Donald Rosenberg, the recently shafted reassigned music critic for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, has spoken publicly about his situation to the New York Times. Of course, Rosenberg is not happy about the whole thing, and says that his career has been taken away from him. Well, what else is he going to say?
I find it really, really, ironic that Times writer Daniel Wakin provides a laundry list of Rosenberg's criticisms of Welser-Möst, presenting it as if these seemed unduly harsh when contrasted by his "much kinder treatment" of Christoph von Dohnanyi, the previous music director in Cleveland. First of all, why is it odd for a critic to write approvingly of an artist whom he thinks does well, but then is critical of someone he doesn't? Hello, since when does The Times think that's out of line? Whether or not one liked his handling of the details of certain scores, Dohnanyi brought a gravitas that the younger man just doesn't have, and his work with Cleveland got better and better as time went on. Secondly - and here's why I added that second "really" - how many times have New York Times reviewers busted on Loren Maazel, especially since it's almost always the same criticism? Wakin conveniently leaves that out. Pointing out that Solti supposedly waited until a critic he didn't like was gone before taking over Chicago is irrelevant.
Also, I noticed that the one quote Wakin provides as support for European approval of the conductor is a critique mentioning how well the orchestra played. Of course they're going to play their best on a big European stage. Where are the encomiums about the conductor's interpretation?
I do have to say it's funny that Times critic Anthony Tommasini apparently found several of Welser-Möst's Mozart performances to be ineffective, since that's about the only music I've heard him do right by my ears. He'll probably do just fine in Vienna anyway, since that repertoire will suit him well.
I've already said why I think this was just a bad deal all around. I doubt we're going to learn any more about what really went down, but I hope Rosenberg finds a new outlet for his voice, and no other orchestra boards get any silly ideas. Again, I want to say that the Cleveland Orchestra is first rate, and the musicians don't deserve to have their reputations messed up by this.
And now, the future of music criticism in Cleveland: a lovely apologia by Rosenberg's replacement. Did they have to be so obvious about it? I would have thought this situation called for a little restraint.
Comments