for tickets than we do. This will impact our sales. Can we cancel? I was told that exclusivity was industry standard.

Was there a booking contract? What did it say? If the contract provided your venue with a period of exclusivity or restrictions on when and where the artist could perform before or after your engagement, then the artist might be in breach of the contract. (Remember, unless the agent is acting as a producer, your contract is between you and the artist.) On the other hand, if there was no booking agreement or if the booking agreement didn’t provide you with any period of exclusivity or restrictions, then you probably would not have the right to cancel. If you fail to negotiate something (a commission rate, cancellation terms, licensing rights, etc.) “industry standard” will not provide the missing terms. Unvoiced assumptions and expectations do not become contractual arguments. To the contrary, if you fail to negotiate something, the missing terms remain missing and unenforceable.

I’ve said it before, but it always bears repeating: there is no such thing as “industry standard”—least of all in the performing arts industry. In this case, in my personal opinion, I would certainly consider it unprofessional for either an artist or an agent to intentionally book an engagement that directly competes with an already booked engagement, and I suspect I am not alone in that perspective. However, I also suspect it would be far from easy to obtain a consensus as to whether or not a smaller venue 25 miles away necessarily constitutes a “competing venue.” Regardless, contractual terms are not written by majority opinion. Neither “common industry practice” nor my own personal opinions rise to the level of contractual obligations. Without a contractual requirement specifically prohibiting the artist from performing within two weeks at another venue 25 miles away from you, you would be the one in breach of the contract should you decide to cancel for that reason alone. It would also be equally inappropriate for you to coerce or otherwise suggest that the artist breach his or her contract with the other venue in order to accommodate your concerns.

My advice would be for all parties concerned to consider an appropriate adjustment of some kind. Perhaps there is still time for one of the dates to be moved, or there can be a reduced engagement fee, or even a joint marketing strategy. Assuming that this was an unanticipated outcome by all of the parties, the primary objective at this point needs to be to preserve the relationships between the parties and find a way for both engagements at both venues to continue as planned.

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!