Via Sounds & Fury, I just learned that the Cleveland Plain Dealer has reassigned Don Rosenberg, the music critic who has covered the Cleveland Orchestra for about thirty years. It seems that he was too critical, too often, of music director Franz Welser-Mõst, and some people from the orchestra board complained enough that the paper is taking him off the beat.
How completely stupid. I'll let others do the bit about how it's a critic's job to be critical, and instead say that this is just another sign of the problems going on with the orchestra. I suppose this is related to the fact that in June, the orchestra extended Welser-Mõst's contract until 2018(!), while they have been having fundraising difficulties almost since he got there. Rosenberg has been critical of his leadership, although always seemed to give praise when due.
They're having the same troubles other organizations are having holding onto donors, and it seems questionable that in the middle of this situation they would grant such an extension to the music director's contract. There have been other difficulties at the orchestra in the last year as well, including personnel issues such as the resignation of the associate concert master due to a questionable restructuring of the section. Things like that don't come from the board, so the true problem may be deeper.
Daniel Lews has been one of the biggest financial supporters of the orchestra. He has also been involved in some behind-the-scenes machinations. I don't know if he's involved in this move to protect Welser-Mõst, but it may not be a mere coincidence that he donated $10 million the year they hired their young European rising star (which is what they wanted). Not only have they extended his contract to an absurd length, but recently eliminated the position of music director of the local Blossom Festival and gave it to the Music Director Nearly For Life. Curious. They apparently treat him very well in the office.
Rosenberg is not alone in his lack of total love for Welser-Mõst, or as he is known in some quarters as "Worse Than Most". But the Vienna Staatsopera has him slated to take over from Ozawa in a couple of years, so he clearly does have quality support. Of course, his repertoire there will be a little more limited than it is in Cleveland, and one of the main criticisms is that he just doesn't bring it in some works.
The Cleveland Orchestra has a rich history, always in the conversation about top orchestras in the US. They're still an excellent group, but maybe not as inspired all the time as they might be. I've certainly never been a big fan of Welser-Mõst, and from what I've read, Rosenberg seems to have his number. Naturally, the people on the board who just signed him on for what seems like an eternity in music director years will want to hear as little criticism as possible. This is far from the first time an orchestra has raised a fuss with a local paper about coverage, but in this day and age it's pretty ridiculous for a paper to cave in like this.
Unfortunately, this is exactly the kind of thing that can alienate an orchestra from its community. It's one thing for a music critic to get downsized, as people will begrudgingly accept that newspapers everywhere are struggling and doing this kind of thing. It's quite another matter when the writer is merely taken off the beat because the orchestra doesn't like him. It's important to remember that even if this is the result of noise from just a single faction of the board, it reflects back on the entire orchestra. This must look awfully petty to orchestra supporters.
Not only that, but this amounts to the Cleveland Plain Dealer turning its back on readers. In effect, this personnel decision is a statement that readers will no longer get a reliable report about an important cultural institution.
Stupid.
UPDATE: Sam Bergman, violist and blogger for the Minnesota Orchestra, has made a comment below which (in his signature) links his post about this issue on his and Sarah Hicks's "Inside the Classics" blog, which has a little more information about how this may have happened. Read his comment, and then go here to see what he's talking about. A VP of the board is still a "faction", albeit a small one, and this was still handled in a very stupid fashion. At least we agree that this reflects badly on the orchestra, which is the most important consideration. I mean, regardless of the political machinations of the board and the paper, this affects the relationship between the community and the musicians as well.
Admittedly, I haven't spent much time thinking about how else this could have been handled. If Rosenberg is just biased and couldn't be stopped after five or six years, why is he still writing for the paper? If he was so clearly out of line, would his colleagues have elected him president of the Music Critics' Association of America? Okay, maybe, but I kind of doubt it. If the critic is acting unprofessionally, is reassigning him going to cure that? Was this simply a case of a unique personal prejudice, which would never happen in another situation? Maybe, but the problem is that Rosenberg is not exactly a lone voice in being underwhelmed by this conductor. Since this is not the first time the paper heard these complaints, how has this been handled behind the scenes until now? I guess we'll never know.
My thanks to Sam Bergman for the comment and the update. I should have done this a while back, but the Inside the Classics blog has now been added to the Orchestra Blogs list on the left.
UPDATE: Yes, I can spell Welser-Möst's name. A typo is one thing, but there's no excuse for copying and pasting it to avoid having to do the alt-code for the "ö", and never noticing what I'd done. My bad, fixed now.
Former Plain Dealer publisher Alex Machaskee, currently a VP on the orchestra's board, would seem to be a better bet than Lewis on the who-made-the-call angle...
Posted by: Sam | September 21, 2008 at 01:52 AM
Blogs are good for every one where we get lots of information for any topics nice job keep it up !!!
Posted by: how to write a good dissertation | February 06, 2009 at 05:02 AM
What does it say about a society when even criticism, especially when it's in the job description, is criticized? Without critique, even if it *is* harsh or biased, the incentive to make good music suffers. This whole ordeal reflects badly on basically everyone involved.
Posted by: Liz | October 19, 2009 at 03:32 PM