“We Didn’t Hear the Same Concert”

March 21st, 2012

by Sedgwick Clark

That’s a traditional reader complaint. But it happens to critics too. Russian violinist Vadim Repin and Lithuanian pianist Itamar Golan have solid careers, and their program last Saturday evening (3/17) in Alice Tully Hall was an enticing selection of works by Janáček, Ravel, Grieg, and Chausson.

From mid-parquet I found Repin’s sound surprisingly coarse and aggressive, as if playing to the last row of Avery Fisher Hall, where he has often performed, rather than the medium-sized Tully. His tone, most deleteriously in Ravel’s jazzy Violin Sonata, was grainy and monochromatic, thick and unsubtle; pizzicatos made scant effect. The same composer’s Tzigane had little gypsy flavor, just headlong virtuosity, and Janáček’s Sonata sounded unaccountably ugly. Chausson’s Poème, which required mostly soft playing, elicited his best moments.

Two seats to my left, The Strad’s Dennis Rooney was filled with praise, although he did suggest that Repin’s violin had problems “in the middle” and would be in the shop next week. Maya Pritsker had been sitting several rows closer and walked back to say hello at intermission, rhapsodizing at how Repin reminded her of David Oistrakh. I reacted with horror and suggested that she stay back with me for the second half. At one particularly unattractive moment in Grieg’s Second Sonata I looked at her and she nodded in understanding; at the end of the work she said he didn’t sound so loud down front.

I was astonished to read Zachary Woolfe’s Times review, stating that “. . . Mr. Repin brought remarkable tone: sweet and focused to the highest reaches of the instrument but never syrupy or heavy. He was game for a wide range of colors—savage attacks and pale whispers—but the atmospherics were less precise and varied: in lyrical passages he tended to be square.” I could agree with only the last part of that sentence.

No movements were listed in the program, which may be why the over-enthusiastic audience applauded between movements—which can’t have helped the performers’ concentration. The stage lighting was distracting as well, throwing shadows on the performers’ faces. A shoddy presentation.

New York Phil Opens Its Archives

Tomorrow (Thursday, 3/22, 10:30 a.m. EST) the NYPhil Archives hosts an “online discussion” of its second release from its steadily burgeoning digital archives: a world-wide discussion of Philharmonic tours from 1943 to 1970. Most important, perhaps, are Leonard Bernstein’s tours with the orchestra to the former Soviet Union, Europe, Japan, and South America. Scholars and musicians from Russia, Japan, Munich, and the United States will join NYP Archivist Barbara Haws and moderator Jeff Spurgeon of New York radio station WQXR for the one-hour event, streamed live via Google Hangout. Click on this link for full info: http://archives.nyphil.org/hangout/

Gil Shaham’s Hartmann

Last week I wrote in anticipation of hearing Karl Amadeus Hartmann’s Concerto funèbre played by Gil Shaham at the Philharmonic and promised a report. It’s not an immediately ingratiating work, and I look forward to the broadcast for further acquaintance. James Keller’s notes mention references to Mahler, Bartók, Stravinsky, Berg, Webern, and Hindemith, and when I went backstage I had to admit that I missed them. Gil’s eyes brightened and he played a passage containing an instantly recognizable quote from Stravinsky’s concerto. He hopes to record the piece, and perhaps my ears will be attuned to Hartmann’s allusions by that time.

MTT’s American Mavericks at Carnegie

My most highly anticipated concerts of the season are upon us: Michael Tilson Thomas’s American Maverick’s series, in celebration of the San Francisco Symphony’s centennial season, the first of which are listed below and will continue through the week. Twentieth-century American masters Ives, Ruggles, Cowell, Varèse, Cage, Feldman, and Adams in the big hall with full orchestra during the coming week. Then on Thursday and Friday in Carnegie’s mid-size Zankel Hall, members of the SFSO will perform works by Harry Partch, Lou Harrison, David Del Tredici (his Syzygy, which Michael told me 40 years ago was a masterpiece), Steve Reich, Lukas Foss, and New York premieres of hot-off-the-press works by Musical America’s 2012 Composer of the Year Meredith Monk, Mason Bates, and Morton Subotnick.

Looking Forward

My week’s scheduled concerts:

3/21 Rockefeller University. Rachel Barton Pine, violin. Paganini: Caprices (24).

3/25 Avery Fisher Hall at 3:00. Murray Perahia, piano. Bach French Suite No. 5. Beethoven: Sonata No. 27, Op. 90. Brahms: Klavierstücke, Op. 119. Schubert: Sonata in A, D. 664. Chopin: Polonaise in C-sharp minor; Prelude in F-sharp minor; Mazurka in C-sharp minor; Scherzo in C-sharp minor.

3/25 Zankel Hall at 7:30. Ensemble ACJW/David Robertson; Moran Katz, clarinet. Wagner: Siegfried Idyll. Ligeti: Chamber Concerto for 13 Instruments. Adams: Gnarly Buttons. Haydn: Symphony No. 8 (“Le soir”).

3/26 Zankel Hall. So Percussion. Works by Cage, Cenk Ergün, Matmos, Dan Deacon, and Jason Treuting.

3/27 Carnegie Hall. San Francisco Symphony/Michael Tilson Thomas; St. Lawrence String Quartet; Joan La Barbara, Meredith Monk, Jessye Norman, vocalists. Cage: Selections from Song Books. Cowell: Synchrony. Adams: Absolute Jest. Varèse: Amériques.

3/28 Carnegie Hall. San Francisco Symphony/Michael Tilson Thomas; Emanuel Ax, piano. Ruggles: Sun-Treader. Feldman: Piano and Orchestra. Ives: A Concord Symphony (orch. Brant).

The Truth About Industry Standards

March 21st, 2012

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

Dear FTM Arts Law:

I was recently reviewing a contract I received from an agent. When I asked for some changes, she told me that her contract was “industry standard” and that nothing could be changed because that’s the way everyone does it. In the future, I don’t want to waste anyone’s time or appear like I don’t know what I’m doing. Are there industry standards for certain types of contracts? Where can I learn what is and is not legally required?

Do not mistake “industry standard” for “legally required.” Something which is “legally required” is mandated by statutes or regulations—such as visas, taxes, licenses, or permits. The term “industry standard”, on the other hand, usually means: “This is how I’m used to doing it and I’d rather not change.” Too often, its employed as a form of peer pressure to make you feel that you have no right to make counterproposals, counter offers, or suggest a new or different way to structure the deal or transaction. Nothing could be further from the truth! The only industry standards in this industry are that there are NO standards! This is not to suggest that there are not ways to structure some deals and transactions that are more common than others, but even a common practice or custom does not mean that it is unchangeable. More significantly, if you polled a cross section of performing arts professionals about any given topic, you will find a significant divergence of opinion as to what is and what is not “standard”. In other words, just because someone has done something a certain way for 20 years does not mean that’s the way everyone else must do it, much less you. It may be “standard” for that individual or organization, but it doesn’t make it “standard” for anyone else.

In your question, you don’t mention the specific terms that were at issue. Depending on the circumstances, what you were asking for may have been completely reasonable or completely ridiculous. But that really doesn’t matter. Perhaps more than in any other industry, the arts is based on relationships and success depends on the health and strength of those relationships. When entering into any arts-based relationship, you should always feel free to ask questions, propose new ways of doing things, and think creatively. This does not mean you will get what you want. That will depend on negotiations and the negotiating positions of the parties. If you need to licensing rights from another party or want to work with them more than they want to work with you, its to be expected that they may counter any or all of your proposals with “take it or leave it.” However, that’s not because of any predetermined “industry standard”, its just that they may be in a better position than you are to dictate the terms they want. That’s not necessarily unfair, its just reality. In response to an attorney who once presented me with a contract which he insisted was “industry standard”, I told him that, according to his “standard”, the artist gets screwed, so we need to pick a better standard. It never hurts to ask!

___________________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ftmartslaw-pc.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. FTM 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!

 

Getting Airplay for your CD

March 15th, 2012

By: Edna Landau

To ask a question, please write Ask Edna.

I would like to express my thanks to my good friend and colleague, Gail Wein, a former NPR producer and currently a communications consultant and publicist in New York City, who provided the information that is the basis for my column below.

Dear Edna:

What is the best way for an unknown artist to get airplay for a CD (say, NPR in particular)? —Patricia Goodson

Dear Patricia:

Thank you very much for your question, which I am sure will be of interest to many of our readers. Like so many aspects of career building today, success in getting airplay for a cd is largely dependent on its special appeal and the excellence of the performer(s) involved. It is unlikely that NPR would feature a recording of standard repertoire by an unknown artist unless there were an unusual story surrounding that artist or they were brought to their attention by several individuals whose opinion they highly respected. If the repertoire is unusual, the chances are greater. For example, I recently met a gifted saxophonist, Christopher Brellochs, who had access to the unpublished manuscript of Aaron Copland’s original version of music for  Quiet City, which was written for chamber ensemble. He adapted it for concert purposes, making a few small orchestration changes, and with the blessing of the Aaron Copland Estate and Copland’s publisher, Boosey and Hawkes, made the world premiere recording.  This recording, rounded out with music by other American composers, was featured by both American Public Media and National Public Radio (Performance Today and Weekend Edition), alongside interviews with Mr. Brellochs. It is not hard to see why it captured their attention.

In attempting to get airplay for a cd, you can work at both the local and national level but the objectives will be somewhat different. A local station (which may be a member station of NPR) might play your cd as a stand-alone item, perhaps with a little introductory explanation that could include information about a related performance in the area. An approach to NPR in Washington, D.C., would be made in hopes that the recording would interest them enough to produce a feature story about it or invite you to be interviewed. There is also the possibility that you could be asked to do a live, in studio performance.  In approaching a local classical station, you would begin by going on the radio station’s website and looking for the name of the Music Director. If that is not apparent, the next choice would be the Program Director. The third choice would be the individual host of a specific show. The next step would be to send the cd by mail to the particular individual with a short bio of the artist(s), a press release about the cd, if you have one, and a cover note that explains why you think that it is of particular interest. If you are based in the area or have performed there, it would be wise to point that out. It is advisable to simultaneously send an e-mail to this person with the same basic content and also alerting them that you are sending a cd to them and would be most grateful for their consideration.  It may be a bit challenging to get the e-mail address but you should call the station and if you are not successful in getting through to anyone, ask for the membership department, which almost always answers. Be aware that these stations probably get dozens of cd’s a week and, therefore, they are not likely to respond to you. However, it is fine for you to follow up with another e-mail or phone call, saying that you hope they received your cd and will consider it for airplay. You can leave your phone number in case they have any questions. It is not advisable to approach everyone whose name you come up with because they are likely to be in close communication and feel as if they have been bombarded by you. If you already know someone at the station, albeit not in one of the above three categories, feel free to send them your cd and ask if they can shepherd it along. Ms. Wein advises me that even though press kits and performances are often shared digitally, some media outlets prefer to receive cd’s. Therefore, it is probably safest to go that route, unless the station’s website advises otherwise.

If you are seeking national exposure on shows such as NPR’s All Things Considered, Morning Edition or Weekend Edition, it will be all the more crucial that your cd has a story associated with it that would justify national exposure (premiere recording of certain repertoire, unjustly neglected composer, newly formed ensemble of great interest, etc.) You can indicate your availability for a live interview or studio performance, should they be interested. You will want to go on the NPR website and follow their instructions in the section called “How do I submit materials (cd’s, books…) to NPR for possible review”. Please note that they ask you not to contact them for follow-up as they will contact you if they have any questions.

I wish you the best of luck in gaining wider exposure for your recorded performances.

To ask a question, please write Ask Edna.

© Edna Landau 2012

Finding the Right Gimmick

March 14th, 2012

by Sedgwick Clark

Shaham’s 1939 Dark Horse

Gil Shaham had an epiphany. After years of recognition as one of the brightest young lights of the concert circuit, the Israeli-American violinist conjured one of the most imaginative programming concepts in years. He had been struck by how many violin concertos written in the 1930s had entered the basic repertoire: Stravinsky (1931), Berg and Prokofiev Second (1935); then, in 1939 alone, the same year that Hollywood produced perhaps its greatest year ever, the Bartók, Hindemith, Walton, Britten, and Barber concertos. Since 2009 he has performed all of these but the Hindemith and Britten, and in December, when he received Musical America’s Instrumentalist of the Year award for 2012, he promised that he would get to those too.

But there are many other concertos on the periphery waiting to be discovered—as Dennis D. Rooney mentioned in his tribute to Shaham in the Musical America Directory—waiting for the right performer to bring them alive to a public that loves the tried and true but welcomes a little spice too. The Szymanowski Second (1932) is one; Henryk Szeryng introduced it to me at a New York Philharmonic concert nearly 40 years ago. And after four decades of over a hundred concerts a season, countless radio broadcasts, and the collection and partial deaccession of over 20,000 LPs and 10,000 CDs, I’m about to be introduced to another ’30s violin concerto at a Philharmonic concert—this time courtesy of Gil Shaham, who gave the Walton concerto such a virtuoso turn with this orchestra last spring. The work is Karl Amadeus Hartmann’s Concerto funebre (1939). Astonishingly (to me, anyway), I don’t know if I’ve ever heard a note of Hartmann’s music. Shaham will perform this concerto with the New York Philharmonic and David Zinman on March 15, 16, 17, and 20. Who knows? As with Szymanowski it may be a new love affair. I’ll let you know.

As a warmup to hearing Gil again in concert, I listened this past weekend to two Shaham CDs on his own Canary Classics label, which he founded several years ago when his previous label, Deutsche Grammophon, didn’t want to record a disc of Fauré chamber music. An all-Prokofiev disc (ATM CD 1555) includes the two violin sonatas, Opp. 80 and 94, the Five Melodies, Op. 35, and three Heifetz transcriptions sandwiched between the larger works. It’s a great CD, with the violinist contributing subtleties of dynamic shading and phrasing that elevated these works far beyond my previous estimation; he is ideally partnered by his sister, Orli Shaham. The sound, superbly produced by Eric Wen, matches the performers in its breathtaking realism. My preferred recording of the sonatas was previously the ’70s Perlman-Ashkenazy (most recently paired on an RCA CD with Perlman’s peerless recording of the Second Concerto with Leinsdorf and Boston). Henceforth, I’ll reach for the Shahams. Another superior Shaham CD on Canary is called “Virtuoso Violin Works” by Sarasate (CC07). This time Gil shares violin duties with his wife, Adele Anthony, and the pianist is Akira Eguchi. The four tracks requiring orchestral accompaniment feature the Orquesta Sinfónica de Castilla y León conducted by Alejandro Posada.

The Rest Is Noise in London

Another brilliant programming connection will dominate London’s Southbank Centre next season. It takes the subject of American music critic Alex Ross’s award-winning book The Rest Is Noise as a stepping-off point, and I quote:

“In 2007 Alex Ross wrote the seminal book The Rest Is Noise – listening to the Twentieth Century. Throughout 2013 we bring the book alive, with nearly 100 concerts, performances, films, talks and debates. We will take you on a chronological journey through the most important music of the 20th century to dramatise the massive political and social upheavals. The London Philharmonic Orchestra, with over 30 concerts, is the backbone of the festival that reveals the stories behind the rich, exhilarating and sometimes controversial compositions that have changed the way we listen forever.”

BBC Four is also involved in the project, assuring that the Foggy City will be awash in 20th-century music next season (see link).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/bbc-four-southbank-partnership.html

NOW, I ask you, my good friends at Lincoln Center: Here’s a concept inspired by an internationally acclaimed book by an American author, published in America (Farrar, Straus, Giroux). With all your resources and a campus made for a project of such scope, why . . . ? But that’s a hopeless query. The Brits beat us to it, and no arts org on this coast is likely to jump off the 20th-century music cliff in today’s economic climate.

A New Carlos Kleiber Bio—in ENGLISH!

Alison Ames informs me that Corresponding with Carlos: A biography of Carlos Kleiber by Charles Barber has been published by Kindle, available through Amazon for $52.69. The reader reviews, which seem astute, are raves, and two of the reviewers find the price well worth it. Here’s the link:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=Carlos+Kleiber&x=0&y=0

American readers frustrated by the existence of three bios in German may click on this link for info (they’ll still be frustrated, of course, but at least the info will be available to them):

http://www.amazon.de/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?__mk_de_DE=%C5M%C5Z%D5%D1&url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Kleiber%2C+Carlos&x=0&y=0

Looking Forward

My week’s scheduled concerts:

3/15 Metropolitan Opera. Verdi: Macbeth. Gianandrea Noseda (cond.). Thomas Hampson, baritone; Nadja Michael, soprano; Dimitri Pittas, tenor ; Günther Groissböck, bass.

3/16 Avery Fisher Hall. New York Philharmonic/David Zinman; Gil Shaham, violin. Hartmann: Concerto funebre. Beethoven: Symphony Nos. 1 and 3.

3/17 Walter Reade Theater.1:30 The Callas Effect. 3:00 Callas on Film.

3/17 Alice Tully Hall. Vadim Repin, violin; Itamar Golan, piano. Janácek: Violin Sonata. Ravel: Violin Sonata. Violin Sonata No. 2. Chausson: Poème. Ravel: Tzigane.

3/18 Carnegie Hall. American Symphony Orchestra/Leon Botstein; Stephen Powell, Lori Guilbeau, Robert Chafin, Burak Bilgili, Corey Bix, soloists; Collegiate Chorale Singers. Schmidt: The Hunchback of Notre Dame (in concert).

3/21 Rockefeller University. Rachel Barton Pine, violin. Paganini: Caprices (24).

Is Specialization Limiting or Helpful?

March 8th, 2012

By: Edna Landau

To ask a question, please write Ask Edna.

I recently made my third visit to the Bard College Conservatory of Music and spent two hours with some wonderful young singers who have been picked by Dawn Upshaw, Kayo Iwama and their vocal faculty colleagues to participate in the prestigious Graduate Vocal Arts Program. I was asked the following question which, at the time, had me a bit stumped.

Does having a specialization in a musical area or genre limit you, or does it make you more marketable as a performer?

I don’t think that 20 years ago, artists would have devoted their attention to what might make them marketable, yet I applaud the questioner for thinking this way. In this very competitive time for emerging young artists, achieving recognition in a certain area or genre of music would seem to be a plus. It increases the chances that someone will think of them when programming particular pieces. If an artist demonstrates that they have a great affinity for a specific area of repertoire and they perform it with considerable expertise, they may well enjoy a distinguished career. One example which comes to mind is soprano Emma Kirkby, who has mostly performed Renaissance and Baroque works and has achieved great recognition both for her live performances and extensive discography. The problem sets in when artists are repeatedly asked to sing in Bach masses and Haydn oratorios but they would equally love to perform Barber’s “Knoxville” or Britten’s “Les Illuminations”. If they have a manager representing them, they must arrive at a total meeting of the minds early on as to how to achieve and maintain this delicate balance. The manager must bear the responsibility of regularly reminding presenters and conductors about the breadth of the artist’s repertoire. One need look no further than the Artistic Director of the Bard program, Dawn Upshaw, to find a sterling example of someone who successfully met this challenge. She made her early mark in opera in Mozart roles, but her intellectual and musical curiosity led her to explore a huge variety of repertoire and to partner with leading composers of our time, such as John Harbison, Osvaldo Golijov, John Adams and Kaija Saariaho. Her major career breakthrough was the recording of Henryk Gorecki’s Symphony No. 3, which sold over a million copies. The commitment she has given to every corner of the repertoire along her artistic journey has been so complete that her fans have adoringly followed her, and presenters have waited with great anticipation to learn of her latest project. The answer to the above question, therefore, lies totally in the aspirations and abilities of the performer.  Fortunately, many artists are privileged to enjoy long careers which afford them the opportunity to change direction and embark on new musical adventures, once they have established a name for themselves. Demonstrating a special affinity for a particular area of repertoire can be a real advantage, but it does not in any way need to limit the options for any singer to excel in and be thought of for other works in the extensive vocal literature.

To ask a question, please write Ask Edna.

© Edna Landau 2012

A Raft of Orchestras

March 7th, 2012

by Sedgwick Clark

Rattle/Berlin’s Bruckner and Mahler

People used to equate Bruckner and Mahler (their music is both long and loud, after all). And those who heard Simon Rattle lead the Berlin Philharmonic at Carnegie Hall in Bruckner’s Ninth (2/24) and Mahler’s “Resurrection” (2/25) symphonies in such close proximity should have been able to tell the differences at once. Overall, tempos were well chosen and Rattle eschewed the confounding manipulation of pace and phrase that has marred much of his work in the standard repertoire.

Indeed, the Bruckner was one of the finest performances I’ve heard of the symphony in recent years. Rattle’s firm focus on the long line and pacing of climaxes was unerring, and unlike many conductors he never shortchanged the composer’s pauses or sustained whole notes. Even if Bruckner’s innig indications—“intimate,” “heartfelt”—and traditional spirituality seemed a bit underplayed, Rattle’s interpretive mastery was mightily impressive.

The evening’s importance was further marked by the U.S. premiere of a “performance version by Samale-Phillips-Cohrs-Mazzuca, 1983-2011” of the symphony’s projected fourth movement, left unfinished at Bruckner’s death in 1896. The 1903 premiere of the Ninth claimed it to be emotionally sufficient in three movements. Wrong, maintains John Phillips in the program booklet: “Bruckner left the movement very largely complete.” Some pages were missing, he admits, “But in most all cases, Bruckner’s preliminary sketches enabled us to reconstruct an accurate picture of the musical continuity, and the fully orchestrated sections showed clearly how Bruckner intended it to sound.”

“Intended” is the key word. One can acknowledge and study the achievement but still realize that melodically the material is eminently forgettable, mediocre, not up to anything in the sublime first three movements. Quite unlike Mahler’s inspiration in his unfinished Tenth—so brilliantly revealed by Deryck Cooke’s “performing version”—this movement detracts from the first three. All serious Brucknerites will have to acquire Rattle’s recording of the four-movement Ninth when EMI releases it in May, but I’ll bet most listeners will opt out of the finale after a single hearing.

Rattle’s Mahler Second (“Resurrection”) was a disappointment from its mushy opening attacks to the inaudibility of the tam-tam and organ on the final page. Those who know his recording will not be surprised with his tempos, and except for a couple of hasty accelerandos I found them unobjectionable. I especially liked his lilting second-movement Andante moderato (Bernstein’s least successful movement). But some of his choices—the first movement’s huge climax at the end of the second development and his adherence to the score’s wrong-headed Tempo 1indication at movement’s end (and he is by no means alone in these instances)—were ponderous and unintuitive. The offstage horns in the finale were placed outside the balcony but could have sounded even farther away. My Carnegie touchstones for this effect are the Indianapolis Symphony’s “Resurrection” under John Nelson and Julius Rudel’s Buffalo Philharmonic performance of Mahler’s Das Klagende Lied—both in 1980—in which the offstage instruments in the latter sounded as if they were playing full tilt from the middle of Central Park. Stupendous! But Rattle gave full power to the gigantic crescendo in the finale, and the offstage-right brass episode was well balanced and quite exciting.

The Times’s Anthony Tommasini wrote in his review of the first of the orchestra’s three concerts that “it is fascinating how even with so many new and younger members, the character of the orchestra remains.” Sorry, sitting in Row T across from Tony in the parquet, I don’t hear it. Few of the instrumentalists appear old enough to have played under Karajan. Their sound under Rattle, to my ears, is powerful yet coarse in texture and opaque in tuttis, with little of the sensuous beauty and rich, organ-like sonority cultured by the elder maestro. And the purely technical quality of the BPO’s playing appeared at least partially dependent upon which of the three First Concertmasters was playing. In retrospect, the Bruckner’s excellent performance seemed in large part due to Daishin Kashimoto’s attentive cues, whereas the schlamperei of the ensemble in the Mahler seemed mirrored in Daniel Stabrawa’s less-heedful demeanor.

Maazel Mauls Sibelius

The young Lorin Maazel recorded a Sibelius symphony cycle with the Vienna Philharmonic for Decca between 1963 and ’68, and the septuagenarian Maazel’s Carnegie Hall concert with the VPO on March 2 might have been seen by the hopeful as a return to the best of those efforts: Nos. 3, 4, and 6. No such luck. Played at this concert were Nos. 1, 5, and 7, and the performances were bloated (7 and 5 each gaining more than five minutes over the recordings, to no end save tedium), spottily played (5 and 1), and littered with Maazelisms (most pronounced in the first movement of 1 and the exaggerated though precisely played distention of the final six chords of 5). Coming after his spectacular traversal of Strauss’s Alpine Symphony with the New York Phil last October, a distinct disappointment.

Honeck’s Tchaik 5 Sears the Ears

Two years ago, the Pittsburgh Symphony under Music Director Manfred Honeck sounded in Mahler’s First as if every instrument had its separate microphone. I vowed never to attend another concert by him, but I was in town for Rattle and Berlin and my legendary sense of fairness won out. On Sunday afternoon (2/26) in Avery Fisher Hall the Pittsburgh sonority was far more unified. The New York premiere of Steven Stucky’s17-minute celebration of Rachel Carson, Silent Spring, seemed a hit with both audience and players. While all the water clichés of the past appeared unavoidable (my ears were boating in Giverny, but Allan Kozinn in the Times heard Jackson Pollack as a “visual analogue”), Stucky’s tonal idiom and masterful orchestration were a balm to the senses. Honeck and the PSO were flypaper accompanists to Hilary Hahn’s dietetic Prokofiev Violin Concerto No. 1.  If heartless Tchaikovsky is your preference, Honeck’s awesomely drilled Fifth Symphony after intermission filled the bill. The whiplash tempos, wide dynamics, and slashing attacks were undeniably impressive, but one felt brutalized. Moreover, his flashy conducting style actually encouraged the audience to applaud prematurely in the dramatic pause before the finale’s coda. Not even the encore, Khachaturian’s already-virtuosic Galop from Masquerade, escaped Honeck’s teeth-grinding excess. The audience went wild.

Don’t Miss St. Louis

Alas, I can’t get to everything. I’ll be out of town on Saturday (3/10) when David Robertson leads his St. Louis Symphony in a fabulous program of Debussy’s early Printemps, Kaija Saariaho’s shimmering Quatre Instants, sung by Karita Mattila, and Stravinsky’s complete Firebird ballet. (By the way, all of these musicians were Musical America awardees: Conductor, Composer, Musician, and Musician, respectively.)

Ten Do’s and Dont’s of Career Building

March 1st, 2012

By: Edna Landau

To ask a question, please write Ask Edna.

Dear Edna:

In this fast paced changeable world we live in, we artists feel like a little boat in a vast ocean, many times lost and orphans of good guidance. A wonderful legacy, and a practical one from an accomplished pro like you, would be for us new artists to have a list of ten things to focus on and a list of 10 don’ts. Would you be so generous to share that with us? —Susana Galli

Dear Ms. Galli:

It is a weighty task to come up with ten do’s and don’ts and hope that they comprise some sort of legacy! However, I have done so below, and perhaps I will follow up at a future time with a second installment.

DO’S

Spend considerable time identifying your particular strengths, soliciting input from teachers and others who know you well, in order to plan your career and performance repertoire in a way that emphasizes them.

Make sure that you have good quality, attractive photographs and that your promotional materials are well-written and always up to date. In addition, take care that any video samples you post on YouTube show you off to best advantage. Having a fine quality performance dvd, or at least a demo cd, is definitely an advantage.

Go to a healthy number of concerts, especially if you will hear music with which you are unfamiliar or performances by artists you admire who are likely to inspire you. Go backstage to meet them after the concert. It is an added plus if some of these concerts take place in untraditional venues.

Look for opportunities to perform for audiences who may not go to concert halls, and identify performance spaces that might allow you to engage with new audiences in a more informal setting. If you are aware of series, for example at a library, which present artists at your level of career development, write to them directly, proposing an attractive program that you are prepared to perform. It might be helpful to go to one of their concerts and to try to meet the director of the series in person. You can also write to institutions with whom you have been associated in the past, who might be interested in presenting you in concert (e.g., a school, competition or youth symphony).

Consider forming a chamber ensemble, especially as performance opportunities may be more numerous and competitions and residency opportunities might afford avenues for exposure.

Begin to build a list of people who might be interested in supporting special projects you plan to undertake and also identify individuals whom you would like to meet through others. Whenever you succeed in getting such meetings, be sure to read up on the person in advance so that you can ask intelligent questions and evidence your awareness of their considerable accomplishments. Be sure to let these people know of your ongoing career successes.

Look for opportunities to attend training workshops that will expand your horizons, such as those offered by Carnegie Hall. Even if you are unable to attend in person, bear in mind that some, such as Chamber Music America’s “First Tuesdays”, are archived online.

Plan to spend your summers in places where you might be noticed by established artists and industry leaders who regularly visit.

Try to meet composers, especially those of your own generation, who might welcome the opportunity to write something for you that they know will be performed.

Go the extra mile and be nice to everyone. Write a handwritten thank you note to anyone who does something nice for you. So many of the significant things that happen for artists evolve from the good relationships they have established over the years.

Dont’s

Don’t use superlatives about yourself in your bio, on your website, or in written communications with presenters.

Don’t perform a concerto or other substantial work in an important place for the first time.

Don’t enter a competition seeking greater exposure unless you feel comfortable with the process and motivated by the potential for artistic growth, and for gaining valuable performing experience, regardless of the outcome.

Don’t push too hard too soon. For example, you should only seek out management when your artistry comes across as distinctive and personal.

Don’t think of being on a management’s roster as prestigious unless the management is recognized as being effective on behalf of its artists and has earned respect and recognition in the industry.

If you have management, don’t arrange concerts on your own, thinking that the management won’t find out and you won’t have to pay commission.

Don’t record music that is not in the public domain without first exploring rights payments.

Don’t grant any rights to another party unless you understand everything about how those rights will be used and are comfortable with the terms.

Don’t let your concert attire divert the audience’s attention from the impact of your performance and affect the memory of it that they carry away with them.

Don’t address someone you don’t know by their first name, unless it’s me in my Ask Edna column!

To ask a question, please write Ask Edna.

© Edna Landau 2012

New York Was His “Howieland”

February 29th, 2012

by Sedgwick Clark

It’s a most improbable New York story: Broadway salutes a theater critic, of all things, by dimming its lights during prime box-office time prior to curtain. How often has that happened? No one would have been more astonished to receive this honor than its recipient, Howard Kissel, theater critic of the New York Daily News for 20 years, who died on Friday (2/24) at age 69 of complications from a 2010 liver transplant.

Howard and I shared a Midwestern upbringing and undying gratitude for living in New York City and being able to partake of its wonders. He was as unassuming, knowledgeable, and gentlemanly a member of the Fourth Estate as one could imagine. His critical judgments were direct, perceptive, and never gratuitously personal, laced with a droll, understated wit that always left one smiling. I had met Howard at the Russian Tea Room back in the 1970s when he was arts editor of Women’s Wear Daily and W magazine but only got to know him well in the ’90s. In between, he appeared in his one and only film as Woody Allen’s manager in Starlight Memories (1980). He wrote a biography of David Merrick and a study of Stella Adler’s teaching techniques. We saw each other frequently at Carnegie Hall and Lincoln Center, when we would compare notes and I could grill him about shows I should try to sandwich between my concertgoing. I never received a bum steer.

An S.R.O. audience at Howard’s funeral yesterday shared many tears and much laughter as he was remembered. His sisters, Anne and Judy, affectionately eulogized their big brother, saying that he always seemed to be from another planet, which they called “Howieland.” A friend recounted that Howard had been on a list for a liver transplant for some time, but when the hospital finally called he discovered he had tickets that evening for City Center’s Encores! presentation of Stephen Sondheim’s cult musical Anyone Can Whistle and opted for the show. It would be months before he got a second chance for a new liver.

Musical America was fortunate to have Howard writing theater reviews for its Web site on occasion in recent years, and he blogged under the title “The Cultural Tourist” for the Daily News and, more recently, the Huffington Post, in which he filed his last, bittersweet entry three days before his death. Both the News and the Times printed obits worthy of his charmed life.

And then, on Tuesday at 7 p.m., Broadway dimmed its lights for a minute in recognition of one of its own.

Looking Forward

My week’s scheduled concerts:

3/2 Carnegie Hall. Vienna Philharmonic/Lorin Maazel. Sibelius: Symphonies Nos. 1, 5, and 7.

3/5 Zankel Hall. Making Music, Jeremy Geffen, moderator. Soloistes XXI. Saariaho: Echo; Nuits, Adieux; Lonh; From the Grammar of Dreams; Tag des Jahrs.

3/6 Carnegie Hall. Boston Symphony/John Oliver. Tanglewood Festival Chorus/John Oliver. Christine Brewer, soprano; Michelle DeYoung, mezzo; Simon O’Neill, tenor; Eric Owens, bass-baritone. Beethoven: Missa solemnis.

Crystal Pite’s Futuristic Choreography

February 28th, 2012

By Rachel Straus

Seeing The Matrix in 1999 made my heart sink. It wasn’t Keanu Reeves’s acting that depressed me; it was the advances in live action animation. In the final battle scene, Reeves and Hugo Weaving engage in mortal combat. With millisecond timing, they evade each other’s rocket-force punches by bending their head to their feet (like a slinky) and by levitating into the air (like a twister). How, I thought, can dance compete with this technological display of bodily virtuosity?

Then, ten years later, I saw Crystal Pite’s Dark Matters. Her choreography augured a new movement style, a Matrix-esque sense of physical wonder. On January 24 at Baryshnikov Arts Center (BAC), Pite’s choreography enthralled the audience. At the end of The You Show, made in 2010 with her company Kidd Pivot Frankfurt RM, Pite and her eight dancers received a standing ovation.

Photo by Chris Randle

Pite’s style is not lyrically based (like Isadora Duncan), predicated on the balletic idiom (as with George Balanchine), psychologically motivated (in the case of Martha Graham) or in rebellion against concert tradition (Judson Dance Theatre). Its subject is the futuristic body—that’s faster and more intricate than machines. In the beginning of The You Show, Peter Chu falls backward in slow motion onto the floor; he folds like an accordion. Later Cindy Salgado undulates her prone body off the floor—in a blink of an eye. These moments don’t look like stunt work. They are part of a skein of movement, which occurs in inner-space pitch darkness (thanks to lighting designer Robert Sondergaard). They create a dream-like world, which seems only possible in the imagination.

Because Kidd Pivot is celebrating its tenth anniversary, has been a resident company at Künstlerhaus Mousonturm in Frankfurt since 2010, and is only now giving its New York performance debut, Pite has become something of cause célèbre for New York dance-interested audiences. In describing her style, writers often allude to her seven years dancing in William Forsythe’s Ballet Frankfurt. But it’s reductive to see Pite’s work as merely a derivation of Forsythe’s. While Forsythe’s performers looked loopy and frenetic in recent works presented in New York (Three Atmospheric Studies and I don’t believe in outer space), Pite dancers never look out of control. Rather than resembling epileptic victims, they resemble Marine fighters.

In the program notes, Pite writes how The You Show derives from her “fascination with familiar storylines of love, conflict and loss, and the body’s role in providing the illustrative shapes of those stories.” While some observers might find Pite’s relationship theme as captivating as her movement vocabulary, I did not. The three sets of duets, and one group dance, all ended the same way: the significant other leaves the beloved. These departures began to feel a bit pat. What was not pat was Pite’s definition of a relationship in section two, titled “The Other You.” In the duet, Eric Beauchesne and Jiří Pokorný are the same people. Pokorný pushes his alter ego, Beauchesne, around. He resembles a ventriloquist with his dummy. The duet, to an array of atmospheric and classical music, including Beethoven’s Piano Sonata No. 14 in C Sharp Minor, seemed to reveal a deeper message: The dancer fights each day with her self. The enemy isn’t the other person; it’s the voice that says, “I want to rest!”

Photo by Michael Slobodian

Pite makes fun of this dancer-as-fighter conceit in the last section of The You Show. There, Jermaine Maurice Spivey dons a red cape and becomes a super hero. Later he fights Tron-style with his mate (Sandra Marín Garcia). Their mechanized armor is composed out of three dancers who weld their bodies to either Spivey or Garcia’s. The result is that Spivey and Garcia’s body mass quadruples to resemble armor-clad gladiators. Audience hooted with laughter, when they recognized that Pite was satirizing her combative style. But after this scene, Pite returned to her ardent tone. Four women danced Pite’s electric-shock gestures and buttery, spiraling, back bending floor-to-standing phrases with total seriousness. Their commitment to pushing their bodies beyond what most dancers deem possible is what made Pite’s The You Show entirely captivating. It’s what makes Pite’s choreography part of the zeitgeist, where conversations about the the blending of man and machine abound.

 

Charles Anthony, No Unsung Hero

February 27th, 2012

by James Conlon

On February 15, one of the great men of opera passed away. Charles Anthony will be long remembered for the stunning statistics of his career at the Metropolitan Opera: 2,928 performances of 111 roles in 69 operas in 57 years. He appeared there more than any other artist in the Met’s history. For those who love facts and figures, his accomplishments are staggering. They can earn him a place in the Guinness Book of World Records or Ripley’s Believe It or Not. But for those of us who knew him, worked with him, and loved him, however extraordinary the numerical data, it only tells part of the story.

Charlie, as he was almost universally called, brought sunshine into the theater and the lives of his colleagues every day he went to work. He loved opera, he loved his work, and he loved his colleagues. This coming June would have marked 40 years since I first worked with him. I met him the first day of rehearsals for a production of Falstaff, which was in fact my first professional engagement to conduct an opera.

Any singing artist who holds the stage for over a half century into an advanced age is noteworthy. But it is not the quantity of performances but the quality of his shining gifts that is the essence of Charlie’s greatness. His devotion to a single institution belongs to the values another era. It is almost unheard of today among opera singers. He could have had a career singing leading roles all over the world, but chose not to. He incarnated the ideal of an ensemble singer, whose loyalty was to the team as much as, or more than, to himself.

We live in an increasingly celebrity-obsessed culture. Evolving technologies have vastly multiplied the means of distribution that promote latter-day stars. It is increasingly difficult for the public, given these means, to differentiate between notoriety and quality. At the altar of personality, we celebrate superstar singers, instrumentalists, directors, and conductors. As it is easy to overlook the fact that symphonic orchestras are made up of very accomplished individual musicians who are not in the limelight, we must remind ourselves that the core of an opera house is to be found in its orchestra, chorus, resident singers, stage and technical staff, and in the countless individuals who work behind the scenes, literally and figuratively. “Star” singers, guest soloists and conductors are rented for the duration of their visit to an institution, but do not represent its spirit. The true spirit a musical ensemble is defined by its permanent members and constituent parts.

There are many persons, not celebrities, who have devoted their lives to music and the performing arts. Their role needs to be brought back to our attention, lest we forget how essential they are. Just as it easy to overlook the importance of general practitioners, schoolteachers and team players, it is tempting to be distracted by the glamor and glitter “at the top.”

Those of us who are able to practice our art, and earn a living thereby, are among the most privileged eople on this earth. I think Charlie knew that in a very special way, and he communicated it to all around him on daily basis for over half a century. The radiance and warmth he brought to work with him every day won him universal admiration and a special place in the hearts of all of his colleagues. I never heard a bad word spoken by him, nor about him. He reminded all of us how lucky we are.

There are many others in our symphony orchestras and opera houses around the country who, like him, deserve our admiration. But for those of us who knew him, we recognize that there was only one Charles Anthony, and he is irreplaceable.