The Columbus Saga, Briefly

On January 18, 2008, the Columbus Dispatch reported the results of a “Strategic Plan” prepared by the board of the Columbus Symphony Orchestra (CSO). The plan concluded, and the Dispatch reported, that the CSO budget was to be cut immediately by $3 million—from $12.5 million to $9.5 million. This was to be accomplished, in part, by firing 22 of the 53 full-time musicians and cutting the 46-week season by 12 weeks.

The plan had never been discussed with the musicians during its development and the first they heard of it was weeks before the first scheduled bargaining session. At that first bargaining session, management made that proposal for a one-year contract to the union team (“Committee”). The union (Central Ohio Federation of Musicians, Local 103) responded with a proposal for a three-year contract with a six percent cut in musicians’ compensation in the first year, smaller cuts in the second, and recovery in the third. The union’s proposal, of course, did not include the firing of any current players, but a willingness to discuss a reduction in the size of the orchestra, gradually, by attrition. The CSO response to this proposal was to drop the demand for firing any musicians, but instead, proposed a reduction in the total compensation of the 53 full-time musicians by 40% and cutting the per service rate for subs and extras from $150 to $100—a 33 1/3% reduction for these musicians who enjoy few benefits and no job security. That proposal, of course, simply moved money around and the proposed budget would remain at $9.5 million.

When that was rejected, the next proposal from the CSO was that any money raised over and above the $9.5 million would be “shared” with the musicians. An interesting proposal in light of their position that it was impossible for them to raise any more than $9.5 million in Columbus. When the union asked about a multi-year agreement, the response was affirmative, provided that each year was to be budgeted at $9.5 million. Nevertheless, in a further attempt to accommodate the board, the union even proposed that if they insisted on that magical $9.5 million, the union would accept it, provided that the musicians’ share would be $5 million—still a reduction from the previous musicians’ compensation of $5.6 million by over $500,000! This, too, was rejected and the management continued to insist that the musicians’ share be slashed to $3.6 million.

Because the management was obviously not bargaining in good faith, the union proposed that the “bargaining” end and that the dispute be submitted to impartial binding arbitration. Once again, that proposal was rejected. The response of the union was to suggest that a consultant/mediator from the orchestra field be invited to help. That suggestion was likewise rejected.

At that point the CSO team turned their previous proposal into a “final offer.” In order to dispel any notion that the Union and the Committee were not truly representative of the orchestra, the Union agreed to take it back to the bargaining unit, albeit with a recommendation that they reject it. And reject it they did—60 to 0. At the meeting, not a single musician expressed any interest in their “final offer” despite the Committee’s admonition that rejection could mean the shutdown of operations.

Upon learning of the vote and after one more meeting with the union team, the CSO confirmed that no proposal from the union would be acceptable which did not contain a $9.5 million budget and a 40% cut in musicians’ compensation. With no further meetings scheduled, the board then announced their intention to cancel the seven-week summer season. In our opinion, for a number of reasons, such a “shutdown” constituted an illegal lockout. When the union would not relent, the board followed through on the threat and the summer season was cancelled. At the same time, the board announced that the CBA was terminated. A grievance was filed and the filing of an unfair labor practice will follow.

After cancelling the summer season, the board finally agreed to consultation/mediation with the executive director of the Nashville Symphony, Alan Valentine. Immediately upon reaching that agreement, management insisted upon bringing in a labor mediator as well. This had never been discussed—the CSO simply chose the mediator and invited him. Nevertheless, in order not to kill the mediation, and because it is only mediation and not arbitration, the union agreed to add the labor mediator.

The mediation lasted three days, and despite the best efforts of the mediators, the “final offer” of the management which was presented to the Committee was rejected by the Committee and ultimately by the overwhelming vote of the orchestra. As of this writing no further meetings are scheduled.

Chairperson’s Report

I have been thinking a great deal recently about the importance of civil discourse. A few years back I wrote about what I perceived as a “culture of hostility” in our field. I meant this to include both the relationships between musicians and managers, as well as the relationships among musicians themselves. Every season we elect some of our colleagues to endure a most onerous task, that of serving on the orchestra committee, and then we all too frequently reward their offer of volunteer service with abuse instead of support.

Of course, the democratic process that we all embrace should welcome an avenue for disagreements and respectful debate. But all too often this disagreement is expressed in the form of personal attacks and name calling. We are all the weaker as a result.

Throughout my work in these past two years as chair of ICSOM, time and time again I have received calls from committee chairs who are facing personal criticism as they try to serve. I always counsel them with the advice that if everybody liked you, it would probably mean that you were doing something wrong.

One of my teachers told me many years ago, “If you are going to stand for anything in this world, there will be people who will stand against you. Some will oppose you because of what you stand for, and others will oppose you simply because you are able to stand.”

As I look out across the ICSOM landscape, I see great reason for hope, and I feel an uplifting optimism. Every time we have asked our member orchestras to act as a unified body, they have done so. You all responded to our friends in Jacksonville during their time of need by sending nearly $100,000. As I write this, our orchestras have sent over $70,000 to Columbus in the first 21 days since the latest Call to Action was issued.

Through uniting, and through seeking a richer dialogue, we can defeat the culture of hostility. Our organization is strong enough to welcome dissension, provided that we decide not to tolerate personal attacks.

All of this occurs to me this evening because I am deeply concerned about the future of the AFM. You have all heard of the conflict that exists between the AFM administration and the Recording Musicians Association (RMA). Our concerns were so great last summer that the 2007 ICSOM delegates passed a resolution calling for unity. In that resolution, we said:

WHEREAS, The current disputes between the AFM administration and the Recording Musicians Association threaten to tear apart this great union;

Therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the delegates and Governing Board of the 2007 ICSOM Conference implore the Recording Musicians Association and the current administration of the AF of M to meet together in a spirit of unity, put aside their differences, and achieve the higher goal of reunification and solidarity for the greater good of all the members of the AFM and their families.

I’m saddened to tell you that the relationship between the AFM and the RMA has worsened, and indeed I feel that the very survival of this union is at risk. It is my hope that ICSOM might play a role in bridging the terrible chasm that exists.

The strengthening of the unity within ICSOM offers great hope for this union, its members, and musicians everywhere. But our unity must be nurtured. We are not without our problems.

Perhaps the most potentially divisive issue that symphonic musicians face is in the area of media. There is a great disparity of opinion, and these opinions are quite strongly held. As many have observed, it is interesting that media would be the source of division within the symphonic ranks, since it produces just a small amount of our income. But, it is vitally important to our future, and we will have to engage in debate as new technologies offer new opportunities. It is equally important for us to work to preserve fair compensation for the highly skilled labor we perform, especially when that labor is even more difficult to perform with a microphone and camera two inches from your bell, bow or brow.

Despite these concerns I feel the sense of community is growing among our orchestras. That strength is entirely due to the musicians who perform nightly, and their elected committee leaders who voluntarily surrender time with their families to serve all of us.

In this year, I have been inspired by the dedication and altruistic service of our musician leaders from Jacksonville, Columbus, and elsewhere across the country. I have been moved by the overwhelming response of our orchestras to their colleagues in need. While others might be mired in dissension, ICSOM aspires to a greater goal. I hope that we have only just begun to accomplish even greater things for our field. But to do that, we must reject the culture of hostility. We must continue to elevate the tone of our debates, and we must always strive to avoid expressing our disagreements through personal attacks.

Thank you all for your friendship and support, and I look forward to visiting with your elected delegates at our annual conference in San Francisco in just a few weeks.

MOLA Conference in Nashville

As ICSOM Secretary it was my great honor at the end of May to attend the Major Orchestra Librarians’ Association (MOLA) Conference that was hosted by Nashville Symphony librarians D. Wilson Ochoa and Jennifer Goldberg. The conference began with a reception co-hosted by MOLA and the Nashville Symphony Players’ Assembly following our Friday evening Classical Series concert. Many attended the performance and were treated to the first performance of Principal Librarian D. Wilson Ochoa’s transcription of Aaron Copland’s Emblems.

Founded only a quarter-century ago, MOLA quickly has become a truly international organization, with 248 member organizations representing 420 librarians on six continents. Nearly one hundred member librarians traveled to Nashville from as far away as Spain, Sweden, New Zealand, and Germany. MOLA also includes many U.S. military ensembles. The conference has more than two days of plenary sessions, smaller breakout sessions on established topics, and a host of opportunities to meet during breaks, breakfast, and a wonderful dinner I was invited to attend. I must thank Marcia Farabee (MOLA president, National Symphony), Karen Schnackenberg (past president of MOLA, Dallas Symphony) and Pat McGinn (conference volunteer and MOLA administrator, Milwaukee Symphony), as well as my colleagues Wilson and Jennifer for making me welcome. I hope we can reciprocate during an ICSOM Conference in the future.

The message I delivered, during a closed session for members only, had to do with the inclusion of librarians in the bargaining unit. (I’m told I was the first non-member ever to give an address during their business meeting.) I am personally committed to including librarians in our collective bargaining units and am proud to say that we in Nashville have achieved success by bringing both our librarians into the bargaining unit.

Librarians work an incredible number of hours to assure that parts are legible, and they work with string principals to assure bowings are done and marked into our parts, that notes and rhythms are corrected, and that the music is available in a timely fashion. Our principal librarian was also involved in designing the library in our new hall and designing the music drawers so the parts are available even when the library is closed. (Wilson admits borrowing the idea from Seattle’s Benaroya Hall.) Our librarians serve as an additional set of ears during recording sessions and have taken on the daunting task over the years of getting all licensing clearances for our live performances and any recording or broadcast uses (like on our websites or for season demo disks). I heard a great deal during this conference about music clearances and find that it’s not as easy as a simple phone call to one place. This requires a great deal of time and effort in addition to all their other duties.

And let us not forget (though many do) that our librarian colleagues are, first and foremost, musicians. They might not volunteer it, but they began their careers as performing musicians, some of them working in our finest orchestras before taking on the responsibilities and duties of librarians. There are a variety of reasons why they chose to be librarians, but their musical background is right there for the asking. The special tasks they do for all of us are in addition to their constant attention to preparing folders, ordering music, contacting conductors and composers about their needs, etc. For example, during the last two months in Nashville, our librarians had to prepare two sets of audition books for our committees, in alphabetical order, with the first round already set up for committee use. Why any of our musicians would not want these folks to receive the benefits of protection under our CBA is a mystery to me. I don’t honestly know where they find the time to do everything they are tasked with—imagine the organizational skills this job must entail!

Additionally, and most may be unaware of this fact, unless a librarian is a member of the bargaining unit, there is no obligation to pay or include them on recording contracts. The additional work that is put into part preparation for recordings can be enormous, sometimes including fixing massive mistakes in the music, but it receives no additional compensation. That just doesn’t seem fair to me, but managers (and there are some who go around the country touting their displeasure over including librarians in bargaining units) as a general rule won’t pay recording fees to any but those who are mandated by national agreements.

I promised the members of MOLA I would educate my colleagues about all the many responsibilities and qualifications of librarians. I believe it is important to understand and embrace those orchestra members who contribute so much to our livelihood and to encourage orchestra negotiators to fight to include them in bargaining units that do not already cover librarians. Honestly, it’s not really a cost issue for our managers since they were already included in the budget, the salaries just shift from one area to another.

Including the librarians in our bargaining unit strengthens the unit with increased numbers, reinforces the local union with additional work dues, and supports the Federation with a deeper membership base. By virtue of that action alone, these musicians receive recognition, pension contributions, recording payments, and contract protection. Let’s face it: we could not do our jobs without them.

Addendum

by Paul Gunther

Laura’s description, above, of the recent MOLA Conference, and her segue into the work of the orchestra librarian, is a model of concision and clarity. One thing in her humility she neglected to mention: not only was Laura the first non-member to address the MOLA business meeting, but hers was actually the opening address. At its conclusion it was greeted by applause much more enthusiastic than just polite. The time was ripe for this, and Laura’s delivery was on the money.

In Minneapolis, when I give talks about the orchestra library or tours to students, donors or guests, I like to frame the librarian’s duties with metrics like these: Let’s say your orchestra has 75 players playing 100 different concerts per year, averaging three works per concert. (This is just an example; the numbers will vary considerably.) Simple multiplication yields 20,000 or more pieces of music floating around, every single one of which must be located and placed in the right folder for the right concert. This does not include vocal parts for chorus numbers, scores for conductors and anyone else interested, chamber music, recordings, etc. Now, imagine for a moment a ball player with a 950 batting average; this person would have to be superhuman; and if he actually existed, would be held in very high esteem—and command a superhuman salary. If, on the other hand, the orchestra librarian could locate only 95% of the music, it would be akin to a player hitting only 95% of the notes correctly; in these cases a high number is not necessarily a great average, or even acceptable to the profession.

Also, I like to outline in this way the difference between an orchestra librarian and a librarian working in any other field: To be able to handle the work, an orchestra librarian must be a trained and experienced performance musician, or the job would be impossible. An education and degree in information science (the field formerly known as “librarianship”) —even an advanced degree—could not help a bit in the orchestra library, unless one were first and foremost a musician.

ICSOM Member at Large Paul Gunther is the principal librarian of the Minnesota Orchestra. A MOLA founding member, he served six years on the MOLA board, including two as president.

SFS's Revolution in Music Education

The San Francisco Symphony has a longstanding commitment to music education, beginning in 1919 when the orchestra performed its first group of children’s concerts. At the start of the 21st century, the orchestra embarked on a multimedia project with ambitious goals and unprecedented scope: to use media in its most public and accessible forms to instill a lifelong love of music and show that classical music can speak to everyone. The Keeping Score project is a national, multi-year educational media program designed to make classical music accessible to people of all ages and musical backgrounds.

In an effort to bring the classical music experience to new and experienced listeners alike, Keeping Score encompasses a national PBS television series, an interactive web site to explore and learn about music, a national public radio series (The MTT Files), documentary and live performance DVDs, and an education program for grades K–12 to further teaching through the arts by integrating classical music into core subjects. “Keeping Score is designed to give people who have been intimidated by the rituals of classical music the chance to get past that,” says Michael Tilson Thomas, music director of the San Francisco Symphony. “If I were sitting down next to somebody before I was about to play a piece on the piano, I’d say, ‘Let me tell you a few things.’ One on one. As simple and direct as that. My goal is to clarify everyone’s intentions—what the composer had in mind, what the performers have in mind, what kind of voyage of discipline and self-discovery goes into the process of making music.”

The project began in 1999 when the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund proposed to partner with the SFS in a new and groundbreaking music education initiative. The Hass Foundation told the SFS to “think big,” and according to John Kieser, general manager and director of electronic media, Tilson Thomas and the SFS creative team came up with several ideas. The idea the Haas Fund liked best was to recreate for television the popular Family Concert Series that MTT had created with the orchestra in Davies Hall. The Haas Fund wanted the shows to be produced for PBS so there would be access for all, with no economic barriers preventing anyone from viewing the programs. But as the creative team worked towards the goal of broadcasting the concerts on television, they realized that they couldn’t just record them in the traditional way—since the time of Bernstein’s Young People’s Concerts, media has progressed dramatically and today’s viewer would require much more richness and diversity.

They decided that they needed to capture live concerts in a way that had never before been attempted. First, the camera would have to bring the viewer right inside the orchestra and show people how the music and performance were constructed. Next, the television programs needed to be “experiential” documentaries that would explore why music is so powerful, would humanize the composers, and would put the music into an historical context. Realizing that television was starting to fade as a medium when compared to the World Wide Web, the SFS team decided that the project should be like a three-legged stool, having a broadcast component (TV and radio), an Internet component, and a teacher training program to integrate classical music into the curriculum for all subjects in public schools. “We wanted to give people an entry point into classical music,” Kieser says. Another goal was showcasing the musicians in the orchestra and the partnership with MTT. “Besides educating future audiences, we wanted to clearly establish Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Francisco Symphony as providers of an exceptional classical music experience,” says Kieser.

The initial pilot program for the Keeping Score series was a documentary and live capture performance of Tchaikovsky’s Symphony No 4. After the taping and editing were completed, the broadcast was shown to focus groups in Seattle, Philadelphia, and Atlanta. The groups were composed of people of different ages who didn’t listen to classical music, but had watched at least one program on PBS in the last year. In terms of building future audience, the age group the SFS was most interested in reaching was 22–44. After watching the program all participants in the groups felt that music had an intrinsic value, but they were afraid to talk about it because they found it intimidating. “It’s like wine,” Kieser says. “Everyone has a fear of getting into it.” It was so intimidating that when asked what sort of person should lead them on the journey into exploring classical music, the groups agreed that someone with an English or German accent would be best! The groups liked the format of learning about one composer and one particular work in each show, and loved hearing from the musicians themselves, going behind the scenes to learn what goes into creating a performance. The SFS team did a lot of tweaking to the show after it was viewed by the focus groups, and the Tchaikovsky pilot aired in June of 2004 on the PBS Great Performance series to wide critical acclaim. The show was watched by over 1 million American households.

Much of what was learned from the taping of the initial program was applied to the first full series of television programs, Revolutions in Music, aired on PBS in November 2006. The three broadcasts in this series each feature a composer who changed the way music was written in his time, setting the course for the generations of musical evolution that followed. These documentary episodes cover Beethoven’s Symphony No. 3 (Eroica), Stravinsky’s Rite of Spring, and Copland’s Appalachian Spring. To date, the broadcasts have been viewed by four and a half million people nationwide. Live concert performances of the three works were also aired on High-Definition PBS stations and are available for sale on DVD, with sales approaching 30,000 units, for over $285,000 in revenues. Currently in production, Series Two is expected to premiere nationally on PBS in 2009 with episodes on Berlioz (Symphonie Fantastique), Charles Ives (Holidays Symphony), and Shostakovich (Symphony No. 5).

The companion web site to the series, www.KeepingScore.org, provides an interactive online experience designed to give people of all musical backgrounds a way to explore the music and stories behind these works in much greater depth and detail, and at the listener’s own pace. In one section of the web site, it is possible to follow along with the musical scores while audio and video content is seamlessly integrated as the measures of the score go by. Other sections explore a variety of musical concepts, such as Beethoven’s use of themes and keys or Stravinsky’s intricate use of meter. Separate sites for each composer feature biographical and historical information that explore the influences that led to the composition of the featured works. Alex Ross, in an excellent October, 2007 New Yorker article about the Internet and classical music, praises the Keeping Score project and web site, and hails MTT as “Bernstein’s most faithful and hopeful follower…with these programs he is performing radical acts of demystification.” Over 150,000 people have visited the site to date.

The MTT Files is written and hosted by Michael Tilson Thomas and co-produced with American Public Media. The radio program features eight 60-minute episodes where MTT metaphorically pulls out some of his “files”—ideas and musings about music and art, and reminiscences of the legendary artists he has know throughout his career. The series includes an episode featuring Tilson Thomas in conversation with James Brown in one of the soul singer’s final interviews before his death. The MTT Files recently won a Peabody Award for Radio Programming.

Perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of the project is the Keeping Score teacher training program. Designed to help students learn through the arts, the program trains K–12 teachers to integrate classical music into core subjects such as science, math, English, history, and social studies. School districts in San Jose, Sonoma, and Fresno, California as well as in Oklahoma City and Flagstaff, Arizona are currently participating in the program, with more districts planned for the future. Each district selected for the program must have socioeconomic and racial diversity in their student populations (45% of the students currently participating in the project are below the poverty line), must have an institution of higher learning (university or college), and a semi-professional or professional orchestra in the community. Most importantly, the districts selected must be seeking innovative ways to improve their schools.

Participating teachers are trained by SFS musicians, educational staff, and a variety of arts educators. The teachers come to San Francisco for a week of immersion in music during which they experiment with different instruments, attend SFS concerts, and participate in a highly structured program of workshops and lectures from morning to night. Feedback from teachers has been impressive, with many remarking that this is the only program they’ve ever been involved with that concentrates primarily on them—on making them better teachers by improving their skills, including being able to generate their own ideas about how to use music as a tool in their classrooms.

One third-grade teacher who was teaching about the western expansion in America used Copland’s Billy the Kid as a soundtrack and urged students to create a character, Billy, who was heading out west for the first time. Instead of just learning dry facts about the Louisiana Purchase, the period of western expansion comes to life for the students as they connect historical facts to their version of “Billy.” In a fifth-grade math classroom, a teacher played the overture to La Traviata and asked kids what they heard. Surprisingly, the students initiated a discussion about longing and desire after listening to the powerful music of Verdi. The teacher made the point that equations are expressions of desire—x and y just want to belong to somebody. After hearing the music and participating in the discussion, the children in the group had a much easier time grasping the concept of equations.

Sometimes, there are unintended outcomes in the classroom. A fourth-grade teacher in Flagstaff assigned students the task of creating their own musical instrument out of found objects. She had two homeless students in her class, and because of their experiences, they were much more creative than their fellow students at imagining the possibilities inherent in their found objects. These two children came back to class with instruments that impressed and amazed the other students. As a result, their social standing in the class went way up, along with their feelings of self-worth.

The SFS is doing all it can to fill the void now that music education is being reduced or eliminated in public schools across the country. “As the schools have, by and large, cut arts education and music education out of the curriculum, it has become up to large organizations to help people understand the language and power of music,” says Tilson Thomas. “Our big performing arts organizations have to take the lead in picking up the slack, which is difficult, because that is not why these institutions were created; it was not envisioned as part of their responsibility…a responsibility that we have no option but to accept and undertake is to guide and encourage children and young people in their understanding of how music really works and what it means.”

It is very rewarding to work for an organization that is taking the lead in music education with a visionary project like Keeping Score. I am proud of the commitment my orchestra has made to making the music I love accessible to all. Of all the maestros I have worked with, MTT is the most able to connect with audiences and really get them excited about the music. He is entertaining and engaging—able to put people at ease, to tell stories that draw them in, and to show them a way to experience music on a more personal level. His ease in front of the cameras and the enthusiasm he exudes are key components to the success of the project, as are the wonderful insights and personal stories my colleagues in the orchestra provide. Already the Keeping Score project has come a long way to meeting its goals of enlarging the audience for classical music, reaching and educating underserved audiences, cultivating an appreciation of the art form, and establishing the SFS as a provider of exceptional classical music experiences.

The musicians of the SFS Media Oversight Committee want to extend our great thanks and appreciation to Debbie Newmark, AFM’s director of symphonic electronic media. She spent countless hours helping the committee navigate its way through issues not addressed by the A/V Agreement, including compensation for musician interviews, use of material from the SFS radio archives, and use of A/V and audio material on the web. Thanks also to Trish Polach and Lenny Leibowitz for their legal assistance.

Lights, Camera, Anxiety: How Live Capture Affects Performance

As a member of the ICSOM Electronic Media Committee, I have been involved in the AFM’s Symphony, Opera and Ballet Audio Visual negotiations since last November. These negotiations were put on hold for several months while the Managers’ Media Committee (MMC) and the AFM had “framework discussions” to explore the possibility of some type of integrated media agreement, which could include Radio, Internet, and A/V all under the same agreement and might simplify media projects for all parties. The final framework discussion was on June 30, when the AFM and the MMC decided to move forward into negotiations for an integrated media agreement.

As symphonic musicians, we hear again and again that managers are using media to try to force concessions from musicians at a local level. It will probably come as no surprise that the managers involved in these national discussions want us to do more media work for less money. They argue that we should give them media for free or for token payments in order to help support and promote our institutions and to build audience. They’ll share revenue—why shouldn’t we be happy with that? And besides, turning microphones and cameras on for a service that we’re already being paid for (live recording) isn’t any extra work. You’re already performing! Don’t you play your best anyway when you’re performing? The managers say they should be able to capture that performance for no additional compensation. Why should they pay us twice for the same amount of work?

It is this argument that rankles the most. As a member of the San Francisco Symphony, I have done quite a bit of live media activity over the past few years. My management has come up with some very innovative and creative projects that we are all proud to be a part of. However, most members of the SFS feel that cameras and mikes add an enormous amount of stress to our jobs. (Full disclosure: I am the piccolo player for the SFS, so while I may feel “high” pressure more than some, I have had extensive conversations on this subject with members of all sections of my orchestra.) Our jobs change significantly when we’re being recorded, and we should be well compensated for recording services.

Many of us feel that as musicians we are only as good as our last performance. We want to sound great all the time. But how do you play at your peak when you have three, four, and sometimes even five concerts a week for so many weeks of the year? Performance anxiety is a serious issue for most musicians: we all know the stories of celebrated artists who have to be pushed onto the stage, or talked into going out in front of the audience. What we do is extremely precise, requiring intense concentration and very highly developed coordination. And then there is that pesky artistry issue. Just going out and playing the notes perfectly and with a beautiful sound is not going to cut it. You need to be able to transcend the difficulties of your instrument and play with creativity and freedom in order to spin out gorgeous phrases and conjure a performance that will really move an audience. It is not enough to be a technician—you must be an artist.

When I perform, I try to tell myself: “Cathy—this is not brain surgery! No one’s life is at stake here if I flub the run in Tchaik 4, or play a giant clam in this gorgeous, lyrical Shostakovich solo!” But perhaps it really is more like brain surgery. As a classical performer, you get one chance. If you make a mistake, there it goes, out into the air, out to the audience of 2,743 people (in my case). You can never get it back—it’s gone. You can’t erase it, readjust, or try it again. Most of us can probably picture, in alarming detail, the concerts where we have made major errors—plowing in with gusto on a fortissimo entrance while the rest of the orchestra is wrapped up in the GP that you somehow forgot to experience, or flubbing a note in a major solo (like not having the final pianissimo note speak in the Elegia movement of the Bartok Concerto for Orchestra, and having this low hippo death call come out instead while the whole orchestra is in tears around you trying to muffle their laughter—not that this has ever happened to me).

If you blow it, not only is it embarrassing for you professionally, but it reflects poorly on the entire ensemble. You’ve blown it for “the team”—you’ve let everybody down. Making an error in a concert feels so bad that we do all we can to try to avoid it: we take drugs to slow our heart rates down and keep our hands from sweating and our mouths from drying out, all of which seriously affect performance. We try exercise regimes, yoga, change our diets, meditate, or bring our lucky whatever with us on stage as a talisman. We do the exact same preparation we did for a “good” performance, hoping to get the same result.

This pressure to be perfect has only increased over the years as recording has gone digital and people in the editing room are able to create technically perfect recordings with no bloopers. Many people who attend concerts seem to remember these blooper moments when discussing a concert afterwards. “Didn’t the horn player make a mistake?” “My Beethoven 7 recording doesn’t sound like that.” This adds to the performance pressure that musicians experience. I’ve heard section string players describe the nausea they feel when the cameras are on them because of the pressure to be perfectly unified. Their bows must be exactly in sync; they must not lose concentration and play in a rest. They see the camera coming out of the corners of their eyes and are very distracted. Chasing after perfection inhibits artistic freedom and makes us less likely to take artistic risks in performance. This, I feel, is detrimental to our mission to give audiences great live concert experiences as our ensembles sound more careful and cautious instead of more exciting and energized. The cameras only make this trend more inevitable, adding to the already extraordinary performance pressure that musicians feel.

Perhaps in our local and national negotiations we should try to get our managers to imagine doing their jobs while being recorded. How would our managers feel if they were doing a normal but difficult part of their job—for example, giving a presentation to their board, or participating in a tricky negotiation?

Let’s picture an executive director sitting at a table in the board room. There is a microphone on the table in front of him or her, recording every word. As he begins his presentation, he is aware of a camera on a boom above his head. He doesn’t see it, exactly…but he can feel it over him because it creates a slight breeze that makes his hair move a little bit, and he is aware that it is casting shadows on the paper he is referring to on the table. Our executive director notices that there are two cameras on either side of him, but they are far away. There is a person operating each one, moving it back and forth, but it’s not so bad. He can get used to it. He notices as he is speaking that the several bald men in the room are wearing pancake makeup on their heads, which is slightly distracting—but shiny heads don’t look good on camera. Our executive director has an irritating itch on his nose that he’d really like to scratch before he continues, but he’s on camera, so he doesn’t. He is distracted enough by the itch that he makes a mistake, but gets back on track quickly, reminding himself to concentrate. He moves on to make a key negotiating point, slicing his hand in the air for emphasis. It’s dramatic. At that moment, he is distracted slightly by a low mechanical whirring sound—it is our new, good friend, the robotic camera! The robotic camera wants to be right in his face to capture this special moment— but please, executive director, make your point strongly and well, with feeling. Don’t let that camera distract you.

Now let’s imagine that all this captured material will be edited with no say from the executive director. (The most dramatic section of the presentation was done particularly well, but one of the bald men in the room sneezed, so the material will have to be edited out.) The finished product will be viewed by critics, colleagues in the field, and lovers of classical music all over the world. If you are wearing a stupid tie, your mascara is running, or you say something that is incorrect or controversial that wasn’t edited out, your moment could be viewed by millions on YouTube.

Somehow, I don’t think the managers would think this was “the same” work.

But I think I know what they’d argue next (okay, I have a lot of experience with this). They’d say that if the cameras and mikes were on all the time, we’d get used to it. And perhaps we would get used to it, but something would really be lost in the process. To be able to create a great performance, musicians need “down time” in order to “rise to the occasion” for the mikes and cameras. SFS musicians had the experience last winter of having three straight weeks of concerts and most rehearsals taped (concerts were A/V; rehearsals were audio only, in what SFS’s media oversight committee feels is an abuse of the current A/V Agreement). I can emphatically say that at the end of the three weeks there wasn’t a musician on stage who was getting used to it. Everyone was completely exhausted. Taping rehearsals is a bad idea. There is no opportunity to “play” with a phrase, or try out a new idea, or experiment with a fingering. There is no opportunity to “save it for the concert” because you’re giving 100% all the time. The intensity leads to more exhaustion, which leads to more mistakes, and the fear of mistakes leads to more careful and boring playing. Yes, bring the media activity on—but with limits as to what material and how much material can be captured.

With the explosion of web sites like Facebook and YouTube, the managers are more interested than ever in A/V product, and as costs for A/V projects come down as technology changes and improves, musicians from more and more orchestras will be hearing these arguments from their managers. While I agree with our managers that media activity is desirable for orchestras and we need to have a major media presence in the new media frontiers of the 21st century, the workload and stress of doing our jobs is much greater when the digital wheels are spinning. Musicians need to be protected and compensated appropriately.