Who will get the Berliner Philharmoniker gig?

[king ubu]

I have seen a picture of Thielemann in his early 20s rehearsing with Karajan. He sported something like a Prince-Valiant-Cut then and I tend to think the actual style is an improvement.

not sure he agrees!

[San Antone]

Seems to me that the BPO made a huge blunder.  The political issue is a side show and ought not to overly influence the outcome, after all the main gig is musical director and the primary criteria for electing the next conductor ought to be for musical considerations.  If his politics are a distraction he can keep quiet more often or entirely, but he has to conduct, etc.  At this point, they will either not get anyone's first choice or get someone who will come in under a cloud.

Neither outcome is good for the orchestra, at least initially.  The best that can be said is that all this will blow over at some point.

[Jo498]

Why should the political issue have been decisive? Someone like Thielemann is obviously musically polarizing as well as has been discussed in this thread already. There is no point in appointing a very polarizing director against a strong minority in the orchestra. This would probably lead to trouble and Thielemann also has a history of not being the easiest person to work with, her more or less departed in anger from at least two former positions (Deutsche Oper Berlin and Munich Phil).

[NJ Joe]

So, please tell me who got the gig!



I'm waiting...

[North Star]

Nobody yet.

[Karl Henning]

Great shot of the young Yoda to Thielemann's right, too!

[Jo498]

The guy further right (left for the viewer) is neither young Harrison Ford nor Jon Bonjovi but Siegmund.

[Brian]

Why should the political issue have been decisive? Someone like Thielemann is obviously musically polarizing as well as has been discussed in this thread already. There is no point in appointing a very polarizing director against a strong minority in the orchestra. This would probably lead to trouble and Thielemann also has a history of not being the easiest person to work with, her more or less departed in anger from at least two former positions (Deutsche Oper Berlin and Munich Phil).

Exactly. I am not keen on Thielemann's musical approach to the repertory classics (though I will listen more of his recordings, to be more certain) and not keen on the "obscure" music he chooses to rehabilitate. The political leanings just give me more reason to be skeptical.

If they want a truly great Germanic repertoire conductor who is politically safe and personally affable, they can choose Honeck. (And I don't know about politics/personality, but if the core German repertoire is really that important, Chailly and Fischer are also extremely good candidates.)

[San Antone]

Why should the political issue have been decisive? Someone like Thielemann is obviously musically polarizing as well as has been discussed in this thread already. There is no point in appointing a very polarizing director against a strong minority in the orchestra. This would probably lead to trouble and Thielemann also has a history of not being the easiest person to work with, her more or less departed in anger from at least two former positions (Deutsche Oper Berlin and Munich Phil).

I am not going to go back this thread and fish out the discussion of Thielemann's musical controversies among all the talk of his politics and now, even his haircut. 

Would you mind summarizing the "obviously musically polarizing" nature of his musical career?

[North Star]

The guy further right (left for the viewer) is neither young Harrison Ford nor Jon Bonjovi but Siegmund.

He was even more to the far right than Karajan? 

Exactly. I am not keen on Thielemann's musical approach to the repertory classics (though I will listen more of his recordings, to be more certain) and not keen on the "obscure" music he chooses to rehabilitate. The political leanings just give me more reason to be skeptical.

If they want a truly great Germanic repertoire conductor who is politically safe and personally affable, they can choose Honeck.

Agreed.

[San Antone]

Exactly. I am not keen on Thielemann's musical approach to the repertory classics (though I will listen more of his recordings, to be more certain) and not keen on the "obscure" music he chooses to rehabilitate. The political leanings just give me more reason to be skeptical.

If they want a truly great Germanic repertoire conductor who is politically safe and personally affable, they can choose Honeck. (And I don't know about politics/personality, but if the core German repertoire is really that important, Chailly and Fischer are also extremely good candidates.)

Can you be more specific?  His Ring is generally seen as the best of the recent lot, and in general his interpretations of the traditional works from the German tradition are highly regarded, at least by most of the critical responses I've seen.

I don't think his politics should figure in at all. 

[jlaurson]

The guy further right (left for the viewer) is neither young Harrison Ford nor Jon Bonjovi but Siegmund.

Indeed... except almost. Peter Hofmann... also Peter Alward, Michael Glotz, and José van Dam rehearsing a 1982... Dutchman.

Can you be more specific?  His Ring is generally seen as the best of the recent lot, and in general his interpretations of the traditional works from the German tradition are highly regarded, at least by most of the critical responses I've seen.

Really? His Rings are let down by modest singing; the Vienna Ring by a less-than-desirable orchestral performance, too. Don't get me wrong, I think he is easily capable of putting on the best Ring of our time (and beyond, in both directions), but I don't think that these two efforts present him anywhere near his best or anywhere near a point where he is satisfied.

[Brian]

Would you summarizing the "obviously musically polarizing" nature of his musical career?

Here's David Hurwitz turning his flame-thrower onto a disc of Thielemann conducting Bruckner's Fifth. I haven't heard the disc yet, so I don't know if I agree, but I'm just giving you an example. 

-

First the good news: Christian Thielemann and the orchestra create a rousing climax at the end of the finale. Now the bad news: the prior 80 (out of 83) minutes show Thielemann to be quite clueless when it comes to Bruckner. Big surprise. Take the first movement. It basically operates in two tempos: adagio or allegro. Some conductors, such as Jochum or Furtwängler, play the music very freely, both within sections and in making transitions between them, but all great performances have one thing in common: they clearly define the difference between adagio and allegro, not just in terms of absolute speed, but also in terms of rhythm and phrasing. Tell that to Thielemann, whose inaugural concert with the Munich Philharmonic this release commemorates. His allegro is as dull and clunky as Bruckner's most vociferous detractors claim. You can hear this very obviously at the opening of the development section, where the upward tutti arpeggios for full orchestra alternate with the movement's principal theme in the winds, each in its respective tempo. For this passage only, Thielemann tries to make some kind of distinction. He has no choice. But as soon as the main section of the development bursts in, the music becomes slower, thicker, and muddier.

In fact, those 83 minutes make this one of the slowest performances on disc, not because of the Adagio, which Karajan, Solti, and Celibidache (of course) all take even slower than Thielemann's reasonable 20 minutes. That means he's unusually droopy everywhere else, and in this of all symphonies that's not a good thing. His scherzo, for example, admittedly plods only slightly at the outset, but then totally self-destructs in the excruciatingly drawn-out central development section, its intertwining lines for horn, flute, and violins sounding painfully clumsy and approximate in phrasing when squeezed out at this tempo. Dance music this is not. It barely staggers into the reprise of the opening–but speed, as noted above, is only part of the problem. Thielemann is notably soft on rhythm. Attacks and releases sound mushy, particularly in the outer movements. Take the finale's fugue theme as announced by the strings, which Thielemann actually de-accentuates despite Bruckner's clear directive that the last three notes must always be played as emphatic downbeats.

Dynamics are also very casually observed. For example, the woodwind solos that open the Adagio are too loud, while the brass playing at the same movement's final climax is paradoxically overbearing and ugly, yet lacking in impact. Another example: the solo clarinet at the opening of the finale makes almost no distinction between pianissimo and forte, surely at the conductor's behest. Thielemann obviously loves big, fat brass sonorities, and the symphony's many chorales (weighted toward the tuba) sound impressive at first, then monotonously similar thereafter, an undifferentiated mass of tone unrelated to its context. Consider the appearance of the central chorale in the finale: parenthetically slow, but hardly grand. Thielemann's dynamic adjustments, which consist of spurious decrescendos at the end of each phrase, only add to the overall feeling of flaccidity. This music should resound; each statement should echo and reverberate over the timid answers from the other sections of the orchestra. Not here. The extended meal that Thielemann makes of the soft string codetta preceding the double-fugue only emphasizes how wrong his instincts are in Bruckner.

Whenever the music needs to flow onward, you can count on Thielemann to stop it dead in its tracks. He is constitutionally incapable of sustaining tension, especially through quiet passages. This includes much of the Adagio–both the long sequences in the middle of its second subject as well as the entire last five minutes of the movement–and never mind those extended, pianissimo fugal episodes in the finale. I could go on and talk about Thielemann's inability to give the first movement's second and third subjects sufficient rhythmic profile; his willingness to let balances go awry at various climaxes; the lack of necessary contrapuntal clarity; or the failure to capture any of the music's drama or spirituality. What a pathetic non-event Thielemann makes of the theoretically violent and terrifying conclusion of the first movement's development section! He is a veritable fount of unidiomatic, unconvincing, and unmusical ideas, bringing nothing positive to the equation at all. I have no doubt that this orchestra could play the symphony better on its own, without a conductor.

[San Antone]

Indeed... except almost. Peter Hofmann... also Peter Alward, Michael Glotz, and José van Dam rehearsing a 1982... Dutchman.

Really? His Rings are let down by modest singing; the Vienna Ring by a less-than-desirable orchestral performance, too. Don't get me wrong, I think he is easily capable of putting on the best Ring of our time (and beyond, in both directions), but I don't think that these two efforts present him anywhere near his best or anywhere near a point where he is satisfied.

I remember reading several raves at the time (I'm not sure which) his Ring came out.  I haven't kept up too closely with his career but my overall impression has been positive regarding Wagner, Strauss and the rest of the big German rep, except for some reason Mahler.

[San Antone]

Here's David Hurwitz turning his flame-thrower onto a disc of Thielemann conducting Bruckner's Fifth. I haven't heard the disc yet, so I don't know if I agree, but I'm just giving you an example. 

One bad review equals musical polarization, other than because the reviewer himself is polarizing?  And for all we know you might not even agree with it.

[Jo498]

His early (mid-90s) Schumann (and one Beethoven disc) with the Philharmonia Orchestra was almost unanimously panned. As I do not much care for Wagner and Strauss I do not own a single recording by Thielemann.

I listened to the first movement of the Eroica on youtube (concert in Vienna) and I found this so grotesquely slow (and also with wild, pseudo-Furtwanglerian tempo shifts) that I had no inclination to even try the funeral march (all of 20 minutes or so). Beautiful sounds from the woodwinds, though.

I don't really dare to imagine Thielemann's Haydn, Mozart on the one hand or Bartok and Stravinsky on the other hand. He might be extremely good in a certain repertoire from 1850-1920 but otherwise I have my doubts.

[San Antone]

Karajan was not the best Haydn conductor out there either. 

Here's an indepth review from a respected opera publication of Thielemann's live ring from Vienna on DG.  And while I wouldn't call it a "rave" it is balanced and positive on many counts.

[Karl Henning]

Karajan was not the best Haydn conductor out there either. 

I still shudder at odd times when recalling his Mozart.

[Karl Henning]

The guy further right (left for the viewer) is neither young Harrison Ford nor Jon Bonjovi but Siegmund.

Not Rutger Hauer?

[San Antone]

Thing is, none of the other candidates have even done the Ring much less recorded it twice.  Say what you will, but a conductor who has mastered the Ring should have no difficulty with the rest of the other warhorses of the BPO repertory.

Although many of you are trying to say it is not about his politics, I think it is.