Dear Maestro, dear colleague,
In the latest issue of the Slovak classical music periodical Hudobný život [Music Life, issue 3-4,2008], you give a reaction on the previous interview article, where maestro Peter Feranec is airing a critical view on the current situation of the Symphony Orchestra of the Slovak Radio. I was very glad to finally see your personal reaction - to which I would like to place a reaction and a few comments:
It is quite natural, that you want to publicly give an insight to the whole matter, as the discussion around the SOSR is very high-tense, such that people would understand the difficult position, which you are in. Nevertheless, the points which you bring forward, are not quite adequate, and it seems to me that you mistake a few facts, which discolour the situation more or less.
Firstly, you refer to the Slovak Philharmonic's sacking (let's just call it that way) of Musica Aeterna and the Moyzes Quartett, implying perhaps, that maestro's Feranec' musical corpus was equally guilty of drastic cost cutting in the past. While it might seem the same, I tend to disagree, since the severance of the said ensembles is not a similar case, and moreover, Musica Aeterna and the Moyzes Quartett are better off - at least quality-wise Musica Aeterna, with which I am closely working with, has attained a far better and stable level ever since it became an independent body. Such a situation is not at all comparable to individual players which had to leave the SOSR.
Moreover, you remind maestro Feranec on the fact, that the SOSR is offering opportunities for young conductor-students of the Music Academy, which they had never before. Although, it is a very kind gesture to be concerned about the next generation conductors, I think, that this point has nothing to do with justifying the current situation. Yes, every conservatory abroad would be jealous to have a professional symphony orchestra ready waiting, to give its young students a chance to perform. However, this is not the reality.
In the event, you had a fully functional orchestra, the situation would be a bit different. Be reminded, that your SOSR is not fully functional at all; an orchestra that is being sent home half of the month, where the number of musicians is not at the level as promised by management, banking on the availability and benevolence of music academy students to compensate the open seats. Maybe one could (justly) argue, that the number of musicians would suffice for most of the romantic works (even Brahms rarely had a 1960-megaloman-sized Herbert-von-Karajan-style symphony orchestra at his disposition, so let's not be confused by 20th our century spectacles to lament a smaller sized group). But even though the absolute numbers are not that dramatic per sé, it is the fact that being sent home for half of the time, makes the orchestra a sitting lame duck. In addition, as I hinted before, there is still a strong discrepancy between what management has been promising and what has happened or put into effect. The result is a massively demotivated group of musicians, who have lost all confidence. That is the main problem and deadly in any organisation. With this given, you can never start working on quality, if you intend to give still the little precious time away to students. The SOSR therefore is reduced to merely a (demotivated) student orchestra.
Concurrently, you don't agree with the often heard criticism on the lack of direction, mentioned the fact, that never before has there been such a thoroughly planned regie. Perhaps at this very moment you have maybe clear plans and scenarios - but given the experience of management's behaviour in the past and not keeping their word, this is not very credible anymore. Hopefully it will prove later in time that the impression was wrong. The current dramaturgy appears to be just a result of the change, and not that the change was directed by a pre-concepted dramaturgy. Again, if this is not the case, then we deal with a poorly managed PR, since the reality and projection (=impression) are too far apart and that makes public as well as your organisation restless, even unconvincing.
Having said that, I agree, that perhaps many critics and discussions were obviously driven by high emotions, perhaps resulting in a fierce show of blaming-culture. This is very understandable, since musicians tend to be people with emotions (though not a fact exclusively for musicians only). In any transitional stage where changes are being implemented, people are not feeling comfortable. This must have been acknowledged by management beforehand and pro-actively channelled into a workable direction. This chaos is obviously uncontrolled.
You appeal to all those, who are seriously concerned about the SOSR's survival to hand you an "economical recipe" (financial blueprint) for the orchestra's survival. This is not what will save the orchestra. Here you mistake management with simple accounting. I agree, that you deal with serious financial/budgetary constraints - despite Slovakia's rapid economic growth (for some time the biggest within the EU), this is a strangely enough a chronic disease. But, dear colleague, a financial plan is not what you need. Moreover, if indeed a so-called economical recipe would exist, all people would be rich entrepreneurs. The outside world is not that simple. It would be simply too naive to blame only the numbers and to believe there's one magic recipe to solve the matter. It is management conduct in general that needs drastic changing, since its wrong priorities (inexperience?) have lead the SOSR into this direction.
Arguments like "having to save the oldest symphonic orchestra in Slovakia" are not acceptable or debatable to you. I am very sorry to hear that, even the more, since you add that an orchestra derives no legitimacy for its existence this way, that only the (financial) situation will dictate what the SOSR will have to look like (or in that case even perhaps to be dismantled). As a conductor, I would have hoped for a bit more visionary attitude, and as part of the orchestra management more strategic goal setting. In my eyes this is a very passive and defeatist attitude, which no manager (or even a conductor) should ever show. This way, why not close the joint right away?
External factors will unavoidably always be on your way, blaming them is not a sign of good leadership. True leadership takes responsibility - even if external factors were unexpected and out of your control. This responsibility is part of your role in management (being a conductor within this hierarchy is another discussion) and it's simply part of the game. Whichever way the situation will turn, and none of us is owning a magical cristal looking glass to foresee all things happening, as a manager - and this role you have visibly and actively taken upon your shoulders - you must accept the consequences; not seeking for excuses. Every managers faces tight budgets - or is accountable for proper expenditure - but also needs to identify and address (new) sources to continue his business.
To summarise: yes the orchestra is in a precarious situation, which is unfortunate and never easy. Your points which you had published, however, are beside the point (even though I can imagine why you name them). The initial step was that due to financial constraints to start improving the quality of the orchestra (which in itself is a very valid argument, with which in principle I tend to fully agree) - an objective which unfortunately became so blurred due to failing management, that big and to some degree irreversible harm has been done. As a manager, you must address these issues adequately, not downplaying them, nor hiding behind false arguments. I fully appreciate your position to wanting to defend your cause. Keep in mind that, statistically there are far smaller nations than Slovakia, having more thriving orchestras and a more flourishing cultural podium life, yet coping with the same budget. Too many people are staring at the wrong picture, and I have the feeling as if constantly cause and consequence are being mixed up, where the tendency is rather to blame the consequences for the cause. And to remind you of the fact, that perhaps this very same 'cost cutting' is causing your orchestra to lose potential income as event organisers have shown no longer interest in dealing with an incomplete orchestra.
In addition, I think you can always find me (I am not that invisible in Bratislava), so - coming back to your appeal to all those concerned with the SOSR's survival: in case you are interested in genuine solutions - as far as there's still something to be saved - I am more than willing to have a friendly chat, since the survival of the SOSR (or any orchestra if you will) is for me not only of professional interest, but also for the sake of the community.
Yours truly,
MS
In the latest issue of the Slovak classical music periodical Hudobný život [Music Life, issue 3-4,2008], you give a reaction on the previous interview article, where maestro Peter Feranec is airing a critical view on the current situation of the Symphony Orchestra of the Slovak Radio. I was very glad to finally see your personal reaction - to which I would like to place a reaction and a few comments:
It is quite natural, that you want to publicly give an insight to the whole matter, as the discussion around the SOSR is very high-tense, such that people would understand the difficult position, which you are in. Nevertheless, the points which you bring forward, are not quite adequate, and it seems to me that you mistake a few facts, which discolour the situation more or less.
Firstly, you refer to the Slovak Philharmonic's sacking (let's just call it that way) of Musica Aeterna and the Moyzes Quartett, implying perhaps, that maestro's Feranec' musical corpus was equally guilty of drastic cost cutting in the past. While it might seem the same, I tend to disagree, since the severance of the said ensembles is not a similar case, and moreover, Musica Aeterna and the Moyzes Quartett are better off - at least quality-wise Musica Aeterna, with which I am closely working with, has attained a far better and stable level ever since it became an independent body. Such a situation is not at all comparable to individual players which had to leave the SOSR.
Moreover, you remind maestro Feranec on the fact, that the SOSR is offering opportunities for young conductor-students of the Music Academy, which they had never before. Although, it is a very kind gesture to be concerned about the next generation conductors, I think, that this point has nothing to do with justifying the current situation. Yes, every conservatory abroad would be jealous to have a professional symphony orchestra ready waiting, to give its young students a chance to perform. However, this is not the reality.
In the event, you had a fully functional orchestra, the situation would be a bit different. Be reminded, that your SOSR is not fully functional at all; an orchestra that is being sent home half of the month, where the number of musicians is not at the level as promised by management, banking on the availability and benevolence of music academy students to compensate the open seats. Maybe one could (justly) argue, that the number of musicians would suffice for most of the romantic works (even Brahms rarely had a 1960-megaloman-sized Herbert-von-Karajan-style symphony orchestra at his disposition, so let's not be confused by 20th our century spectacles to lament a smaller sized group). But even though the absolute numbers are not that dramatic per sé, it is the fact that being sent home for half of the time, makes the orchestra a sitting lame duck. In addition, as I hinted before, there is still a strong discrepancy between what management has been promising and what has happened or put into effect. The result is a massively demotivated group of musicians, who have lost all confidence. That is the main problem and deadly in any organisation. With this given, you can never start working on quality, if you intend to give still the little precious time away to students. The SOSR therefore is reduced to merely a (demotivated) student orchestra.
Concurrently, you don't agree with the often heard criticism on the lack of direction, mentioned the fact, that never before has there been such a thoroughly planned regie. Perhaps at this very moment you have maybe clear plans and scenarios - but given the experience of management's behaviour in the past and not keeping their word, this is not very credible anymore. Hopefully it will prove later in time that the impression was wrong. The current dramaturgy appears to be just a result of the change, and not that the change was directed by a pre-concepted dramaturgy. Again, if this is not the case, then we deal with a poorly managed PR, since the reality and projection (=impression) are too far apart and that makes public as well as your organisation restless, even unconvincing.
Having said that, I agree, that perhaps many critics and discussions were obviously driven by high emotions, perhaps resulting in a fierce show of blaming-culture. This is very understandable, since musicians tend to be people with emotions (though not a fact exclusively for musicians only). In any transitional stage where changes are being implemented, people are not feeling comfortable. This must have been acknowledged by management beforehand and pro-actively channelled into a workable direction. This chaos is obviously uncontrolled.
You appeal to all those, who are seriously concerned about the SOSR's survival to hand you an "economical recipe" (financial blueprint) for the orchestra's survival. This is not what will save the orchestra. Here you mistake management with simple accounting. I agree, that you deal with serious financial/budgetary constraints - despite Slovakia's rapid economic growth (for some time the biggest within the EU), this is a strangely enough a chronic disease. But, dear colleague, a financial plan is not what you need. Moreover, if indeed a so-called economical recipe would exist, all people would be rich entrepreneurs. The outside world is not that simple. It would be simply too naive to blame only the numbers and to believe there's one magic recipe to solve the matter. It is management conduct in general that needs drastic changing, since its wrong priorities (inexperience?) have lead the SOSR into this direction.
Arguments like "having to save the oldest symphonic orchestra in Slovakia" are not acceptable or debatable to you. I am very sorry to hear that, even the more, since you add that an orchestra derives no legitimacy for its existence this way, that only the (financial) situation will dictate what the SOSR will have to look like (or in that case even perhaps to be dismantled). As a conductor, I would have hoped for a bit more visionary attitude, and as part of the orchestra management more strategic goal setting. In my eyes this is a very passive and defeatist attitude, which no manager (or even a conductor) should ever show. This way, why not close the joint right away?
External factors will unavoidably always be on your way, blaming them is not a sign of good leadership. True leadership takes responsibility - even if external factors were unexpected and out of your control. This responsibility is part of your role in management (being a conductor within this hierarchy is another discussion) and it's simply part of the game. Whichever way the situation will turn, and none of us is owning a magical cristal looking glass to foresee all things happening, as a manager - and this role you have visibly and actively taken upon your shoulders - you must accept the consequences; not seeking for excuses. Every managers faces tight budgets - or is accountable for proper expenditure - but also needs to identify and address (new) sources to continue his business.
To summarise: yes the orchestra is in a precarious situation, which is unfortunate and never easy. Your points which you had published, however, are beside the point (even though I can imagine why you name them). The initial step was that due to financial constraints to start improving the quality of the orchestra (which in itself is a very valid argument, with which in principle I tend to fully agree) - an objective which unfortunately became so blurred due to failing management, that big and to some degree irreversible harm has been done. As a manager, you must address these issues adequately, not downplaying them, nor hiding behind false arguments. I fully appreciate your position to wanting to defend your cause. Keep in mind that, statistically there are far smaller nations than Slovakia, having more thriving orchestras and a more flourishing cultural podium life, yet coping with the same budget. Too many people are staring at the wrong picture, and I have the feeling as if constantly cause and consequence are being mixed up, where the tendency is rather to blame the consequences for the cause. And to remind you of the fact, that perhaps this very same 'cost cutting' is causing your orchestra to lose potential income as event organisers have shown no longer interest in dealing with an incomplete orchestra.
In addition, I think you can always find me (I am not that invisible in Bratislava), so - coming back to your appeal to all those concerned with the SOSR's survival: in case you are interested in genuine solutions - as far as there's still something to be saved - I am more than willing to have a friendly chat, since the survival of the SOSR (or any orchestra if you will) is for me not only of professional interest, but also for the sake of the community.
Yours truly,
MS
No comments:
Post a Comment