800 Words: Boston Symphony New Music Director Sweepstakes Semi-Finals Part I

No classical music organization ever did more for America than the Boston Symphony, and no classical organization’s decline has been more tragic. The list of works the Boston Symphony is responsible for birthing in its Golden Age reads like a retrospective of its period’s masterworks: some of which include Stravinsky’s Symphony of Psalms, Bartok’s Concerto for Orchestra, Britten’s Peter Grimes, Messiaen’s Turangalila Symphony, Howard Hanson’s Romantic Symphony, Copland’s 3^rd Symphony, Roussel’s 3^rd Symphony, Roy Harris’s 3^rd 5^th and 6^th Symphonies, Prokofiev’s 4^th Symphony, Barber’s 2^nd Symphony, Martinu’s 1^st Symphony, Martinu’s 6^th Symphony, Hindemith’s Konzertmusik for Strings and Brass, Barber’s Knoxville: Summer of 1915, Stravinsky’s Orpheus, and Poulenc’s Gloria. Is there any orchestra of that period with similar excellence in the work it commissioned?

But what does the BSO have to show for the fifty years since Charles Munch left?...not very much I’m afraid. Like all the Big Five orchestras (except Cleveland), the glory days are long since passed and these once progressive institutions have turned into sad nostalgia acts – playing concerts high on prestige yet low on musical substance. All the while, the most artistically satisfying concerts on the orchestral scene have been found in California for the past twenty years. The Los Angeles Philharmonic and San Francisco Symphony are orchestras far readier for, and far more understanding of today’s challenges  - with lots more (and better) world premieres of new compositions, far better community outreach, and much more integration into their communities. If the LA Phil or SF Symphony folded tomorrow, the cities would truly change because their subscriber base is younger and their outreach programs affect more people. But at any point in the last half-century, a Boston without their symphony orchestra would fundamentally be the same place.

And if that wasn’t enough, no orchestra fell quite as precipitously as Boston has in the last few years. Until recently, the BSO could at least console itself that it was not subject to indignities any different than those of New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia. But as James Levine cancelled concert after concert, his dates fell mostly into the hands of no-name assistants, none of whom proved up to the job’s demands as Michael Tilson Thomas did when William Steinberg fell ill in the early 70’s. There were reports of open giggling by musicians during their performances. One would think that in such a situation a new music director, even a mediocre one, would be especially crucial. But no such announcement was forthcoming, nor have they even seemed to try to get one.  Like Chicago and Philadelphia before them, the Boston Symphony is too proud to settle for 2^nd best.

As a rather pathetic concession to the fact that bad authority is better than none, Chicago and Philly decided on ‘Principal Conductor’ appointments that at least saw a consistent authority figure preside over concerts for 6 weeks of the season until they could find a first-rate director, and however dumb the idea of a ‘principal conductor’ appointment is, even that’s better than what Boston did has seen fit to leave the inmates in charge of the asylum. In Boston, there’s no music director, no principal conductor, not even a principal guest, nothing to signal that there’s a figure at the helm except a grab-bag of guests to take the place a music director should have. The sense of entitlement is simply shocking, especially considering that their last music director was barely present for the last two years of his tenure.

Even if a David Robertson or a Robert Spano is perhaps too dull or mediocre for such a major appointment, surely either would be better than five years without a figure at all to guide the orchestra. To insist on a ‘great’ music director or none at all is to cut off the nose to spite the face. In music, as in life, we all have to settle. Whether in Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, or Washington, a decent conductor who’s there 15 weeks of the year makes for far better music than a good-to-great one who’s there for 4 to 6. It’s a lesson that the New York Philharmonic finally learned, and with the intelligent-but-dull Alan Gilbert at the helm they’re at least in better long term shape than the rest of the Big Five (save Cleveland). Why shouldn’t David Zinman, Leonard Slatkin, James Conlon, Robert Spano, David Robertson or Marin Alsop get Big Five appointments? They might not be the world’s greatest conductors, but they surely understand what makes an orchestra successful in America better than the foreign also-rans who usually beat them out. Is there really so much difference between the quality of James Conlon’s music making and Kurt Masur’s? The only reason which conductors like Masur get taken more seriously is the distinction of their accents – because no American could possibly conduct European music with the profundity of a European…could they?

It would seem from this year’s schedule that the BSO is finally getting at least little serious about finding a real music director. Around this time last year year, I wrote that the BSO was clearly staking its claim on either Riccardo Chailly or Andris Nelsons, and clearly had nobody else in mind. As I predicted, this was a horrendous error, because it could backfire on them so easily. Both Chailly and Nelsons had to cancel, and there passed not only another year without a new music director, but another year without so much as an audition for a new music director.

This year is at least a little better. There are a few young conductors on this list, some of whom are genuinely promising. Riccardo Chailly is, sadly, nowhere to be found. Chailly would have made a respectable choice: his performances are like the man himself – energetic, intelligent, and warm-hearted. In many ways, they remind one of James Levine (only Chailly is even more gifted), and I don’t doubt that their similarities are why Chailly was considered. He shares with Levine a great love for Italian opera and a dramatic feel for the ‘big tune,’ along with absolute comfort in the more knotty complexities of modernism. But Chailly’s one great fault as a conductor is also one of Levine’s, a freeze-dried lack of spontaneity – the sense that the interpretation we hear was planned thirty years in advance, with no concession made to what the situation of the moment requires that isn’t absolutely necessary to preserve the ensemble. For all his hyper-control, Chailly never fully gives himself to either a performance or an organization, and his legacy will one day be as a curator of great orchestras rather than as a creator of his own performance tradition. Chailly left his post as director of the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam for a rather slight provocation. By signaling interest in the Boston Symphony, he seemed to be indicating a willingness to leave his current post as director of the Leipzig Gewandhaus for something equally slight. In the last thirty years, a conductor as talented as Chailly could have been another Toscanini – remaking the entire concept of Italian opera by running any one of a dozen opera houses in Italy. But instead Chailly became a mere custodian to great orchestras, injecting them with just enough innovation to keep the Amsterdam Concertgebouw and Leipzig Gewandhaus fresh without actually changing them. Chailly would have been a ten year appointment in Boston (probably ten turbulent years); just long enough to give them respectability again, but not long enough to begin a second golden age.

In Chailly’s place seems to be another middle-aged Italian. Daniele Gatti, who is scheduled to conduct for a full three weeks of the season – and as he is the only conductor under 75 to receive that honor, he must be considered the clear favorite for the job. In many ways, he is Chailly’s polar opposite. If Chailly is all restraint and consistency, then Gatti is all emotion and volubility. In many ways, he is simply not as good a conductor as Chailly – neither as consistent, nor as curious, nor perhaps as intelligent (who is?). But he has the one quality which Chaily lacks in spades – the ability to give of himself completely. For fifteen years, Gatti directed London’s Royal Philharmonic, and gave this by no means top-flight orchestra a sense of direction which bigger name orchestras in London lacked. His agent, Ronald Wilford, told him he could have his pick of appointments twenty years ago, but Gatti told him he’d go at his own pace.  Gatti does not seem much loved in his position as director of the Orchestre National de France, but a number of the world’s most prestigious orchestras and opera houses seem to find him among their most cherished guest conductors. In fact, rumor holds that when an informal poll was taken of Berlin Philharmonic musicians of whom they would like to replace Simon Rattle during a period when it seemed doubtful that Rattle’s contract would be renewed, Gatti was the clear favorite to replace him. Gatti is a romantic through and through – with a temperament to match. Whereas Chailly seems to play the flake, always finking out on commitments, Gatti seems a genuine hothead – known for tantrums that would even make Riccardo Muti blush. A Gatti appointment would not necessarily be a disaster, but it’s far from advisable. Gatti is a thoroughgoing traditionalist, and his musical conservatism would make an unlikely fit for the most intellectual town in America. I’ve heard a number of performances under his baton in which the playing was near-disastrous. Unlike Chailly, Gatti is no orchestra builder, he is merely a conductor who sometimes gets visceral performances. Yet that ability alone is so lacking among many top-flight conductors that more prestigious appointments may come calling for him very soon. Chailly is eight years Gatti’s senior, and probably missed his chance to be La Scala’s director, but whenever Daniel Barenboim and Stephane Lissner leave (they can’t be there for more than 5 years, can they?), Gatti could easily take over. He would be a well-loved music director at La Scala (for a time), doing the standard Verdi/Wagner fare and doing it quite well – Boston cannot compete with that kind of allure. But with all those provisos, there’s a chance – however small – that Gatti could have a very fine tenure in Boston. He could last twenty years, and remake Boston into a great conservative organization that does romantic repertoire as well as any orchestra in the world. My only problem with this is that an orchestra like the BSO would be setting the bar far too low if they didn’t go for a true innovator. But then again, life is about settling…

Boston Symphony Upcoming Season: PATHETIQUE!

The new BSO schedule is finally out. It will suffice to say is that this is frightening. This schedule shows that the highups at the BSO are probably not aware they're currently in a crisis of fairly stupendous magnitude. It's the same old repertoire with the same old conductors. I'm sure that management would argue that they did the best they can to fill Levine's dates with whomever was available. I'm equally sure that there are any number of promising potential Music Directors who would drop everything in the most underhanded manner to be courted by the Boston Symphony.

It would seem that the BSO is putting all their eggs in the basket of Riccardo Chailly or Andris Nelsons. Both of whom probably have more attractive options than the current BSO. As for the other conductors on the schedule:

- Esa-Pekka Salonen is already the director of the Philharmonia in London and (allegedly) a full-time composer as well.

- Jiri Behlolavek wouldn't have even been seen as an attractive option if he hadn't just been (re)hired by the Czech Philharmonic to be their next Music Director (which he should have been for the last fifteen years).

- Juanjo Mena and Jaap van Zweden are both very good musicians who probably know that being invited by the BSO to direct for two weeks is a great honor.

- Anne Sophie Mutter and Leonidas Kavakos are fine violinists.

- Frankly, I've never heard of Juraj Valcuha.

As for the other people on this list. Here are the most distinguished conductors among them and precisely why they're not legitimate candidates to be new Music Directors:

David Zinman - 75 Years Old

Charles Dutoit - 77 Years Old

Rafael Fruhbeck de Burgos - 78 Years Old

Christoph von Dohnanyi - 82 Years Old

Bernard Haitink - 82 Years Old

Kurt Masur - 84 Years Old

If the Boston Symphony were willing to do what the New York Phil did with Lorin Maazel and give a proven veteran seven years to keep the orchestra in shape, any one of these directors would make for a very good stopgap - ten years ago. But now they're simply too old to commit to more than a couple weeks a year. I smell another principal conductor appointment, and I can't possibly be the only music lover who thinks that a Principal Conductor is just a euphemism for 'Absentee Music Director.'

So let me say what must now be said in a manner that won't offend anybody:....

THE OLD BOSTON BRAHMINS AND JEWS WHO COME TO YOUR CONCERTS ARE KEELING OVER BY THE HUNDREDS EVERY YEAR! START BUILDING A NEW AUDIENCE!

If the Big Five thought they were immune to the problems of 'lesser orchestras,' one would think that the bankruptcy of The Philadelphia Orchestra (!) would remind them of the times we live in. The New York Philharmonic, until recently the most antique of American orchestras, finally began the serious work of building a new reputation for itself as an orchestra in touch with the world of the contemporary arts. Had the Cleveland Orchestra acted with the sleepiness of the other Big Five members, they'd have met the Philadelphia Orchestra's fate long ago. It is not too late for any of them, even Philly, to turn things around. But the great orchestras of Boston, Chicago and Philadelphia seem determined to do everything they can to make it precisely that.

Boston Symphony New Music Director Sweepstakes

In a helpful demonstration of what happens to out of shape conductors who take two jobs, James Levine has been forced to quit the Boston Symphony. Surprise!

As Alex Ross said, it's a terribly sad ending to a promising partnership. The BSO seems to have been fraught with excessive tzuris for the last fifty years - a great American orchestra (probably the greatest during the WWII era) whose leadership made mistake after mistake. None more costly than the thirty-year tenure of Seiji Ozawa, a virtuoso technician whose aptitude for flashy grandstanding was entirely wrong for the most intellectual city in America.


(Vintage "Silver Age" BSO under Charles Munch.)

But under Levine, morale was higher than it had been since (the first two years of) the William Steinberg era (1969-72). Unfortunately, like the Steinberg tenure, the Levine Rennaisance was cut cruelly short by the conductor's health. Even so, James Levine was precisely what the BSO needed - a veteran who guaranteed quality. Jimmy showed the organization that they can still be a first-class orchestra so long as they had a first-class musician facing them. Here's hoping that the next director can stick around longer, though I'm not holding my breath.

Now the search begins for the new music director. There are probably dozens of conductors who would drop everything in the most undignified possible manner to lead the BSO. I'm guessing the search will probably focus primarily around two candidates with almost diametrically opposed strengths:

1. Riccardo Chailly (58) -




The Good: Purely as a conductor, the Italian director of the Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra is probably the most talented of his generation - combining supercharged energy in his performances with intellectual rigor. Equally at home in the traditional repertoire and the avant-garde, he will combine all of Levine's strengths with the added energy of someone in good health. Has a 30-year relationship with Decca Records which shows no signs of abating.

The Bad: Chailly's friendly demeanor belies a long history of clashes and flakes with both orchestras and management. Less than ten years ago, he stunned the music world by leaving his post as director of the Royal Concertgebouw to become the Gewandhaus's music director. It was said that he left Amsterdam to direct more opera, but within three years he had resigned from the opera portion of his job in Leipzig because of clashes with management.

The Ugly: Reports have surfaced that he's already entered talks with the BSO, but did so partially as a way to extract more money from the city of Leipzig (for the orchestra, not him).

2. David Robertson (52)




The Good: Like Leonard Slatkin before him, the current music director of the St. Louis Symphony looks like the superstar that never was. There is no one in the entire orchestral world who programs more interesting music, and no one more willing to engage the public to show them why they should give obscure music a chance. With attendance falling around the country, what every great orchestra needs is a great ambassador to the community. No candidate would devote more energy to the Boston Symphony or be better tailored for the city's unique strengths. He has subbed for James Levine on a number of occasions and has a long-standing relationship with the orchestra.

The Bad: His performances can sometimes be as dull as his programs are interesting. Often gives interpretations, at least in Romantic repertoire, of great intelligence and little personality. He can seem like every inch what a great conductor should be, until you're in the concert hall. Still, can be extremely compelling in more no-nonsense repertoire.

The Ugly: The longtime darling of the New York Times was twice a bridesmaid with the New York Philharmonic - losing out the second time to Alan Gilbert, whom many consider a younger, better-connected version of Robertson.

Other Candidates:

3. Andris Nelsons (32)




The Good: The new 'hottest young conductor in the world' is already spoken of in terms reserved for the very greatest. It cannot be denied that this Latvian is already displaying an interpretive maturity far beyond his years. Though currently the director of Simon Rattle's old band, The City of Birmingham Symphony, it's only a matter of time before he is called up to the big leagues. Perhaps even bigger than the BSO.

The Bad: It's already circulating that his longtime mentor, Mariss Jansons, is grooming him to shortly take over the Bavarian Radio Symphony in Munich as his health grows more frail. And Nelsons could be headed for altitudes still higher before long. Simon Rattle's contract with the Berlin Philharmonic is up in 2018. Unless things aren't working for Gustavo Dudamel in LA, all bets are off if either Rattle or the Berlin Phil. decides not to renew.

The Ugly: Mariss Jansons had decades to develop his craft away from the spotlight, Nelsons has been thrust into it nearly from day 1. Nelsons is still extremely young, and it shows in the willfulness of his interpretations. He takes more risks than any conductor in his generation, and as great as the results often are, his obvious gifts can still curdle into some pretty grotesque mannerisms.

4. Vladimir Jurowski (38):




The Good: A talent that dwarves even Riccardo Chailly. Perhaps the single most talented conductor since Carlos Kleiber, the Russo-German comes from a family of fine conductors and looks to have re-energized the London Philharmonic to a level on which they have not played at since the days of Klaus Tennstedt. A brilliant technician with an intellectual's brain who can elicit remarkable results over a jaw-droppingly wide range of repertoire, including many new composers.

The Bad: Committed to the LPO and the Glyndebourne Festival in the summers for a long while, Jurowski has already turned down the Philadelphia Orchestra and may have difficulty fitting the summer-driven BSO into his schedule. He also may very well be the replacement for Antonio Pappano at the Royal Opera House in a few years, or for that matter be in the running to replace Levine at the MET when the time arrives (and who can doubt that it's coming soon?).

The Ugly: Conflicting reports about his demeanor. Some say he is a dream to work with, others that he has a temper.

5. Antonio Pappano (51):




The Good: The Itali-Brit-American is respected and loved by soloists and singers around the world. It helps that he's also a very talented conductor who breathes enormous life into old warhorses both operatic and symphonic. The Royal Opera House has not had a more successful music director since Sir Georg Solti. But in a few years, he will probably leave Covent Garden for less stressful pastures. He is likely ready for a challenge in the orchestral realm and is no doubt more than up to the administrative side of being an American music director.

The Bad: Not the most intellectually probing conductor. A mostly unknown quantity with new music. Committed to the Orchestra St. Cecilia in Rome for the time being.

The Ugly: Rumors of tempers flaring at Covent Garden (but it's Covent Garden, which would make St. Cecilia herself blow up).

6. Vassily Petrenko (34)




The Good: At 34 years, the young Russian has already amassed a reputation in his native repertoire equal to Gergiev and Temirkanov. In five years, he has energized the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic to a level unheard in living memory. Thanks to Naxos, he is the most recorded conductor of his generation.

The Bad: A nearly unknown quantity outside of Russian music.

The Ugly: I'll bet Petrenko is kicking himself right now. I remember reading somewhere (can't remember where) that the BSO was thinking about him as a replacement for Levine. But those rumors may have stopped with last week's announcement that Petrenko will become the next director of the Oslo Philharmonic. The quickness with which he was willing to accept a post the 'next rung up' from the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic leaves doubts about his ability to see a job through.

7. Semyon Bychkov (58)




The Good: The Russian-American is currently unattached and beginning to attract a reputation as an old master. Twenty-five years ago he was hailed as a once-in-a-generation talent, but he has since developed out of the spotlight. At home in a huge array of repertoire and possesses both the ear for orchestral color a BSO music director needs, and the intellectual heft Boston requires.

The Bad: He could just as easily end up Levine's replacement at the Metropolitan Opera...or Pappano's at the Royal Opera. He says he is happier than ever as just a guest conductor. But every conductor seems to say that until a better job comes around.

The Ugly: Seriously, this dude is the ugliest conductor since Fritz Reiner. Also, rumored to not always be the most avuncular sort.

8. Ivan Fischer (60)




The Good: If Riccardo Chailly is a generation leader, then Ivan Fischer nips at his heals. Musicians who work with Fischer seem to have a uniformly high (to say the least) opinion of his musicmaking. He created an orchestra in his native Budapest (The Budapest Festival Orchestra) and made it one of the world's finest. There is no finer conductor in today's world of traditional repertoire. He also has a fantastic recording contract with Channel Classics.

The Bad: Just accepted a job as the director of the Konzerthausorchester Berlin (Berlin's 4th orchestra, very weird...). Does not seem to perform much in the way of new music. Known as a bit of a control freak.

The Ugly: With the situation becoming increasingly dire in Hungary, Fischer has been curiously mute - his name was conspicuously absent from a manifesto against the Hungarian government's authoritarianism which his brother Adam (another fine conductor) co-authored. Could very well be looking for a way out of the situation in Budapest. What better parachute than Boston?

9. Osmo Vanska (58)



The Good: A master orchestral trainer who has spent his career in the shadows of flashier Finns like Esa-Pekka Salonen and Jukka-Pekka Saraste. A conductor of austere temperament known as an authority on 'northern composers' both classic and modern. He stunned the world by releasing a Beethoven cycle which proved him as adept at Beethoven as he was at Sibelius and Nielsen. An extremely productive long-term contract with BIS means that the BSO would never lack for recordings.

The Bad: Vanska would be a fool to come to Boston if it meant leaving Minneapolis. With the Minnesota Orchestra, Vanska has found stardom, artistic freedom, and a community that idolizes him. Their partnership is one of the world's most fruitful, and no greater orchestra should be able to tempt him away.

The Ugly: The volcanic nature of Vanska's performances is often said to be a reflection on Vanska's temperament. Conductors are a temperamental species.

10. Daniele Gatti (49)



The Good: A conductor highly respected as a guest with nearly every world-class orchestra. Said (by Norman Lebrecht at least) to be struggling with his current job in Paris. Could have had an appointment equal in prestige to Boston fifteen years ago, but instead decided to develop away from the spotlight.

The Bad: Probably in the running to be the next music director of three of the world's major opera houses (at La Scala he's probably the favorite). Said to, at the moment, be the Berlin Philharmonic's most favored choice to replace Simon Rattle after 2018. Compared to what he might get, the BSO could be a step down.

The Ugly: His impulsive, erratic, emotional interpretive style is perhaps a reflection of a distinctly long record of divo flareups.

11. Sakari Oramo (45)



The Good: An unassuming Finn who handled the unenviable task of succeeding Simon Rattle in
Birmingham with remarkable assurance. A very fine conductor over a wide array of repertoire with an uncommon level of musical curiosity - interested in everything from new music to obscure composers. Also does the traditional stuff extremely well.

The Bad: Committed in Sweden to the Royal Stockholm Philharmonic for the foreseeable future. Sakari Who?

The Ugly: Does Oramo have an ugly side? Others would probably know this better than I.

12. Ilan Volkov (35)



The Good: The Israeli former assistant conductor of the BSO is known for musical intelligence, musical curiosity to burn and an extremely wide repertoire.

The Bad: A young, relatively unproven youngster who is already not thought of as having the same promise he did five years ago.

The Ugly: Couldn't even handle the BBC Scottish Symphony without temper tantrums.

13. Robert Spano (49)



The Good: The American director of the Atlanta Symphony is another of the American model like David Robertson and Alan Gilbert. Long on the cultural ambassadorship and wide sympathies in his repertoire. He has a longstanding relationship with the Boston Symphony as the director of the Tanglewood conducting program. He has taken such an interest in new music that a group of composers he champions have come to be known as the 'Atlanta School.'

The Bad: Like Robertson, he is often more interesting than good. He is similarly wooden in the core repertoire and is far more comfortable when operating outside the norm of traditional concerts. Not a bad thing in today's world, but if the blue-hairs insist on more tradition, it could become a distinct problem.

The Ugly: With the exception of Osvaldo Golijov, most of the 'Atlanta School' music is thought of (correctly) as music stripped of its ability to make an impression because it is stripped of its ability to offend (and Golijov was never really part of it anyway).

13. Daniel Harding (35)



The Good: One of that increasingly common phenomenon known as the 'child prodigy conductor' who was taken under the tutelage of Simon Rattle (himself a prodigy conductor) and afterward an assistant to Claudio Abbado. He is now all grown up (though he barely looks it) and the director of both the Gustav Mahler Chamber Orchestra and the Swedish Radio Symphony (where his contract currently runs out in 2012). He has a winning combination Abbado's meticulousness and Rattle's passion. His talent is nearly limitless, but...

The Bad: He is capable of using that talent to obtain distinctly weird results. By the time he's 60 he could incarnate the best of Abbado and Rattle combined, or he could become a second Lorin Maazel - using his obvious gifts to give weird, unmusical interpretations that show little more than his contempt for a job that comes to him so easily.

The Ugly: Seriously. What's up with him and Janine Jansen?

14. Leonard Slatkin (66)

He needs the work.



Who Will Get It: The BSO probably exhausted all its willingness to bet on youth with Seiji Ozawa in the early 70's. They will in all likelihood appoint a proven oldster from Europe like Chailly or Bychkov. Either would get some great performances out of them, but neither would be drama free.

Who Should Get It: David Robertson. Dull or not, the BSO needs reviving as a Great American Institution (and he's not as bad as all that). Nobody is better equipped to make the BSO an essential orchestra again than Robertson.

In a Perfect World: Former Assistant Conductor Michael Tilson Thomas would have been given the keys to the kingdom in the early 70's rather than Seiji Ozawa, and the partnership would be going strong into year 40.