wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

as an emerging visual artist i find myself turned off by current leadership, young and old, because they have no great young art to embrace. We are stuck in a period where "avant-guarde" no longer means anything. Artists and curtors alike are draawn to breaking down barriers-- experimenting with new forms -- but that itself is old. Modernism is old. Now we must build up a fresh tradition, but no one has emerged yet to show the way

I don't agree that most art institutions are "irrelevant." Think BAM - very relevant and interesting. Yes, a lot of other ones are stodgy and not trying very hard to attract other groups. That is a shame.

Benjamin,

The track was called "Don't Let Go" from the album All Good Things by Pacha Massive, who will be on Soundcheck today. In fact, they'll be performing the song live in our studio it just a few minutes.

Soundcheck

I think it's a silly question. I would hope that an organization will be able to evaluate what their specific needs are and make a decision based on that. If a person can do the job, has the skill and maturity to handle the pressures and deliver, what does their age matter?

Unrelated: what was the hip-hop track that just played in the break in this segment? Anyone? Thanks!

This should not be an issue. I'm the biographer of Arturo Toscanini, who was appointed music director of La Scala when he was 31 and music director of the NBC Symphony when he was 70; he was presumably very good at both ages. When I was a kid growing up in Cleveland, the conductor was gray-haired George Szell - and I followed his work with enormous enthusiasm - but I was also fascinated by the work of Pierre Boulez, who was just turning 40. If you love music (or any art), you don't care about the age of the person who is creating it; you care about the quality.

I deplore ageism in any guise whether in favor of the 'young' or 'old.' We should stop worrying about demographic constituencies.

What's wrong with just 'quality' as the criterion?

Let's take some risks.

I find this young v. old argument disingenuous. Once a talented, creative and intelligent conductor is ready to stand behind a baton, then he is ready, and if he is a match for an organization, then that's the right person. Age doesn't mean talent, youth doesn't mean energy. It's as individual a decision as that of finding the right spouse.

It's the heart of the composer that matters most. Just because you're old doesn't mean you can't connect with younger people. An example of that here in Bloomington, IN is Indiana University's David Baker, a Jazz conductor of the highest caliber who pulls people young and old to his shows.

NEITHER,

Most art institutions are -irrelevant- and are filled with boring administrators who are comfy with their salaries and feeling popular and loved...and thus they rarely take substantive risks (usually a pre-req. for avant garde work)

So, the people who lead the arts in the future will continue to be a diverse variety of people OUTSIDE the establishment.

DUH.

Orchestral/Operatic conducting is a mature artist's game. Sure, there are always a handful of younger conductors, ready to lead programs of wide-ranging content...whether or not they are prepared to be "Music Directors" is another question - and a job description that requires another set of skills.

Often (and I speak as the manager of several consutors), younger conductors are appointed because their salary requirements are lower than their older colleagues. It can also be an art-vs-money bet with the devil!