Bernard Chasan writes:

>>THE canon is simply when the orchestra plays a Beethoven symphony and a
>>Brahms concerto this week, and a Beethoven concerto and A Brahms symphony
>>next week.  It is clearly easier to do this than to think about program
>>making.

And Dennis Fodor responds:

>It's easiest of all to play any darn thing that happens to come to mind,
>or is in some other way handy.  What orchestras usually play is what
>impressarios, conductors, intendants, critics, and, very importantly,
>audiences collectively think will make a satisfying program.

Fine - the canon is to orchestras what comfort food is to restaurants,
but is it really enough? Is that all there is? Is the canon a reason to be
smug and complacent? Should we accept uncritically the collective wisdom
of the tastemakers? Is there no value to discovery? Shouldn't we have the
opportunity to stretch ourselves? Of course recorded music gives us the
opportunity to do just this, but it would be nice to get the opportunity
to do the same at live concerts more often.

Is it possible that the bad financial situation of many American
orchestras is tied to all that satisfying program making?

Professor Bernard Chasan
Physics Department, Boston University