A Test of the Philharmonic and Reviewer

As a Los Angeles Philharmonic musician for the last 18 years, it was easy to relate to Milton Okun’s feelings about a performer’s vulnerability, and his desire for more responsible and humane treatment by the press. Okun is distressed by “sarcastic, mean-spirited writing” and says that even the toughest of world-class critics are able to show some “respect and empathy for the gifted--and not so gifted--artists who spend their lives trying to move and inspire us.

Times Music/Dance Critic Martin Bernheimer likes to educate his readers. We learn about the compositions, the artists, other historic performances, backstage gossip, even the advertising necessary to sell tickets. But seldom do we hear of the challenges a certain composition may pose for sections of the orchestra, or for a particular instrument. And even less often are our efforts properly acknowledged.

A good example is a recently reviewed performance of Shostakovich’s Eighth Symphony in which there was no mention of one of the most difficult English horn solos in the entire literature. Bernheimer could have at least taken a cue from Maestro Sanderling’s gesture of having the player immediately take a solo bow at the conclusion of the performance. Instead there was only the most general comment in his review: “Principals throughout the orchestra turned in pertinent, well-shaped solos. . . .” This kind of omission is almost insulting and shows a clear lack of empathy.

Another example was his review of the St. Matthew Passion in which there was only one adjective used to describe the three-hour effort of the orchestra (which faced some rather extraordinary and formidable challenges).

Imagine a sportswriter’s account of a baseball game in which there was no mention of those who hit home runs, made double plays, stole bases or made fine defensive plays. We’ve gotten used to press coverage of symphony concerts which typically allows 95% of the space for the conductor, soloist(s) and program notes while the players in the orchestra are mentioned only rarely.

In fact, it is the orchestra which can make or break the reputation of conductor and soloist alike, and indeed on occasion the orchestra has been known to save a reputation or two! I’ve always found it curious that we are so often reduced to anonymity by the press--practically taken for granted.

We risk our reputations every time we go on stage, attempting to play up to a standard Bernheimer himself admits has reached “world-class.” Perhaps if a little more thought were given to our dedication, hard work and vulnerability, the tone of his reviews would change. We understand that naming names is a double-edged sword and we accept that. Let the chips fall where they may. No one is asking for undeserved praise, just for enough sensitivity to allow for credit to be given where credit is due.

Bernheimer serves as a role model among critics. He has the power to be of great service to the performing arts by providing objective and informed criticisms. Misusing that power can be devastating to an arts community which is constantly struggling to survive in a precarious political and economic climate. He, and other critics as well, need to be reminded of the potentially far-reaching ramifications of “sarcastic, mean-spirited writing.” Not only can it be grossly unfair to individuals, it can rob a deserving group of its audience and possibly even put it out of business.

Los Angeles deserves tough, demanding, knowledgeable and respectful critics who can sell newspapers without placing our cultural assets in jeopardy. If Martin Bernheimer can learn something from his critics, L.A. will move a step closer to attaining the kind of quality journalism of which we can all be proud.