Thielemann to leave Munich PO after Season 2010/2011

Started by Tapio Dmitriyevich, July 22, 2009, 08:45:46 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2
User actions

MishaK

#2
July 22, 2009, 08:56:39 AM
OK, you beat me. Jinx!

But what a sycophantic article by the SZ! Read the NMZ piece I posted: http://www.nmz.de/kiz/nachrichten/keine-vertragsverlaengerung-thielemann-verlaesst-2011-die-muenchner-philharmoniker

jlaurson

#3
July 22, 2009, 10:29:03 AM
Quote from: O Mensch on July 22, 2009, 08:56:39 AM
OK, you beat me. Jinx!

But what a sycophantic article by the SZ! Read the NMZ piece I posted: http://www.nmz.de/kiz/nachrichten/keine-vertragsverlaengerung-thielemann-verlaesst-2011-die-muenchner-philharmoniker


Here's my piece for WETA on it.
Christian Thielemann to Leave Munich Philharmonic in 2011

http://www.weta.org/fmblog/?p=591

I don't agree with your characterization of the SZ piece. If you lived in Munich and experienced the incredibly high level of excellence that CT tickled out of that orchestra, you'd probably feel differently, too. He's a grievous loss to the Munich cultural scene and it'll take someone very special to get the Munich Philharmonic to remain as exciting as they currently are. Perhaps Andris Nelsons? Perhaps a luxury replacement like Daniele Gatti? We'll have to see. In any case, this is a case of grand buffoonery on the part of all involved.

MishaK

#4
July 22, 2009, 10:41:52 AM
Quote from: jlaurson on July 22, 2009, 10:29:03 AM
I don't agree with your characterization of the SZ piece. If you lived in Munich and experienced the incredibly high level of excellence that CT tickled out of that orchestra, you'd probably feel differently, too. He's a grievous loss to the Munich cultural scene and it'll take someone very special to get the Munich Philharmonic to remain as exciting as they currently are. Perhaps Andris Nelsons? Perhaps a luxury replacement like Daniele Gatti? We'll have to see. In any case, this is a case of grand buffoonery on the part of all involved.

I have experienced CT on many occasions, from the time he was a wee unknown lad conducting provincial orchestras, to his overhyped debut recordings to his recent live appearances in Munich and Vienna and I have more often than not wondered what all the hype is about. I hear timid, fawning interpretations with all the edges rounded off and little of interest structurally or texturally. Also, his repertoire is rather limited. Sorry.

But the reason the article is sycophantic is that it does not present the views of the city or the orchestra very well at all. For that you have to look to other publications.

jlaurson

#6
July 24, 2009, 11:29:31 PM

Munich critics bemoan loss of star conductor Thielemann

The writing had been on the wall for several days, yet the decision, when it came, still sent shockwaves through Munich's cultural scene and well beyond. Christian Thielemann, chief conductor of the Munich Philharmonic since 2004, will not have his contract renewed when it expires in 2011.

Nuances aside, the consensus among local critics is that Thielemann's departure is a great, possibly irreparable, loss for Munich. Arts editor for Munich's Abendzeitung newspaper, Robert Braunmueller, said that unless an equivalent successor could be tempted to the job, Thielemann's loss would be remembered as a political debacle.


The Munich Philharmonic is need of a new conductor
It wasn't money, or even the number of performances, that led to a breakdown in contract negotiations between the world-renowned composer and Munich's cultural affairs department.

The sticking point was a clause which gave the orchestra's general director, Paul Mueller, the final say in the choice of guest conductors and repertoire over Thielemann.

Thielemann objected to this curtailing of his influence, telling the Suedeutsche Zeitung "it can't be that I have say over 30 concerts and the director over 60. That would negate my position as chief conductor."

Responding to the decision for the first time publicly on Friday, Thielmann held out the possibility of a compromise in the dispute, suggesting that performance decisions could be agreed upon by a committee of colleagues. In a statement released by his lawyer, he said he hoped the council's decision would not spell the end of negotiations, "as final as it sounds."

Continued at Deutsche Welle

MishaK

#7
July 25, 2009, 06:41:17 AM
Quote
One of Thielmann's [sic] chief concerns has been that other conductors might dilute the carefully honed romantic sound of his orchestra.

Oh come on please! No orchestra in the history of orchestras has ever lost its sound due to the guest conductors. A guest conductor who is airdropped for a week of three or four rehearsals and three performances is lucky to get any new repertoire pieces to sound the way he wants them to. But he has no chance of "changing the sound of the orchestra" in any lasting way with just three rehearsals. That is just BS. Yes, the PR battle between pro-Thielemann critics and his detractors has started.

jlaurson

#8
July 25, 2009, 07:09:50 AM
Quote from: O Mensch on July 25, 2009, 06:41:17 AM
Oh come on please! No orchestra in the history of orchestras has ever lost its sound due to the guest conductors. A guest conductor who is airdropped for a week of three or four rehearsals and three performances is lucky to get any new repertoire pieces to sound the way he wants them to. But he has no chance of "changing the sound of the orchestra" in any lasting way with just three rehearsals. That is just BS. Yes, the PR battle between pro-Thielemann critics and his detractors has started.

This article is just reporting on what (allegedly) goes on... not on the veracity thereof or whether CT's or anyone else's attitudes are justified. That you see some sort of call to arms in this is very telling, but not so much of CT or the MPhil or the city's administration but of your disposition.

MishaK

#9
July 25, 2009, 07:45:31 AM
Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 07:09:50 AM
This article is just reporting on what (allegedly) goes on... not on the veracity thereof or whether CT's or anyone else's attitudes are justified. That you see some sort of call to arms in this is very telling, but not so much of CT or the MPhil or the city's administration but of your disposition.

You seem to be new to the theater of musical intrigue in Germany. An MD resigns in a hissy fit. What follows is a 'discussion' in the media which pits the MD's proponents (who want to 'shame' the politicians for letting such a 'historic' talent slip through their fingers) vs. the city politicians and their mouthpieces in the press (who want to represent the MD as an immature baby). This is standard procedure. I wasn't doing anything more in my post than describing that. The truth, as usual, is somewhere in the middle and has nothing to do with my musical dislike of CT. However, the preponderance of the evidence suggests that CT is not being quite reasonable here. a) He has a history of leaving posts in a hissy fit. That's not really the kind of leadership any musical institution needs, no matter what your musical qualifications are. b) No MD in Germany has total control over the programs of guest conductors. These things are always decided at least jointly with the Intendant, if not entirely by the orchestra or the Intendant. He's asking for the moon here. c) He has already caused such friction with the previous Intendant that the latter left before his contract was up. The city was understandably pissed about that. d) As even reported in the piece you cite, the orchestra was not always happy with the guest conductor choices CT made. Others report that they were also unhappy with CT's lack of enthusiasm for international tours. These are biggies for an orchestra. The Munich Phil for all its excellence has been living below the international radar for too long during Celibidache's tenure, owing to Celi's refusal to record and the resulting lack of international exposure. Tours, recordings and the quality and caliber of the guest artists it can attract are to a great deal the metric of orchestral excellence these days, for better or worse. When one music director with a narrow artistic ideal exerts total control over programming of an orchestra (and a priori excludes a good number of renowned performers just because they have different interpretive ideas), the band can quickly become a provincial backwater, unable to attract the biggest names and unable to fill its hall. At this point CT has not been in Munich any longer than Levine, so how much of an imprint he will leave on the orchestra is questionable. For someone who describes himself as a servant of a long conducting German tradition, there is just not enough continuity in his job history to suggest that he is terribly invested in maintaining any orchestra's tradition. Sorry, but res ipsa loquitur in this case.

jlaurson

#10
July 25, 2009, 08:38:27 AM
Quote from: O Mensch on July 25, 2009, 07:45:31 AM
a) He has a history of leaving posts in a hissy fit. That's not really the kind of leadership any musical institution needs, no matter what your musical qualifications are.
b) No MD in Germany has total control over the programs of guest conductors. These things are always decided at least jointly with the Intendant, if not entirely by the orchestra or the Intendant. He's asking for the moon here.
c) He has already caused such friction with the previous Intendant that the latter left before his contract was up. The city was understandably pissed about that.
d) As even reported in the piece you cite, the orchestra was not always happy with the guest conductor choices CT made. Others report that they were also unhappy with CT's lack of enthusiasm for international tours. These are biggies for an orchestra. The Munich Phil for all its excellence has been living below the international radar for too long during Celibidache's tenure, owing to Celi's refusal to record and the resulting lack of international exposure. Tours, recordings and the quality and caliber of the guest artists it can attract are to a great deal the metric of orchestral excellence these days, for better or worse. When one music director with a narrow artistic ideal exerts total control over programming of an orchestra (and a priori excludes a good number of renowned performers just because they have different interpretive ideas), the band can quickly become a provincial backwater, unable to attract the biggest names and unable to fill its hall. At this point CT has not been in Munich any longer than Levine, so how much of an imprint he will leave on the orchestra is questionable. For someone who describes himself as a servant of a long conducting German tradition, there is just not enough continuity in his job history to suggest that he is terribly invested in maintaining any orchestra's tradition. Sorry, but res ipsa loquitur in this case.

Your points are, well... beside the point. For one, you seem to be misinformed as regards one particular detail:


Point "b": The rights that Thielemann wanted were rights he had already HAD. He wasn't trying to wrest from the city new concessions (he did that on the number of concerts to be conducted), the city was taking rights away from him they had previously granted him. That's a rather major difference!

Point "c" explains why politicians have made that decision... it says nothing about the quality of the decision. (But yes, the personal relationship between the city's cultural affairs director (HGK) and the MPhil Intendant (PM) certainly had something to do with the city's intentions to strengthen the intendant at the expense (!) of the GMD.

Point "d": You can get as many opinions from the orchestra as there are stars in the sky. They weren't asked in any case, so their opinion is irrelevant. And if they had been asked, the decision probably would have been pro-Thielemann from the mood-barometer readings I'm able to take.

But to tackle that point, despite its irrelevance with regards to the subject of not renewing CT's contract (no one ever claimed that it was for artistic reasons or failure to live up to expectations that the contract would not be renewed), on CT not doing what is necessary for the MPhil: CT is undoubtedly the best chance of the MPhil to achieve exactly what they have in mind. That CT is not a big hound on touring they knew ahead of time... but he does tour. To get a recording contract with DG and Unitel, the biggest dogs in the business, isn't half shabby, either. To get a complete Bruckner Cycle is neat. To get a complete Strauss Orchestral Song Cycle is neat. To get to record a Rosenkavalier for Decca is neat. Don't know if there's all that much room to complain, given the economic climate in that particular industry. And the focus on repertoire probably helps the MPhil, rather than hurting it. Is it supposed to become a second BRSO? In the same city?

Whether CT's programming control really kept away the good conductors is open to debate. I tend to think that the guest conductors were pretty weak... colleagues of mine think otherwise, and cite Nagano, Mehta, Tilson-Thomas, Gatti who have all appeared in the last season.

MishaK

#11
July 25, 2009, 09:17:16 AM
Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 08:38:27 AM
Point "b": The rights that Thielemann wanted were rights he had already HAD. He wasn't trying to wrest from the city new concessions (he did that on the number of concerts to be conducted), the city was taking rights away from him they had previously granted him. That's a rather major difference!

That is honestly news to me. Was this in his original contract or was this simply the effective result of having eked Hoekstra out of his post? Did his original contract actually say: "the GMD has the final word on choice and programming of guest conductors"? Do you have a source? I am genuinely curious.

Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 08:38:27 AM
Point "c" explains why politicians have made that decision... it says nothing about the quality of the decision. (But yes, the personal relationship between the city's cultural affairs director (HGK) and the MPhil Intendant (PM) certainly had something to do with the city's intentions to strengthen the intendant at the expense (!) of the GMD.

Nor did I claim otherwise. My points were explanations as to the background of the decisions, not value judgments about them. That being said, if you are negotiating for something you want it is never agood idea to piss off your counterparty over a sore point. If you care about the musical culture of an orchestra you show leadership and overcome your differences. If you only care about yourself, you walk away.

Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 08:38:27 AM
Point "d": etc....

I am perfectly willing to concede that a bunch of orchestra musicians rarely have uniformly good opinions about their MD and that for the most part they haven't a clue what the current economic environment for the recording industry really looks like. A DG/Unitel contract is really nothing to complain about in the present situation. That being said, Levine did produce more recordings in his brief interregnum than Thielemann in the same amount of time, if quantity alone is the measure.

Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 08:38:27 AM
Whether CT's programming control really kept away the good conductors is open to debate. I tend to think that the guest conductors were pretty weak... colleagues of mine think otherwise, and cite Nagano, Mehta, Tilson-Thomas, Gatti who have all appeared in the last season.

Well, to evaluate that we'd have to know how much input each of the GMD and the Intendant and whoever else actually had in the process. I'm not yet convinced CT had the powers you claim and that the city is now trying to take them away. I've had mixed experiences with Mehta and Nagano (though Mehta has a huge following in Munich and I'm sure helped fill the hall), I'm not sure how you could describe MTT and Gatti as 'very weak'. Even if they failed to connect with the orchestra, they certainly should have produced solidly professional performances, but I would be surprised about anything meriting the words 'very weak' even with Nagano and Mehta. Your choice of words makes me wonder ...

jlaurson

#12
July 25, 2009, 10:24:08 AM
Quote from: O Mensch on July 25, 2009, 09:17:16 AM
That is honestly news to me. Was this in his original contract or was this simply the effective result of having eked Hoekstra out of his post? Did his original contract actually say: "the GMD has the final word on choice and programming of guest conductors"? Do you have a source? I am genuinely curious.


I'll ask the director of the city's cultural affairs dept. on Monday to clarify... if he will. (Am afraid that issue might be skirted, though.)

QuoteI am perfectly willing to concede that a bunch of orchestra musicians rarely have uniformly good opinions about their MD and that for the most part they haven't a clue what the current economic environment for the recording industry really looks like. A DG/Unitel contract is really nothing to complain about in the present situation. That being said, Levine did produce more recordings in his brief interregnum than Thielemann in the same amount of time, if quantity alone is the measure.

On Levine: quantity alone is notthe measure. Seven or eight discs on Oehms* are, with all due respect of the Oehms label, not exactly getting the word out. Oehms has since come into being more vigorously--Naxos distribution helps--but back then, none of the live concerts (odd, if intriguing mixes, as they were) were even available internationally until AFTER Levine had left the MPhil. I agree with you on the rest: what they have is nothing to be scoffed at, right now. [* Fantastic Gurrelieder, btw., and very nicely done Bluebeard's Castle.]

QuoteI'm not sure how you could describe MTT and Gatti as 'very weak'. Even if they failed to connect with the orchestra, they certainly should have produced solidly professional performances, but I would be surprised about anything meriting the words 'very weak' even with Nagano and Mehta. Your choice of words makes me wonder ...

I'm not saying "Gatti" or "MTT" are or were very weak. In fact, I've described the Gatti concert as one of the very best I've ever heard (Lulu Suite & Mahler 4th)... which is saying much and said fully aware of the dangerous proximity to hyperbole. I did say that I agree with those who describe the general guest conducting situation at the MPhil as weak. Naturally those who don't agree would cite the biggest names that have come and stopped by to conduct the MPhil (Seymon Bychkov is another regular guest, btw.), and in fairness to them I have to cite those names, too.

My personal opinion of--and experiences with--Nagano and Mehta is, err... "mixed".  ;) Suffice it to say that I've heard excellence from both, on occasion. (With CT, I find it's the rule, though.)

Now that CT has started to speak on this matter, we'll know more soon. I certainly hope to get a little more Klarheit into this mess by Tuesday.

MishaK

#13
July 25, 2009, 11:53:27 AM
Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 10:24:08 AM
On Levine: quantity alone is notthe measure.

That's why I added the qualifier...  ::)

Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 10:24:08 AM
I'm not saying "Gatti" or "MTT" are or were very weak. etc....

Thanks for clarifying. That wasn't apparent from your above statement.

Looking forward to your further reports on the matter.

MishaK

#14
July 25, 2009, 02:34:40 PM Last Edit: July 25, 2009, 02:36:19 PM by O Mensch
Jens,

This Zeit article seems to support you re: CT previously having had sole authority:

http://www.zeit.de/online/2009/30/christian-thielemann-muenchen

Quote
Kern des Konflikts ist eine Klausel in der neuen Geschäftsordnung und also in Thielemanns Anschlussvertrag (der 50-Jährige ist seit 2004 im Amt), die besagt, dass das Letztentscheidungsrecht in Sachen Gastdirigenten zukünftig ausschließlich bei Paul Müller liegen soll, dem philharmonischen Intendanten. Bisher besaß Thielemann in dieser Frage ein Vetorecht, das ihm vor allem im deutschen Fach (Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner, Strauss) eine klangliche Hoheit zusicherte. Warum sollte er von diesem Recht zurücktreten?

Translation:

The crux of the conflict is a clause in the new bylaws and also in Thielemann's renewal agreement (the 50-year-old has been in office now since 2004), which says that the final decision in matters of guest conductors in future will be with Paul Müller, the Intendant of the Philharmonic. Until now, Thielemann had a veto right in this matter, which guaranteed him especially in the German repertoire (Beethoven, Brahms, Bruckner, Strauss) sonic supremacy. Why should he step back from this right?


But this is also very true:

Quote
Auch wenn das Weltdorf München es nicht gerne hört: Die Münchner Philharmoniker mögen eines der bestbezahlten und am besten zahlenden Orchester der Republik sein – in ihrer spielerischen Qualität und Souveränität sind sie nach wie vor entwicklungsfähig und keineswegs mit den Berlinern oder den Wienern zu vergleichen.

Translation:

Even if the 'metro-village' Munich does not like to hear it: the Munich Philharmonic may be one of the best paid and best paying orchestras of the republic - in terms of the quality and assuredness of its playing they still have room for development and can in no way be compared to the Berliners or the Viennese.


Whatever my dislikes of CT, it is very true that the MPO probably needed CT much more than he needed them.

jlaurson

#15
July 25, 2009, 02:53:49 PM
Quote from: O Mensch on July 25, 2009, 02:34:40 PM


But this is also very true:

Translation:

Even if the 'metro-village' Munich does not like to hear it: the Munich Philharmonic may be one of the best paid and best paying orchestras of the republic - in terms of the quality and assuredness of its playing they still have room for development and can in no way be compared to the Berliners or the Viennese.


Whatever my dislikes of CT, it is very true that the MPO probably needed CT much more than he needed them.

This is *certainly* true. (Braunmueller at the AZ, among others, says so much.) And one of the reasons the MPhil is not as good as it should is closely related to the fact that the GMD cannot (!) remove or add musicians. Once their violins get a complete overhaul, there's much hope, though!

MishaK

#16
July 25, 2009, 03:12:45 PM
Quote from: jlaurson on July 25, 2009, 02:53:49 PM
And one of the reasons the MPhil is not as good as it should is closely related to the fact that the GMD cannot (!) remove or add musicians. Once their violins get a complete overhaul, there's much hope, though!

Beg to differ. The MD of the Berlin Phil doesn't have that power either, as the BPO is a self-governing 'republic' and Vienna doesn't even have an MD and in neither case has that done any damage to the quality of their musicianship. It is very rare in Germany for an MD to have such powers. Not even Karajan had such powers (see, e.g. the battle over Sabine Meyer). Some of the Munich strings aren't that bad. The concertmaster Sreten Krstic is quite superb.

MishaK

#17
July 25, 2009, 03:32:31 PM
The plot thickens....

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/311/481779/text/

According to CT, it was the orchestra that created the mess, not the city:

Money quote:

Quote
Laut Thielemann waren die Verhandlungen über die Verlängerung seines Vertrages bis zum Ende der Spielzeit 2016/17 eigentlich bereits Ende Mai abgeschlossen worden. "Es lag ein von beiden Seiten gebilligter unterschriftsreifer Text vor", erläuterte der Dirigent.

Anfang Juni habe sich dann der Orchestervorstand an die Stadt gewandt und verlangt, die Entscheidungskompetenz bei Gastdirigaten dem Intendanten zu übertragen. Die Stadt habe diesen Brief zum Anlass genommen, die Vertragsverhandlungen wieder zu eröffnen und ihm einen neuen Vertragsentwurf vorzulegen, der eine Reduzierung seiner Kompetenzen vorgesehen habe.

Translation:

According to Thielemann, negotiations for an extension of his contract through the 2016/2017 season had been completed in mid-May. "A contract text approved by both parties was ready," the conductor explained.

In early June, the orchestra committee then approached the city and demanded to have power over decisions regarding guest conductors. The city took this letter as the opportunity to reopen contract negotiations and to send him a new draft contract which saw a reduction of his authorities.

Brünnhilde ewig

#18
July 25, 2009, 04:28:13 PM Last Edit: July 25, 2009, 04:32:35 PM by Brünnhilde ewig
Fascinating discussion! No matter what the Münchner politicians come up with - nobody has recorded a better Richard Strauss Rosenkavalier Suite than Christian Thielemann!

Wasn't there also another political Misthaufen about Levine's engagement in München?

P.S.: Thielemann also makes the best Gespickten Rehrücken mit Spätzle!  ;D

MishaK

#19
July 25, 2009, 05:50:35 PM
Quote from: Brünnhilde ewig on July 25, 2009, 04:28:13 PM
Wasn't there also another political Misthaufen about Levine's engagement in München?

...or for that matter multiple times with Celi when he repeatedly threatened to leave when he didn't get his way, plus a mindlessly stupid 13-year sexist crusade against a stellar female principal trombonist.

Quote from: Brünnhilde ewig on July 25, 2009, 04:28:13 PM
P.S.: Thielemann also makes the best Gespickten Rehrücken mit Spätzle!  ;D

You dined with him?
Print
Go Up Pages1 2
User actions