Bully pulpit
The Louisville Courier-Journal just ran a commentary/critique that reminded me of how far we've come in our expectations of an optimal concert experience.
The gist of the article: the Louisville Symphony presented a concert with Beethoven - Prometheus, Strauss - Metamorphosen, Beethoven - Symphony No. 3, a program in which the first two pieces connect thematically to the Symphony. The critic's complaint? That there was passing mention of this fact in the program notes, but nothing more was made of it. As he writes:
Still, consider how much more could have been accomplished. What if Mester had asked the orchestra to play a snippet from the "Prometheus" incidental music in which the "Eroica" tune appears? Then the orchestra might have followed up by playing the excerpt from Strauss's "Metamorphosen" that also alludes to the symphony?
It's lovely to have pre-performance comments by orchestra CEO Brad Broecker and a board representative, but that's no substitute for having the music director inform their listeners. All it takes is a little planning and, yes, imagination.
Which, to me, points out to the tremendous sea change that has been going on in our business. The implication is that it's not enough to entertain; the point is to educate and enlighten. This is particularly important in the context of current cultural norms; whereas 50 year ago, we may have been able to assume a certain level of knowledge about orchestral music and standard repertoire, these days, with the push to expand and diversify audiences, we can no longer make those assumptions.
What was even more fascinating to me was the direct plea to the music director to do some pre-concert explanations - certainly many organizations have pre-concert lectures (including the Minnesota Orchestra - the "Music Up Close" program), often led by a musician or musicologist or sometimes the conductor of the concert. More to the point, the suggestion in the Courier-Journal was for the explanation to involve the orchestra, to essentially be an integral part of the concert experience for the entire audience, not just an added extra for people who bothered to show up early.
Speaking from the podium is a topic that I've frequently
addressed, and it's a major feature of my work. After all, conducting is the ultimate bully pulpit, why not use the opportunity to enlighten? As I keep saying, the concert experience will undergo further (and maybe radical) changes within my career lifetime, and it behooves us all to think about what keeps audiences engaged and enthralled.
The gist of the article: the Louisville Symphony presented a concert with Beethoven - Prometheus, Strauss - Metamorphosen, Beethoven - Symphony No. 3, a program in which the first two pieces connect thematically to the Symphony. The critic's complaint? That there was passing mention of this fact in the program notes, but nothing more was made of it. As he writes:
Still, consider how much more could have been accomplished. What if Mester had asked the orchestra to play a snippet from the "Prometheus" incidental music in which the "Eroica" tune appears? Then the orchestra might have followed up by playing the excerpt from Strauss's "Metamorphosen" that also alludes to the symphony?
It's lovely to have pre-performance comments by orchestra CEO Brad Broecker and a board representative, but that's no substitute for having the music director inform their listeners. All it takes is a little planning and, yes, imagination.
Which, to me, points out to the tremendous sea change that has been going on in our business. The implication is that it's not enough to entertain; the point is to educate and enlighten. This is particularly important in the context of current cultural norms; whereas 50 year ago, we may have been able to assume a certain level of knowledge about orchestral music and standard repertoire, these days, with the push to expand and diversify audiences, we can no longer make those assumptions.
What was even more fascinating to me was the direct plea to the music director to do some pre-concert explanations - certainly many organizations have pre-concert lectures (including the Minnesota Orchestra - the "Music Up Close" program), often led by a musician or musicologist or sometimes the conductor of the concert. More to the point, the suggestion in the Courier-Journal was for the explanation to involve the orchestra, to essentially be an integral part of the concert experience for the entire audience, not just an added extra for people who bothered to show up early.
Speaking from the podium is a topic that I've frequently
addressed, and it's a major feature of my work. After all, conducting is the ultimate bully pulpit, why not use the opportunity to enlighten? As I keep saying, the concert experience will undergo further (and maybe radical) changes within my career lifetime, and it behooves us all to think about what keeps audiences engaged and enthralled.
Labels: conductors and conducting, contemporary culture, orchestras not named minnesota
posted by Sarah at
4:41 PM
11 Comments:
So, basically, Andrew Adler wants the Louisville Orchestra to start doing Inside the Classics concerts? Maybe we should offer franchises...
In so many words...yes. Leave it to you, Sam, to put things succinctly!
Are you going to offer them the whole Zip-line from the Third balcony thing?
Back in the day, Peter Schickele/PDQ Bach used to make his initial appearance on stage by climbing down a rope from the first balcony of whatever hall he was playing - good times.
Sarah,
I just had the strangest image of you flying in as Peter Pan [ala Mary Martin] with Sam joining you as an oddly cross-dressed Tinker Bell . . . Not good.
-Paul
oh wow, now THAT'S an image...
Um, yeah. Not happening. And why do I have to be Tinkerbell?
Hmmm...for me part of what's exciting about hearing music you don't know is the art of discovery. In reference to the Louisville program of Beethoven "Prometheous" & "Eroica", I figured out recurring themes long ago, when I was probably 17-18 years old, all on my own, just by listening carefully and jumping into things I didn't know. I often time feel that if everybody tells us what to listen for that it takes away a little bit of the excitement of hearing things.
I also think it's possible to potentially spoil a "moment" for someone. For instance, the first time I ever heard Vaughan-Williams' "The Lark Ascending" I was stationed in the ARMY in the middle of the desert in New Mexico. I was barely able to get reception at all out of the classical station in El Paso...but what I heard in this piece was really extraordinary and it fit the open air quality of my locale. Now, every time I hear that piece I think back to this moment in time.
So I think sometimes think that by having conductors and composers explain pieces to us in advance sometimes squashes out what each individual listener might have heard in their own mind. This is one of the main reasons I dislike on-stage conversation during concerts. Every single person hears something in a slightly different way, and leaving things open to that person I think makes us stronger listeners in the end.
I think during his years as Music Director in New York, Leonard Bernstein had one day out of their 4-day series of programs that he used to discuss the pieces at hand. That seems like the best solution, as it gives those that appreciate the added explanation a chance to get involved, while not upsetting those that don't appreciate as much this concept.
I think the other thing to keep in mind is that not all Conductors are the greatest speakers. Sometimes there is a language barrier or they just don't covey their thoughts to the audience as clearly as they do to an orchestra in rehearsal, thereby making the act of listening much more difficult.
Having said that, I don't know how many of you remember Eric Friesen, formerly of MPR, and then of CBC fame (recently retired I believe..due partially to the CBC format-switch fiasco). During Edo de Waart's tenure as Music Director in Minnesota he and MPR would devote many of the live Friday broadcasts to him actually introducing and discussing the music from the stage. It was a full-blown broadcast, just done on the stage rather than entirely in the booth. Eric is, simply put, an exceptional broadcaster...and probably one of a very, very small number of people that would be able to pull this off convincingly. I think if someone like Eric could be located, and the format was similar to this, it may actually be an exciting concept.
I apologize for the typos in my last post. I'm pretty hopped up on cold medicine at the moment!
spartacus, you bring up the point that's been the sticking point in the pre-concert debate; there are people who don't want (or need) an explanation of the music, so it can be experienced in a more individual way. i do like the idea of repeated concerts offereing different performance experiences - one night, without lecture, and another night, with, and people can choose which experience they want. best of both worlds, right?
I think giving people a choice is always a good idea.
I also think that broadening music education in public schools would also help, although we wouldn't see the results for years. Kids love music. I have a friend who takes her grandkids to family concerts. They download the music before the concert and introduce it to the kids. I think that's a great idea but not everyone has the time.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home