Dorny, Jurowski to Staatsoper

March 6th, 2018

Vladimir Jurowski photographed by Simon Pauly in Berlin

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: March 6, 2018

MUNICH — The rumor emerged last fall, lingered, and today became fact during a Free State of Bavaria cabinet meeting: Serge Dorny, 56, and Vladimir Jurowski, 45, will in Sept. 2021 take over as Intendant and Generalmusikdirektor, respectively, at Bavarian State Opera. So said a statement from Bavaria’s Kultusminister Ludwig Spaenle, listing the appointments in that sequence. No contract term was disclosed, and no salary. The opera company will go without a GMD in the preceding season, after incumbent Kirill Petrenko steps down.

Lyon-based Dorny and Berlin-based Jurowski have been colleagues before, if not salaried together, notably by way of the London Philharmonic and the Glyndebourne Festival. Presumably they will get along, as have Petrenko and outgoing Intendant Nikolaus Bachler. Bavaria’s Culture Ministry did not answer questions about the joint nature of the new hiring.

Dorny drew attention around Germany when in 2014 he sued Dresden’s Semperoper for wrongful termination. He had been appointed Intendant of that company for five years, to start that fall, but was peremptorily fired in February, midway through an agreed preparative season, and suffered the further indignity of a Saxon minister’s televised description that he had behaved “like the Sun King.” He won the case, and pay and damages to the tune of a reported €1.5 million, and in July 2016 fended off the Free State of Saxony’s appeal.

Dorny grew up in a Flemish-speaking family on western Belgium’s French border. He began his career in 1983 as a dramaturge working for Gerard Mortier at the Théâtre Royal de la Monnaie. Four years later he was heading the Festival van Vlaanderen. From 1996 to 2003 he served as chief executive and artistic director of the London Philharmonic, a post that took him yearly to Glyndebourne, before he started in his present, acclaimed role as directeur général of the Opéra de Lyon.

The Moscow-born conductor, whose family emigrated to Germany in 1990, promises high standards and a slightly freer approach to music direction than Petrenko. His theater work has centered on projects at Glyndebourne, where between 2003 and 2013 he filmed operas by all three of BStO’s so-called “house gods”: Mozart, Wagner and Strauss.

Janowski debuted with BStO in Nov. 2015 leading an adrenaline-charged Akademiekonzert program of Liszt, Hindemith and Prokofiev, and weeks later presided over a musically and dramatically successful new Ognenny angel (Огненный ангел). Although he did return for one performance of that opera the next summer, he has not appeared with the company since.

Andris Nelsons’ name was also floated for the GMD position. He moved to Munich in 2015 and had seemingly been interested in vitalizing the thinnish opera side of his career at Germany’s biggest opera company. However, as Munich’s Merkur newspaper has reported, his schedule was deemed too full to take on all the GMD duties — a fair assessment but one that could equally apply to Jurowski, who today heads orchestras* in London, Berlin and Moscow. Four performances of Rusalka last June have been Nelsons’ only BStO assignment.

[*He is concurrently principal conductor of the London Philharmonic, chief conductor and artistic director of the Rundfunk-Sinfonie-Orchester Berlin and artistic director of the State Academic Symphony Orchestra of Russia (in Moscow, formerly the USSR State Symphony Orchestra) … as well as principal artist of the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment, in London, and artistic director of the George Enescu Festival, in Bucharest.]

Photo © Simon Pauly

Related posts:
Candidate Nelsons?
Berlin’s Dark Horse
MPhil Bosses Want Continuity
Die Fledermaus Returns
All Eyes On the Maestro

SOME CANTANKEROUS MUSINGS ON PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO SPEED UP USCIS INCOMPETENCY

March 1st, 2018

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.

For those of you who are unaware, on February 28, 2018 U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), both former chairmen of the Senate Judiciary Committee, have introduced the Arts Require Timely Service Act (ARTS Act); a bill that would require U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to provide premium processing (15-day turnaround) free of charge for any arts-related O or P visa petition that it fails to adjudicate within 14 days as required by law. You can read the official press release here:

https://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/leahy-and-hatch-introduce-bipartisan-arts-act-to-speed-processing-of-visas-for-visiting-artists

Many people have already asked us to weigh in on this development.

Be careful what you ask for.

First, and foremost, I must express my sincere awe and admiration with regard to the amazing and tireless arts advocacy of many people, but particularly that of Heather Noonan of the League of American Orchestras, who have been working on this for years. Given that this is actually a bill that is being “re-introduced”, having been previously introduced and rejected, getting it back on the table for re-consideration is nothing less than heroic.

However, as to my thoughts? Let me first share two recent Requests for Evidence (RFE) issued by USCIS which were brought to our attention. One asked for further evidence as to whether or not an artist who led a group which also bore the name of the artist performed a “critical role” with the group. The requested clarification as to an artist’s actual country of nationality where the petitioner wrote the word “German” as opposed to “Germany” on the i-129 form where it asked for “Country of Citizenship.” Given such stellar cognitive abilities, you can forgive my hesitation if my heart does not sing out to the heavens in joy and tearful gratitude over the prospect of merely speeding up a broken, illogical, frustrating, and inane process as opposed to actually proposing anything substantive to fix it. Its like offering the captain of the Titanic the option of actually averting the iceberg and, instead, having him decide merely to speed up the ship and get the disaster over with more quickly.

Its also important to understand that term “adjudicate” does not mean “approve.” An “adjudication” merely means that USCIS will review the petition and either approve it or issue an RFE. When an RFE is issued, the adjudication process is put on hold until the petitioner responds to the RFE. So, if passed, the prosed bill would provide that USCIS either has to approve a petition or issue an RFE within 14 days after a petition is received, or USCIS will be required to spew out some sort of inane dribble free of charge within the next 15 days to stop the clock and buy itself some more time. In short, if you want to guarantee any adjudication in less than 30 days, a petitioner will still be required to pay an additional $1225 for Premium Processing.

Nonetheless, given the lack of any meaningful acknowledgement or support of the arts on the part of the U.S. Government, I am always grateful for any crumbs that are tossed to us, however inadvertently, from the banqueting table. Still, I’d personally rather forgo free expedited USCIS processing time if it meant that, in exchange, USCIS would implement some sort of meaningful screening process when hiring USCIS examiners, as opposed to the current system of requiring only a pulse, potty training, and a patriotic dedication to protecting the American way of life from nefarious violinists.

In the meantime, I’ll take my crumbs, crawl back into my hole, and work on visa petitions.

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

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

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. Questions will be answered ONLY in future blogs. 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 and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

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!

 

 

CAN A U.S. ORCHESTRA REFUSE TO PAY A NON-U.S. MUSICIAN?

February 27th, 2018

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

Dear Law and Disorder:

I am a musician on an O-1 visa that my agent got for me. It covers multiple engagements. Last September, I was hired to be a section musician with an orchestra. They have been paying me up until now, but now they are saying that legally they have to withhold my paycheck and can’t pay me because they just realized my visa does not name them specifically and I have to get another one just with their name on it if I want to get paid for the last two weeks. If I don’t, they say they have to fire me. They checked with their lawyer and he says its because their musician contracts require them to pay me as an employee and that my visa only covers independent contractors, not employees. He says that according the USCIS regulations [8 CFR 214.2(o)], employers must be listed on separate O-1 petitions where it says “employer” on the form. Is this true? I thought the O-1 allowed me to work for whomever I wanted because it was a multiple-employer O-1.

Sadly, we get this question a lot. To be fair, U.S. tax and immigration laws and regulations are a huge, big, stinking pile of insanity. Fortunately, most of the folks in our industry who work regularly with foreign artists make at least a valiant effort to figure out the rules as best they can, either by consulting experts or colleagues or through their own research. Unfortunately, there are others, be they forgotten in the bowels of a hugely complex institution or trapped in their own dark worlds of paranoia, anal retention, and over-simplicity, who do not. These include most, but, by no means all, of the following: (1) the international student officers and offices of most schools and universities; (2) the personnel directors of small orchestras; and (3) any non-profit with a volunteer attorney who only practices insurance law, but claims to be an expert on all subjects.

It appears that you have been dragged into the dark world of numbers (2) and, perhaps (3).

The O-1 visa category is not only available for artists, but also for the field of business, science, education, and athletics. Technically, the sodden-witted pignut at your orchestra is correct that, in most instances, an individual with an O-1 visa who works for more than one employer must file a separate petition for each employer. HOWEVER, he or she is ignoring the fact that USCIS regulations 8 CFR 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(D) provides an exception for artists (and ONLY artists) as follows:

In the case of a petition filed for an artist or entertainer, a petitioner may add additional performances or engagements during the validity period of the petition without filing an amended petition, provided the additional performances or engagements require an alien of O-1 caliber.

Moreover, for purposes of work authorization, USCIS does not make distinctions either between full-time and part-time employment or between employees and independent contractors. Why? Because as we try to remind everyone again and again and again and again and again: U.S. law requires anyone who “provides services” in the U.S. to have work authorization regardless of whether or not they are paid for such services. So, as a work visa is required even if an artist performs for free, the manner in which they are paid is irrelevant for immigration purposes.

Admittedly, what adds to the confusion is that USCIS requires the same USCIS form (i-129) to be completed not just for O-1 visa petitions, but for a whole alphabet of other visa petitions as well: E, H, P, L, M, R and Q, among others. Because of the government’s “one-size-fits-all” mentality, the i-129 form uses the broad term “employer” to cover every possible scenario in which one person can engage the services of another. In other words, USCIS does not use the term “employer” to refer exclusively to an “employer/employee” relationship.

The issue of whether or not an individual performing services for another should be paid as an “employee” or “independent contractor” is determined by various federal and state regulations, laws, and authorities, such as the Department of Labor and the IRS. USCIS is part of the Department of Homeland Security. Once it authorizes someone “to work”, it simply doesn’t care about how, or even if, they are paid. That’s not in its purview. Which means that, so long as your O-1 authorizes you to provide services to more than one entity, then you can be paid either as an employee or independent contractor. Your orchestra is not violating U.S. immigration law by paying you as an employee.

Amusingly, your orchestra is actually finds itself in even greater peril by refusing to pay you for work already performed. The same state federal and state regulations, laws, and authorities that determine whether or not someone is an employee or an independent contractor, also make it explicitly clear that it is illegal to refuse to pay someone for work already performed based on a claim that they violated immigration law. Its perfectly acceptable—nay, required—to refuse employment to or fire someone who is not legally authorized to work in the U.S. However, that does not apply retroactively. If the work has been performed, even illegally, the worker must be paid. Otherwise, unscrupulous employers would just hire foreign workers and then refuse to pay them. Work authorization and payment are to very different things!

So, there’s your answer. However, getting your orchestra to understand or accept this reality may not be easy. People in the aforementioned categories prefer simple answers to complex questions and are often loathe to accept nuance. So, here’s simple suggestion: Are you or your orchestra a member of the American Federation of Musicians? If so, stop reading this and call AFM now. Trust me, they will be more than happy to make this matter very simple for the orchestra indeed!

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

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

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. Questions will be answered ONLY in future blogs. 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 and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

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!

 

 

 

 

Margaine, Tézier Find Favor

February 27th, 2018

La Favorite at Bavarian State Opera in Munich

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: February 27, 2018

MUNICH — Sometimes the revival has the better cast. So it was for La Favorite at Bavarian State Opera on Sunday, when Giacomo Sagripanti, Clémentine Margaine and Ludovic Tézier made more sense of the music than their counterparts in the 2016 production’s first run (a Deutsche Grammophon DVD) — conductor Sagripanti instilling new urgency and sweep, Margaine singing magnificently as Léonor, Tézier’s Alphonse resonant and incisive. Matthew Polenzani and Mika Kares reprised their monastic duties as Fernand and Balthazar, Kares with impressive control of line. Much applause. It was, though, a night to listen rather than look because Amélie Niermeyer’s morally confused, for-the-camera staging serves neither the historical characters nor Donizetti’s.

Photo © Wilfried Hösl

Related posts:
Voix and Cav
Plácido Premium
All Eyes On the Maestro
Candidate Nelsons?
Die Fledermaus Returns

Five More Years

February 21st, 2018

Munich’s City Council, or Stadtrat, in January 2018

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: February 21, 2018

MUNICH — Putting box-office steadiness ahead of artistic achievement, the city council here voted this morning to extend by five years Valery Gergiev’s contract as Chefdirigent of the civically run Munich Philharmonic, as requested by the orchestra’s managers. The move doubles the Russian’s tenure, to encompass the seasons 2020–25. No salary was disclosed, as usual, but past reports have shown €800,000 as an annual figure.

Matthias Ambrosius, spokesman for the musicians, and clarinetist, noted in writing that the “vast majority” of MPhil players had wanted to lengthen the collaboration with Gergiev. Nonetheless it is widely understood that the managers’ request stemmed from a desire to ease dislocation of the orchestra in 2020, when a massive project to reconfigure its Gasteig home begins. Gergiev will in this sense be doing the city a favor, gamely cooperating for seasons at a temporary concert hall.

Photo © Landeshauptstadt München

Related posts:
MPhil Bosses Want Continuity
Bruckner’s First, Twice
Flitting Thru Prokofiev
Netrebko, Barcellona in Aida
Honeck Honors Strauss

MPhil Bosses Want Continuity

January 31st, 2018

Valery Gergiev and Munich Philharmonic Intendant Paul Müller in 2017

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: January 31, 2018

MUNICH — Contrary to a London blog report yesterday, nothing has been “locked down” with regard to a contract extension for Valery Gergiev at the Munich Philharmonic, though things are indeed moving in that direction, for practical more than artistic reasons.

What has happened is that Hans-Georg Küppers, Kulturreferent of the City of Munich, which operates the orchestra, has gone public with his resolve to recommend a full five-year renewal for the Russian maestro to the city council at its scheduled Feb. 21 meeting. Any contract-signing would naturally take place later.

Küppers, MPhil Intendant Paul Müller (pictured last year with Gergiev), and Munich Bürgermeister Dieter Reiter are all inclined on continuity because 2020, when the present contract expires, heralds the lengthy and probably tortuous closure of the MPhil’s Gasteig home for gutting — at which time the musicians must decamp for a temporary wooden hall next to a power plant up the Isar River.

Gergiev has been no more of a musical success here than anyone predicted, but the high tensions around his friendship with Vladimir Putin — at fever pitch in 2013 when he was hired — have abated, and artistic decision-making since he began his tenure 29 months ago has gone smoothly.


Regarding other jobs around town, rumors persist that Vladimir Jurowski has joined Andris Nelsons im Gespräch for Kirill Petrenko’s position as Generalmusikdirektor at Bavarian State Opera. Petrenko steps down in fall 2020 after an unprecedented single season as head both of Germany’s largest opera company and of the Berlin Philharmonic. No rumors are yet floating about a successor to, or a renewal for, Mariss Jansons, whose contract at the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra is up one year after Gergiev’s.

Photo © Florian Emanuel Schwarz

Related posts:
MPhil Asserts Bruckner Legacy
Flitting Thru Prokofiev
Berlin’s Dark Horse
Gergiev, Munich’s Mistake
Horses for Mozartwoche

Jansons Turns 75

January 12th, 2018

Mariss Jansons and Martin Angerer in rehearsal in Munich’s Gasteig in January 2018

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: January 12, 2018

MUNICH — Against the medical odds, perhaps, Mariss Jansons turns seventy-five on Sunday, still adored by his favorite orchestra. Bavarian Broadcasting marks the occasion with a 44-minute video portrait, Im Zeichen der Musik, or In the Music’s Character, freely watchable. Last evening here at the Gasteig, a subscription concert of the Symphonie-Orchester des Bayerischen Rundfunks paraded contrasting sides of the musicians’ long union with Jansons, and everyone’s versatility. Martin Angerer navigated the elegant byways and tricky trills of Hummel’s Concerto a trombe principale (1803) with apparent ease in its original key of E, tidily accompanied. In an interview, the section principal distinguished this “godly” tonality from the “mundane” feel of E-flat, taken often in a convenience edition of the Hummel he deems a “stab in the heart,” but he stopped short of chancing the performance with the kind of Klappen-Trompete used originally, preferring the luxuries of a modern American piston instrument. (Soloist and conductor are pictured midweek.) Genia Kühmeier, Gerhild Romberger, Maximilian Schmitt and Luca Pisaroni made an impeccable quartet for the program’s main work, after the break, Beethoven’s C-Major Mass (1807), although the bass for some reason sang half-voice. The BR Chor glowingly intoned its lines yet struggled to focus the words in the acoustically poor venue. Jansons led supportively but as always from the ground up, never from the bowels of the Earth, and showing no inquirer’s zeal for the imaginative score. His clinical manner and the Bavarian players’ skill found their most persuasive outlet in an episodic exercise in chromatic unrest at the top of the evening: the Symphony in Three Movements (1945) of Stravinsky. Here, structure reigned, details sparkled, and the con moto third movement sounded (suitably) die-cast. It was in 2003 that this celebrated partnership began, since when the demanding and fussy but personable Latvian maestro’s contract has been renewed with accelerating commitment: for three years in 2013, and for three more years less than two years later — right after he sounded receptive to a theoretical, but as it turned out imagined, offer in Berlin. Which takes us up to 2021, past several happy birthday returns.

Photo © Bayerischer Rundfunk

Related posts:
Zimerman Plays Munich
Busy Week
MPhil Bosses Want Continuity
Manon, Let’s Go
Time for Schwetzingen

Staatsoper Imposes Queue-it

December 28th, 2017

Queue-it

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: December 28, 2017

MUNICH — Post is under revision.

Illustration © Queue-it and Bayerische Staatsoper

Related posts:
Staatsoper Favors Local Fans
See-Through Lulu
Ettinger Drives Aida
U.S. Orchestras on Travel Ban
Time for Schwetzingen

Fall Discs

November 26th, 2017

Recommended CDs and DVDs

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: November 26, 2017

MUNICH — Post is under revision.

Photos © Arthaus, BelAir Classiques, Querstand, Supraphon, Warner Classics

Related posts:
Winter Discs
Time for Schwetzingen
Ives: Violin Sonatas on CD
Chung to Conduct for Trump
Manon, Let’s Go

Gärtnerplatztheater Reopens

November 4th, 2017

Die lustige Witwe at the Staatstheater am Gärtnerplatz in Munich in October 2017

By ANDREW POWELL
Published: November 4, 2017

MUNICH — With a shrill, pretty Hanna, a shriller, pretty Valencienne, a Camille of uneven tone, but a tight, fluent chorus and much charming orchestral work, Die lustige Witwe ended six years of darkness at the Staatstheater am Gärtnerplatz Oct. 19. This city’s second opera company, of the same name, had been homeless all that time while painfully slow laborers spiffed up the 1,000-seat venue’s front-of-house and essentially rebuilt its backstage.

Both of the bosses were on duty for the return: Anthony Bramall, the company’s new Chefdirigent, buoyant of rhythm and propulsive in Lehár’s 1905 score; and Josef Köpplinger, the Staatstheater’s Intendant, who took it upon himself to stage Victor Léon and Leo Stein’s bubbly book within a tragic frame, adding a dark-angel mime (Adam Cooper) to lace the action and sustain his “concept” as if unaware that living without anxiety had been the authors’ message.

Pontevedro’s assets had been secure from the start in Danilo’s love for Hanna, but the alliance of Bramall and Köpplinger going forward could prove far from secure. For Gärtnerplatz remains all about the “show,” not so much the singing, just as before the years of closure. The embassy, the garden, the animated pavilion, the “Maxim’s” theme-party in Hanna’s ballroom looked terrific, while only Daniel Prohaska’s nuanced Danilo, of the principals, sounded worthy.

Photo © Marie-Laure Briane

Related posts:
Die Fledermaus Returns
Manon, Let’s Go
Chung to Conduct for Trump
Kaufmann, Wife Separate
Time for Schwetzingen