Filed under: Commentary | Tags: Berlin Chamber Orchestra, Cleveland State University, Cleveland's Trinity Cathedral, Colorado Symphony, Coors organ, Denver Philharmonic, DPO, Horst Buchholz, James Palermo, Valerie Clausen
I was thrilled yesterday when I received a news release from the president of the Denver Philharmonic Orchestra, Valerie Clausen, notifying me that the Denver Philharmonic had appointed Dr. Horst Buchholz as the Conductor Laureate. Dr. Buchholz was the Music Director and Conductor of the DPO for the last 10 years preceding his current appointment as Canon of Music at Cleveland’s Trinity Cathedral and Conductor of the Trinity Chamber Orchestra. He is also a member of the organ faculty at Cleveland State University. It is my sincere opinion that this kind of recognition is long overdue.
In his ten years as Conductor of the Denver Philharmonic, Buchholz raised the performance level of the orchestra so that it became the best community orchestra in the state of Colorado. The conductor of a community orchestra does this by being a consummate musician and by being very sensitive in his balance of making musical demands on the orchestra while realizing that most of its members are not professional musicians, but volunteers. Horst was able to teach the orchestra that a conductor’s instrument is the entire orchestra. It is the same thing as a pianist making professional demands upon himself so that his concert is impeccable. The DPO was Horst’s instrument. It responded to him very well, thanks to his ability to communicate his love for music, which is always infectious.
His background is absolutely unassailable. When he was 21 years old, he not only debuted with the Berlin Philharmonic as organ soloist, he also founded the Berlin Chamber Orchestra. He became the assistant conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic Chorus and worked with Herbert von Karajan, Ricardo Muti, and Claudio Abbado. He still returns to the International Summer Festival in Salzburg, Austria, as conductor and organist.
While he was here in Denver, he also was Professor of Organ at DU’s Lamont School of Music. He was also the curator of the William K. Coors organ. That means that he was the motivating individual behind obtaining the organ, designing the organ, and having it built. That says a lot about Dr. Horst Buchholz.
In addition, he was Canon of Music at the Cathedral of The Immaculate Conception and Professor of Music at the St. John Vianney Theological Seminary.
It should also be obvious that anyone who has accomplished all of this in his lifetime also possesses a very secure foundation in scholarship and academic achievement.
Regrettably, I did not save an article written for the Denver Post about three months ago by reviewer, Kyle MacMillan. The article discussed for replacement possibilities for Jeffrey Kahane, the Music Director and Conductor of the Colorado Symphony Orchestra. The candidates in MacMillan’s article were all under the age of forty-five, two of them were in their twenties as I recall, and one had a trouble-plagued tenure with an orchestra in Texas. None of them had the experience that Buchholz has had and none of them was the assistant to von Karajan, Abbado, or Muti. Of course the article did not say that these were the only four candidates for the position. It seems to me that Dr. Horst Buchholz should be somewhere on the list because he clearly has more ability as a profound musician and excellent conductor than those four candidates. In a conversation that I had with James Palermo, the President and CEO of the Colorado Symphony, I was assured that the CSO wants to hire a “big name.” But the above mentioned four candidates, while I certainly knew one of them, are names that are never heard.
There is an old saying that covers many disciplines, not just music, and that is, “The greater the distance one hires from, the greater the expert the subject is.” There is also a law about diminishing returns.
But at least the Denver Philharmonic has the foresight to do what it can, while, at the same time, keeping Dr. Buchholz’ ties to Colorado unbroken. Now, if the board of the DPO could just get a grant to pay Dr. Buchholz his worth, do you think he might come back…??…or if the Colorado Symphony…??…….
Filed under: Commentary | Tags: arts instituions, ballet, foundations, mosh pit, museums, orchestra, outreach, theater
In the United States (I am not sure about Europe) arts institutions have to fulfill certain obligations in order to secure funding from foundations, individuals, the government, and industry. In the term arts institutions, I include community and professional orchestras, theater, ballet, and museums. One of the requirements that art institutions must fulfill is that of outreach.
Outreach encompasses a wide variety of programs, most of which are in addition to the main thrust of the organization. Outreach demonstrates to the granting organizations and individuals that the institution is providing a service to the community or to the public in addition to its stated purpose. For example, a community or professional orchestra demonstrates outreach by sending orchestra members out to the public schools to encourage the students to take music lessons and learn about an orchestra. Orchestra outreach may also include summer concerts in the park usually at reduced ticket prices. This is done for the benefit of the community, and to give a sense of ownership to the community for the orchestra. It also may entice the community to provide more support for the orchestra, the art gallery, the theater, or dance group depending upon what group is involved. Most arts institutions develop their own niche concerning outreach which they may act upon for several years.
There are problems of course with outreach and its fulfillment. Some arts organizations are so busy fulfilling their primary responsibility that outreach can be an added burden. And, some arts organizations find themselves in a Catch — 22 because they may have such a small budget that outreach places a severe burden on their expenses. And yet, if they do not do outreach their budget may remain small because the granting institutions require some form of outreach. All of these requirements can force the organization to seek new volunteers and new board members just so they can fulfill the outreach obligation. Some of the smaller organizations may become so involved with the extra steps necessary that their primary responsibility could possibly suffer.
If we look closely at today’s society, there is a group that seems to have absolutely no problem getting funding. As a matter of fact, the members of this group are some of the wealthiest in our nation. Many have huge homes, flashy cars, and a somewhat devil — may — care lifestyle that often includes long vacations on private yachts in the Mediterranean.
I am, of course, referring to the many pop music, rap, and rock stars that reap so much attention in the media. But I think it behooves us all to look at their outreach accomplishments.
For example:
- The mosh pit – even though this usually takes place in close proximity to the stage, it is a great place to meet members of the community as they are often passed hand over hand so that they may greet their neighbors. This heightens the close relationship and bond between the band and the community.
- Beneficial to the instrument industry – while this benefit primarily helps guitar factories that could conceivably spread to other instruments as well depending upon the number of instruments that are smashed to bits onstage.
- The travel industry – includes oil companies and airport personnel because the band usually travels by private jet (the less fortunate travel by bus) and of course, it is unnecessary for them to appear before Congress to defend their mode of transport. Some bands are environmentally friendly because they ship their personal cars to the country where they are appearing so that they may drive those cars in that country, thus saving gasoline in a flight from city to city.
- The medical industry – more than once, a band member may fall off the stage requiring attendance from paramedics, ambulances, and members of the medical profession.
- The hospitality industry – many bands invite selected members of the audience to their hotel after the performance, thus requiring overtime pay for members of the hotel staff, certainly the security staff.
- International trade – many bands, and certainly individual members, seem to proselytize the use of drugs, thus benefiting some third world countries around the globe.
- The clothing industry – aside from setting trends in fashion, and here I also include cosmetics, I predict an increase in the manufacture of bikinis because the latest trend seems to be appearing on network television in a bikini while sitting on a desk.
- The health and rehabilitation facilities – there seem to be a large number from this group that gain even more fame after they have lost weight, or have “seen the light” after spending at least one month in a rehab center.
It should be pointed out too, that this outreach success is usually had without the difficulty and exertion of thought just like the music that they perform. But these individuals do seem to be highly skilled at demanding attention.
Due to media coverage of these groups, I think that it is safe to say that their outreach talents far surpass their primary responsibility. I wonder what would happen if their outreach accomplishments would appear in a grant proposal to a foundation? It boggles the mind.
Filed under: Commentary | Tags: Amadeus, Andrew Steptoe, Constanze, Count von Wallsegg, Daniel Leeson, Karl Mozart, Mozart, Mozart's death, Requiem, Salieri, Sussmayr
Every now and again a new theory comes to light concerning the death of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Since Mozart died the theories have encompassed all manner of death from accidental suicide, political assassination, a fractured skull due to a fall from a horse, medical errors, renal failure: the list goes on and on. Some individuals still believe that Mozart was poisoned. ABC News reported today, August 18, 2009, that a group of doctors in Europe headed by Dr. Andrew Steptoe, announced that it was their opinion that Mozart died of a strep infection. This is not the first time that theory has been put forward. They base their conclusion on the fact that his symptoms included swelling and back pain. They do offer the caveat that even though they have done some research, the result is speculation. Of course, it would have to be, since we have no body to deal with and of course, it has been two hundred and eighteen years since he died.
The doctors do not seem to know about a remarkable book which was published in 2004. It was written by Daniel Leeson, and published by Algora Publishing in New York. The name of the book is “Opus Ultimum: The Story of The Mozart Requiem.” Since Mozart’s Requiem Mass was left unfinished by his death, Mr. Leeson deals with the time of his death, the symptoms of his death, as well as considerable research as to how his Requiem was finished. It seems amazing to me that the doctors who theorized that Mozart died of a strep infection do not seem to know of this book. They have undoubtedly read some sources but they leave out one important symptom that Leeson mentions in his book. It is that Mozart’s body exuded such an incredibly foul odor that it was very difficult for anyone to enter his room. He was also sometimes delirious and sometimes unconscious. His body was indeed swollen, but it was swollen to such an extent that even the touch of his nightshirt caused pain. And as Leeson points out, and I quote, “Many years later, his older son Karl, then seven, would remember standing in a corner of the room, terrified at seeing his father’s swollen body, and unable to forget the appalling smell of decay.” Since I am not a doctor, I asked a friend who is a doctor to comment on the extreme swelling and the foul smell caused by Mozart’s disease. Of course, as I pointed out above, and as Dr. Steptoe and his team pointed out, it was a long time ago, but my friend said that such an odor would be most likely caused by some kind of anaerobic infection that might be similar to gangrene. There are two kinds of bacteria that cause infection. The first, is an aerobic bacterium which requires air to live. The second, is an anaerobic bacterium, and of this type does not require surface air in order to survive, and it often involves the decay of flesh. And I would like to point out that Karl Mozart’s account of the odor was not the only such account.
So, in the end we still don’t know what killed Mozart, but it seems that if Dr. Steptoe and his team were familiar with Daniel Leeson’s book they may have come to a different conclusion.
The cause of Mozart’s death and the manner of it is important, because it puts to rest much of the nonsense that was in the movie “Amadeus.” In the movie, Mozart died while dictating his Requiem Mass to Salieri. It may be good scene in the movie but it did not happen. Mozart’s friends simply could not enter his room because the odor was too strong, plus he was going in and out of consciousness and was often delirious. We also know that Salieri did not finish Mozart’s Requiem. It was finished by Franz Xavier Sussmayr, Mozart’s student, who had often discussed a Requiem Mass with his teacher, and even though a fairly mediocre composer, he rose to the occasion when he finished Mozart’s Requiem.
It should be pointed out, however, that the reason for Mozart’s composing his Requiem was surrounded by a bit of a mystery as the movie “Amadeus” depicted, but it was hardly all that sinister. Not far from Vienna there lived a minor Count named Franz Josef Anton von Wallsegg. The Count’s wife, Maria Anna Teresa Prenner Edlen von Flammberg died at a young age and her husband desired to honor her with a Requiem. However, Count Wallsegg was known to commission works from composers and then claim them for his own. And that was the reason Wallsegg asked that the commission be kept secret. Mozart, and his wife, Constanze, needed the money from the commission because they always spent lavishly. Mozart died without finishing the Requiem, and eventually it fell to Sussmayr to finish it at Constanze’s bidding because she was desperate for the money from the commission. Constanze Mozart suspected Wallsegg might be planning a fraud, and before she gave the completed score to him she had it performed in Vienna and sent a copy to Mozart’s publisher, therefore eliminating any chance that Count Wallsegg could claim it as his own.
This is a fascinating story which is true. I would encourage all of you to read Daniel Leeson’s book, as it is a very scholarly account written, surprisingly, not for fellow scholars, but for the public at large. Leeson goes to great lengths to prove that many of the stories surrounding Mozart’s death are myths. But for me, there is still a mystery caused by the fact that I am not a doctor, but from what I have heard, the strong odor that emanated from Mozart’s dying body would probably rule out any kind of a strep infection. I think that it is safe to say that he did not die of strep throat, as one newspaper almost playfully reported.
The movie, “Amadeus,” did portray Mozart’s personality accurately, and therefore he probably would be a bit amused by all the furor about the cause of his death. I am sure that he would much prefer that we all sit down and listen to one of his symphonies, a quartet, or a sonata.
Filed under: Commentary | Tags: Arapahoe Philharmonic, Aurora Symphony, community orchestra, competition, Denver Philharmonic, Jefferson Symphony, Lakewood Symphony, Littleton Symphony, Niwot Timberline, symphony
A friend of mine recently performed with one of the local community orchestras. He played two performances of an extremely difficult piano concerto. He sent me an e-mail (he has now returned to Italy) in which he expressed his disappointment because the orchestra paid him only $100 for both performances. That, of course, brought to mind all kinds of thoughts concerning the community orchestras in this state and in particular in the Denver metro area. And, if I may interrupt myself, that also brings to mind a comment that Denver Post reviewer, Kyle MacMillan, made Sunday, June 8, 2008 when the National Performing Arts Convention was held in Denver. Mr. McMillan stated correctly that “… because of the sizable distance from other major cities and the extremely high cost of booking touring symphony orchestras, such ensembles virtually never appear here, depriving local audiences of any opportunity of hearing alternatives to the Colorado Symphony or the Boulder Philharmonic.” Now that comment genuinely puzzles me. It should have been qualified. Is he talking about professional orchestras, is he writing off the community orchestras that are in the Denver metro area because he thinks they are not worthy of mention, or is he completely ignorant of the fact that there is the Denver Philharmonic Orchestra, the Jefferson Symphony Orchestra, the Littleton Symphony Orchestra, the Lakewood Symphony Orchestra, the Aurora Symphony, the Arapahoe Philharmonic, and just a little north of Boulder, the Niwot Timberline Orchestra, among others.
To return to the main topic of the $100 remuneration for two outstanding performances, I must say that sometimes the local community orchestras back down from confronting what they need to do head-on and with a great deal of vitality. Now it is certainly true that their boards are made up of volunteers that have other full-time jobs. And I freely admit to today’s economic realities. But, there is still absolutely no excuse to pay an accomplished pianist $100 for two performances when he is a known performer in this area, and has played throughout Europe. It is too easy for orchestra boards to say “we just don’t have the money.” That is doing the things halfway or not at all. They should have given the soloist a contract, and they should have done so far enough in advance so that they could raise the money.
The board of this particular orchestra needs to overcome the fear of asking individuals who have the capability and financial freedom to donate money. They could make a request before each concert for donations from the audience, which I did not hear them do at one of these performances. I am sure that this particular pianist would have been quite happy with $1,500 for both performances. That is certainly not out of line. That may seem like a lot of money to the orchestra but they need to develop relationships with corporations or individuals so that money can be raised. There are countless ways to attract attention to the orchestra. For example, each board member could come up with a list of names, maybe just five, of individuals who could donate money for specific events. $1,500 divided five ways isn’t so very much money. Perhaps a benefactor could be approached for a matching grant. And of course, there are always foundation grants, and while they often result in an immediate large sum of money, the best way is to have a steady income from donor drives which are done on a quarterly basis. But every board should have someone who can write a foundation proposal and do the preliminary research as to which foundation to approach.
Another way for orchestras to attract attention to themselves is to hold a competition. But, a word of warning. The prize money must be sufficient to attract serious competitors – one does not want to sponsor a competition and have no competitors. The Jefferson Symphony runs their annual competition very efficiently and awards a $5,000 prize, as well as a performance with the orchestra. Any community orchestra in the state which holds a competition must offer at least $5,000 for the first-place award because the Jefferson Symphony has set the standard. The first-place prize of $100 or $200 simply will not work. I also know of one orchestra that is holding a competition, and while the winner does get to perform with the orchestra, the main thrust of the competition is being called “an educational event,” because part of the first prize is that the winner gets to perform in a master class. Therefore, this orchestra is not going to have accomplished competitors and will not draw them from a large area. Competitors of the ilk that the Jefferson Symphony draws have grown up playing in master classes, and having that as a part of a prize is no reward at all. Therefore, I predict that the competition will fail. This particular orchestra is conducting their competition in this manner so as to see if holding a competition is a valid project. They wish to “start small” to see if it will work. That is certainly no way to run a competition as you cannot do it any way but the correct way the first time.
There is an organization of community orchestras, known as the Denver Metro Community Orchestra Association. Perhaps they could pool some money and have a large competition that would immediately involve competitors from an international level. Of course it must be understood at the outset, that since the Jefferson Symphony has such a fine competition that does pull international competitors, they probably would not participate. But one can never tell.
I know that many community orchestra board members are totally devoted and extremely competent. But it is up to them to convince the rest of the boards to work hard. If they cannot convince the other board members of that necessity, than those board members should be replaced. If that sounds harsh, it is. But there is no law that says a person who wishes to volunteer on the board should be allowed to volunteer. In this time of economic troubles, everyone must pull their weight.
Wouldn’t it be nice if all the community orchestras attracted so much attention to themselves with their good works and outreach that the local paper would run at least a one-page spread like it did for the Warped Tour on Sunday, August 9, 2009, in its Arts & Entertainment section on page 3E? Of course, I would not expect the conductors and soloists, or even the orchestra members, to be covered with tattoos.
Filed under: Commentary | Tags: attendance, Beethoven, concerts, culture, galleries, Haydn, orchestras, outreach, Suzuki
In a few weeks the concert season will be officially open and well underway. It will be interesting to see, in these tough economic times, how all of Colorado’s orchestras, ballets, theaters, and art galleries maintain their attendance. Those who have read my articles on outreach must surely realize by now that I have mixed emotions concerning this requirement demanded by funding organizations. But all arts organizations have to deal with the old truth, which is, “You don’t get a grant because you have a need; you get a grant because you fulfill a need.” Many orchestras are even playing short duration concerts at the noon hour in downtown cities where they sell tickets for only $2.50. This low ticket price is sure to draw audience members who are simply tired of walking around on their lunch hour seeing the same old sights, or just trying to get out of the rain. These concerts can be structured so that the entire orchestra does not have to perform. Then of course, in European cities – Prague, for example – volunteers and students from the Prague Conservatory stand on the sidewalk offering concert tickets for sale. I have been told that this technique dramatically increases audience attendance. It certainly worked on me.
Some orchestras are even trying a new kind of membership program. In this instance, there are several paid membership levels, say $25, $50, and $100 that are paid every year. The $50 level allows the concertgoer to purchase tickets anywhere from one hour to nine months before the concert, and allows the purchaser to sit in one section of the auditorium. The higher the membership, the better the seats. The purchaser can even print their own tickets at home using this membership with barcodes that would be scanned by ushers upon arrival at the concert hall.
Orchestras all over the country are becoming very creative in trying to attract audiences, and one would hope that this creativity attracts the admiration from institutions and individuals who donate money. However, not much has been said about creating the kind of artistic cultural society that the United States enjoyed in the 1930s and 1940s, even up to the 1950s. It was not at all unusual to see young people in attendance at concerts or art galleries during those years. And of course, the big reason for this is that music and art were taught more seriously in the public schools by those who were qualified to teach music and art.
I am stating this because I know of one middle school that offered a music course which was taught by someone completely unqualified to teach the course. I say unqualified because I have long been told, and it has also been my opinion, that music learned in the public schools should be music that may not be available to the students in their everyday life. That means learning about serious music written by the great composers. One of my piano students attends this middle school and told me that most of the music discussed in class was music from the pop-culture such as Pink Floyd, Michael Jackson, and other rock groups that one hears constantly on radio and television, and, I might add, that appear splashed across even the front pages of our newspapers. The teacher of the class did discuss serious music briefly, making statements that demonstrated his complete lack of knowledge of the subject. I questioned my student carefully in order to make sure that he had accurately understood what the teacher told the class. One statement the teacher made was that Joseph Haydn was an unimportant composer, and that all he really did was to lay the groundwork for Beethoven. He did not mention the fact that Beethoven was Haydn’s student, or are the fact that Haydn had written 104 symphonies or 62 string quartets. Some of the statements by this teacher were so outrageous, that my conclusion is that the principal of the school surely had no idea what was being taught in this classroom.
Many times I have felt compelled to have great sympathy with teachers in the public schools, because I am absolutely convinced that they take the brunt of criticism when it is especially clear that it is the parents who do not provide their children with anything resembling a proper cultural education. But in the case mentioned in the previous paragraph, the irresponsibility lies squarely with the teacher. I wonder how prevalent this is, but I certainly have no way of knowing.
This has a tremendous impact over time on attendance at concerts, at art galleries, not to mention the general understanding and knowledge of quality art.
And it also underscores the need for arts organizations to do outreach simply because our present society and its schools are not fulfilling their obligation. That places the onus on the arts. Shouldn’t the schools have some responsibility?
Another example: In the last several years much has been made of the Suzuki method of teaching music which has proven so successful in Japan. It has been my observation from approximately 50 years of teaching privately and teaching at the university level, that the Suzuki method is not terribly successful in the United States. That is not the fault, necessarily, of the Suzuki teachers in this country. It works well in Japan because the public schools in Japan teach students how to read music. The public schools in the United States do not teach the students how to read music. I have had many students come to me who have been taught by the Suzuki method for a few years, and they have great difficulty reading music, even though they can find their way around the keyboard in a fairly competent manner. Some do not even understand why it is necessary for them to learn to read music.
It is so very clear that audience attendance at concerts, at art galleries, ballet, and theater is the result of what our children are taught in our schools.
If all of the arts are to survive, we need to teach our students how to “see.” I think it was Robert Rauschenberg who said, “The whole progress of an artist, I guess, is to learn what your gravity is, what your language is, what your force field is, how you can draw others in to see as you see, rather than giving in and seeing as others see.”