The Anti-Mutter

While anyone might be forgiven for thinking this photograph depicts Shirley Stoler, in fact it is a photograph of American cellist Alisa Weilerstein.

Weilerstein is twenty years younger than Anne-Sophie Mutter—yet Weilerstein looks old enough to be Mutter’s mother.

A friend of mine from Vienna was in Oslo on business this past week, and he happened to attend a concert of the Oslo Philharmonic. The conductor and soloist were the infamous Weilersteins, brother Joshua and sister Alisa, one of the more bizarre brother-and-sister acts to have entered the field of show business over the last hundred years.

My Viennese friend said the concert was the worst concert he had ever attended (my friend is my age, comes from a musical family, and has been attending concerts and recitals since he was fifteen years old). He said the Weilersteins came across like bumpkins at a fancy-dress ball. He said they were personifications of the stepsisters in the ballet, “Cinderella”: ugly, clumsy, crass, low-class—and perpetually clueless, and perpetually on-the-make. The Weilersteins were, he said, I Trashisti Puri.

I have had the misfortune of hearing cellist Weilerstein, both in concert and in recital.

After hearing Weilerstein play the Shostakovich Cello Concerto No. 1 with the Saint Petersburg Philharmonic under Yuri Temirkanov in April 2011 in Boston, I wrote:

Weilerstein was inaudible much of the afternoon. The Concerto is a series of personal utterances for the soloist, tempered with isolated public outbursts, and only the outbursts involve full orchestra. Issues of audibility should not arise in this work.

Yet Weilerstein was barely audible when unaccompanied, even in the lengthy third-movement cadenza. She disappeared completely in passages involving full orchestra. I wonder whether Weilerstein plays an inferior instrument.

Weilerstein must have an Actors’ Equity card. She performed a series of moon faces for the audience while she performed. She also engaged in unnecessary and ostentatious playacting gestures when applying bow to strings.

The disparity between the largeness of Weilerstein’s onstage dramatics and the smallness of her sound was disconcerting.

After hearing Weilerstein in recital (Beethoven, Barber, Stravinsky, Rachmaninoff) in January 2013 in Saint Paul, I wrote:

Weilerstein is a capable instrumentalist, but she is not an interesting musician. Her playing is bland; it lacks personality and individuality and character and depth. Everything she plays sounds much the same—and, to my ears, remarkably insincere.

Weilerstein is thirty years old. Her musicianship is that of someone ten years younger, which signifies that Weilerstein is developing far too slowly . . . or has no business embarking upon a solo career. Weilerstein appears to be—and very much acts like—the prototypical American airhead, with very little between the ears.

Throughout the recital, Weilerstein emoted shamelessly.

Her facial muscles received the workout of a lifetime; it was exhausting—and ultimately demoralizing—to watch Weilerstein go through her prepared facial maneuvers. Her eyebrows, alone, embarked on a Marine Corps-like lifting regimen demanding unprecedented strength and endurance.

Weilerstein threw her head—and mountains of hair—back and forth and side-to-side all night, like some madwoman in a 1930s Warner Brothers prison movie; her ostentatious, ultra-dramatic bow movements, clearly rehearsed, were straight from 19th-Century “She Can’t Pay The Rent” melodrama.

I hadn’t seen such hokey onstage dramatics since . . . the last time I saw Weilerstein.

The above photograph of Weilerstein, incomprehensibly, is an official publicity photograph—a publicity photograph gone horribly awry. If I were the artist, not only would I not have cleared the photograph, I would have sued.

How can anyone do other than laugh at the photo? The upturned face to hide the double chin; the fake dreamy gaze on the subject’s face; the subject’s pig-like eyes; the revolting makeup scheme intended to give the illusion that the subject has a facial structure; the ridiculous (and supremely unflattering) hair; the gown that looks totally preposterous on such a blob-like body: the photograph is instant camp.

Doesn’t this woman have any idea how grotesque she looks? Doesn’t she have friends who can help her get her presentation in order?

To begin repairs, as a first measure, I would suggest that it’s time to lay off the Cocoa Puffs.

A Chain Composer Objects To A Chain Restaurant

There is an exquisitely retro steakhouse [in Indianapolis] (retro in the sense of it having been around for 100 years) and a funny wine bar and a hipster cocktail boîte and all that, and then there are the cancerous and ubiquitous chains. There is something grotesque to me about there being this wonderful steakhouse St Elmó, and then just up the street the linguistically repellant chain steakhouse “Ruth’s Chris,” whatever that means, opens up shop. I feel like the people should take to the streets with pitchforks to protest that ****.

Nico Muhly, 9 February 2013

Apparently abject lack of originality in music composition is perfectly acceptable—rewriting someone else’s music, over and over, is to be admired if not celebrated—but every steakhouse on every corner in every city must be different from all others.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving

As I have written before, the internet is the greatest tool ever invented for public and profligate display of idiocy.

One of the great imbeciles of the worldwide web, William Eddins, whom I have had to take apart before, is at it again. Recently decrying the music of Arnold Schoenberg (spelled “Shoenberg” in the alternate universe in which Eddins resides), Eddins claimed that Schoenberg’s music was a principle cause of the decline in concert attendance in recent decades.

Eddins specifically invoked the music of Schoenberg to explain declining attendance in recent seasons at the Minnesota Orchestra and Saint Paul Chamber Orchestra. Eddins, alas, neglected to mention that the Minnesota Orchestra and Saint Paul Chamber Orchestra do not often program the music of Schoenberg, which is especially the case with the former ensemble.

Eddins’s statements about Schoenberg were the statements of a moron. He was, quite naturally, obliged to change his argument once challenged, and claim that in fact he had been preaching not against Schoenberg but against “orthodoxy”—whatever that is in Eddins’s muddled mind.

Since November 2008, when I took advantage of delicious opportunity and skewered Eddins, Eddins has provided countless additional fodder for rich mirth and glee. However, I never bothered to take advantage of the fresh material and engage in further merrymaking—after all, when the target is as unintelligent as Eddins, it becomes ungenerous to point out imbecility more than once or twice. The man’s stupidity speaks for itself.

Today, however, I could not help but notice that Randol Schoenberg took Eddins on. Schoenberg was all too happy to note, repeatedly, that Eddins is not the brightest bulb in the closet or the sharpest tool in the shed.

The sad part is that what Schoenberg wrote was probably over Eddins’s head.

Cause And Effect

[Zarin Mehta, President and Executive Director of the New York Philharmonic] noted that the Berlin Wall fell 30 years after the Philharmonic, led by Leonard Bernstein, played Moscow in 1959.

“Things don’t happen overnight,” he said.

________________________________________________


No, they do not.

And the Berlin Wall was not ERECTED until 1961.

Conclusion: massive nexus failure.

________________________________________________


Mehta, of course, is the same moron that appointed Alan Gilbert to the post of Music Director of the New York Philharmonic.

Under Gilbert, the NYPO has experienced a significant decline in ticket sales and has suffered its largest-ever single-season deficit, both of which might have been foretold the day Gilbert’s disastrous appointment was announced.

Simply put, serious music-lovers are not going to pay to hear Alan Gilbert.

At least anyone who knows anyone can now get free tickets to all Gilbert-led NYPO concerts: the orchestra has been reduced to papering Avery Fisher Hall for Gilbert concerts.

Indeed, for the bulk of Gilbert’s NYPO concerts, more complimentary tickets have been distributed than tickets sold to paying customers.

Yet despite heavy papering, the hall is seldom even half-full for Gilbert concerts.

I wonder whether Mehta has identified the cause of the NYPO’s attendance woes for Gilbert concerts.

Everyone else already knows the answer—after all, NYPO attendance remains robust for concerts featuring guest conductors of quality—but Mehta very well may be preparing to advance some crackpot cause-and-effect theory akin to his absurd if not idiotic pronouncement about the NYPO and the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Two Of The Most Idiotic Statements Of All Time

Two of the most idiotic statements of all time, offered by two of the biggest idiots of all time:

________________________________________________


Smetena’s Moldau speaks of the joy of life lived fully.

The New Yorker Music Writer Alex Ross

My jaw drops. I have never encountered a more idiotic statement. Is this moron channeling Walter Damrosch?

Yet even Damrosch never would have written anything half so foolish.

And even Damrosch knew how to spell “Smetana”.

The famous tone poem—by Smetana, not “Smetena”—positively seethes with Czech melancholy and longing.

“Speaks of the joy of life lived fully”? I cannot believe anyone would have the face to write such nonsense.

________________________________________________


The band at the celebrations we went to (in Titusville, where friends live) was playing it—and I realized that a Yiddish song performed by three Greek sisters is what America is all about!

The New York Times Political Writer Paul Krugman, writing about music heard on The Fourth Of July

My jaw drops. A Yiddish song performed by three Greek sisters is what America is all about? This is what our ancestors fought for?

Let freedom ring.

No wonder other professors at Princeton openly and pointedly and repeatedly called Krugman a fool (and far worse).

________________________________________________


I grieve for this nation.

And it must be stated, once again: we live in a nation of morons.

However, I must also note—with some small measure of optimism—that justice is being accomplished.

Twenty years ago, one could go into any residence in Edina and see The New Yorker and The New York Times on coffee tables in every home. Today, one never encounters either publication. Today, one sees The Wall Street Journal and The Financial Times instead.

Over a two-decade period, educated persons abandoned The New Yorker and The New York Times. The two publications lost their credibility—and lost their readerships. The New Yorker and The New York Times became hardcore screed sheets, with the consequence that they are now read only by the Hard Left.

In the process, The New Yorker and The New York Times became huge money-losing enterprises, two of the biggest money-losers in the entire world of publishing. The New Yorker and The New York Times are drowning in red ink, continually cutting costs and yet continually losing ever-larger sums; advertisers have switched allegiances; and the parent companies are overwhelmed with mountains of debt, most of which will never be repaid. Neither The New Yorker nor The New York Times will be around twenty years from now.

Twenty years ago, The New York Times enjoyed America’s largest newspaper circulation, far, far outselling every other newspaper. Today The Wall Street Journal outsells The New York Times by a factor of more than three-to-one. The rise of The Wall Street Journal and the decline of The New York Times has been the most extraordinary story in the field of journalism of the last twenty years—and the end result has been the most extraordinary change in newspaper readership in American publishing history. Remarkably, this dramatic change occurred in less than one generation.

Twenty years ago, The New York Times was consistently voted the globe’s finest newspaper by the worldwide newspaper association that annually ranks newspapers from all advanced countries. For the last ten years, The Wall Street Journal and The Financial Times have occupied spots numbers one and two, vying with each other year-by-year for top bragging rights. The New York Times no longer even appears on the list of top ten worldwide newspapers (newspapers in France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Switzerland are now more highly-regarded than the once-mighty Times).

Twenty years ago, The Wall Street Journal and The Financial Times were not money-making enterprises; their owners strove merely to break even and somehow stay afloat.

Today The Wall Street Journal and The Financial Times are highly profitable, as are their parent companies. In fact, The Wall Street Journal and The Financial Times are two of only a handful of profitable newspapers anywhere in the world.

Twenty years ago, The Financial Times was not available for sale throughout most of the United States. Today one may pick up The Financial Times at any news outlet nationwide—or at any food store or drug store or convenience store.

These things are as they should be—and they also give cause for reassurance: while we may live in a nation of morons, not everyone in our nation is a moron.

And yet one question remains: what are idiots like Alex Ross and Paul Krugman going to do once their publications fold and they no longer enjoy forums from which to espouse and promulgate conspicuous idiocy?

I suspect both are too obtuse to realize their fates are cast.

Iowa's Sally Mason

The photograph below is not a joke, and it has not been altered in any way.


The photograph depicts Sally Mason, President of the University Of Iowa, opening a jewelry store in Iowa City, Iowa, on April 2, 2011.

In the photograph, Mason presents herself in a manner totally inapt for a professional educator, let alone a university president. Her attire is more appropriate for attending a livestock auction than presiding over the affairs of a large state university—and it looks as if her entire ensemble were picked up for $5.00 at Goodwill Industries.

The photograph reveals a woman that is pure hillbilly.

Examine closely her hair. Examine closely her teeth. Examine those squinty eyes. Examine those hardened facial muscles.

The woman in the photograph is appalling: unknowingly, she represents both tragedy and farce, and in equal measure. I gawk in amazement.

I would think that people affiliated with the University Of Iowa, or any resident of the State Of Iowa, would be appalled over the spectacle Mason presents.

I would also think, given the vast array of critical problems facing the University Of Iowa, that opening an incredibly crummy, down-market jewelry store is not a productive use of the President’s time.

However, I suspect this woman is incapable of embarrassment.

I must echo what former Senator Robert Dole was wont to say: Where is the outrage?

This foolish woman should have been fired within months of her 2007 appointment.

Iowa Board Of Regents: Do your job!

(And thank you, Joel, for the photograph. I am getting lots of Iowa visitors in recent days.)

Update at 7:35 p.m. on 28 April 2011:

I knew Sally Mason was unpopular, but I did not know how truly unpopular she was until I published this post. This post has generated an enormous number of visitors, about half of which are from the University Of Iowa and about half of which are from other universities.

This post was published 42 hours ago. Its search result ranking already is in the stratosphere.

If one googles "Sally Mason Iowa", this post is, as of this moment, the number six search result among 9,770,000 search results for "Sally Mason Iowa".

If one googles "Sally Mason Iowa", the image appearing on this post is, as of this moment, the number three image search result among 118,000 image search results for "Sally Mason Iowa".

"A Celebration Of Excellence And Achievement"

Surfing the web while Joshua has been preparing for his final exams (his “final finals”, as Josh calls them), I somehow came across this extravagant bit of foolishness that has had both of us howling and hooting for the last 24 hours.

I emailed it to my father, who roared with laughter, and I emailed it to several friends, who suggested that such conspicuous, screaming cant deserves wider dissemination—if for no other reason than that all persons mentioned in or associated with this ridiculous press release may be mortified, publicly, into perpetuity.

If one were to create a satirical press release, intending to point out how our institutions of higher learning are in grave crisis at present, the press release below would serve as role model. Not a single word would need to be changed.

I reprint the press release in full.

University of Iowa News Release, March 30, 2011

Annual tribute to women at the UI to be held April 5

A Celebration of Excellence and Achievement Among Women, the University of Iowa's annual tribute to the accomplishments of women at the university, will be held Tuesday, April 5, in the Senate Chamber of the Old Capitol. A reception will begin at 3:30 p.m., followed by the awards program at 4 p.m.

[The first paragraph prepares the reader for what will follow: everyone instinctively understands that awards reserved for a particular classification of recipient inherently have nothing whatsoever to do with “excellence” or “achievement”.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that the second use of the word "university" in the paragraph should have been capitalized.]

This annual event recognizes outstanding scholarship, research, service, leadership and activism among UI undergraduate, graduate, staff and faculty women.

[The word “activism” is always a sure tip-off that the awards in question are, prima facie, dubious, and are intended above all to reward ideology.]

Georgina Dodge, chief diversity officer and associate provost, will present the keynote address. Master of ceremonies will be Teresa Mangum, director of the Obermann Center for Advanced Studies and associate professor of English.

[The word “diversity” is always a sure tip-off that the word “merit” will have no place in the award scheme.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that official titles such as "Chief Diversity Officer", "Associate Provost", "Master Of Ceremonies", "Director" and "Associate Professor" must be capitalized.]

The UI Distinguished Achievement Award will be given to Marcella David, associate dean for International and Comparative Programs and professor in the College of Law and Jane Paulsen, professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine. The Jean Y. Jew Women's Rights Award will be given to Pauline Brine, Elizabeth Pelton and Nancy Thompson.

[The Christian names Marcella, Jane, Lucille and Jean—as well as Pauline, Elizabeth and Nancy—are the same as female characters in the 1925 musical, “No, No, Nanette”.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that a comma was required after "College of Law"; otherwise, it becomes the nonsensical "College of Law and Jane Paulsen".

And, once again, someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be reminded that official titles must be capitalized.]

The Distinguished Achievement Award is presented to staff or faculty members who have significant years of service within the university community, who are pioneers in their work or service; and are role models for women and/or girls.

[The word “pioneer” is always a sure tip-off that the awards are for profoundly mundane and unimaginative deeds. No sane person uses the word “pioneer” in the context set forth in the press release.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised of the inappropriate use of the semi-colon. Have rules of punctuation been outlawed in Iowa? And proof-reading prohibited pursuant to some misguided provision in the University Code Of Conduct?]

David returned to the law school faculty in January 2010 after serving more than five years in central administration, most recently as special assistant to the president for equal opportunity and diversity and associate provost for diversity from 2006-2009.

[The phrase “equal opportunity” is seldom encountered anymore. It has, more or less, disappeared from the lexicon. Everyone now understands the phrase “equal opportunity” to mean “preferential treatment”, just as everyone now understands “diversity” to mean “lower standards”. They are corrupt terms, and are in the process of being abandoned.

Of course, “preferential treatment” and “lower standards” typify both the University Of Iowa Administration and the University Of Iowa Law School, two profoundly troubled enclaves that do not even arise to the level of mediocrity.

The recipient of the award, clearly, has been carefully chosen.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised, once again, that official offices and official titles must be capitalized.]

She joined the law faculty in 1995. From 1991-92, she studied Human Rights and Comparative Law as a Ford Foundation Fellow in Public International Law at the Harvard Law School. Her research interests include the use of economic and other sanctions, international criminal law, and questions related to international organizations. Her research has included impact of economic sanctions in Iraq and South Africa.

[The press release is accompanied by a photograph of this woman, which I am thoughtful enough not to reproduce.

Can anyone be surprised that mention of economic sanctions against Libya, Iran and North Korea, among other rogue nations, is conspicuously absent?

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that there is no "the" preceding references to "Harvard Law School". There is, however, a requirement that the word "the" be inserted before "impact" in the paragraph's last sentence.

Are professional writers, grammarians and proof-readers on strike in Iowa?]

Among her accomplishments at the UI is the development of the Philip G. Hubbard Law School Preparation Program. This summer pre-law program seeks to support diversity in the legal profession by inspiring students from groups historically under-represented in the law to become lawyers and by providing them with the skills and assistance that will strengthen their preparation for law school. More than 200 students from under-represented groups have taken part in the program over nine years.

[The phrase “pre-law program” is always a sure tip-off that what one really is talking about is “remedial training”. Excellent law schools do not admit persons in need of remedial training.

This unfortunate “pre-law program” suggests that the University Of Iowa Law School is admitting unqualified persons, and is producing not lawyers but glorified paralegals.]

Paulsen, professor of psychiatry in the Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, researches the neuropsychological aspects of Huntington's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease and schizophrenia. She has attracted funding from the National Institutes of Health and the High Q Foundation to support the largest clinical research program ever undertaken in Huntington's Disease, and her findings represent the greatest growth in knowledge about the disease since study of it began. The Huntington's Disease Society of America has given the program its Center of Excellence Award every year since 2000. Paulsen directs the division of psychology within the Department of Psychiatry, and she also directs the department's neuropsychiatry service.

[The press release’s accompanying photograph of this woman, which I am considerate enough not to reproduce, reveals a woman whose countenance I find frightening.

If one glosses over the text, merely skimming the announcement, one might be justified in thinking that the discussion involves a recipient rather than a provider of psychiatric care.]

She receives the highest evaluations for her teaching and presentations and is known as a caring and effective mentor. She has mentored more than 30 graduate students, and supervision and training to 27 undergraduates, 14 interns and 13 postdoctoral fellows. The vast majority of these trainees have been women, and Paulsen has been an excellent role model for them on how to succeed in an academic career.

[“The vast majority of these trainees have been women”—well, that bone-jarring admission certainly raises one’s antennae (as well as raises serious legal issues). “Role model on how to succeed in an academic career”—well, once again, that unpleasant turn-of-phrase definitely causes one’s eyebrows to arch.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that the word "provided" should have been inserted immediately before "supervision and training", or else "supervision and training" replaced with "supervised and trained".

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that correct usage demands that "the vast majority . . . has been women" replace the incorrect "the vast majority . . . have been women".]

The Jean Y. Jew Women's Rights Award is named for a professor of anatomy who fought an uphill battle for more than a decade to defend herself against slander and sexual harassment from faculty in her department, a struggle that she ultimately won. Given annually by the Council on the Status of Women and the Women's Resource and Action Center (WRAC), the award honors a faculty, staff or student member of the university community who has demonstrated outstanding effort or achievement in improving the status of women on campus.

[The name of the award mentioned in this paragraph, as well as the acronyms, were stolen—surely—from back issues of Mad Magazine circa 1973.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be reminded, again, that official titles must be capitalized.]

This year's recipients, Elizabeth Pelton, Pauline Brine, and Nancy Thompson, (pictured left to right, with attorney Kelly McClelland, third from left) were tenured associate professors in the dental hygiene program at the UI College of Dentistry; Brine was the chair of the department. In 1991, UI officials decided to eliminate the dental hygiene program, but Brine, Pelton and Thompson filed suit against the university claiming that the scheduled closing discriminated against the all-female program. They embarked on a five-year struggle to retain the program, pursuing the case through both administrative and legal channels.

[The photograph accompanying this paragraph is too gruesome to contemplate. Accordingly, as a matter of good taste, I shall not reproduce it here.

In fact, I am not entirely certain that the photograph is not some vast put-on.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that a comma is required between the words "university" and "claiming". Otherwise, it is the university itself that becomes the party alleging discrimination. ]

They lost the legal battle after several appeals and the UI ultimately closed the department in 1995, but in nomination materials Sharon M. Lake wrote, "Their loss does not diminish the significance of their fight – nor render their efforts meaningless. They empowered all women by example. Their bold legal strategy made a significant contribution to the history of resistance to sex discrimination, and their struggle remains a vital cultural resource for future women's rights campaigns on this campus in this state and in the U.S."

[The word “empowered” is always a sure tip-off that the persons “empowered” have officially been ruled losers.

Praxiteles is a vital cultural resource. Saint Augustine is a vital cultural resource. Rubens is a vital cultural resource. Beethoven is a vital cultural resource. Dostoyevsky is a vital cultural resource. Carlyle is a vital cultural resource. A “struggle” over a dental hygiene program in Iowa City, Iowa, some twenty years ago, is not “a vital cultural resource”—not even when measured by the floor-level standards used by the University Of Iowa.

And who is Sharon M. Lake (whose grammatical errors the author of the press release presumably felt obliged to preserve)?

Mysteries abound.]

Pelton is associate professor emeritus in the Department of Health and Sport Studies in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and Thompson is associate professor in the Department of Community and Behavioral Health in the College of Public Health.

[The designations “Department Of Health And Sport Studies” and “Department Of Community And Behavioral Health” reveal all one needs to know—and constitute a timely warning that a university with such-named departments is not, indeed, a Princeton, a Yale or a Harvard. It is, instead, nothing more than an oversized if not bloated community college.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be reminded yet again about the rules of capitalization. Why, for instance, does the press release capitalize departments, and not capitalize titles within departments?]

Student scholarships will include the Margaret P. Benson Memorial Scholarship, which will be presented to two recipients: Conner Spinks, undergraduate majoring in gender, women's and sexuality studies, and political science, and Lamia Zia, graduate student in journalism and mass communication.

[Thirty years ago, “gender, women’s and sexuality studies” were known by different terminology: “no major selected”.

Conner Spinks is, I think, the ideal name for a prospective P.E. teacher. In fact, did not Muriel Spark write Conner Spinks into one of her novels?

Lamia Zia's name bears a striking resemblance to the name of an office/retail building my older brother formerly owned in Trikala, Greece.

Is the initial “a” in Lamia pronounced hard or soft? It makes a significant difference in Lamia's journey through life.

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that a semi-colon is required after "political science".]

This award was created by a designated bequest to the UI Foundation to recognize qualified female applicants who demonstrate financial need and are committed to women's issues, diversity and social activism. WRAC administers the scholarship and selects its recipients.

[“Women’s Issues”, “Diversity”, “Social Activism”: the trifecta of misguided American educational institutions gone ominously awry—and code words, all, for “mediocrity”.]

The Adele Kimm Scholarship will be given to Sumaya Rabee, undergraduate student majoring in anthropology. In 1992, a bequest from Adele Kimm in memory of her brother, S. Conrad Kimm and his wife, Hilda, made it possible for the Women's Studies Program to award the this scholarship to a deserving women's studies student.

[Apparently the main criterion for this award is that the recipient must have the least Iowa-like name imaginable. Such a requirement seems somehow fitting for the field of anthropology.

And what is "the this scholarship"? It sounds vaguely and uncomfortably post-modern.]

The Wynonna G. Hubbard Scholarship will be presented to Samycia Lewis, an undergraduate student majoring in journalism and mass communication. Established by the late UI Vice President Emeritus Philip G. Hubbard in memory of his wife, the award is given each year to an African-American woman with a grade-point average of 3.0 or higher who demonstrates an unusual interest in the well being of others.

[“An unusual interest in the well being of others”? That’s the standard? Can this be serious?

And a 3.0 grade average is the astonishingly-high bar to be met?

"A Celebration Of Excellence And Achievement", indeed.

This is some sort of giant put-on, right?

And someone at the University Of Iowa needs to be advised that the term is “well-being”, not “well being”.]

The Ada Johnson/Otilia Maria Fernandez Women's Studies Fellowship will be given to Kenisha Looney, an undergraduate student majoring in interdepartmental studies. The fellowship is named in honor of two Iowa graduates who are among the first African-American and Latina women to be found in University records. Begun in 1993, the award is given alternate years to an undergraduate or a graduate woman.

[At last! A recipient whose name describes precisely the true nature of the award in question!

And yet, once again, I suspect a giant put-on.

I sincerely wonder whether someone inserted this paragraph into the press release as a joke, solely to ascertain whether anyone was paying attention.]

The Jane A. Weiss Memorial Scholarship will be awarded to Cristina Ortiz, a graduate student in anthropology. The scholarship is named in honor of Jane Weiss, an assistant professor of women's studies and sociology at the time of her death in 1981. The award is made to doctoral students whose dissertations promise to expand understanding of important women's issues.

[The noted Brazilian pianist has dropped her concert career in order to study “important women’s issues” at the University Of Iowa? Goodness gracious!

Why did no one try to talk sense into Miss Ortiz? And try to avert such a tragic outcome to what otherwise had been a brilliant career as a gifted virtuoso musician?]

For more information on the Celebration of Excellence and Achievement Among Women see http://www.uiowa.edu/celebrationofexcellence.

[By this point, readers surely have seen enough, haven’t they?]

STORY SOURCE: University of Iowa News Services, 300 Plaza Centre One, Iowa City, Iowa 52242-2500

[Reuters trembles at such level of competition.]

MEDIA CONTACTS: Judie Hermsen, 319-335-3553 or Laura McLeran, 319-335-5011, Celebration of Excellence and Achievement Among Women committee; George McCrory, University News Services, 319-384-0012, george-mccrory@uiowa.edu

[Ladies, I shall be giving you a call—and soon!

And George, too!

And should not the word "committee" have been capitalized?]

College of Liberal Arts & Sciences
240 Schaeffer Hall
University of Iowa
Iowa City, IA 52242-1409
319.335.2611
clas@uiowa.edu

[This last involves a simple typographical error in the email address. The correct email address is: noclass@uiowa.edu.]

________________________________________________


A reading of the above press release creates unmitigated mirth, but it also causes one to grieve for this nation.

Nonetheless, it explains fully, in and of itself, the root cause of the bizarre circumstance that tiny Grinnell College, two hours to the West of Iowa City, has a larger endowment than the endowment of The University Of Iowa Foundation: Grinnell College produces successful and generous alumni, while the University Of Iowa, despite a plethora of professional graduate schools, does not.

________________________________________________


And, in closing, a personal message to The Iowa Board Of Regents:

Heed Meredith Willson: YOU’VE GOT TROUBLE IN RIVER CITY.

William Eddins

The Internet is the greatest tool ever invented for public and profligate display of idiocy.

Tribute must be paid to a particularly notable piece of idiocy I encountered last week, notable because of its extravagant ignorance and conspicuous foolishness.

The idiocy in question was authored by William Eddins, a Minneapolis-based musician who has been trying, without much success, to create a minor conducting career over the last couple of decades. This weekend, for instance, Eddins finds himself in Portland, Oregon, doing a one-off “talk and demonstrate” educational outreach appearance with a local ensemble, the kind of thing a talented and serious musician would never consider doing unless money for the household were in very short supply indeed.

My parents met Eddins a few years ago at some function or other in the Twin Cities. At that gathering, Eddins tried first to corner my father, who allowed Eddins to talk to him for three or four minutes until my father could not stand it any longer and managed to escape. Shortly afterward, Eddins tried to corner my mother, who immediately dismissed Eddins with one of her subtle but skillful maneuvers for extracting herself from unwanted social exchanges. In neither case did Eddins even have a clue that he had been cut.

Last week on InsideTheArts.com, Eddins wrote an astonishing entry about funding for The National Endowment For The Arts. The piece contained not a single word of truth, but it offered spectacular confirmation to the world that Eddins is indeed an idiot of the very highest order.

The content of what Eddins wrote was disorganized and largely incoherent, but the thrust of his muddle was that the budget for The National Endowment For The Arts took a “nose dive” during the Reagan Administration, a nosedive that was especially painful—or so Eddins claims—after the generous decade of the 1970’s, a decade which Eddins believes, inaccurately, to have represented some sort of glorious period, a golden age, for government-sponsored arts funding. Eddins suggests that The National Endowment For The Arts has yet to recover from The Reagan Era.

Eddins does not think or write clearly, so instead of trying further to clarify his presentation, I reproduce his key paragraph. All errors are his, not mine. It would be pointless to attempt to correct them all.

Think back to the 1970s if you dare. Disco, Oil at some ridiculous price, Blaxploitation movies, La Choy makes Chinese food … taste American! And, of course, the NEA. Grants to artists, interest in local Arts organizations, Arts funding through government councils, etc. Then Reagan, Helms, and the rest of them got into office with the “Just look at those stupid, silly Artists making their Godless Art! Why are we wasting money on them? Those poor Rich people are suffering so much that they need a tax cut” ideology and…. voilá!….. Arts funding in this country took a nose dive. Ironically, in trying to “wrest Art from it’s elitist ideals” the Reagan revolution firmly ensconced the artist into the back pocket of the rich and famous. It’s the rich, after all, who have disposable income. The average Joe (non-plumber) no longer had a stake in the Artist’s life because none of their tax dollars went in that direction. So a vicious cycle was born.

None of what Eddins writes is true.

While The National Endowment For The Arts has often been a source of ridicule by politicians over the years, what Eddins has written about its budget is sheerest fantasy on his part. Eddins has espoused—publicly, boldly, foolishly—utter nonsense.

The entire Appropriations History of the NEA, from the agency’s inception through Fiscal Year 2008, may be viewed here. Had Eddins bothered to google “National Endowment For The Arts” and “budget”, he would have found the referenced comprehensive tabulation to be the first search result.

The Appropriations History of The National Endowment For The Arts disproves Eddins’s many misstatements.

There are four particularly telling facts contained in the government data.

First, NEA funding was far more substantial and generous in the decade of the 1980’s than it had been in the decade of the 1970’s.

Second, there were only two reductions in the budget of the NEA during the Reagan Presidency.

The first reduction was in Fiscal Year 1982, Reagan’s first budget, when Reagan imposed budget cuts of 10 to 15 per cent across the board upon all Federal agencies. The NEA suffered a budget cut that fiscal year in line with other government agencies.

The second reduction was in Fiscal Year 1986, when the NEA appropriation was reduced by $5 million, or less than three per cent, from the 1985 appropriation. The NEA budget increased annually during the other six fiscal years of Reagan’s terms of office.

Third, the budget of the NEA during Reagan’s final six fiscal years was higher than it is today, over twenty years later. This is so in real dollars, not in inflation-adjusted dollars (in the latter case, the disparity is even more pronounced).

Fourth, there HAVE been cuts in the NEA budget since the agency was established—substantial cuts, indeed—but such cuts came long after Reagan left Washington and returned to California. Those cuts came, not under Reagan, not under Bush I and not under Bush II. Those cuts came under Clinton, when the NEA experienced a drastic decline in its appropriation. Under Clinton, the appropriation for the NEA was cut almost in half, declining in six of eight fiscal years for which Clinton was responsible for the federal budget.

In sum, literally nothing Eddins has written about the NEA and NEA Appropriations History contains a syllable of truth.

Alas, Eddins’s childlike, uninformed and unsophisticated views on matters economic and political are not restricted to the domestic realm. They are international in scope.

After demonstrating his vast ignorance on the subject of American arts funding, Eddins goes on to allege that decreases in arts funding are spreading, American-style, to Europe, Canada—and even Australia, of all places.

The latter nation, Eddins assures the reader, is hobbled by a “vicious, short-sighted, conservative” government, a government “which has lost its collective mind”.

The people of Australia would be startled to learn this dismaying news, having narrowly elected, one year ago, a left-of-center government.

Of course, Australians would be equally startled to learn that they were living in what Eddins describes as a “bastion of Liberalism”. Reading such a description of their country, Australians would all have a hearty laugh—and this is so whether Eddins intended to refer to Liberalism or liberalism (not that he would know the difference between the two).

Of course, in the world of Eddins, things are no better in Canada, which is also burdened by a “vicious, short-sighted, conservative” government.

One can only ask: is any nation immune?

According to Eddins, things are so bad up north that it was he who had to break the news to professional musicians in Edmonton that orchestras in the U.S. receive virtually no government funding. Eddins’s earth-shattering revelation caused “looks of shock” on the faces of Edmonton musicians, or so Eddins claims.

Such an incredulous assertion signifies one of three things: (1) that orchestra musicians in Edmonton are too lazy to keep up with their profession by reading arts newspapers, music periodicals and music trade journals; (2) that orchestra musicians in Edmonton are mentally retarded; or (3) that Eddins inherently lacks credibility.

The correct answer, as a general rule, is the most logical one.

Of course, public displays of idiocy are generally accompanied by further indicia of imbecility, all guaranteed to provide great entertainment value if nothing else.

Eddins does not disappoint.

Eddins’s profile on InsideTheArts.com informs the reader that “Bill has many non-musical hobbies”. Those “hobbies” include “cooking, eating, discussing food and planning dinner parties”.

What versatility!

Of course, none of this comes as a shock—only the very dullest reader could be surprised to learn about this fascination with food after glancing at the accompanying photos of a very, very well-nourished Eddins.

Eddins’s agent, naturally, is drawn into the picture, and the fun continues. His agent is an “innovative leader in the music business” and “works over nationally known soloists, conductors, ensembles and institutions”.

Well, that last bit certainly explains why his agent only has four clients!

There are no other conductors, alas, on Eddins’s agent’s roster—not even Christoph “Eschenback”, to use the Eddins spelling of the German conductor’s last name on InsideTheArts—but this surely may be explained away by the fact that Eddins’s agent, according to the agent’s own website, runs four or five other businesses in addition to his thriving arts management practice.

The agent’s comprehensive client list is comprised of two brass ensembles (in both of which the agent himself is a player), one utterly unknown pianist, and Eddins.

This all must be very efficient. The agent, no doubt, need devote only a few hours each year to his arts management business, with all necessary paperwork contained within a single manila folder.

I could go on and on, given the excellent fodder Eddins has provided—this is a case in which the material virtually writes itself—but my point has been sufficiently made.

The genuine question for which I would like an answer is: what is it about America that propels its citizens to engage in public demonstrations of profound, flagrant and basest idiocy?

Low intelligence and lack of education play a role, of course, but low intelligence and lack of education are capable of explaining, only in part, the contemptible ravings of someone like Eddins, who quite clearly believes in the lunatic fantasies to which he gives public utterance. That his fantasies are connected to his field of work simply makes his fantasies more troubling still.

I wish a good explanation were at hand.

Josh’s answer is a simple, pithy one: “IQ is determined at birth”.

A colleague at work who read Eddins’s article made references to “brains” and “rubber ducks”, but his full remarks are unprintable.

My father said that the article offered conclusive proof of the validity of Justice Holmes’s admonition regarding society’s legitimate interest in preventing generation upon generation of imbeciles.

My mother only had two words to say: “Oh, dear”.

Oh, dear, indeed.

The "No-Longer-Tenable" Donald Rosenberg

It has been announced that Donald Rosenberg, writer for Cleveland’s Plain Dealer, will no longer be permitted to review concerts of the Cleveland Orchestra. Rosenberg will continue his other work for the newspaper, writing about other music and dance events in the Cleveland area, but he will no longer cover the Cleveland Orchestra beat.

This move is six years overdue, as Rosenberg had long ago lost all objectivity in his coverage of the Cleveland Orchestra’s Music Director, Franz Welser-Most, whom for some reason Rosenberg has always detested on a deeply personal level.

Rosenberg’s personal grudge against Welser-Most has been one of the two or three major stories in the American music world for the last half-decade, constantly talked about everywhere, even (and especially) in Europe, although no American publication has been willing to write about this matter on a single occasion.

I have read Rosenberg every week for years, with amazement, as he hacks away at the world’s finest orchestra and the finest conductor now working regularly in the U.S.

I am pleased that the Plain Dealer has at last addressed this situation, even if belatedly.

Last week, I read the reviews in the European press of the Cleveland Orchestra’s appearances at this year’s Salzburg Festival. Once again, I could not help but notice that only European critics seem to appreciate this miraculous ensemble.

When the most knowledgeable (and jaded) European music critics proclaim the Cleveland Orchestra vastly superior to the most exalted European ensembles, one cannot help but compare the depth and breadth of their knowledge with the idiocy that passes for music criticism in American newspapers and magazines.

My father, one of the world’s most brilliant men, and who is never wrong about anything, remarked to me three days ago that something significant had happened in recent days. He told me, on Wednesday night, that the most recent round of European reviews for the Cleveland Orchestra made Rosenberg’s position at the Plain Dealer “no longer tenable”. My father said that Rosenberg would be gone “by Christmas”.

Christmas has come early this year.

Deficiencies In Hearing And Judgment: A Kirshnit Follow-Up

The December 5 "New York Sun" article about America's orchestras attracted a great deal of negative comment from "Sun" readers, as may be seen on the "Sun" website. No one defended the author, Fred Kirshnit, and readers noted many of the same points I addressed.

The extracts below, taken from reader comments on the "Sun" website, are verbatim, except that I have corrected spelling errors.

Forgive me when I long for Cleveland, Chicago or Philadelphia when the San Francisco Symphony's sound cannot fill up Carnegie Hall or there are several cracks in the horn after the Adagietto in the Mahler Symphony No. 5.

Despite being able to secure Martin Chailfour as its concertmaster--formerly the assistant concertmaster in Cleveland--Los Angeles still has an undistinctive string sound, often a rough edge and an overwhelming brassy sound that might otherwise work in Chicago or Philadelphia.

On and off again in terms of being a commanding conductor, Welser-Most has had many successes and the Cleveland sounds fabulous still. Clearly, Cleveland selected wisely over Eschenbach, as Welser-Most was apparently courted by Philadelphia as well. However, Philadelphia will recover from its current problems when Eschenbach leaves and will be as great as ever again.

I found this article completely unnecessary and frankly a bit off-base. If the point is to tell readers that the other orchestras have caught up to New York, Boston, etc. . .Most serious listeners have known that for years, so we don't need one of the worst commentators on the subject telling us this.

This article is not particularly insightful, and mentioning the long-ago departure of Mariss Jansons from Pittsburgh as though it were a recent event doesn't inspire confidence in the author's work.

And with Kent Nagano now in charge in Montreal for only three months, it's hard to imagine that the possibility of him leaving for Chicago is anything but uninformed speculation.

Los Angeles presents interesting programming and a lively sound, but has nowhere near the depth of Cleveland (string sound, ensemble) in the standard repertoire.

By admitting at the outset that he has given more credence to ensembles who come to him in New York, Kirshnit immediately identifies his ignorance--not all great American orchestras visit New York. And even when they do, these orchestras have a different sound from what they do in their own halls. A real critic would go hear the orchestras on their own turf.

Franz Welser-Most may never be the critics' favorite but he is a musicians' musician and has kept the fabled Cleveland precision while adding some warmth and flexibility to the mix.

One response to the article came from a conductor, whose name the "Sun" withheld.

If your ears are this bad that you think Los Angeles sounds that good--you're crazy. I've conducted Los Angeles and they have nothing on Cleveland. Also--you're so off base with Vienna State Opera liking Ozawa it's not even funny. It is not very responsible reporting to make a mistake that is well known amongst all professional musicians in the world. Mr. Ozawa had a falling out with Vienna while performing some Mozart operas last year. I hate to tell you what everyone else already knows but they hate him now.

Reading the sheaves of comments on the "Sun" website, I thought it was interesting that so many persons stepped forward to point out one bleedingly obvious fact: that the West Coast orchestras are simply not very good.

I have never understood why so many New York-based journalists praise the orchestras on the West Coast, and hold them up as torch-bearers for the American orchestra. The West Coast orchestras are noted for their poor ensemble, poor quality of sound and poor musicianship (as well as for the amazing ignorance of their audiences). Musicians everywhere know this. And this is somehow considered to be the standard to which other orchestras should aspire?

For anyone to claim that the West Coast orchestras are "leading the way" demonstrates nothing more than profound deficiencies in hearing and judgment.

Fred Kirshnit

Yesterday, December 5, 2006, a bizarre article appeared in The New York Sun. The title of the article was "New York Drops Off The List Of The Big Five Orchestras". The author of the article was Fred Kirshnit.

The thrust of the article was to claim that America's five finest orchestras are now the Boston Symphony, the Chicago Symphony, the Cincinnati Symphony, the Los Angeles Philharmonic and the Pittsburgh Symphony, the latter three ensembles having replaced the Cleveland Orchestra, the New York Philharmonic and the Philadelphia Orchestra, former members of this exalted group.

Kirshnit is a virtually unknown personage who for years posted concert and opera reviews on an obscure website, concertonet.com, before joining the Sun to supplement Jay Nordlinger. Anyone who wishes to sample the quality of Kirshnit's work will have hours of fun and millions of laughs leafing through years and years of Kirshnit's web reviews, which remain posted at concertonet.com. These old reviews are some of the best sources of reliable hilarity in the entire online world, akin to the novels of E. F. Benson--always available when one needs a bit of light amusement.

When I first discovered the concertonet.com website, initially I thought that the whole thing was a big put-on. Kirshnit's reviews were, I thought, deliberate send-ups, mimicking the bad writing and perverse musical judgments too often on display in musical coverage in American newspapers and magazines.

After I read about a dozen or so of Kirshnit's pieces, however, I started to realize that this guy's writings were not tongue-in-cheek at all but that he took himself deadly seriously, just like the television character Ted Baxter or the vocal artist Florence Foster Jenkins, neither of whom had a clue that they were ridiculous figures, entitled to nothing but scorn.

As I learned in law school, anyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, but no one is entitled to his or her own set of facts. While Kirshnit's judgments in his Sun article are neither serious nor informed--they speak for themselves and will be taken seriously by no one--his many ridiculous misstatements of fact need to be corrected for the record.

I am going to italicize the biggest howlers, but I encourage everyone to read the full article, as it truly is priceless. Visits to the concertonet.com website are also a must for anyone who needs a laugh.

But music director Mr. Jansons recently announced his intention to move back to Europe permanently, taking over not one, but two of the world's finest ensembles, and leaving Heinz Hall forever.

Yes, Mr. Kirshnit, and thank you for that timely news bulletin. As everyone on the planet already knows--except for you, apparently--in June 2002, four and one-half years ago, Mariss Jansons announced his "intention" to leave his post with the Pittsburgh Symphony.

And, alas, I have even more news for you, Mr. Kirshnit. JANSONS IS ALREADY GONE! He has been gone for two and one-half years!

Now the powers that be have spent their money not on a new music director but rather on spin doctors. The new paradigm is for the orchestra to be led by Sir Andrew Davis, Yan Pascal Tortelier, and Marek Janowski. And, apparently, the twain shall never meet. The plan is for each conductor to instill his own ethnicity into the mix and for the public to swoon with delight at the innovation.

Mr. Kirshnit, you are to be commended on your excellent Jackie Collins imitation!

And once again, Mr. Kirshnit, you are to be thanked for that timely news announcement, which the rest of the world learned in September 2004. You will be happy to learn that "the plan" has now been in place in Pittsburgh for 18 months.

But wait, Mr. Kirshnit--I have even more updates for you! Andrew Davis announced, more than two months ago, that he will not continue as part of "the plan" and that he will cease to "instill his own ethnicity" in Pittsburgh when his contract expires in another 18 months. Are you withholding this news, waiting to break it in March 2009 or thereabouts?

Rumor has it that the very talented Kent Nagano will leave troubled Montreal and settle on Michigan Avenue.

"Rumors" about Kent Nagano taking over the Chicago Symphony may be floating about in other solar systems, but in OUR solar system there are no rumors involving Kent Nagano and the Chicago Symphony. Anyone who knows anything about the Chicago Symphony and its Board Of Directors and its management knows that Kent Nagano is not on Chicago's short list or on Chicago's long list or on ANY list concerning Chicago's search for a music director.

The "rumors" in Chicago involve Riccardo Chailly, Riccardo Muti and David Robertson. The members of the orchestra want Chailly, the Board Of Directors wants Muti and Deborah Card wants Robertson. The members of the orchestra are lobbying against Robertson, Chailly needs to be given a reason to leave Leipzig, and everyone would love to have a glamour figure like Muti at the helm of the orchestra but there is great concern that Muti would be hard to handle.

Austrian Franz Welser-Most had a terrible reputation when chosen to take over. Crucified by the British press--they quickly dubbed him "Frankly Worst Than Most"--he was hunted down in London as relentlessly as Bill Sykes. His tenure at the head of their Philharmonic was not just stormy but deeply unsatisfying for audiences at the Royal Festival Hall.

In Cleveland, performances have been uniformly poor, unpopular with both patrons and critics alike. For four years now, Maestro has brought his charges to Carnegie and my critical reaction has been somewhat subdued as I have been forced to concentrate on physically controlling my impulses to shudder on a regular basis.

Mr. Kirshnit, thank you for that 1990 update, as well as for the Norman Lebrecht imitation, which I genuinely enjoyed. Are you participating in a competition for a bad writing award?

Things have changed quite a bit in London since 1990, Mr. Kirshnit. Welser-Most was always popular with London audiences but fiercely opposed by some of the London critics at the very beginning of his tenure with the London Philharmonic. Welser-Most was only 27 years old at the time, and his youth was held against him.

By the end of his tenure with the London Philharmonic, in 1996, Welser-Most's London reviews were quite good (and often considerably better than that, especially in Bruckner--he began receiving superlative London notices in Bruckner from the age of 30 or so), and he and the London critics have long since made peace. Welser-Most's reception in London today is near-rapturous, which you would know if you kept abreast of the London musical scene.

The performances in Cleveland under Welser-Most have been uniformly excellent, at a higher standard than anywhere else in the world. This cannot be a surprise to anyone, as the Cleveland Orchestra is the finest orchestra in the world on a pure ensemble basis. Anyone selected at random from the telephone directory could conduct the Cleveland Orchestra, and the performance would be magnificent. This is because the members of the orchestra would ignore the conductor and play as a chamber group, acutely listening and responding to each other.

Welser-Most's reception in Cleveland has been extremely positive among audiences, patrons and the Board Of Directors. It is the critic of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Donald Rosenberg, who does not like Welser-Most. Other than Donald Rosenberg, Welser-Most's Cleveland reception has been a very fine one--so fine, in fact, that after his first year in Cleveland the orchestra's Board Of Directors asked Welser-Most if he would extend his five-year contract to a ten-year contract, which Welser-Most agreed to do.

In the late 1990's, Seiji Ozawa became the most infamous victim in Massachusetts since Sacco and Vanzetti. His troubles began with The Great Nutcracker War, when he took his orchestra to Asia in November and December 1996, leaving the city without a season of Christmas music performances. Then he dared to assert his leadership at the Tanglewood festival, replacing certain key personnel who were beloved by the press. The crushing blow came from New York critics, who wrote articles claiming the BSO had lost all professionalism and that its sound was devoid of proper intonation and balance. This avalanche of disrespect eventually led to Mr. Ozawa abandoning his lifelong artistic project and signing on with the Vienna State Opera, where, I am happy to report, everyone loves him.

Mr. Kirshnit, are you writing about Vienna, Austria, or Vienna, Saskatchewan? You clearly know nothing about the music scene in Austria.

Seiji Ozawa has been a well-publicized disaster in Vienna, held in such low repute by all parties that he has basically departed from the house, and is now merely a figurehead whose appearances are confined to the opera house's stationery.

Ioan Holender, the Intendent, does not like him, the critics do not like him, the public does not like him, and the members of the orchestra do not like him. Ozawa's conducting of his first big production in the house, Ernst Krenek's "Jonny Spielt Auf", was such a preeminent disaster--reported in frightful detail, worldwide--that he was basically written off by everyone concerned from that time forward. And that "Jonny Spielt Auf" was the absolute high point of his Vienna tenure!

The Wiener Staatsoper is now simply waiting for Welser-Most's contract in Cleveland to expire, because Welser-Most is Holender's choice to replace Ozawa. Welser-Most is also being aggressively lobbied for this post by the Austrian Ministry Of Culture, on orders of the Austrian government.

Ozawa now only appears in Vienna for a handful of performances each season--roughly eight performances a year, in a house that performs seven nights a week, ten months a year--and he has no involvement in the selection of repertory, artists, new productions or anything else pivotal in the administration of an opera house. He is music director in name only. Everyone in the world knows this, whether they live in Vienna or elsewhere--except, apparently, you. And you are "happy to report" that "everyone loves him" in Vienna? YOU DO NOT HAVE A CLUE WHAT YOU ARE WRITING ABOUT, MR. KIRSHNIT.

Your recitation of the facts about Ozawa's deteriorating situation in Boston is also totally mucked up. The facts in Boston are as follows.

Ozawa completely lost the confidence of the members of the Boston Symphony between 1980 and 1990. From 1973, when Ozawa assumed his position in Boston, until the very early 1980's, the members of the orchestra disliked him--from a musical standpoint--but nevertheless the musicians continued to play exceptionally well as an ensemble, assuming that Ozawa, a very limited musician, had such obvious shortcomings that the Board Of Directors would replace him in short order.

In 1980, Ozawa's contract was extended, to the dismay of the musicians, and Boston Symphony musicians began departing, moving on to other orchestras. Morale among the musicians got worse and worse throughout the 1980's as Ozawa's contract kept being extended , and departures of orchestral members continued, until by 1990 the orchestra was only a shell of its former self. It was during this same decade that much of Boston's traditional subscriber base abandoned the orchestra.

The management of the Boston Symphony did not handle the situation well. Boston has the largest endowment of all American orchestras, and long-term full-season subscribers who departed were to some extent replaced by new, mini-season subscribers. The orchestra, financially, was still doing quite well and the management, through some combination of inertia and bad judgment, allowed the situation to continue to deteriorate for another decade.

It was only when Mark Volpe became the orchestra's Executive Director, in 1996, that he was able to convince, quietly, important members of the Board Of Directors that it was time to ease Ozawa out the door.

Ozawa's departure from Boston had nothing to do with the 1996 tour to Asia or to staff changes at Tanglewood. The infamous 1998 Greg Sandow Wall Street Journal article, similarly, had nothing to do with Ozawa's ouster, which by that time was, in any case, already engineered. Publicly, Boston even came to Ozawa's rescue. Anyone can read, online, the furious denunciations of Greg Sandow issued by the Boston Symphony in response to his Journal article as well as the statements of support the BSO strong-armed out of several prominent musicians on Ozawa's behalf.

Boston's reviews, in any case, had been deteriorating for years, in New York and elsewhere, long before the appearance of the Sandow article. Andrew Porter's Ozawa reviews in The New Yorker, still widely available, address the shortcomings during the first fifteen or so Ozawa Boston years, after which point no one--the members of the orchestra, Boston's musical public, the record companies--any longer cared. Boston's fall from greatness had already happened. By 1990, it was a done deal.

Despite having been so good for so long, the Philadelphia Orchestra has quite recently lost its edge. After enjoying the heralded reigns of Stokowski, Ormandy, Muti and Sawallisch, all of whom preserved that patented "fabulous Philadelphians" sound, the players were extremely upset by management's decision, taken unilaterally and without consultation, to hire Christoph Eschenbach. That signature sound is now unraveling at the seams.

Mr. Kirshnit, Philadelphia lost its unique sound long ago, during the Muti years. Muti deliberately altered the "drenched" nature of the Philadelphia string sound, which he believed to be inappropriate for much of the orchestral repertory. That was one of his publicly-stated objectives when he was named Ormandy's successor and, whether people liked the change or not, Muti effectuated it, and he effectuated it fairly quickly. The Philadelphia sound, as altered by Muti in the early 1980's, has not substantially changed since that time. Sawallisch consciously sought a less brilliant sound than Muti, but the Philadelphia sound has been consistent since 1982 or 1983, through the remainder of the Muti years and through the Sawallisch years and through the now short-lived Eschenbach years.

The "unraveling at the seams" in "that signature sound" occurred almost a quarter century ago, Mr. Kirshnit, and not under Eschenbach. Eschenbach's problems in Philadelphia have had nothing to do with Philadelphia's sound--they have been caused by his wildly fluctuating tempos, which have not convinced the musicians, and the attendant decline in unanimity of ensemble that all those tempo changes create.

Eschenbach's fate in Philadelphia was determined during his first European tour with the orchestra, a tour that included concerts in Vienna and elsewhere in Central Europe. Influential patrons of the orchestra accompanied the orchestra on that tour, and when they read the orchestra's reviews--especially translated for them--from the German and Austrian newspapers, they were shocked. The reviews were brutal, just about the worst reviews any major American orchestra has ever received on a European tour. The critics announced that the Philadelphia Orchestra was no longer a "great" orchestra, no longer a "special" orchestra, no longer an orchestra worth going out of one's way to hear. The Philadelphia Orchestra's supporters did not much appreciate reading such harsh words about their orchestra. Eschenbach's fate in Philadelphia was sealed after that first European tour, a fact widely if quietly known in Philadelphia and elsewhere.

Nobody in this part of the world seems to know how good this ensemble really is, but this, I believe, is strictly a matter of East Coast superciliousness. Esa-Pekka Salonen is a dynamic, exciting presence, and a first-rate composer to boot. His ability to prod his forces into extraordinary bursts of color while still keeping proper balance allows the left coast Phil to dance on winds positively fairy-blown. The strings are lush but nimble, the woodwinds precise and poetic, the brass warm and accurate, the percussion bright and crisp. All are allowed to let loose in a rather elastic manner. Perhaps Mr. Salonen's secret is a palpable confidence that allows his players to breathe freely while still under his strict control. Whatever the formula, he has applied it exceptionally well. For 20th century music, this is the band of choice.

Mr. Kirshnit, I love your Barbara Cartland imitation! I hope you win that bad-writing award, because you sure have worked hard to come out on top. That is one of the most inane paragraphs anyone has ever written!

The Los Angeles Philharmonic is a regional orchestra. It has a very unpleasant sound--it has always had a very unpleasant sound--and its level of ensemble "swims": the orchestra cannot play as a tight, cohesive ensemble.

The string sound of the Los Angeles Philharmonic is particularly unpleasant. It is a very thick, colorless, undifferentiated sound. It is not luminous, it is not translucent, it is incapable of delicacy, and it suffers from a total lack of refinement. It is, however, loud.

The woodwind section is the best section of the orchestra, but the Los Angeles Philharmonic winds offer no competition whatsoever to the wind sections of the Cleveland Orchestra or the Chicago Symphony or the Philadelphia Orchestra, all three of which feature wind ensembles at an entirely different--and much higher--level.

The brass section of the Los Angeles Philharmonic is merely bad. However, I would like to concede one point to you: the orchestra's percussion section, no doubt, truly is "crisp", as you state. But are not all percussion sections, because of the instruments they play, by their very natures, "crisp"?

Alas, none of the different sections of the Los Angeles Philharmonic blend well together. I can say this, having heard the orchestra on its home turf, Disney Hall. I have also heard the Los Angeles Philharmonic perform at the concert hall of the Kennedy Center in Washington and at Carnegie Hall in New York, and the orchestra sounded disgraceful in both of those venues, too. However, orchestras can be shaken out of tune by traveling, and orchestral musicians generally hear each other in new and different ways in foreign halls, so it is impossible to know how any orchestra truly sounds unless that orchestra has been heard in its home auditorium. I HAVE heard the Los Angeles Philharmonic play in its home auditorium, and I can state, uncategorically, that the orchestra sounds just as bad in Los Angeles as it does on the Eastern Seaboard.

However, all of the West Coast orchestras have horrible sound, and they have ALWAYS had horrible sound. The San Francisco Symphony has a horrible sound, too--not even Herbert Blomstedt could do much with the sound of that orchestra--and the Seattle Symphony has a TRULY horrible sound. I have always assumed, rightly or wrongly, that this must have something to do with the very, very best musicians always gravitating toward Cleveland, Chicago and Philadelphia, always the most prestigious jobs for American orchestral musicians since Boston's downfall.

So, Mr. Kirshnit, which are America's very finest orchestras?

I know of no informed, serious person who does not rank the Cleveland Orchestra number one. Cleveland is also the ONLY American orchestra that ALWAYS receives dazzling reviews in Europe.

I know of no informed, serious person who does not rank the Chicago Symphony Orchestra number two. The Philadelphia Orchestra traditionally offers Chicago its competition for the second spot, but the Philadelphia Orchestra is going through a bad period right now.

I know of no informed, serious person who does not rank the Philadelphia Orchestra number three. Despite its current difficulties, it remains a splendid ensemble, capable of playing any other American orchestra under the table, save Cleveland and Chicago.

After the top three spots, rankings become more difficult. The next grouping would have to be, in alphabetical order, Cincinnati, Dallas, Minnesota, New York and Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh is losing important musicians now, moving to other orchestras, a situation I am confident you are keeping up-to-date on, Mr. Kirshnit). The next grouping would have to be, again in alphabetical order, Atlanta, Baltimore, and Boston. After that grouping, the rest of America's orchestras are all pretty much lumped together in a muddle.

Truly, the concept of the traditional "big five" American orchestras should be replaced by the "big three", because that has been the reality of the orchestral situation in the United States more or less since the day I was born--in 1980.