Some Things to Learn About Philharmonic and Its Woes

Mark Swed’s commentary “A Testing Moment for the Philharmonic” (June 25) indicated that the orchestra is already failing its ultimately most-important test--that of having an audience.

Many years ago your former critic Martin Bernheimer began to notice with concern the number of unoccupied seats at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, and now we read of “how empty” it is at some concerts and ticket sales being “in decline at both the Pavilion and the Bowl.” I urge your newspaper to do an in-depth feature that would address the following questions:

* By how much is attendance declining, and what can be done about it? Is the problem essentially that of a lack of new customers to replace those who are (literally) dying, or has the programming of Esa-Pekka Salonen caused an accelerated exodus of the largely elderly audience?

* Why aren’t the elderly being replaced in sufficient numbers by their children, the “boomers,” whose numbers are such that even a much-smaller percentage would be enough? Obviously Salonen is not attracting them; do they simply have to get older?

* If the Philharmonic is facing a decline of income from ticket sales, then is it not really a charity being kept alive by those willing to make a donation? How much of a slowdown in contributions would create a potentially dangerous financial situation?

* How can the expense of the Walt Disney Concert Hall be justified for an entertainment enterprise evidently in decline? Why build a structure costing so much per seat if a high percentage of them will not be used? How can the indulgence in this Frank Gehry design be reconciled with the evident need to create a new audience?

DAVID JOHNSON

Chula Vista

*

Swed rightly comments “we need to know that the orchestra can cope with its current leadership void” and “we need to know that . . . the Philharmonic can rise above administrative squabbling and put art first.”

Add to these that we need to know the basis for the current dispute, as we, the public, pay the high salaries of Mssrs. Wijnbergen, Salonen, et al. These coy gentlemen display disdain and contempt for the concert-goers in refusing to enlighten us about the “serious issues” that caused Willem Wijnbergen’s now-disputed termination of his contract. (Will we also be paying the costs for the inevitable litigation that follows?)

Perhaps being honest with the public is not on the agenda for the Philharmonic’s “major reorganization” and bold innovations, but it should be!

J. SUSAN GRAHAM

Los Angeles

*

It is ironic that, only eight months after the Philharmonic paid tribute to the late Alfred Wallenstein’s 100th birthday, Mark Swed omitted this great conductor’s name in his article about the orchestra’s current leadership problems.

In his 13 years as music director (1943-56), Wallenstein conducted an astonishing breadth of repertoire, raised the performance level tremendously and took the orchestra on its first international tour.

TUPPER L. TURNER

Tarzana

*

I can still remember my first time last year going to the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion and how overwhelmed I was. My husband and I have enjoyed many great concerts ever since.

It is too bad that Wijnbergen has chosen not to see the orchestra into the new century and the new concert hall. It seems to be his loss, because I for one will still be in L.A. listening to the music and having a blast.

THERESA GASSLER

Northridge