|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
108.5.178.99
No big surprise imo, but philanthropic donations have surpassed ticket sales as the main revenue source for (classical) symphony orchestras. For better or worse, this has a major impact on what we hear in the concert hall.
Follow Ups:
From an economics point of view, the issue of performances of live classical music, in appropriate venues, is that there is not a means to improve productivity. It still takes an hour, more or less, to perform Beethoven's 9th, with the same number of musicians, as it did a hundred years ago. In the meantime, we have huge gains in productivity in other areas - for a couple of grand we can buy the equivalent computing power of a room full of computers 30 years back. (My one visit to the computer museum in Mountain view was both enlightening and depressing - I have used most of the computers that are now in this museum.....).
Thus the relative cost of performing Beethoven's 9th is far higher than it was 100 years ago, so it is inevitable that the cost of maintaining an arts organization is going to continue to rise. Ticket prices have risen to very high levels, still they cover less of the costs of a first class symphony or opera than they did a generation back. The only way to bridge the gap is with supplemental income - in Europe in means state subsidies, in the US charitable contributions. (While we like to think that state support of the arts is a good thing, it is actually regressive from a tax policy view - poorer people who have less interest in the arts subsidizing better off people who do - generalization, of course).
Orchestras can and should seek out ways to increase productivity - the Berlin Philharmonic digital concert hall is one example, and the sale of recordings on the orchestra's own label is another.
Support for the arts throughout Europe comes not so much from local government, but from national governments that view their cultural mission as a public service. In Germany, the federal funding supports almost 10,000 musicians in the 150 or so supported classical orchestras and other ensembles. Cultural programming on TV and radio is abundant and high quality.
This is true (in varying degrees) throughout the EU, as there is continuing commitment to preserve the cultural heritage of their countries and concomitantly to public education.
As a result, all citizens of the EU enjoy edifying and enriching access to the arts. Not only music, but theater, dance, museums, etc. That benefit is society-wide, unlike the U.S. where education and access to the arts tends to be a niche for the well-heeled and well-educated. This is especially true as NPR and Public Television have progressively curtailed their efforts to offer high art programming.
"Life without music is a mistake" (Nietzsche)
/
.
nt
I'll listen to Gliere's 3rd symphony this weekend in your honor. And Men of Harlech in honor of my 5th grade music teacher Mrs. Grace. (Some of you will know that song from the climactic scene in Zulu, but I have Mrs. Grace to thank).
hahaha -- I hope it is Farberman's recording.
In retaliation, I'll play some modernist music that could have been snipped from the same cloth -- Philip Glass, Symphony No. 9 -- and then I'll drop into Silvestrov's haunting Symphony No. 5.
Being in the mood, I'm also going to listen to Reich's "Music for 18 Musicians" soon. It's been awhile.
"Life without music is a mistake" (Nietzsche)
that government and charitable support of the arts benefits the rich rather than the poor. Especially when it is education in and exposure to the arts that is being supported, it is a great benefit to those who could not otherwise afford to provide this education and exposure to their children.
Support for the arts generally, whether government or charitable, benefits the general public, not the wealthy few. Tickets to the symphony and opera can cost a lot in NYC, but in most cases nowhere near as much as tickets to NFL and NBA games. And there are great programs to get children to concerts and operas, often though the schools, for very little money.
Donors have been paying the piper and calling the tune for as long as I can remember.
Opera more so than symphony? Maybe.
Rather have a few deep pocketed donors/fat cats/symphony board members calling the tune than my local mayor and board of supervisors though.
Good point there. My local mayor, Rudy Giuliani, tried to close and sell off NYC's public radio station, WNYC, after it broadcast some political and news commentary he didn't like.
But WNYC bought its independence from the city and thrives on both charitable donations, which listeners are urging to make in fundraising drives, and commercial ads, (though less of those than an ordinary commercial station, as they will frequently remind you).
The same model now applies to NYC's last commercial classical music station, WQXR, after it was bought by WNYC and moved to a much weaker (and less valuable) frequency.
So, still some good music (but all "classical hits" and "relaxing music" -- nothing esoteric) and much more hiss and background noise. That to me sums up a lot about philanthropic support for the arts.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: