Berg 2, Schubert 0, Bloggers 5

The San Francisco Symphony began "Dawn to Twilight: A Schubert/Berg Festival" tonight with a program I found to be only a partial success. Whether you would like it or not will likely depend on how you like your German Romanticism served. I prefer mine to be robust, bloody and well-cooked. Tonight's Schubert's offerings catered more to those who tastes lean toward the more easily swallowed without much effort. That may be fine for an appetizer, but it makes for an unsatisfying main course- especially when paired with a dynamite wine.

Ok- enough of the stupid food analogies. I guess that's what happens when the concert starts an hour earlier than usual and one is forced to have supper post-performance. Please, no more 7:00 PM start times. If anything, start later rather than earlier. Why can't the show start at 9:00? Then everyone would be on time and well-fed. It would be so much more civilized.

Allow me to a digress for a moment, if you please. A few years back I was sitting in the now-departed Vicolo prior to a Symphony concert and I recognized a member of the orchestra eating alone. I mustered the arrogance to tell him I didn't much care for the way MTT had conducted Beethoven's work those past couple of years, especially an Eroica which I had recently attended that I thought had nothing remotely heroic in at all. In my opinion it was a prancing horse and I desired a snorting bull. Much to my surprise, he agreed with me. For the past few years I've avoided MTT conducting Beethoven for that very reason. This season I relented and decided to attend the the September 11th performance of the 9th Symphony and I was floored. It was the most gorgeous and powerful 9th I've ever heard. My faith was renewed and all was immediately forgiven.

So my expectations for the Schubert-side of this festival were pretty high, because MTT was back to giving full-blooded accounts of my favorite genre of classical music. Alas, to my disappointment, he has slipped back, at least for this night, into that lean, bloodless mode I find so discouraging. On the opening Rosamunde Overture that can be forgiven, even expected, but when that same scourge bleeds the life from Unfinished it just leaves me feeling sad. Even the orchestra looked sheepish afterwards, as if they wanted to say to the audience,"We're sorry, we know could have kicked-ass on this, but tonight we just didn't." And fie to the trombones.

Berg on the other hand, was performed with something close to perfection, including the trombones. Go figure.

In the evening's first half Michelle DeYoung turned in an incredible performance of Seven Early Songs that made me immediately want to see her cast across the street and right away. Check my review of LA Opera's Die Walkure back in April to see that she turned in that day's strongest performance against some pretty heavy competition. She's incredibly talented and was the evening's highlight far and away. I'm adding her to my list of must-see performers.

Three Pieces for Orchestra, also performed just this past January, was brilliant (and loud!).This crazy quilt of sound that spools out of a white-hot central core into molten tendrils was thrilling and beautiful, with each section of the orchestra coming through crystal clear while making a cacophonous din. Who knew MTT would use this evening to show off his Modernist cred? At the end, the orchestra looked very pleased with itself and it was justifiable satisfaction.

One thing I've recently learned that this concert validated in both halves: in the entire classical music canon, there may be no one who can compose and ending to a piece as effectively as Berg. We'll get to see the ultimate example of this gift next week in the Violin Concerto, but tonight it was on full display with every one of his works.

As for the 5 bloggers, that was how many were present at the Opera Tattler & Axel Feldheim's table at intermission. SF Mike snapped a picture to prove it. Also at the table was SFist's Cedric, who recently interviewed Michelle De Young, as he does most of the visting talent at Davies.

"Knight" at the opera? More like Otis P. Driftwood.

Janos Gereben's puff piece on San Francisco Opera's General Director David Gockley in Sunday's San Francisco Examiner has raised my ire so allow me to vent my spleen once again.

Gereben writes:

When posed the ethereal question of “What plans do you have for your next
life?” David Gockley pauses, considering an alternate existence as an
architect or professional basketball coach. Then he stops. “No,” he says, “I
would do this again."

“Managing the financial end is more difficult now, with the numbers
and what the numbers will buy,” Gockley said. “But every financial decision is an
artistic decision. I must create a balance to maintain a critical mass of
quality, attractiveness, attendance, funding ... to keep the whole thing moving
forward.”

Earlier this month I wrote post criticizing SFO's cutbacks that in my opinion fell too heavily on the backs of the administrative staff (see "Smell the dirty laundry"). Gereben's fawning has prompted me to look for more stuff that stinks in SFO's numbers and it wasn't hard to find.

Gockley's mantra since his arrival has been something about bringing "the world's best singers" and "grand opera" back to San Francisco, often in comments that contained thinly-veiled snipes at the previous administration and insults directed at singers who appeared onstage during it (most egregious were his comments regarding Catherine Naglestad's Norma).

During the current economic crisis cutbacks have been made in many areas, as is warranted, but are the cutbacks being made at SFO coming from the necessary places? Are they saving the "quality" of what ends up on the stage? In my opinion the answer is a firm "no."

So far, during his administration, there have been few genuine total triumphs, and the two that come immediately to mind, "Der Rosenkavalier" and "Iphigenie en Tauride," originated under his predecessor. There have been successes, sure- last year's "Lucia" and "Appomattox" are obvious, but I would argue there has been little so far that rivals the best stuff that Rosenberg gave us and I see little on the horizon that promises to change that outlook.

Are these cuts taking place because Gockley wants to save the money ear-marked to bring us all these "great singers"? Are we seeing more money spent on the stage itself? Is that why the administrative staff is taking a beating, the programs for families have been cut, rehearsals cut and there will be no Peter Grimes this year?

Nope.

It appears that's not the case at all. In fact, it seems less money is being spent on what ends up onstage under Gockley that it was under Rosenberg. That's rather hard to believe, with all his crowing to the contrary and the sky-rocketing price of tickets during his tenure, but it's all there in the numbers I'm afraid, which I've pulled directly from SFO's own financial audits.

Here's the breakdown on production and artistic costs over the past six years (in millions) with the corresponding percentage of these costs in the overall Artistic Budget- this is the money actually spent that ends up on the stage (we are now in Gockley's 4th year, so the first three of these years are from Rosenberg's era):

2003/ 2004 /2005 /2006 /2007/2008

Singers, Conductors, Directors & Designers:

2003: $8.761-19%, 2004: 9.060-22%, 2005: 7.282-18%, 2006: 8.559-20%, 2007: 7.716-18%,

2008: 8.548-17%

Orchestra :

2003: 9.438-21%, 2004: 8.438 -20%, 2005: 8.865-22%, 2006: 8.620-20%, 2007: 9.195-22%

2008: 9.510-19%

Chorus and Ballet:

2003: 5.142-11%, 2004: 4.332-10% , 2005: 4.572-12% , 2006: 4.788-11%, 2007: 4.969-12%,

2008: 5.560-11%

Scenery, Properties Stage Hands, Technical staff

2003: 14.855-32% , 2004: 13.317-32%, 2005: 11.397-29%, 2006: 13.943-32%, 2007: 12.275-29%,

2008: 16.463-33%

Costumes, Wardrobes, Wigs, Make-up:

2003: 4.911-11%, 2004: 3.960-10%, 2005: 3.512-9%, 2006: 3.865-9%, 2007: 3.264-8%, 2008: 4.372-9%

Artistic and Music Administration:

2003: 2.880- 6% , 2004: 2.337- 6%, 2005: 3.793-10% , 2006: 3.579- 8%, 2007: 4.557- 11%,

2008: 5.656-11%

Notice anything unusual?

Well, I do. It appears the money being spent on singers has actually decreased during Gockley's tenure. So has the money spent on making those singers look good onstage.

Huh?

Orchestra and scenery costs appear static, no doubt due to union stipulations and the like, same for the chorus and ballet costs.

But what is with the 83% increase in "Artistic and Music Administration" costs that have occurred under Gockley?

I would speculate the large spike in Rosenberg's last year was related to bringing Doctor Atomic into the world, but after that, what can account for this huge, ongoing increase? Where the hell is that money going? Appomattox and The Bonesetter's Daughter? I can see the justification for putting the money into Doctor Atomic, but I can't see the justification for the other two. Adams' opera is on its way into the repertoire. As a Glass composition, Appomattox may have some legs, but Daughter is unlikely to ever again see the stage of a major house.

Will the percentage of this spending be down this year since there are no premieres on the schedule? It should be and I think this will be worth looking at when the next set of numbers come out. If these costs remain at their high percentage, then where is this money being spent? And how is it the budget on singers is no higher than it was during Rosenberg's tenure, even though that was what was used as justification for higher ticket prices? So where is that money going?

Can someone please explain this? I'd also like an explanation as to why Gockley is getting such a free ride in the press when I for one can't see anything that merits such a pass as the one Gereben just gave him.

In the meantime, I think the "Knight at the Opera" is making SFO's board and audience look more and more like Margaret Dumont. No wonder next season opens with Il Trovatore.

The cool kids take over

Friday night's concert had the buzz of "an event." It was a rare was sell-out, good reviews of the previous performances were widely read and the hall had a palpable sense of anticipation. There was a noticeably larger, diverse contingent of younger people in the audience than one usually encounters at Davies, perhaps in part due to the final "After Hours" event to be held after the concert.

First up was Sibelius's Symphony No. 4. MTT offered a disclaimer of sorts complete with spoilers and samples before starting the music. I'm not the only person in the audience who didn't appreciate this, but we are probably in the minority. I think he should save that stuff for the 6.5 audience. The piece itself was well-performed, with a restraint that must have been difficult to achieve because the opportunities to go overboard are present at almost every turn. The horns sounded especially in sync with the tone of the work, something that hasn't been too common in the concerts I've heard lately, especially in the beautiful, lachrymose 3rd movement, which to my ears sounds very reminiscent of Puccini's "E lucevan le stelle" from Tosca. Tim Day's flute was simply gorgeous.

MTT said in his remarks, somewhat spinning Sibelius' own comments on the work, that "no one is prepared to offer a conclusive answer" as to what the music is about. Written against the idea "program music," Sibelius' 4th is regarded as being "austere" and "severe." I look at it another way: the composer is striving to get out from under Beethoven's shadow and in this piece I think he fails completely. Every movement seems to be written as a direct antithesis of Beethoven's 9th to the point where I found myself distracted by the dialogue the between the two.

The second work of the first half featured a commission by composer/DJ Mason Bates, The B-Sides. Featuring samples of Apollo 5 astronauts, a broom, a typewriter and a large orchestra, Bates manned his laptop as a member of the percussion section and gave the audience a vision of where contemporary classical music may be headed. The percussionists looked pretty happy to have him in their midst, though I sensed a more subdued response from the rest of the orchestra, as if the future had just dropped by unexpectedly and was now seated at the kitchen table and they were unsure if they should ask it to stay for dinner.

MTT was uncharacteristically subdued during the performance and it was hard for me to tell who was leading whom during all but one of the work's five sections. It almost seemed like duelling conductors, but I immensely enjoyed watching the breakdown of the traditional conductor/orchestra barrier. The nature of the work transformed the orchestra into something that was at once more cohesive yet also somewhat unsure of its role. It was a significant performance which I won't soon forget.

As for the music itself, it was pretty engaging, creating a musical kaleidoscope encompassing everything from Beck to Bernard Herrmann, though parts did remind me of the more ambient side of The Art of Noise, especially during "Aerosol Melody." The audience ate it up and gave Bates a huge ovation. I overheard one older gentleman enthusiastically exclaim afterward "now that's what contemporary music should sound like!" I have to say I admire the way Bates can forge a funk groove and make excellent use of a full orchestra in the same piece. Let's have more of this, please.

Yuja Wang joined the orchestra after the intermission to perform Prokofiev's 2nd Piano Concerto. On the orchestral side, the work features many of the elements one likes most about Prokofiev- those spidery, jumpy folk tunes jumping out of that make one want to move with the music without being aware of it. For the pianist it's simply a tour-de-force finger-buster. The cadenzas are two stops beyond over-the-top and could be easily be called gratuitous but that's what makes the piece fun.

Wang performed it with a dexterity and precision that was pretty much mind-boggling to watch and hear. However, I can't say she performed it with a lot of feeling, which may be the downside of being such an immensely talented musician at the age of 22. I would love to hear her perform this piece again at 10 year intervals so we can witness her interpretation being informed by her experiences. She received an extended, very loud, and I'd say well-deserved ovation. She's definitely a star and her future appearances should be considered be must-sees.

This was brilliant programming, and given the tremendous enthusiasm with which it was received, obviously appreciated by the audience. It should be noted far and wide that the most satisfying and electrifying SFS programs of this season have all featured contemporary works and female soloists. The world is changing right in front of us.

The final "After Hours" event of the season was held after the concert, which I'll cover in another post.

San Francisco Symphony's strong close begins

For the past few years the San Francisco Symphony has made a habit of the saving some of their best programming for the last part of the season, and tonight starts a run of concerts over the next month which are likely to be the highlights of an already impressive year.

This week's performances feature pianist Yuja Wang performing Prokofiev's No. 2 concerto in G Minor, Sibelius' 4th symphony, and electronica composer/DJ Mason Bates performing his own work, The B-Sides, with the Symphony. If nothing else, these concerts should be interesting and are likely to fascinate with their contrasts. Additionally, Bates is going to be DJing the next Davies After Hours, scheduled for this Friday after the concert. These are well worth checking out after the show.

Then we roll into what I've been waiting for all year long- the three week Dawn to Twilight festival of Schubert and Berg, which is a feast of gorgeous and challenging music with some serious talent showing up to play a part- Michelle DeYoung, Yefim Bronfman, Gil Shaham, Laura Aiken (whose turn as the Angel in SF Opera's St. Francis is still one of the most indelible performances I've ever experienced), Julia Fischer and more.

Finally, the week of June 18th, there's the semi-staged production of Iolanthe.

Tickets for most of the performances are showing up on Goldstar. If you haven't gone to the Symphony yet this season, now's the time folks.

Glee Club!

Since I originally started this blog to write about opera and classical music and other high-fallutin' interests of mine this post may throw some of you off, or even put you off, but it's my blog and I'll write about what ever I want to simply because I can.

Tonight's question is why was the teaser episode of "Glee" so freakin' good? I read some positive reviews in the Times and SFGate prior to tonight's broadcast, but the show really exceeded my hyped expectations. Now, before you get all dismissive and haughty, know that the last show I saw one episode of and fell in love with was "Deadwood," and if you can find a similarity between the two besides sure-handed and near-flawless execution let me know, okay?

This one episode just seems like it hit the zeitgeist dead on. I wonder if when it returns in the fall it will seem the same way. That's going to be a real challenge, or maybe time and attitudes just move slower than I think they are at this point in time. And how did this come from the creators of "Nip/Tuck," which I had to turn off after 15 minutes in sheer revulsion and still felt the need for a shower.

If they can keep it up in the fall when the show returns, look for Glee to become a monster success because it hits its tried-and-true, uniquely American-centric themes with the blunt force of a baseball bat to your face, but due to the times we're living in makes it feel like a delicious orgasm. You're brain should be saying, "Oh god, please make it stop" but instead it's asking for a larger dose. It's complete, masterful manipulation.

Make no mistake- the creators of this show have taken the pulse of the U.S and have come up with a confection acknowledging how messed up things are while reminding us how good things are going to be once we're out of these woods, because gosh darn it- this is America. And yet the show winks to the cynics every chance it gets and then swats away that same cynicism with defiant faith in its mission and message.

Amazingly, they pull it off. It evens manages to do it with a soundtrack featuring Journey. The people who are behind this show are brilliant. Bring it on. I want some more.

Me sing pretty one day

Sometimes the little, stupid things are just too annoying to let pass, especially when there are big annoying things to be bothered by. When I was looking at San Francisco Opera's website this weekend and noted the stupid "this production may contain nudity" blurb on the Salome page, I also noticed the even more stupid "pronunciation-key" that's the first thing one sees when they look beneath the photo meant to get us all excited about the production. But some comments on the Reverberate Hills made me go back and take a look, just because I'm killing some time until Idol comes on and Adam blows the other two gomers off the stage.

Now the idea of the whole correct pronunciation thing is condescending and snooty enough, especially when Die Entfurhung aus dem Serail, La Fille du Regiment and La Fanciulla del West have all been translated into English and their original titles are nowhere to be seen. But what's even worse, is that yes, there is a pronunciation snippet for Porgy and Bess! I didn't go through all of them (I'm not that bored), but the easy ones are all there- Tosca, Faust and Otello. Even Die Walkure gets it's proper pronunciation. Now the ones, that may actually have been helpful, if done in their native tongues (see above)- are all dead links. Click on them and you get- silence. Well, there is a pronunciation for La Fanciulla del West, in English (wtf?) and Italian, even though the window is mislabeled for Faust.

All together now Tos-ca. Oh-tell-oh. Faoost. Very good. Now, say Poor-ghee and Bhess.

Now don't you feel dumb for even trying? Poor thing- you'll be there at the opera and you won't know how to pronounce the name of the show. You bumpkin!

The voice sounds like Kip Cranna's. That's too bad. He seems like such a nice guy. I can imagine him grimacing into the microphone when he had to do this nonsense.

And as of this writing, it still remains to be decided if there will be nudity in Salome. Say-oh-my.

Michael Feinstein at Davies

Photo: Scott Mitchell

Michael Feinstein rolled back into town Sunday night to give us folks in the Bay Area a nice opportunity to take our mothers to a great show for Mother's Day and my sister and I took advantage of it. I didn't even know this show was part of SFJazz Spring Season, which may account for why it seemed so under publicized. SFJazz puts on some really great shows, but unless you're plugged into their mailing list or still read the Chronicle, you're unlikely to see much publicity surrounding their often world-class concerts.

Feinstein's show is called "The Sinatra Project," which generally means he's mining Frank's old set lists for the crowd favorites along with more obscure songs he performed but never recorded. Feinstein makes this work rather impressively and thankfully the the show steers clear from becoming "A Tribute to Sinatra." Backed by a super-tight big band led by Bill Elliott (unfortunately never completely introduced nor listed anywhere I can find on SFJazz's website despite what is says in the program), Feinstein essentially sings in the style and range of the 50's Capitol-era Sinatra while the band goes for a Nelson Riddle, 60's Reprise-era sound.

This is a smart and savvy combination. Feinstein's tenor really sounds nothing like Sinatra's baritone at all, but since today's audiences seemed more predisposed to like the larger and louder Riddle-style arrangements over the more subdued stylings of the Tommy Dorsey era (which would be a more natural fit for Feinstein), why not combine the two?

It works really well, especially since Feinstein has the smarts and talent to play to his own considerable strengths. There probably is no living singer who is better with this material. Avoiding all the cliches except for "New York, New York," which he succeeded in owning outright, the show started off strong with "Luck Be a Lady" and stayed there. Particular highlights included Sammy Cahn's "All My Tomorrows," "Begin the Beguine" and "The Man that Got Away." His voice was simply fantastic- smooth and powerful, with hardly ever any vibrato inching into many of the songs extended climaxes. He pretty much killed it on every tune.

Feinstein thanked San Francisco as being the place he got started 20 years ago and this comment made me long for the good old days when there were still quite a few piano bars in town, almost all of which are now gone or devoid of any reason to visit. This is such a loss for the City. At one point in the not-too-distant past you could go out on any night of the week, in a few different neighborhoods, and listen to very talented local people singing this repertoire for the cost of a drink. Now there's pretty much just Martuni's, which can be anathema for a purist depending on the night. It was very nice to see Barry Lloyd, one the best of the remaining local talents, in the lobby before the show.

By the way, my Mom loved the show, as I hoped she would.

Happy Mother's Day Mom- you're the best.

San Francisco Symphony's Social Network, aka Sysypuss vs the Facebook Monster

This week the San Francisco Symphony launched its own social network site, called, not very imaginatively, The San Francisco Symphony Social Network. That's an unfortunate name that one can't even dumb-down into a decent acronym, which I think would have been a good idea. It's such a good idea I'm going to give the thing a nickname, just so I don't have to re-type that painfully long name nor refer to it by an acronym that I won't be able to pronounce nor remember. Henceforth, it shall be referred to as Sysypuss.

The initial response to Sysypuss from many bloggers seems to be pretty negative, with some questioning the need for yet another network that will have to compete for time and energy against Facebook, Twitter, blogs, Youtube, porn and whatever else people are consuming or participating in online to others who've labeled it "painfully absurd" and behind the curve.

I'm going to take a contrarian view here and state that it's a swell idea, though one that is going to need superb execution and direction to survive. When parts of your base are jeering from the sidelines, it's going to be an uphill road. Regardless, I think the symphony can pull this off and I hope they do.

I think almost everyone who reads this will probably also be on Facebook, with friends ranging in number from 10 to 1,000. Now subtract from that number your friends from work, remove all of your friends from elementary, junior and high schools, take away your family, friends of friends and casual acquaintances. Remove the networking opportunities and people you've met once. Now, how many of those friends are left? I'm betting that leaves your circle of friends pretty diminished. From those that are left, how many like classical music? How many attend concerts? Some of you, and you know who you are, will undoubtedly be saying to yourself, "Ha, that still leaves most of my friends!" Believe me, you're a tiny minority in a larger world that's indifferent to the arts on a good day and completely uninterested the rest of the time.

I think the success of Facebook comes from giving people an online, interactive community, but I also think it's flawed because it's based on the most artificial and weakest of social bonds and it's somewhat voyeuristic. So what do you do after you find out what the girl or guy you longed for in high school now looks like? How many quizzes can you take? It will eventually be replaced by something else more exciting, which will in turn be replaced by something else. Remember chat rooms? When was the last time you were in one?

In their latest redesign, which most people hated and I thought was a huge improvement, you can now "hide" those friends you have little in common with and not have to read about their latest trip to the podiatrist or what the baby/child/husband/boss you have never and will never meet did that morning. Better still on the new Facebook was turning the "Fan" pages into something where communication now takes place both ways, enabling people to get news or "updates" about people, places or things they actually are interested in without have to click a link to find out or "follow." Facebook's new changes allow the user to narrow what was quickly becoming unwieldy and makes it more user friendly by allowing people to filter out a lot of useless information.

That's a great innovation , but while I may be interested in what a musician said in an interview or in a new release of theirs, I for one don't really care if they're playing in Chicago or Bucharest. So the quality and value of these groups will depend on the individuals controlling the posts. Close, definitely an improvement, but not quite there for the most part.

Twitter seems to be getting a lot of press and attention, but what can be very interesting in 140 characters or less? I don't see it growing into a phenomenon like Facebook. Do you really care that right now I can hear a band somewhere in the neighborhood playing a bluesy version of "Little Wing" that is so good even the crack dealers are stopping in their tracks to listen to it? I didn't think so.

So far, the coolest music site I've come across is LastFm., but it's a huge site and can eat up your entire day, weekend, life.

Which brings us back to Sysypuss. Right now there are 280 people who share my interest in the San Francisco Symphony. They are likely to be local. I may have seen some of them at concerts, or even sat next to them. Or chatted with them during an intermission. Or admired them from the audience. Or in the audience. Sysypuss is a portal into a local, living real community in which I can participate to the extent I choose.

I'm already a part of it by choice, not circumstance, and SFS is just giving the social network's users a way to maximize their involvement through an online channel. Will all of those people interest me? Probably not. But I for one, would be interested in reading more reviews from audience members, learning more about the musicians and the music, and coming across the random unexpected and surprising thing that can be the best part of the online experience.

I'd like to see musician's blogs, gossip from the bar, candid pictures and a "missed connections" link similar to the one on Craigslist. I'd like to get opinions on what works or performers I may be interested in from other people, based on what they gathered from a list of the concerts I've attended or subscribed to, or things I've listed in my profile. I'd like to buy an impromptu ticket from someone this way rather than from that guy in the beige trench coat who looks like a nasty Mr. Bean.

Yes, this is niche social-networking and I do think it's what the future looks like. The online community designed for the common denominator isn't all that satisfying to me. I also can't imagine it's that satisfying for many of the arts-oriented people I know. If this is done correctly, the result will resemble something like MySpace for the Symphony. MySpace doesn't get a lot of press in the wake of Facebook, but for music, it's still the community of choice for fans and musicians.

But classical music isn't going to work on MySpace, period, so kudos to SFS for figuring this out and creating a third way. The challenge is going to be keeping it free of cheese, not turning it into a commercial for the SFS, establishing a baseline integrity and maintaining an intellectually and socially stimulating environment. They will need some luck and some smart people to make it work. But I'm all for it and you can find me there.

Raising a stink and will there be nudity or not?

My last post on San Francisco Opera's dubious cost-cutting methods and priorities certainly seems to have gotten some attention over at the quonset hut in the Hayes Valley alley. I wish I could tell if those readers were the ill-treated admin staff or their abusers, but I really have no idea. The post has generated one interesting and illuminating comment and I hope there are more to come. The commenter makes it plain we will be seeing the results of other cuts manifest on the stage this coming season. Coupled with the previously reported cuts in rehearsal times, all of this creates a vision in my mind of a season where highly-paid Met stars will jet in, do a couple of quick rehearsals of roles they can sing in their sleep, and then throw it all up there on the stage and hope the seams don't show too much.

In an email, a friend pointed out these kinds of cuts are taking place in every sector, which is obviously true. He also defended SFO's forays into new media as a pro-active move in the never-ending quest to expand the audience. Furthermore, the money was spent or committed before the economic meltdown, all of which is true. I can see the validity of this viewpoint. I'm just not impressed with the execution and its implications.

True or not, it doesn't change my opinion that a four-fold increase in media spending in one year, including spending on poorly thought-out programs, is simply reckless. Nor does it change the upcoming season, a masterclass in provincial, safe programming done as cheaply as possible but sold as "grand and glorious opera." I for one, would rather have bold and provocative opera, presented with a guerilla mentality in response to the current economic reality, that would have people excitedly talking about what was happening here.

Next season is going to be what it is, and certainly there will be some highlights and great performances emerging from the scheduled dross. On the plus side, Nadja Michael's Salome, Voigt's Minnie, the star-studded Trovatore and Die Walkure are all things to anticipate. Be that as it may, the most exciting art form on the planet is certainly not being moved in a forward direction by the West Coast's company with the most resources at its disposal to do just that.

On another note, what exactly is going on with SFO's website? Why does it say there may be nudity in Salome? Hasn't this already been decided? Is it dependent on Michael's mood? Is there a weight-clause in her contract for a cellulite opt-out? When is the nudity going to be decided? Listen up- just say there will be nudity. It will sell more tickets. Who doesn't know that??? If there is no nudity to be had, then make the announcement before the curtain rises and offer those disgruntled audience members a voucher for the Mitchell Brothers theater.

Also, put up a big sign in the lobby about the nudity, and set up the opera-glass rental stand right next to it- and double the rental price during the run. Think, people!

San Francisco Opera. Smell the dirty laundry?

Fully aware that I'm just stirring the pot with this post, I'm going to go ahead and give in to the desire I've always had of being a muckraker.

Since I previously ranted about San Francisco Opera's million-dollar budget cut largely being carried out on the backs of their administrative staff, I thought I would do a little digging around to see what else is going on over there. It isn't pretty and those latest cuts come on top of some made last year at the expense of the same folks.

As a non-profit (i.e. charity) SFO is required to maintain open books as far as the financials go, so it's easy to see where the money's going, or in this case, being blown. I looked up the 2008 Final Audit for the company and the thing that seemed most incomprehensible to me were the media costs.

By their own definition, these are "Expenses related to the Association’s new electronic media department and activities,which include OperaVision, LobbyVision, radio broadcasts, simulcasts, cinemacasts and DVDs."

According to the company's financials, in fiscal year 2007 SFO spent $716,853 on these activites and items.

For 2008, the number was $3 ,876,204. The math: an increase of more than 3 million dollars. Yeah. A three million, one hundred-fifty nine thousand and change in a year. Can you say "wtf"?

And for what? Oh yes, let's review: OperaVision, LobbyVision, radio broadcasts, simulcasts, cinemacasts and DVDs. Tell me, San Francisco Opera enthusiasts- are high-def close-ups of singers for the cheap seats worth it? How about those mid-day, non-live cinemacasts at the Castro, which have already been dumped as a loser? What DVDs? What radio broadcasts? Do they mean those months-later leftovers that show up on the otherwise opera-void KDFC? That was worth 3 mil?

Now, I don't know how much of that figure goes for "Opera at the Ballpark," which I do think is a great and successful idea. But it's also probably underwritten all the way, and if not, more shame should be spread. So the question here, to my mind, is who the hell signed off on this and why?

Yeah, it's too late now to save that cash and the contributions to the 401ks of SFO's administrative staff, but didn't someone on the board do some due diligence? Who is responsible for keeping Gockley in check? And by the way, I don't mean to trash the board, because they have really stepped in with some cash lately, even though that's why they're on the board in the first place. But really. If you go to Charity Navigator and start comparing the efficeincy rates and salaries for opera companies across the U.S., I think the conclusion you'll draw will be close to my own. Look at Houston's (Gockley's former home for over thirty years with a miserable overall efficiency rate of just 37.66) numbers vs. the in-dire-seriously-straits NYCO's (a 60.05 rating) and you too may get the sinking feeling that SFO needs a new direction- and fast.

I'll post more on these numbers and my interpretation of them in future posts. In the meantime, if you want to dispute them, say I have no idea what I'm talking about, call me an ass, whatever, please do- by all means!

Folly at SFO

Photo by Robert Millard

The Opera Tattler, always first on the scene with this kind of info, just posted the following bad news from the San Francisco Opera. Naturally I'm not privy to the insider workings over there, but I for one have to wonder what SFO's board is thinking at this point about the man in charge. You don't have to wonder what I'm thinking, however- I wish Gockley would go back to Texas. Tomorrow.


It was my understanding Gockley was hired on the strength of his fund-raising and glad-handing abilities (certainly it wasn't his artistic vision), and he quickly brought in some huge contributions. Now, obviously everyone's endowments have been hard hit during this recession, but the only response I'm seeing from SFO is to cut this and cut that, none of which makes for a long term plan nor anything improving what goes on the stage. Now they've issued a press release on saving the company a million bucks largely on the back of the administrative staff (who no doubt are already making less than what they would doing similar jobs in the for-profit world). Is this supposed to inspire confidence in the company's leadership or direction?


How about scrapping Moby Dick, holding raffles at the ballpark telecasts and Opera in the Park for a pair of front-row or center box tickets, eliminating the redundant mailings for subscribers, raising rates for the full-page real estate ads in the programs, creating a worthwhile CD/DVD sales program based on the upcoming season, selling eye-catching posters and T-Shirts and creating new revenue streams in the War Memorial and eliminating Gockley's annual vanity project aka the season preview cd?


Can't SFO find a million dollars in these simple and easily executed suggestions? Hey, at least I'm offering them for free.

ACT's next season

ACT's next season looks promising, with 5 things I want to see and two I consider can't miss- Marco Baricelli and Olympia Dukakis in "Vigil" and the long-awaited "Tosca Project."

SF Ballet's Program 8: Goodies and the Gulag

San Francisco Ballet's Program 8 features begins and ends with two delightful works from the last year's excellent New Works Festival. In between, it feels like an extended stay in the gulag, courtesy of Alexei Ratmansky's painfully long and uninteresting Russian Seasons. But let's start with the good stuff.



I have yet to see a Yuri Possokhov work I haven't thoroughly enjoyed. Fusion, according to the program notes, is meant to represent the choreographer's "personal struggle he experienced as he left dancing behind and gave himself fully to choreography." Movement representing searching and flight, discovery and awareness came across the stage with vigor, accompanied by a score of Burman arranged by Golijov and Fitkin that was a perfect fit for the choreography. Sarah Van Patten, as usual, held my attention every moment she was onstage.



Ratmansky's Russian Seasons featured almost all of the Ballet's top talent A-Team and yet the presence of Yuan Yuan Tan, Lorena Feijoo, Pascal Molat, Damian Smith and Van Patten couldn't overcome the dreary music and uninspired ideas of the work. Unfortunately, it also included a running motif just like the one from Fusion, making me wonder if all of a sudden we were having a theme night I was unaware of. Broken into twelve parts of different combinations of dancers, the piece is meant to evoke themes of life's struggle in an earlier time in Russia that may or may not still exist. There was one high point during this piece for me: at one point Lorena Feijoo fell back into the arms of Aaron Orza, lifted her leg, causing the boring costume to slide back along her thigh. It was like suddenly seeing a gorgeous bird soaring against an ugly, gray sky.

Jorma Elo's Double Evil incorporates contemporary and modern dance movements allowing the dancers to just explode across the stage and have a good time. They looked like they were having a blast and their enthusiasm reached across the pit and captivated the audience. While there are certain movements and poses this piece utilizes that I don't find particularly flattering or beautiful for the women dancers (I call it the assisted rotating beaver display), it is good fun (with music by Phillip Glass, even!).



For this weekend's performances, I've read Russian Seasons was to be replaced by one of the Balanchine Jewels, because of, ahem, a dancer's illness. Hopefully this dancer will remain ill for the rest of the schedule and you'll be spared the trip to the Gulag.

Directors differ on Siegfried

The Washington Post's Anne Midgette has been posting excerpts of her interviews with the directors of four different Ring cycles currently being produced across the U.S. in Seattle, New York, L.A. and San Francisco/Washington D.C..

Today's post was particularly interesting for the completely opposite interpretations of the audience's perception of Siegfried, with L.A.'s director Achim Freyer calling it the most "beloved" of the cycle and containing a straight line narrative while S.F./D.C.'s Francesca Zambello says it's the one people think they "have to sit through" and it's all about language.

N.Y.'s Otto Schenk says it's all drama while Seattle's Stephen Wadsworth says Act 1 is "chock-a-block full of action."

I'm not familiar with the Seattle Ring, but I know the Schenk production through DVDs, and I am attending the L.A. and S.F. productions as they unfurl and the three couldn't really be more different. So far, L.A.'s is far away the superior and rewarding experience, but these differing interpretations of the same opera do illustrate one of the greatest things about the art and why directors are so important to the medium.

The Opera Tattler and the scribe of Out West Arts are two of at least four bloggers I'm aware of currently attending the last cycle of the Met's Schenk Ring and their reviews are making me feel somewhat better for skipping this jaunt, though I would love to have a pastrami sandwich this morning

Living in the 'Loin #1

I live in the Tenderloin and as anyone who knows San Francisco can attest, this neighborhood has its challenges. I've lived here for five years. Some of my neighbors who've lived here longer think the area has improved in recent years, but I don't share their opinion. In fact, in the seventeen years I've lived in and around the City I think the Tenderloin's gotten worse, largely due to an out-of-control drug trade coupled with a police department that seems incapable or unwilling of doing anything about it.

I live in a really cool art deco hotel that was the first building in San Francisco to be converted into condos. My apartment has an awesome view and I can see 180 degrees from the TransAmerica Pyramid to Twin Peaks.

From the street below I can hear the whistles of the dealers, incredibly loud sirens, people screaming, people yelling incoherently and once in awhile the distinct sound of gunfire.

I can walk out the door of my building and get pretty much any kind of food I want at anytime, most of it well made, tasty and cheap. On the other hand there's a Ruth's Chris, Morton's, and a plethora of this city's best restaurants all within a ten to fifteen minute stroll or less.

I can also buy crack, heroin, weed, hookers of both genders and plenty that are a little of both any time of the day or night. It's an eight block walk to work, eight blocks in the other direction the opera house and six blocks to the top of Nob Hill. There are definitely benefits to be had, no doubt, and the good comes with the bad, right?

But it can disheartening, soul-crushing sometimes, to be a witness to the constant human train-wreck that runs rampant through this neighborhood. I never wanted to be the kind of person who just ignored people asking for change, even if I had none to give, but now I'm one of them. I used to offer to buy people food if they asked for some money to get some. No more.

Now I know only suckers and tourists do that. You can get three free meals a day around here if you're willing to wait in line for it. Every day. Free groceries, which I see people sell on the street a few blocks away after they get them. Free medical care. And $2 pints of vodka.

Sadly, I've gotten used to seeing people behave like animals- in how they treat themselves and how they treat others. One gets used to certain things most people would never tolerate if you're you're exposed to it long enough- just ask a victim of domestic violence, a cop, an emergency room nurse, an Israeli, or a Palestinian.

Although it repulses me, I've gotten used to the smell of streets that smell like piss, human shit on the already disgusting sidewalks, people peeing in the streets, discarded used condoms, trash, dealers asking me if I want some crack or some other dope, hookers asking me for dates, bums hitting me up for change, food, cigarettes, my coat. The amputees, the people who reek of urine so badly you can smell them from forty feet away, half a block if the wind is blowing. Usually it just rolls right off my back.

But every once in awhile I see something, or really, someone, whose behavior or condition is just so completely awful it just leaves me feeling so fucking sad and suddenly there is nothing I want to do more than to just leave this place. That sadness always seems to leave a residual Travis Bickle-like anger behind, where I too feel like saying “All the animals come out at night - whores, skunk pussies, buggers, queens, fairies, dopers, junkies, sick, venal. Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets.”

Today was one of those days. Except here, the animals are out all day and all night, and it never rains in California. It only keeps pouring. This is still the Barbary Coast.