In the past month, I've had two theatrical works premiered to packed houses. The Story, Part 1: Alec and Grugh, ran during InTENsity 2.0, produced by Frank Higgins and Tony Bernal. Four of the five nights were sold out (and the other night had 2 open seats. So close!).
And this past Thursday and Friday, Till Coffee Do Us Part, ran. The evening, Rites of Being, was produced by Hunter Long and Black House Collective, and created in collaboration with Kansas City Electronic Music and Arts Alliance. Alison Heryer designed most everything, and Lisa Cordes gave her expert talents as the stage director of all six operas.
There was also some crazy guy that started voguing toward the end of Friday night...He was up on a podium and waved his arms like a damn fool. He did it because whenever he moved his arms, he heard music...and he likes music.
Yes, I was the foolish man.
Did anyone laugh at my title? It's a pun. Get it...Two shows? Two much theater?
These are the jokes people.
And what an experience all this was. I'm many years removed from my theater days. I did the community theater bit for...well, a hella long time. I played in some pits, and did a minor acting role for in undergrad. Worked for a production company, but didn't do much theater work while out East...Until Cake went up, and I was suddenly tossed back into theater.
Then four years pass, and I'm tossed back in again. People always seem amazed to know that I've been on stage since...8? 9? Can't remember...Anyway, a long freakin' time. My first credit as a lighting tech was when I was 12 (designed half the show. Poorly, i might add...but it got done!). My first directing credit was a children's production when I was in HS. I followed that up with directing Pippin, then directing 2 chamber operas for RTB's inaugural Opera Shorts program. I also waved my arms around then, leading several rehearsals when our conductor wasn't around.
Should have taken that "assistant conductor" credit. But I was already "Tech Director, Stage Director, Composer."
Anyway...Yeah, I've done a lot of theater...
But I've never had two shows run so close together. I've never had to flit from a rehearsal of one show to a performance of another. I've never had a show I've solely written the words to on stage. Cake was a collaboration with Eileen Wiedbrauk. Her story, and we sent the libretto back and forth (with a lot of "I have no idea what I'm doing..." "I don't know either..." "Hm, well...it's probably fine.").
So, my words, on stage. That was an interesting experience. The actors never stopped surprising me--in both shows, I laughed several times...which is hella awkward as you're prepping a to cue in the pit, and the actor does something so ridiculous you HAVE to laugh.
There's nothing in this world more magical than live theater. I know, I'm a musician, I should say "there's nothing more magical than a symphony," or something like that. But I'd be lying. There's something about the human voice, about seeing humans interact and draw you into the performance. There's something much more concrete. Music is abstract. Even when moving into more concrete worlds (using obvious quotation that will have cultural contexts, using real world sounds, etc.), music is always a step removed from the concrete image due to what's around it. (Does thunder have the same meaning when surrounded by rain, as it does when it's surrounded by gunfire without rain? a discussion for another time.)
But theater captures us in a snapshot of time. We see events unfold in front of us, and we are either drawn in, or kept at arms length as observers to judge the action (Oh Brecht...). I love me some Brecht, and when he's at his best, he's tricked himself and he's brought you into at least one character, while keeping the problem at arms length (Rise and Fall of the City of Mahoganny is the perfect example to me).
I wouldn't trade this experience for the world. It's not what I do professionally. I'm no actor. My directing is middling, at best. Same goes with my design. It's better for the world if I never sing again. And while I've enjoyed writing words, and think I'm pretty good at it, I'm best at writing music.
So, I'll continue to do that, and do it well. And keep your eyes open for opera number 3!
There's never too much theater in this world.
5/18/13
4/25/13
What REALLY happened to opera?
There's a list going around from Buzzfeed called "What Happened to Opera?"
It's a post that really focuses on 1 thing- Hey, look at how the costumes and sets of opera have changed! And how hot all the singers look! Here's Renee Fleming singing Strauss! She's awesome!
And Anna Letrebko doing Lehar! Look at that beautiful gown! AND THE VOICE!
Let's not forget Diana Danrau as Queen of the Night! Holy Crap, how can she even sing in that outfit!
The post goes on through many notables; Joyce DiDonato, Jonas Kaufmann, Juan Diego Florez, Dolora Zajick, and so forth.
It's great that a site like Buzzfeed put together a list of great opera singers doing (somewhat) modern takes on classic songs.
But it does beg the question "WHAT HAPPENED TO OPERA?!?"
I don't mean this in a "oh, the by-gone days of it's greatness are gone," but in the "what the hell does this actually mean about opera?" Does it mean that opera is only about the singers? Look at all these fabulous singers!
Or is it about the sets and costumes? This is cutting edge stuff people!
Ya know what I think this post says?
It says "We can keep finding new ways to do the same song that's been out since 1791!" Sorry Diana Danrau, you nailed it, but GIVE IT A REST!
You can't put a list together of "What Happened to Opera" without even addressing the music! The examples are all classic rep--not one really adventurous aria on the whole page. Not one work by a living composer even!
It's like they're saying "No one WRITES opera, so we have to come up with new ways to do the same thing you've seen a million times before!"
So, here's MY LIST of "What Happened to Opera?" Instead of focusing on amazing singers (mostly very attractive ones at that), and fancy sets, I'm going to look at fantastic singers singing some modern repertoire! Because, at its heart, opera IS music. If you're going to have a conversation about how it's changed, and not at least toss in some MUSIC to show that, then you've failed miserably.
1) OPERA IS IN ENGLISH!!!
I could choose a thousand thousand operas for this, but I'll go with a man that made English language opera what it is today: hopefully the only dead guy on the list, Benjamin Britten!
And from his rep a million choices. But why not show a scene from the BBC movie version of his opera Turn of the Screw, adapted from the novel by Henry James
2) Opera changes with the musical times!
Oh man...this is a book in and of itself. but why not show some fun examples?
Let's start with a German guy that even predates Britten...But his style was ahead of its time. Wozzeck, by Alban Berg
Not my favourite scene, but Wozzeck is slim pickings. The story is pretty amazing.
Oh, not a fan of modernism eh? No problem, there's plenty of styles to choose from!
Minimalism more your thing? Let's take a cue from the King of Minimalism:
Love Duet from Ahkenaten by Phillip Glass. Sorry all, just music on this one!
Pardon the intonation in the trombone. hard line to keep going. and, no, that wasn't me. This recording easily predates my trombone days.
The list goes on and one. Why not grab one more, just for fun? Here's one that's even more contemporary
from L'amour de loin by Kaija Saariaho
So, maybe these aren't your style. I mean, it's still art music after all
3) Opera is a form! It doesn't just mean "classical" music!
alright, let's go straight for the jugular with this one. Anyone seen or heard of
TOMMY by The Who
You'll have to skip a little forward, to about 1:00 in. alright, I'll admit it, I don't much like rock operas. or rock musicals. This coming from a guy that's about to fly to Sweden to study heavy metal...but this should give you a nice tell that it's not just "classical" music
Maybe, like me, you don't always want Wagner, but The Who just don't do it for you. Sometimes, I pull out a different sort of opera. Why not head back to the 30s for another dead guy, but one that set a trend, changed opera and musicals
Summertime, from Porgy and Bess by George Gershwin
it's from the movie version. And, sorry, Sidney Poitier didn't sing the part. Wonderful actor, but not the best singer.
So far, there's been way too many dead guys. There's nothing wrong with dead guys, and this was a bit of rally against them, right?
4) OPERA IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
how about some living composers? Well, since we ended with some jazz inspired music, let's head for some more jazz inspired music.
from Dead Man Walking by Jake Heggie
It's pretty romantic, but with some jazz style extended harmonies. I went with a pretty one.
And, yes, if the title caught your eye, it is based on the book. But we'll get to that in a minute...
Why not look at an opera that just had a US premiere not too long ago. At the MET no less!
Ariel's Song from Thomas Ades' The Tempest (based on Shakespeare, of course)
5) OPERA IS RELEVANT TO TODAY!
If you look at all the old operas, they are inexorably linked to their times. Jake Heggie's Dead Man Walking is no exception. There are no exceptions: even if the opera is based on a different time, say Ades using Shakespeare, or Bernard Rands telling the story of Vincent Van Gogh, the messages are tied to todays world. And sorry, no copy of Van Gogh on the internet yet--it was just premiered last year! SEE, IT'S STILL HAPPENING!
But enough of that. Let's take one example, just one from the myriad of choices. One of my favourite arias of all time
This is Prophetic from Nixon in China by John Adams
This came out in 1987, about 15 years after Nixon's historic trip...but the questions posed and ideas espoused were very much on people's minds in 1987.
Adams is known for these works: Dr. Atomic and The Death of Klinghoffer just to name two more.
And let's not forget multiculturalism. Why, since we went to China, why not talk about 2 composers of Chinese descent with amazing operas?
The Shadow Haunts Me Wherever I Go from The First Emperor by Tan Dun. Placido Domingo anyone?
And how about a link to a Zhou Long's opera, Madame White Snake. IT WON A PULITZER, AFTER ALL!
Sorry, no vid, but a link to the WGBH Feature!
6) OPERA IS HAPPENING IN YOUR TOWN, ON SCALES THAT EVERYONE CAN ENJOY!
opera doesn't necessarily mean giant sets, 3 hour long shows, or the most lavish costumes you've ever seen. I can name three performances/companies that I'm associated with that make opera with much smaller means...and do an amazing job!
a) Remarkable Theater Brigade. If you're in NYC and follow what happens at Carnegie Hall, their "Opera Shorts" program is probably known to you. I participated in what was, basically, the trial run of this format for RTB back in 2009. And it was a smashing success.
Notice that next year they're featuring Ricky Ian Gordon and a name already mentioned as an amazing performer, Dolora Zajick!
Yep, they're producing NEW WORKS by LIVING COMPOSERS, and bringing them to you in 10-15 minute one acts!
b) Intimate Opera of Indianapolis. You'll notice most of the posts I've made have either been from a coast or Houston (KUDOS TO HOUSTON GRAND OPERA FOR ALL THE WORK PROMOTING LIVING COMPOSERS!). But if you're in the heartland of the US that doesn't mean that exciting opera opportunities aren't there for you!
IOI has a great season running full of amazing works. If you're in Indy, you need to go. Especially in November. I may be in Sweden, but folks in the US will get a chance to hear my first opera, Cake, for the first time in 4+ years! Yes, this is the opera that was on the very first RTB opera shorts, and now IOI has picked it up for its Opera Shots, Black Friday, program!
c) Black House Collective and Kansas City Electronic Music and Arts Alliance. Hey, Kansas City, you love the arts. You love new music, jazz, and installations. You even like electronic music! Why not put it together?!?
In a truly adventurous collaboration, Black House and KcEMA teamed up to commission and premiere 6 brand spanking new one act operas! These are all scored for chamber ensembles and electronics! No huge stage, no 50 person chorus, no 50 person pit. Small space, exciting action, and new music!
The program is entitled "Rites of Being" and will run May 16th and 17th. it includes a world premiere of my second one act opera, Till Coffee Do Us Part. Purchase seated tickets in advance (link to brownpapertickets.com event page). Standing room available day of, but don't take your chances.
Alright, this is far from comprehensive. There are tons of amazing operas happening now, all over the world. Why don't we get the comments rolling?
What contemporary operas do you love? What groups are supporting new operas? Let's spread the love and let people see "WHAT HAS REALLY HAPPENED TO OPERA!"
It's a post that really focuses on 1 thing- Hey, look at how the costumes and sets of opera have changed! And how hot all the singers look! Here's Renee Fleming singing Strauss! She's awesome!
And Anna Letrebko doing Lehar! Look at that beautiful gown! AND THE VOICE!
Let's not forget Diana Danrau as Queen of the Night! Holy Crap, how can she even sing in that outfit!
The post goes on through many notables; Joyce DiDonato, Jonas Kaufmann, Juan Diego Florez, Dolora Zajick, and so forth.
It's great that a site like Buzzfeed put together a list of great opera singers doing (somewhat) modern takes on classic songs.
But it does beg the question "WHAT HAPPENED TO OPERA?!?"
I don't mean this in a "oh, the by-gone days of it's greatness are gone," but in the "what the hell does this actually mean about opera?" Does it mean that opera is only about the singers? Look at all these fabulous singers!
Or is it about the sets and costumes? This is cutting edge stuff people!
Ya know what I think this post says?
It says "We can keep finding new ways to do the same song that's been out since 1791!" Sorry Diana Danrau, you nailed it, but GIVE IT A REST!
You can't put a list together of "What Happened to Opera" without even addressing the music! The examples are all classic rep--not one really adventurous aria on the whole page. Not one work by a living composer even!
It's like they're saying "No one WRITES opera, so we have to come up with new ways to do the same thing you've seen a million times before!"
So, here's MY LIST of "What Happened to Opera?" Instead of focusing on amazing singers (mostly very attractive ones at that), and fancy sets, I'm going to look at fantastic singers singing some modern repertoire! Because, at its heart, opera IS music. If you're going to have a conversation about how it's changed, and not at least toss in some MUSIC to show that, then you've failed miserably.
1) OPERA IS IN ENGLISH!!!
I could choose a thousand thousand operas for this, but I'll go with a man that made English language opera what it is today: hopefully the only dead guy on the list, Benjamin Britten!
And from his rep a million choices. But why not show a scene from the BBC movie version of his opera Turn of the Screw, adapted from the novel by Henry James
2) Opera changes with the musical times!
Oh man...this is a book in and of itself. but why not show some fun examples?
Let's start with a German guy that even predates Britten...But his style was ahead of its time. Wozzeck, by Alban Berg
Not my favourite scene, but Wozzeck is slim pickings. The story is pretty amazing.
Oh, not a fan of modernism eh? No problem, there's plenty of styles to choose from!
Minimalism more your thing? Let's take a cue from the King of Minimalism:
Love Duet from Ahkenaten by Phillip Glass. Sorry all, just music on this one!
Pardon the intonation in the trombone. hard line to keep going. and, no, that wasn't me. This recording easily predates my trombone days.
The list goes on and one. Why not grab one more, just for fun? Here's one that's even more contemporary
from L'amour de loin by Kaija Saariaho
So, maybe these aren't your style. I mean, it's still art music after all
3) Opera is a form! It doesn't just mean "classical" music!
alright, let's go straight for the jugular with this one. Anyone seen or heard of
TOMMY by The Who
You'll have to skip a little forward, to about 1:00 in. alright, I'll admit it, I don't much like rock operas. or rock musicals. This coming from a guy that's about to fly to Sweden to study heavy metal...but this should give you a nice tell that it's not just "classical" music
Maybe, like me, you don't always want Wagner, but The Who just don't do it for you. Sometimes, I pull out a different sort of opera. Why not head back to the 30s for another dead guy, but one that set a trend, changed opera and musicals
Summertime, from Porgy and Bess by George Gershwin
it's from the movie version. And, sorry, Sidney Poitier didn't sing the part. Wonderful actor, but not the best singer.
So far, there's been way too many dead guys. There's nothing wrong with dead guys, and this was a bit of rally against them, right?
4) OPERA IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!
how about some living composers? Well, since we ended with some jazz inspired music, let's head for some more jazz inspired music.
from Dead Man Walking by Jake Heggie
It's pretty romantic, but with some jazz style extended harmonies. I went with a pretty one.
And, yes, if the title caught your eye, it is based on the book. But we'll get to that in a minute...
Why not look at an opera that just had a US premiere not too long ago. At the MET no less!
Ariel's Song from Thomas Ades' The Tempest (based on Shakespeare, of course)
5) OPERA IS RELEVANT TO TODAY!
If you look at all the old operas, they are inexorably linked to their times. Jake Heggie's Dead Man Walking is no exception. There are no exceptions: even if the opera is based on a different time, say Ades using Shakespeare, or Bernard Rands telling the story of Vincent Van Gogh, the messages are tied to todays world. And sorry, no copy of Van Gogh on the internet yet--it was just premiered last year! SEE, IT'S STILL HAPPENING!
But enough of that. Let's take one example, just one from the myriad of choices. One of my favourite arias of all time
This is Prophetic from Nixon in China by John Adams
This came out in 1987, about 15 years after Nixon's historic trip...but the questions posed and ideas espoused were very much on people's minds in 1987.
Adams is known for these works: Dr. Atomic and The Death of Klinghoffer just to name two more.
And let's not forget multiculturalism. Why, since we went to China, why not talk about 2 composers of Chinese descent with amazing operas?
The Shadow Haunts Me Wherever I Go from The First Emperor by Tan Dun. Placido Domingo anyone?
And how about a link to a Zhou Long's opera, Madame White Snake. IT WON A PULITZER, AFTER ALL!
Sorry, no vid, but a link to the WGBH Feature!
6) OPERA IS HAPPENING IN YOUR TOWN, ON SCALES THAT EVERYONE CAN ENJOY!
opera doesn't necessarily mean giant sets, 3 hour long shows, or the most lavish costumes you've ever seen. I can name three performances/companies that I'm associated with that make opera with much smaller means...and do an amazing job!
a) Remarkable Theater Brigade. If you're in NYC and follow what happens at Carnegie Hall, their "Opera Shorts" program is probably known to you. I participated in what was, basically, the trial run of this format for RTB back in 2009. And it was a smashing success.
Notice that next year they're featuring Ricky Ian Gordon and a name already mentioned as an amazing performer, Dolora Zajick!
Yep, they're producing NEW WORKS by LIVING COMPOSERS, and bringing them to you in 10-15 minute one acts!
b) Intimate Opera of Indianapolis. You'll notice most of the posts I've made have either been from a coast or Houston (KUDOS TO HOUSTON GRAND OPERA FOR ALL THE WORK PROMOTING LIVING COMPOSERS!). But if you're in the heartland of the US that doesn't mean that exciting opera opportunities aren't there for you!
IOI has a great season running full of amazing works. If you're in Indy, you need to go. Especially in November. I may be in Sweden, but folks in the US will get a chance to hear my first opera, Cake, for the first time in 4+ years! Yes, this is the opera that was on the very first RTB opera shorts, and now IOI has picked it up for its Opera Shots, Black Friday, program!
c) Black House Collective and Kansas City Electronic Music and Arts Alliance. Hey, Kansas City, you love the arts. You love new music, jazz, and installations. You even like electronic music! Why not put it together?!?
In a truly adventurous collaboration, Black House and KcEMA teamed up to commission and premiere 6 brand spanking new one act operas! These are all scored for chamber ensembles and electronics! No huge stage, no 50 person chorus, no 50 person pit. Small space, exciting action, and new music!
The program is entitled "Rites of Being" and will run May 16th and 17th. it includes a world premiere of my second one act opera, Till Coffee Do Us Part. Purchase seated tickets in advance (link to brownpapertickets.com event page). Standing room available day of, but don't take your chances.
Alright, this is far from comprehensive. There are tons of amazing operas happening now, all over the world. Why don't we get the comments rolling?
What contemporary operas do you love? What groups are supporting new operas? Let's spread the love and let people see "WHAT HAS REALLY HAPPENED TO OPERA!"
4/22/13
hard to believe it...
This month has been absolutely insane. Just, over the top insane. To summarize the basic set of events dating from around March 15th till now.
- Officially got accepted to EMS 13, sent in the "Hell yeah I'm going to Lisbon" form, and started prep on the presentation
- Got accepted to June in Buffalo, made the parts, sent everything out! WOOO, look out Buffalo!
- Had a blog post go VIRAL. It's at just a tad under 12,000 hits. What's really important is that it catapulted the discussion about orchestra strikes and the state of orchestras! It's been quite the experience--I've seen all sides of people in the argument, heard tons of opinions, and have continuously gotten surprised by people (both good and bad).
- had a play chosen for a professional production here in KC! Check out inTENsity 2.0! It's going to be a night to remember! Ten one act plays by nine amazing playwrights, and me! w00t!
- Rites of Being, a night of new one act operas presented by Black House Collective and the Kansas City Electronic Music and Arts Alliance is well under-way. I'll be conducting all six new operas, around 100 minutes of brand spanking new music! My arms are tired, my brain dies every Sunday, but it's a fabulous experience! Show hits are May 16th and 17th at Paragraph Gallery, 12th and Walnut, Kansas City, MO
- and, the biggest news of all...FULBRIGHT! Just heard Friday my proposal has been accepted! now to do all the crazy work involved to get to Stockholm, Sweden. This is an amazing opportunity that I never would have imagined possible. It never would have happened without the support of some outstanding people including Dr. Linna Place, Dr. Paul Rudy, Dr. James Mobberly, and Dr. William Everett...and many many more! Holy crap, I'M GOING TO SWEDEN!!!!
4/13/13
Closing Arguments
The Musicians of the San Francisco Symphony ratified a compromised agreement with management. This is great news for the musicians, and the symphony at large. You can go through the full break down in the musicians press release.
Since this has come to an end, I'll put my closing arguments on this particular strike as well. This isn't to say that my time blogging the political and social affairs in music is over...far from it. The conversations that have occurred thanks to this strike, and the unexpected notoriety of this blog, have really sparked a great many ideas in my head. But for now, closing arguments.
Since this has come to an end, I'll put my closing arguments on this particular strike as well. This isn't to say that my time blogging the political and social affairs in music is over...far from it. The conversations that have occurred thanks to this strike, and the unexpected notoriety of this blog, have really sparked a great many ideas in my head. But for now, closing arguments.
--First off, I want to send a special thank you to Tim Higgins. He took the time to email me, and have a correspondance regarding the strike and answered questions I've had about the strike. I've waited far too long to reply to his last email, but without the back and forth we had (while both being extremely busy, meaning the few emails we were able to shoot off) I couldn't write this post.
--He pointed out that I wasn't giving enough credit to the development and marketing departments. And, that is definitely true! For a group such as San Francisco to hit the $300 Million mark in their endowment, and keep up ticket sales, those groups must be doing a fantastic job.
It did come across a bit that I was against all the administrative positions in symphonies. This just isn't true at all. They are hardworking people, many of whom are musicians on some level, and entered into the administration side. They see this as an opportunity to continue working in something they believe in, and provide amazing support. All these people deserve our respect.
But it's also important to remember, what is the point of an orchestra, and how do we achieve it. See my last post for some thoughts on that.
--As I mentioned, you can go point through point in the breakdown of the contract on this page. To summarize, pay will go through a modest increase of the next five years (up 4.5%). This come close to offsetting the increased payment into benefits, but not quite. The symphony shot down all the "draconian cuts" and got a reasonably fair contract.
In the spirit of cooperation, I'm happy a contract got ratified that doesn't break anyone. In the spirit of my profession, I'm still worried. At the end of the day, they musicians still lose a little money. Management set up a negotiation where a win became "we didn't have to take huge cuts, therefore we win!" instead of "our demands for pay equality were met, so we win!" This was, in some ways, an artificially created situation. Meaning, what were management's real motives? I highly doubt it was their actual demands. There I go into conspiracy theory again, but it is a normal tactic. "If we shoot really high, and get a small portion of what we want, we still win."
--It came out that management was pushing the cuts early on. And that the executive director didn't even meet with the musicians until they went on strike. The group handling negotiations was inexperienced. And it wasn't until an arbitrator was brought in that progress was made.
In the spirit of cooperation, I'm happy a contract got ratified that doesn't break anyone. In the spirit of my profession, I'm still worried. At the end of the day, they musicians still lose a little money. Management set up a negotiation where a win became "we didn't have to take huge cuts, therefore we win!" instead of "our demands for pay equality were met, so we win!" This was, in some ways, an artificially created situation. Meaning, what were management's real motives? I highly doubt it was their actual demands. There I go into conspiracy theory again, but it is a normal tactic. "If we shoot really high, and get a small portion of what we want, we still win."
--It came out that management was pushing the cuts early on. And that the executive director didn't even meet with the musicians until they went on strike. The group handling negotiations was inexperienced. And it wasn't until an arbitrator was brought in that progress was made.
This screams "attack pattern alpha" on the part of management. They didn't want huge cuts. They wanted small cuts. Probably, they wanted something specific, for the musicians to pay into benefits at the same level of administration, which would save a fairly large sum of money. Now, that's not completely unreasonable.
But what if there wasn't really a financial reason? What if they had been operating at large profits and growing their endowment? How do you convince anyone to pay more into something when they don't really HAVE to?
You start a hard negotiating stance. Start with "take 40% pay cut" and go from there. That way, when musicians work back to "no pay cut, but we'll pay into benefits" it seems like a win.
And hold out your guns. What's with symphonies negotiating with underlings, or not even having a director (The ISO went into negotiations with three top management positions vacant)? It's holding back your guns. It gives you a "Oh, I'm sorry, these people didn't understand the negotiations well enough." You get the parent coming in to save the day. take a rational stance, and you'll win.
--Symphonies are becoming meritocracies...without actually giving bonuses for merit. "You have to do X, Y, and Z to keep your pay and benefits." "But we won a Grammy and have huge CD sales!" "but we only grew the endowment 5% instead of 7%" "But...I'm not directly tied to that! All I can do is perform amazingly, and try to get a little personal advertising" "And you didn't do enough of that!" "BUT WE HAVE A MARKETING DEPARTMENT!!!"
This feels like a real conversation. It's similar to what teachers are dealing with. Somehow, it's our fault that universities aren't making money. 1) neither organization is about making money (see previous post). 2) It's placing the wrong conditions on the workers to increase pay!
You start a hard negotiating stance. Start with "take 40% pay cut" and go from there. That way, when musicians work back to "no pay cut, but we'll pay into benefits" it seems like a win.
And hold out your guns. What's with symphonies negotiating with underlings, or not even having a director (The ISO went into negotiations with three top management positions vacant)? It's holding back your guns. It gives you a "Oh, I'm sorry, these people didn't understand the negotiations well enough." You get the parent coming in to save the day. take a rational stance, and you'll win.
--Symphonies are becoming meritocracies...without actually giving bonuses for merit. "You have to do X, Y, and Z to keep your pay and benefits." "But we won a Grammy and have huge CD sales!" "but we only grew the endowment 5% instead of 7%" "But...I'm not directly tied to that! All I can do is perform amazingly, and try to get a little personal advertising" "And you didn't do enough of that!" "BUT WE HAVE A MARKETING DEPARTMENT!!!"
This feels like a real conversation. It's similar to what teachers are dealing with. Somehow, it's our fault that universities aren't making money. 1) neither organization is about making money (see previous post). 2) It's placing the wrong conditions on the workers to increase pay!
Think about a job we can all feel for--cashier at a chain store. Let's say your raise was tied to another department. Electronics has to do a 3% increase in sales, or you don't get a raise. But you don't work in electronics, you work front end. How can you increase sales in electronics? All of a sudden, you're having to pitch batteries and thumb drives by the check out...and hope no one asks about a watch battery. It's beyond the normal scope of your job, but you're asked to do it, to get a raise.
Or, maybe, if could be tied to having an average checkout score of 95% G (that's a Target thing...). That has to do with your speed of checkout based on number of items. That you CAN control (in some fashion). This is becoming a general trend in business--"your raise is now based on something you cannot control in any way. It's based on merit, but not YOUR merit."
--A clear point here--This strike was NOT about greed. I have heard that so many times over the past few weeks. "They make enough money, they're just being greedy."
I'll just give one example. Let's say you work at a large company. This company is doing extremely well, making billions in profits. BILLIONS. You work somewhere in middle-management, say, store manager. You're doing well for yourself, no doubt. And your store has done extremely well. It comes time for bonuses (they do that instead of raises these days), and what happens? You have the power to give bonuses for your immediate employees. Based on the great sales for the year, you cut everyone a nice little bonus (because this middle manager is an awesome person). And then the District Manager, upper management throughout the company get bonuses from corporate. HUGE bonuses, because, somehow, it was their work.
And the middle manager?
He gets nothing.
Now, does he have a right to complain? The company is doing amazing business. He's a fantastic leader, as shown by his store raking in the cash AND being a decent human being and giving bonuses to his immediate employees. But his boss doesn't give him a raise. Because, somehow, upper management only sees upper management as being important. Middle management often understands the workers make everything run. But the middle guys can get squeezed.
It's similar to what happened with the automotive companies. Big time directors got huge bonuses. Line workers kept themselves afloat thanks to the union (and, yes, there was some major union corruption earlier in the time that helped lead to the crisis). But what about the white collar workers? the engineers? the secretaries?
Thrown to the wind. Pay cuts, benefits gone. Even while huge bonuses went to the highest officials. Is this equitable treatment?
--Final notes/questions: This is all about staying together, not just as a "union" (which I'm not even a member of, btw), but as a community. When one person gets screwed, everyone gets screwed. When one symphony takes cuts when they're not needed, then others will as well. When the max pay for the best symphony is $75K, how much will the smallest one make? Everything is compared, precedence is set, and it could doom things.
There are problems the symphony, in general, needs to address. How does it stay relevant? Where do we find new funds? How do we use technology to aid our fundraising?
It used to be a phone call. Now it's an email. How amazingly easy is it to delete an email without even reading the subject? How many donations are lost that way? Phone calls can be annoying, there's no doubt, but what about other more "personal" communications? What's the best way to reach people?
And what makes people excited?
All questions that need researched and answered. But, there's one thing I do know:
A safe, conservative approach will always fail. When you need to grow, you've got to do something special. And that's not 4 Beethoven pieces in a year, and your featured soloist playing the most ho-hum overplayed solo in the repertoire.
Music, and all art, connects with the generation it was created in. Yes, the best art is timeless. And many pieces created during their time were not. But Telemann was widely popular. So was Salieri. And Meyerbeer. Time will tell who lasts forever, but without those people, the people writing music of their time, that connected with people. Not "popular" music in the vulgar sense (there were plenty of dances, songs, and folk music outside of Paris' French Grand Opera) but music that captures that moment and may not last forever.
That momentary music is important. It's important to play it at least once, or else no one will even know if it's going to last forever.
So make truly exciting programs. Take chances. It may turn out to be nothing by kitsch, or it may end up being something truly sublime. But reserve judgement until you've at least given it a shot!
Or, maybe, if could be tied to having an average checkout score of 95% G (that's a Target thing...). That has to do with your speed of checkout based on number of items. That you CAN control (in some fashion). This is becoming a general trend in business--"your raise is now based on something you cannot control in any way. It's based on merit, but not YOUR merit."
--A clear point here--This strike was NOT about greed. I have heard that so many times over the past few weeks. "They make enough money, they're just being greedy."
I'll just give one example. Let's say you work at a large company. This company is doing extremely well, making billions in profits. BILLIONS. You work somewhere in middle-management, say, store manager. You're doing well for yourself, no doubt. And your store has done extremely well. It comes time for bonuses (they do that instead of raises these days), and what happens? You have the power to give bonuses for your immediate employees. Based on the great sales for the year, you cut everyone a nice little bonus (because this middle manager is an awesome person). And then the District Manager, upper management throughout the company get bonuses from corporate. HUGE bonuses, because, somehow, it was their work.
And the middle manager?
He gets nothing.
Now, does he have a right to complain? The company is doing amazing business. He's a fantastic leader, as shown by his store raking in the cash AND being a decent human being and giving bonuses to his immediate employees. But his boss doesn't give him a raise. Because, somehow, upper management only sees upper management as being important. Middle management often understands the workers make everything run. But the middle guys can get squeezed.
It's similar to what happened with the automotive companies. Big time directors got huge bonuses. Line workers kept themselves afloat thanks to the union (and, yes, there was some major union corruption earlier in the time that helped lead to the crisis). But what about the white collar workers? the engineers? the secretaries?
Thrown to the wind. Pay cuts, benefits gone. Even while huge bonuses went to the highest officials. Is this equitable treatment?
--Final notes/questions: This is all about staying together, not just as a "union" (which I'm not even a member of, btw), but as a community. When one person gets screwed, everyone gets screwed. When one symphony takes cuts when they're not needed, then others will as well. When the max pay for the best symphony is $75K, how much will the smallest one make? Everything is compared, precedence is set, and it could doom things.
There are problems the symphony, in general, needs to address. How does it stay relevant? Where do we find new funds? How do we use technology to aid our fundraising?
It used to be a phone call. Now it's an email. How amazingly easy is it to delete an email without even reading the subject? How many donations are lost that way? Phone calls can be annoying, there's no doubt, but what about other more "personal" communications? What's the best way to reach people?
And what makes people excited?
All questions that need researched and answered. But, there's one thing I do know:
A safe, conservative approach will always fail. When you need to grow, you've got to do something special. And that's not 4 Beethoven pieces in a year, and your featured soloist playing the most ho-hum overplayed solo in the repertoire.
Music, and all art, connects with the generation it was created in. Yes, the best art is timeless. And many pieces created during their time were not. But Telemann was widely popular. So was Salieri. And Meyerbeer. Time will tell who lasts forever, but without those people, the people writing music of their time, that connected with people. Not "popular" music in the vulgar sense (there were plenty of dances, songs, and folk music outside of Paris' French Grand Opera) but music that captures that moment and may not last forever.
That momentary music is important. It's important to play it at least once, or else no one will even know if it's going to last forever.
So make truly exciting programs. Take chances. It may turn out to be nothing by kitsch, or it may end up being something truly sublime. But reserve judgement until you've at least given it a shot!
3/30/13
Orchestras Don't Exist to Make Money
For the past week, I've been inundated with comments, thoughts, discussions, and vitriol regarding the San Francisco Orchestra Musicians' strike. There have been blogs and articles posted all over, and I'll link to a few of them during the course of this post.
Many of the conversations have been fruitful, but there are some major sticking points that are driving me absolutely crazy. It reached a point yesterday when I had to call my mom and ask if I was crazy. BTW, if you missed it, my mom has an MBA and has worked in the non-profit sector as an employee, board member, and grant writer/business consultant for a long time...As in she was pregnant with me and working for Milwaukee Opera as a costumer...
So, I had to call her and ask her about the differences between a for-profit and a non-profit structured organization. Why? Because I kept seeing things like this "American Symphonies Spend More Than They Earn" , "It's not clear that they're willing to be as tough minded about costs as directors in the private sector," and "San Francisco and Chicago aren't alone in their financial struggles..."
There are many things inherently wrong with these statements.
The big question: do non-profits exist to make money?
This is an interesting question, and one people really need to look at. First off, generally speaking, a non-profit cannot operate at a large surplus of three times the operating budget for the past year (note, you may have to do a little searching on this. the BBB site wanted current location). Most organizations aren't sitting on three years worth of surplus in a year. In the case of San Fran, it'd be amazing, to make a whopping $300 million surplus. However, they were, in fact, operating at a surplus in 2011, a surplus of a healthy $14million. Now, this might seem like a blip agains their operating budget of $86million from 2011, but it's darn good. But that's not what the BBB uses to allow keep up a non-profit's accreditation. It's three years of operating budgest IN RESERVES for a given year...
Wait, what's the endowment at for the San Francisco Symphony again? at the end of 2011, it was at $262.68 Million. Against the operating cost of $72.15 Million...or roughly 3.64 TIMES the operating budget, for the year 2011, in the endowment. Hey, guess what, that means, according to the BBB practices, you made too much money.
But this doesn't completely answer the question: Do non-profits exist to make money? There are arguments, but most say "no, not really." This doesn't meant they shouldn't make any money, or grow the endowment. Here's a good post at philanthropy.com going over the importance of operating at a small surplus .
There's another big point in accreditation for non-profits. "Spend at least 65% of total expenses on program funding." (also BBB). What's program funding? That's funding that is directly used to further the mission statement. The short one from San Francisco is:
I'm starting to see a major case against the San Francisco Symphony's board right now. They're not acting on the first point of their mission by trying to hide behind the ending statement "maintain financial stability." But, according to BBB regulations, they're beyond financially stable. In fact, they need to spend money. Which they did!
Wait wait wait...hold up...The San Francisco Orchestra board raised spending $11 million last year from 2011. They needed to. They HAD to raise spending. Why? Because they also brought in a whopping $145+ Million for their Second Century campaign, which has been going for the last couple years. Because non-profits CAN work at surplus, but not a large surplus, especially for an extended period of time, they had to raise the budget.
But where did that $11 million of spending go? It wasn't to the musicians. Musicians are currently being asked to pay more in their benefits, and not only not take a raise, but face a possible cut.
HOLD THE PHONE
An organization, that has gone past the allotted surplus amount setup by the BBB, increases spending, mainly on education programs (BRAVO!). They bring in a huge amount, increasing their endowment, now, to almost 4 times their yearly budget, far passing what the BBB allows for non-profit accreditation. And now, in contract discussions with they ask for cuts.
This is a board not acting in the best interest of the mission statement. This is a board made up of two high ranking officers (Current and former) of Wells Fargo bank. And they're treating it like a for-profit. Bonuses were handed out to administration. Hey, guess what, you're spending money NOT ON YOUR MISSION BY DOING THAT! It's not going to a program, it's not going to create the best musical product. For that you need musicians. You want to give money? Keep expanding the education and outreach (which has grown huge amounts thanks to MTT's leadership).
What's this amount to? This is not a symphony fighting for it's life. We cannot compare it to Indianapolis, Atlanta, Detroit, companies where their endowments were shrinking and they were operating at perennial deficits. Yes, things need to change in the total workings of orchestras, I agree. Some blogs attack the highest paid individuals (the second heading. And, to be fair, this blog has many great points, but doesn't seem to understand inner workings of large non-profits. but then, most people don't. I'm not an expert either). This is horrible business. How is cutting the highest paid individuals going to help the lowest paid? It's not. In fact, it's going to hurt lower musicians. You now have nowhere to grow, no possible incentive to make a great orchestra. Not that orchestral musicians need incentive to make amazing music.
This is just one of the many points that have come up. I may try and hit more, but this one just bugged the crap out of me. And I still barely scratched the surface of what's happening. So, like I said, here are a host of links.
A great blog that breaks down some great points, written by Prof. Ellen Rosewall, professor of arts management, UW-Green Bay (shoutout to the frozen north, and all my friends in Lawrence, Eau-Clair, etc!).
Kevin Case, of Case Arts Law has become a bit of a personal hero of mine lately. Do yourself a favor, start at the top, and go through all his articles. This guy is a the best kind of beast- Former concertmaster of Memphis, played with Chicago Lyric and Chicago Symphony, then went to law school. Mr. Case, you're an inspiration to me!
Many of the conversations have been fruitful, but there are some major sticking points that are driving me absolutely crazy. It reached a point yesterday when I had to call my mom and ask if I was crazy. BTW, if you missed it, my mom has an MBA and has worked in the non-profit sector as an employee, board member, and grant writer/business consultant for a long time...As in she was pregnant with me and working for Milwaukee Opera as a costumer...
So, I had to call her and ask her about the differences between a for-profit and a non-profit structured organization. Why? Because I kept seeing things like this "American Symphonies Spend More Than They Earn" , "It's not clear that they're willing to be as tough minded about costs as directors in the private sector," and "San Francisco and Chicago aren't alone in their financial struggles..."
There are many things inherently wrong with these statements.
The big question: do non-profits exist to make money?
This is an interesting question, and one people really need to look at. First off, generally speaking, a non-profit cannot operate at a large surplus of three times the operating budget for the past year (note, you may have to do a little searching on this. the BBB site wanted current location). Most organizations aren't sitting on three years worth of surplus in a year. In the case of San Fran, it'd be amazing, to make a whopping $300 million surplus. However, they were, in fact, operating at a surplus in 2011, a surplus of a healthy $14million. Now, this might seem like a blip agains their operating budget of $86million from 2011, but it's darn good. But that's not what the BBB uses to allow keep up a non-profit's accreditation. It's three years of operating budgest IN RESERVES for a given year...
Wait, what's the endowment at for the San Francisco Symphony again? at the end of 2011, it was at $262.68 Million. Against the operating cost of $72.15 Million...or roughly 3.64 TIMES the operating budget, for the year 2011, in the endowment. Hey, guess what, that means, according to the BBB practices, you made too much money.
But this doesn't completely answer the question: Do non-profits exist to make money? There are arguments, but most say "no, not really." This doesn't meant they shouldn't make any money, or grow the endowment. Here's a good post at philanthropy.com going over the importance of operating at a small surplus .
There's another big point in accreditation for non-profits. "Spend at least 65% of total expenses on program funding." (also BBB). What's program funding? That's funding that is directly used to further the mission statement. The short one from San Francisco is:
The San Francisco Symphony sets the highest possible standard for excellence in musical performance at home and around the world, enriches, serves, and shapes cultural life throughout the spectrum of the Bay area communities, maintains financial stability and gains public recognition as means of ensuring its ability to fulfill this mission.That means 65% of the expenses must be used for the purpose of this mission. How does a symphony set the highest possible standard for excellence? They hire the best musicians in the world. How do they do that? Competitive pay and benefits. If you want to compare to a for profit corporation, think of what it takes to lure someone to a new job. For white collar workers, this is where benefits came from in the 50s and 60s- it was a way to attract the best workers to your corporation.
I'm starting to see a major case against the San Francisco Symphony's board right now. They're not acting on the first point of their mission by trying to hide behind the ending statement "maintain financial stability." But, according to BBB regulations, they're beyond financially stable. In fact, they need to spend money. Which they did!
Wait wait wait...hold up...The San Francisco Orchestra board raised spending $11 million last year from 2011. They needed to. They HAD to raise spending. Why? Because they also brought in a whopping $145+ Million for their Second Century campaign, which has been going for the last couple years. Because non-profits CAN work at surplus, but not a large surplus, especially for an extended period of time, they had to raise the budget.
But where did that $11 million of spending go? It wasn't to the musicians. Musicians are currently being asked to pay more in their benefits, and not only not take a raise, but face a possible cut.
HOLD THE PHONE
An organization, that has gone past the allotted surplus amount setup by the BBB, increases spending, mainly on education programs (BRAVO!). They bring in a huge amount, increasing their endowment, now, to almost 4 times their yearly budget, far passing what the BBB allows for non-profit accreditation. And now, in contract discussions with they ask for cuts.
This is a board not acting in the best interest of the mission statement. This is a board made up of two high ranking officers (Current and former) of Wells Fargo bank. And they're treating it like a for-profit. Bonuses were handed out to administration. Hey, guess what, you're spending money NOT ON YOUR MISSION BY DOING THAT! It's not going to a program, it's not going to create the best musical product. For that you need musicians. You want to give money? Keep expanding the education and outreach (which has grown huge amounts thanks to MTT's leadership).
What's this amount to? This is not a symphony fighting for it's life. We cannot compare it to Indianapolis, Atlanta, Detroit, companies where their endowments were shrinking and they were operating at perennial deficits. Yes, things need to change in the total workings of orchestras, I agree. Some blogs attack the highest paid individuals (the second heading. And, to be fair, this blog has many great points, but doesn't seem to understand inner workings of large non-profits. but then, most people don't. I'm not an expert either). This is horrible business. How is cutting the highest paid individuals going to help the lowest paid? It's not. In fact, it's going to hurt lower musicians. You now have nowhere to grow, no possible incentive to make a great orchestra. Not that orchestral musicians need incentive to make amazing music.
This is just one of the many points that have come up. I may try and hit more, but this one just bugged the crap out of me. And I still barely scratched the surface of what's happening. So, like I said, here are a host of links.
A great blog that breaks down some great points, written by Prof. Ellen Rosewall, professor of arts management, UW-Green Bay (shoutout to the frozen north, and all my friends in Lawrence, Eau-Clair, etc!).
Kevin Case, of Case Arts Law has become a bit of a personal hero of mine lately. Do yourself a favor, start at the top, and go through all his articles. This guy is a the best kind of beast- Former concertmaster of Memphis, played with Chicago Lyric and Chicago Symphony, then went to law school. Mr. Case, you're an inspiration to me!
3/27/13
A Quick Follow-up
A real follow-up will come later. I've been mulling over the various releases from San Francisco Orchestra Musicians and their management, making "sense of it all." For now, here's a great blogpost really hammering on one point I only glossed over:
Non-profits are not run in the same was as for-profit organizations.
Non-profits are not run in the same was as for-profit organizations.
3/22/13
Why you shouldn't talk about an industry you know nothing about
**update one, on why orchestras aren't supposed to "make money"
**update two, contract ratified, final remarks
This in response to one of the most idiotic rants against the striking San Francisco Orchestra musicians I've ever seen.
Anthony Alfidi, a "founding genius" of Alfidi Capital lays into the striking musicians pretty hard. First off, who is this guy? Well, turns out he went to Notre Dame and University of San Francisco, with degrees in Human Resources (wtf kind of degree is that anyway? Hey, let me teach you how to fire someone!), and an MBA in Finance (my mom has one of those. Great degrees that you pay a bunch of money for and mean nothing). He started Alfidi Capital because he was stuck in "dead end jobs" with other marketing firms. He's been investing since college, and has made money, so listen to this guys advice.
Now, I don't usually use this tone in a blog. I'm not usually this derisive, especially about things I have limited experience in. I say limited because, unlike Alfidi, I HAVE worked in similar circumstances, know a thing or two about human resources and management. unlike Alfidi, i worked in small mom-and-pop start-ups. While doing so, I took the time to listen, pay attention, and ask questions about the business side. Plus, I read a book or two about starting businesses, so I know everything there is to know. AND, back in HS, we played the stock market and I came out way ahead by investing heavily in Krispy Kreme, assuming Americans like to be fat.
Oops, slipped into the tone again. Alright, enough of that. Unlike Alfidi, while I can be just as dismissive of everything he does, I'd rather look at facts, and compare them to different sides of the argument. So, let's start off from the top of his little ignorant blog post.
"I was under the impression that every true artist in the world aspired to play at Carnegie Hall."
Well, sir, you're wrong. And, if you run through the list of people who play for the SFO, I bet they've all already played there, if for no other reason than, if memory serves, they played Carnegie Hall's 1998 opening gala. So, um, yeah, they've been there.
And won an Emmy, 4 Grammys for Best Classical Album, 3 Grammys for best choral performance, 4 Grammys for best orchestral performance, and one for Best Rock Instrumental Performance (The Call of Ktulu in 2001 with Metallica). So, yeah, this isn't their main aspiration.
Mr. Alfidi also seems to assume that venue is a big deal. Sorry sir, it only matters a little bit for younger musicians. Building the resume kinda thing...kinda like you had to work for this "other firms" before you could launch your own. Carnegie is a stepping stone, not an end point.
"...these union thugs in tuxedos are unsatisfied with a base salary of $141,700. That is far above the San Francisco median household income of $72,947."
Hey, you're right! go statistics proving whatever we want! let's do some other comparisons, with numbers.
The median expected salary for a typical CEO in US is $727,044. The median for a CEO in San Fran is $871,864. Wow, they make far less than a CEO. Now, let's compare it to something a bit more fitting. Oh, and the SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY CEO MAKES $495,000! But that's not to blame, he's entitled to it, because you understand what his job is.
A major symphony musician has gone through years of training, not some HS student, or maybe 10 years of lessons. The majority of these musicians hold doctorates (hey, they're more educated than you Mr. Alfidi, but then, so am I). They play for what is probably the second or third best orchestra in the world. Let's say, this is like a Financial Associate. Here's a description of their job. It's a pretty meat and potato kind of job in the Financial industry--pretty much a giant catch all. You sell, advise, and plan financial services, from stocks to insurance. So, basically, what you do Mr. Alfidi.
So, how much would a TOP TIER financial associate make in San Francisco? We're talking someone with 20+ years in the game, is a manager, and is training the next generation. According to salary.com, $142,810.
Oh, i get it now. Mr. Alfidi is jealous! He's jealous because he's still somewhat young, is working in a startup, and is probably making in the lower percentile of this job. OR because he is making around the median, and he can't believe someone in a non-financial industry job could possibly make this much. Hmmm...
So, a top tier musician is getting paid slightly less than a top tier ASSOCIATE in the financial industry in San Francisco. Hm...statistics, funny thing, isn't it.
"Making over $85K per year to do something a talented high school musician can do for free is pretty generous."
Really, a talented HS musician? Alright, let's do some comparisons. NOTE: THESE ARE NOT MEANT TO MAKE THE HS STUDENTS FEEL BAD! You're in HS, keep practicing, and you'll be there!
Here's a video of San Francisco Symphony playing the BBC PROMS, MAHLER SYMPHONY 7!
Alright, there's a few things there to think about. 1) BBC PROMS > Carnegie Hall. 2) HOLY SHIT THAT WAS AWESOME!
Now, here's Idyillwild Arts Academy playing Mahler Symphony 2. Sorry, couldn't find a symphony 7 video. Because, it's a bit of a challenge.
BEFORE POSTING, CONGRATS TO IDYILLWILD ARTS ACADEMY! This is a beautiful recording and you all should be proud! And if you keep working, you'll have a shot at the SF Orchestra. Really, I am impressed for your level. MR. ALFIDI, here's an incredibly talented group of HS students.
Again, congrats to Idyillwild Arts Academy. This is a very good, moving performance of a difficult piece! Keep at it and you'll be able to go pro!
Sorry Mr. Alfidi, you're about as far off as possible. If this amazing group of HS students, a private school, cream of the crop type group, can't handle SFO, then you've lost this one.
"If the symphony needs a scab played for the triangle or tambourine to help break the strike, then I volunteer to perform for free. I've had no music education, but those instruments don't look difficult"
Yep, they're cake. Here's a video of Pedro Estevan playing tambourine. Go ahead, tell me you can do this.
Because, if you can handle that simple little thing, then I'll even PAY you to do my next premiere.
"I'm willing to solo O Mio Babbino Caro on a kazoo if Renee Fleming can't elbow her way through the union's picket line."
First off, there is no way in hell Renee Fleming would elbow her way through a picket line. Unlike your incredibly selfish and self-centered profession that revolves entirely around money (shit, the rhetoric went south again...), musicians are collaborators. We work together. On everything. When a musician gets screwed, we band together because we know if one of us gets screwed, it won't be long before all of us get screwed. and never, ever, compare yourself to this, even in jest:
If your kazoo playing can come close to this, I'll write you a concerto.
"Musicians who fancy themselves irreplaceable remind me of the federal air traffic controllers who were justifiably fired in 1981 when they arrogantly broke federal law."
Wow, what a horrible comparison. That's like comparing Mr. Alfidi's blog post to Mein Kompf--both are written documents full of vitriol, political ideas, and skewed perspectives. But that's not much to go off of.
13,000 air traffic controllers went on strike. When they did, all planes in the US were grounded. 2,000 went back to work, and other replacements, mainly military personnel and other people willing to learn the job took over.
You're comparing 13,000 people to around 150. You're comparing a public industry vs. a private not-for-profit. You're comparing a job that risks the lives of thousands to those that provide a service. No, this comparison is completely invalid. Maybe Mr. Alfidi should go back to school and take a logic course...Oops, the derision has come back. There's little comparison beyond "they're on strike and you don't like it."
"Performing classical works in one of the greatest cities in the world is an honor and a privilege that countless musicians dream of having. The spoiled union brats on strike for exorbitant pay no longer deserve such an honor. Their selfish action denies music to fans and brings shame to The City."
First off, I didn't know San Fran was called "The City." That's a pretty haughty claim right there.
Second, honor and privilege doesn't pay the bills. It doesn't put food on the table. This is one of the biggest problems in music today. And I don't just mean classical music.
This idea of "exposure." that it's a "big deal and you should be thankful." Mr. Alfidi thinks that, at best, music professionals should be interns.
Because we do what we love for the sake of doing what we love.
Because it's an "entertainment industry"
Because it doesn't make tons of money, as a corporation.
Oh, Mr. Alfidi, just because you hate your job and secretly wish you had become a pianist like Joseph Alfidi doesn't mean you can bring out your vitriol. Just because you don't understand what it means to be a musician, doesn't mean you can tell us what our profession requires. You don't see me screaming that YOU'RE making too much, that the financial industry is one of the main sources of ruin in America, that investors such as yourself Mr. Alfidi were the reason for the economic downturn, not the millions of hard-working Americans, just doing their jobs. That, somehow, you have "power" because you can trade shares of a company you know nothing about beyond their profit possibilities.
Let's be honest, a high schooler with decent math skills, the ability to read graphs, and make guesses based upon the numbers they see could do your job. Anyone that feels like learning a little math and sitting down could do your job. Do you know how many musicians I went to school with that couldn't get a symphony job decided to go into the financial world? Do you know how many are making as much or more than you? Because, guess what, they dealt in far more math every day.
So, yeah, I'm a bit irritated, because this is an example of someone that has absolutely no idea what he is talking about talking down to other people, demanding their jobs because he just doesn't get it. Well, guess what, any joe schmo can do that. I just did it to you. Does it mean that my claims are correct?
Are my statistics any better than Mr. Alfidi's?
Are my insults more stinging?
Did i not link wikipedia enough?
In other words, Mr. Alfidi, only one thing was really shown here: How to put together an argument. And here are my closing remarks:
Orchestra musicians are top tier professionals in their area. I have previously said in posts that, yes, sometimes we as musicians are over-paid. That sometimes, we have to share in the sacrifice to make sure music happens. But what's been happening in America isn't a shared sacrifice. Here's a break-down of what happened in Indy. There were no cuts to administrative positions, nor CEO pay. In Atlanta, there were 16% cuts for musicians, the CEO took a 6% cut, and no word on other administrative positions. How is this a fair share?
Was this the right to for San Fran to strike? Are their demands fair? Unlike Mr. Alfidi, I'm not going to weigh in exactly. I haven't read the arguments. I was on top of it in Indy, Atlanta, and Minnesota. But, I haven't been on top of this one. But, I can assume, that whatever is happening, it's not fair. We're looking at time when orchestras are having to transform. But what they're doing isn't selfish, it isn't dishonourable. No, they're fighting because they have to fight. They're fighting because there have already been too many loses. As it is, music is becoming a commodity people want for free. There are musicians in KC playing all night gigs for under $100, when they bring in a crowds of people paying a cover and buying tons of drinks. There are audio engineers offering their home studios for $15/hour. Musicians are pricing themselves into obscurity.
Musicians are people, real people, who have worked their whole lives to become top professionals. And they are top professionals Mr. Alfidi. If they were in the same industry as you, they'd be your boss 1000 times over. I've been at this for 22 years of my life, and I still can't hold a candle to some of these musicians. And I don't expect to get paid $146,000. I expect to make a living wage based upon what I do. But with 22 years of experience, I bet I've got you beat. And I'm a small business owner, an entrepreneur, and an innovator, not so much unlike yourself.
So, before you attack a group of musicians for wanting more than the "median" income, maybe you should realize, these aren't "average" works. They're the best of the best fighting for their place in this world, a place that is slowly shrinking because CEOs demand more money, and that "median" income can't buy a ticket anymore. And they're people, who've given more of their lives to their profession than you have even known what your profession was. They're people, Mr. Alfidi. Your blog posts rail against CEOs getting paid bonuses on failing companies, espouse a love for small businesses, and yet you're staunchly anti-union. You rally often for people, but against the structure that protects them.
Before your next post, why not read up on the symphony structure? why not come up with meaningful comparisons. Mr. Alfidi's blog isn't all full of vitriol. He wants innovation, wants to move forward...But this post was as far off as you can get, by someone as far outside the industry as possible. And, maybe, make a meaningful addition to the dialogue.
**update one, on why orchestras aren't supposed to "make money"
**update two, contract ratified, final remarks
**update two, contract ratified, final remarks
This in response to one of the most idiotic rants against the striking San Francisco Orchestra musicians I've ever seen.
Anthony Alfidi, a "founding genius" of Alfidi Capital lays into the striking musicians pretty hard. First off, who is this guy? Well, turns out he went to Notre Dame and University of San Francisco, with degrees in Human Resources (wtf kind of degree is that anyway? Hey, let me teach you how to fire someone!), and an MBA in Finance (my mom has one of those. Great degrees that you pay a bunch of money for and mean nothing). He started Alfidi Capital because he was stuck in "dead end jobs" with other marketing firms. He's been investing since college, and has made money, so listen to this guys advice.
Now, I don't usually use this tone in a blog. I'm not usually this derisive, especially about things I have limited experience in. I say limited because, unlike Alfidi, I HAVE worked in similar circumstances, know a thing or two about human resources and management. unlike Alfidi, i worked in small mom-and-pop start-ups. While doing so, I took the time to listen, pay attention, and ask questions about the business side. Plus, I read a book or two about starting businesses, so I know everything there is to know. AND, back in HS, we played the stock market and I came out way ahead by investing heavily in Krispy Kreme, assuming Americans like to be fat.
Oops, slipped into the tone again. Alright, enough of that. Unlike Alfidi, while I can be just as dismissive of everything he does, I'd rather look at facts, and compare them to different sides of the argument. So, let's start off from the top of his little ignorant blog post.
"I was under the impression that every true artist in the world aspired to play at Carnegie Hall."
Well, sir, you're wrong. And, if you run through the list of people who play for the SFO, I bet they've all already played there, if for no other reason than, if memory serves, they played Carnegie Hall's 1998 opening gala. So, um, yeah, they've been there.
And won an Emmy, 4 Grammys for Best Classical Album, 3 Grammys for best choral performance, 4 Grammys for best orchestral performance, and one for Best Rock Instrumental Performance (The Call of Ktulu in 2001 with Metallica). So, yeah, this isn't their main aspiration.
Mr. Alfidi also seems to assume that venue is a big deal. Sorry sir, it only matters a little bit for younger musicians. Building the resume kinda thing...kinda like you had to work for this "other firms" before you could launch your own. Carnegie is a stepping stone, not an end point.
"...these union thugs in tuxedos are unsatisfied with a base salary of $141,700. That is far above the San Francisco median household income of $72,947."
Hey, you're right! go statistics proving whatever we want! let's do some other comparisons, with numbers.
The median expected salary for a typical CEO in US is $727,044. The median for a CEO in San Fran is $871,864. Wow, they make far less than a CEO. Now, let's compare it to something a bit more fitting. Oh, and the SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY CEO MAKES $495,000! But that's not to blame, he's entitled to it, because you understand what his job is.
A major symphony musician has gone through years of training, not some HS student, or maybe 10 years of lessons. The majority of these musicians hold doctorates (hey, they're more educated than you Mr. Alfidi, but then, so am I). They play for what is probably the second or third best orchestra in the world. Let's say, this is like a Financial Associate. Here's a description of their job. It's a pretty meat and potato kind of job in the Financial industry--pretty much a giant catch all. You sell, advise, and plan financial services, from stocks to insurance. So, basically, what you do Mr. Alfidi.
So, how much would a TOP TIER financial associate make in San Francisco? We're talking someone with 20+ years in the game, is a manager, and is training the next generation. According to salary.com, $142,810.
Oh, i get it now. Mr. Alfidi is jealous! He's jealous because he's still somewhat young, is working in a startup, and is probably making in the lower percentile of this job. OR because he is making around the median, and he can't believe someone in a non-financial industry job could possibly make this much. Hmmm...
So, a top tier musician is getting paid slightly less than a top tier ASSOCIATE in the financial industry in San Francisco. Hm...statistics, funny thing, isn't it.
"Making over $85K per year to do something a talented high school musician can do for free is pretty generous."
Really, a talented HS musician? Alright, let's do some comparisons. NOTE: THESE ARE NOT MEANT TO MAKE THE HS STUDENTS FEEL BAD! You're in HS, keep practicing, and you'll be there!
Here's a video of San Francisco Symphony playing the BBC PROMS, MAHLER SYMPHONY 7!
Alright, there's a few things there to think about. 1) BBC PROMS > Carnegie Hall. 2) HOLY SHIT THAT WAS AWESOME!
Now, here's Idyillwild Arts Academy playing Mahler Symphony 2. Sorry, couldn't find a symphony 7 video. Because, it's a bit of a challenge.
BEFORE POSTING, CONGRATS TO IDYILLWILD ARTS ACADEMY! This is a beautiful recording and you all should be proud! And if you keep working, you'll have a shot at the SF Orchestra. Really, I am impressed for your level. MR. ALFIDI, here's an incredibly talented group of HS students.
Again, congrats to Idyillwild Arts Academy. This is a very good, moving performance of a difficult piece! Keep at it and you'll be able to go pro!
Sorry Mr. Alfidi, you're about as far off as possible. If this amazing group of HS students, a private school, cream of the crop type group, can't handle SFO, then you've lost this one.
"If the symphony needs a scab played for the triangle or tambourine to help break the strike, then I volunteer to perform for free. I've had no music education, but those instruments don't look difficult"
Yep, they're cake. Here's a video of Pedro Estevan playing tambourine. Go ahead, tell me you can do this.
Because, if you can handle that simple little thing, then I'll even PAY you to do my next premiere.
"I'm willing to solo O Mio Babbino Caro on a kazoo if Renee Fleming can't elbow her way through the union's picket line."
First off, there is no way in hell Renee Fleming would elbow her way through a picket line. Unlike your incredibly selfish and self-centered profession that revolves entirely around money (shit, the rhetoric went south again...), musicians are collaborators. We work together. On everything. When a musician gets screwed, we band together because we know if one of us gets screwed, it won't be long before all of us get screwed. and never, ever, compare yourself to this, even in jest:
If your kazoo playing can come close to this, I'll write you a concerto.
"Musicians who fancy themselves irreplaceable remind me of the federal air traffic controllers who were justifiably fired in 1981 when they arrogantly broke federal law."
Wow, what a horrible comparison. That's like comparing Mr. Alfidi's blog post to Mein Kompf--both are written documents full of vitriol, political ideas, and skewed perspectives. But that's not much to go off of.
13,000 air traffic controllers went on strike. When they did, all planes in the US were grounded. 2,000 went back to work, and other replacements, mainly military personnel and other people willing to learn the job took over.
You're comparing 13,000 people to around 150. You're comparing a public industry vs. a private not-for-profit. You're comparing a job that risks the lives of thousands to those that provide a service. No, this comparison is completely invalid. Maybe Mr. Alfidi should go back to school and take a logic course...Oops, the derision has come back. There's little comparison beyond "they're on strike and you don't like it."
"Performing classical works in one of the greatest cities in the world is an honor and a privilege that countless musicians dream of having. The spoiled union brats on strike for exorbitant pay no longer deserve such an honor. Their selfish action denies music to fans and brings shame to The City."
First off, I didn't know San Fran was called "The City." That's a pretty haughty claim right there.
Second, honor and privilege doesn't pay the bills. It doesn't put food on the table. This is one of the biggest problems in music today. And I don't just mean classical music.
This idea of "exposure." that it's a "big deal and you should be thankful." Mr. Alfidi thinks that, at best, music professionals should be interns.
Because we do what we love for the sake of doing what we love.
Because it's an "entertainment industry"
Because it doesn't make tons of money, as a corporation.
Oh, Mr. Alfidi, just because you hate your job and secretly wish you had become a pianist like Joseph Alfidi doesn't mean you can bring out your vitriol. Just because you don't understand what it means to be a musician, doesn't mean you can tell us what our profession requires. You don't see me screaming that YOU'RE making too much, that the financial industry is one of the main sources of ruin in America, that investors such as yourself Mr. Alfidi were the reason for the economic downturn, not the millions of hard-working Americans, just doing their jobs. That, somehow, you have "power" because you can trade shares of a company you know nothing about beyond their profit possibilities.
Let's be honest, a high schooler with decent math skills, the ability to read graphs, and make guesses based upon the numbers they see could do your job. Anyone that feels like learning a little math and sitting down could do your job. Do you know how many musicians I went to school with that couldn't get a symphony job decided to go into the financial world? Do you know how many are making as much or more than you? Because, guess what, they dealt in far more math every day.
So, yeah, I'm a bit irritated, because this is an example of someone that has absolutely no idea what he is talking about talking down to other people, demanding their jobs because he just doesn't get it. Well, guess what, any joe schmo can do that. I just did it to you. Does it mean that my claims are correct?
Are my statistics any better than Mr. Alfidi's?
Are my insults more stinging?
Did i not link wikipedia enough?
In other words, Mr. Alfidi, only one thing was really shown here: How to put together an argument. And here are my closing remarks:
Orchestra musicians are top tier professionals in their area. I have previously said in posts that, yes, sometimes we as musicians are over-paid. That sometimes, we have to share in the sacrifice to make sure music happens. But what's been happening in America isn't a shared sacrifice. Here's a break-down of what happened in Indy. There were no cuts to administrative positions, nor CEO pay. In Atlanta, there were 16% cuts for musicians, the CEO took a 6% cut, and no word on other administrative positions. How is this a fair share?
Was this the right to for San Fran to strike? Are their demands fair? Unlike Mr. Alfidi, I'm not going to weigh in exactly. I haven't read the arguments. I was on top of it in Indy, Atlanta, and Minnesota. But, I haven't been on top of this one. But, I can assume, that whatever is happening, it's not fair. We're looking at time when orchestras are having to transform. But what they're doing isn't selfish, it isn't dishonourable. No, they're fighting because they have to fight. They're fighting because there have already been too many loses. As it is, music is becoming a commodity people want for free. There are musicians in KC playing all night gigs for under $100, when they bring in a crowds of people paying a cover and buying tons of drinks. There are audio engineers offering their home studios for $15/hour. Musicians are pricing themselves into obscurity.
Musicians are people, real people, who have worked their whole lives to become top professionals. And they are top professionals Mr. Alfidi. If they were in the same industry as you, they'd be your boss 1000 times over. I've been at this for 22 years of my life, and I still can't hold a candle to some of these musicians. And I don't expect to get paid $146,000. I expect to make a living wage based upon what I do. But with 22 years of experience, I bet I've got you beat. And I'm a small business owner, an entrepreneur, and an innovator, not so much unlike yourself.
So, before you attack a group of musicians for wanting more than the "median" income, maybe you should realize, these aren't "average" works. They're the best of the best fighting for their place in this world, a place that is slowly shrinking because CEOs demand more money, and that "median" income can't buy a ticket anymore. And they're people, who've given more of their lives to their profession than you have even known what your profession was. They're people, Mr. Alfidi. Your blog posts rail against CEOs getting paid bonuses on failing companies, espouse a love for small businesses, and yet you're staunchly anti-union. You rally often for people, but against the structure that protects them.
Before your next post, why not read up on the symphony structure? why not come up with meaningful comparisons. Mr. Alfidi's blog isn't all full of vitriol. He wants innovation, wants to move forward...But this post was as far off as you can get, by someone as far outside the industry as possible. And, maybe, make a meaningful addition to the dialogue.
**update one, on why orchestras aren't supposed to "make money"
**update two, contract ratified, final remarks
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)