The British 'honours' system appears a closed book at the best of times and probably ought to be thrown clean out of the window; but while we're stuck with it, it continues to cause controversy. Pliable at the Overgrown Path has an excellent post about the veteran British conductor Vernon Handley, who despite having done more to further the cause of British music than probably anybody else alive is still one of the few older UK conductors to be left without a knighthood. This despite a high-profile campaign a year or two ago at Gramophone with a petition named 'Nod for Tod' (we all call Handley 'Tod' for short).
Talking it through with musician friends who are as annoyed about this as I am, we looked at a list of top British conductors and came to one uncomfortable conclusion. Most of 'em went to Cambridge. Tod didn't (he attended Oxford!).
Quite why Cambridge should produce so many successful conductors is a moot point, because you do not learn how to conduct there.
The big exception to the rule is (Sir) Simon Rattle, the best of the lot, who has left the country.
UPDATE: Friday 4 Jan, 9.15pm - Julian Lloyd Webber had an article in yesterday's Telegraph about why there are so few successful British conductors, arguing that the top jobs here always go to foreigners. He's right. He's also right in saying that it's because young conductors are not properly nurtured here.
I reckon that that also explains why the Cambridge brigade gets on. Given that there is no systematic programme for good, serious, high-level musical education for young children in Britain beyond four or five specialist schools and some well-meaning Saturday joints, and nothing except keen amateurdom is seen as desirable in any case (fine in itself, but not for professionals), a would-be anglomaestro can only fall back on experience gained through personal initiative. In Cambridge, any kid who has the drive to do it can book a chapel, put together a student band, stand in front of them and wave the baton. Bingo: experience. This doesn't make them technically adept. Some have gone on to better training chez Musin or Panula. Others haven't. Look at the pedigrees of our resident orchestras' bosses, Jurowski, Salonen and Gergiev, and don't be surprised that we can't compete.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
When I saw the honours had been announced, my first thought was, "Did Handley get his knighthood?" No. Honours, especially knighthoods, are chucked around with such abandon these days that the mystique and secrecy which once shrouded the selection process has also become a nonesense, and we should be able to demand a public accounting. The denial of a knighthood to Handley is a travesty, absolutely, not just relative to some of those who have received a k, and the powers-that-be should explain. Having said that, I am now at the point where I think that, yes, the whole thing should be "thrown clean out of the window." Those who truly know worth have their own ways of recognizing it, without assistance from the honours system. Paul Schofield refused a k, and his greatness as an actor is no less recognized for his name's lack of adornment. Vernon Handley is one of our great conductors, and he would be none the greater for being elevated to the same rank as Cliff Richard and Ken Barlow. I'd be happy to see an end to it.
One wonders: does Mr. Handley really care all that much about it? Perhaps he's happy to go through life without a knighthood, although from hearing his records and his consistent championing of British music, he certainly deserves it (for obvious geographical reasons, I've never heard him live). Perhaps that is part of the problem: he comes off as so very English that he hasn't attained the international profile that the other British conducting knights have, if that makes sense.
But the phenomenon isn't confined to the UK. In America, only one of the "Big Five" is led by a native-born American, James Levine in Boston. (Lorin Maazel was born in Paris, just to split hairs.) Admittedly, that will change in 2009 with the advent of Alan Gilbert to the NY Phil. Likewise, in the US, the only US conductors of the bigger-name, non-"Big Five" orchestras are:
- Michael Tilson Thomas (San Francisco Symphony)
- David Robertson (Saint Louis Symphony)
- Gerard Schwarz (Seattle Symphony)
- Robert Spano (Atlanta Symphony)
- Marin Alsop (Baltimore Symphony)
- Leonard Slatkin (National Symphony, Washington DC)
Even in Holland, using the Rotterdam Philharmonic as an example, they've just named the Canadian Yannick Nezet-Seguin as their next Chief Conductor after Gergiev. The last time the RPhO had a Dutch chef-dirigent was Edo de Waart in the 1970s.
There is also the "personal chemistry" element in naming a conductor to an orchestra, which was a key element in the naming of Nelsons to the CBSO, Karabits to Bournemouth, and Petrenko to the RLPO, if the press reports are to be believed, just to name the more recent ones in the UK. Like two individuals, chemistry either just happens between a conductor or an orchestra, or it doesn't, and nationality is not a primary factor in that.
hi i wanted to announce an event which is happening on Sunday.
I will certainly attend.Here is the link for the information.
http://www.opernhaus.ch/d/spielplan/spielplan_detail.php?vorstellID=10323446
thanx
Post a Comment