Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:29:31 -1000 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Andrew Carlan wrote:
>The tough-as-nails old timers in the NY Philharmonic were not happy with
>Mehta, until he decided to leave.
The orchestra has had a tradition of being tough with most conductors.
Most orchestras always have a faction that aren't happy with the choice
of music director and the faction grows with time. Witness Ormandy in
Philadelphia and Ozawa in Boston. Familiarity breeds contempt no?
While Mehta was inconsistant, I don't know of too many conductors today
who are solid day in and day out. To be fair to him he did replace a lot
of those cynical old birds with quality players who could do Bernstein
justice when he guest conducted. I doubt that the Kapellmeister Masur
would have the success he enjoys today without Mehta's appointments.
In my opinion, Bernstein and Boulez were not orchestra builders/or
maintainers. Most of their choices were poor and are no longer with the
orchestra. Finally, at least Mehta was a decent Mahlerite, unlike KM.
As to Masur, while he put discipline into the orchestra's playing, I think
he's sucked some of the life out of the orchestra. I've heard that there
is a faction in the orchestra that think Masur is an SOB on and off the
podium. I guess years of living in the GDR have made Masur something of
a cynic.
It's a shame that the PR departments of orchestras make it hard to focus on
the musical merits of a directorship. If they spent the time waxing on the
those merits rather than the glamorous, maybe we'd have people like Haitink
on the podium who actually are quality conductors.
Aloha and Mahalo,
Eric Nagamine
|
|
|