In Reply to: Fine article on Salonen and the L.A. Phils in current New Yorker posted by clarkjohnsen on April 25, 2007 at 14:21:08:
It doesn't really say much, besides that the Orchestra and Salonen get along quite well. It tries to imply that audiences love the modernist programming (which many other people have said of Salonen/LAPO), yet concedes that many subscribers returned their tickets to the minimalist festival and that they had to slash tickets prices in order to fill the hall, and that they didn't break even. It also says that the core repertoire in LA is Stravisnky and Bartok, but I think most orchestras play a lot of music by these composers.The most interesting comment Salonen made, was that you'd expect people who see art house films to go to the orchestra, but they don't since they see it as a 19th century art form and when it comes to music, they want something very 20th (and now 21st) century. I'm not sure if that's true -- the art house cinemas here in Philadelphia play 19th century orchestral music while people wait for the films to begin -- but I think he makes an interesting point that just because someone is into one form of art/entertainment, that does not mean it translates over into another.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Fine article on Salonen and the L.A. Phils in current New Yorker - Thornhill 14:46:12 04/25/07 (1)
- Alex Ross - Chris from Lafayette 18:00:14 04/29/07 (0)