DISSONANCE IN WAKE OF OPERA THEATER DEMISE

The folding of Los Angeles Opera Theater last week has brought a mixture of finger-pointing and second-guessing from two widely separated camps within the company. There is also the possibility of legal action from the Wiltern Theatre, where the company was to mount three new productions during its first year at the renovated movie palace.

What was planned as a season of nine staged performances (plus two vocal recitals) actually amounted to only one staged production, “Don Giovanni,” and a recital by Michael Aspinall, both in July. The scheduled October performances of Berg’s “Lulu” were “postponed” in September, and the announcement this week of L.A. Opera Theater’s folding erased any hope of the final 1985 production, a “Cavalleria Rusticana”/”Pagliacci” double bill set for March.

The Wiltern has consulted with an attorney, the theater acknowledged. “This is an obvious breach of contract,” Wiltern Managing Director Kip Cohen said. “The cancellation of ‘Lulu’ and the recent dissolution have serious consequences. We are seeking legal assistance. I can only say that the company’s collapse is not without impact on us.”

Meanwhile, charges and countercharges from three principal figures in the seven-year-old opera company management continue.

Johanna Dordick, founder and, until her sudden resignation in April, artistic director of the company, insisted vehemently that the blame rests not with her, but principally with Edmund Kaufman, president of the board of directors, and to a lesser degree with her successor as artistic director, Henry Holt.

However, both men place much of the responsibility on Dordick’s shoulders.

The only sentiment shared by all is sadness at the company’s demise.

“I killed myself (as artistic director) for seven years,” said Dordick, now a resident of Bronxville, N.Y. “That’s what happens when egos get in the way. Mr. Kaufman thought he knew more than I did. The company was in good shape when I left. After that, I think certain money just stopped coming in.”

Holt said he believes the company’s problems were “a case of biting off more than we could chew. If I saw the plan for the current season (completed by Dordick shortly before her resignation), I wouldn’t have funded it. I mean, who do they think they’re kidding?”

Kaufman agreed with Holt: “The company just kept getting deeper in the hole financially. We lasted as long as we did because of funding from certain members of the board.”

One difference of opinion involved the planning and budgeting of the ill-fated Wiltern season. Both Holt and Kaufman said the production budget for this season was never formally approved by the board.

“Johanna went off to Europe and contracted the whole season,” Kaufman said. “She presented the budget to the board and we started asking questions about accuracy. A lot of suggestions were made: Should we borrow sets? Was it smart to do three new productions? Was ‘Lulu’ a wise choice? She would not listen. She wouldn’t even talk about it. She insisted on absolute authority. It was implicit that we went along with her. I suppose we were looser with it (the budget) than we should have been.”

Dordick said she merely “prepared a budget and the board approved it. We all knew it would cost more at the Wiltern, so how could anybody blame me for the collapse? I did what I was asked to do from the board.”

“There were budget figures,” Holt said, “but most of them were low. For example, we soon discovered that the originally proposed ‘Don Giovanni’ set would have cost three times what it was budgeted for. The season was planned in the most expensive way possible. Each production would have cost around $500,000--excluding administrative costs. We faced the necessity of raising $700,000 between now and March.”

With the Wiltern becoming a union house upon its reopening in May, 1985, costs of the theater had nearly doubled, Holt added, noting that a return to the Wilshire Ebell, former home of the company, was impossible since the Wiltern season was already fully contracted. When the decision was made to scratch the “Lulu” production, he said, the Musicians’ Union Local 47 insisted on payment of $80,000. “Some players were decent about it. But one doesn’t get many breaks in this business,” Holt said.

Competition proved yet another nail in the coffin, Kaufman said.

“When we heard about the Music Center making plans to produce its own operas, it put a time element pressure on us. We had to produce big or we were finished. Then, Johanna came back from Europe all excited about her plans. And then the Wiltern opened up for us.”

Holt pointed out that the rise to prominence of the Music Center Opera Assn. “changed people’s minds about where the opera money (i.e., private and corporate contributions) should go.” When it appeared that his company was not going to produce the March double bill, Holt added, he went to Opera Assn. executive director Peter Hemmings.

“We discussed whether he (Hemmings) could take over the production. His attitude was extremely helpful. He looked to see if it was feasible. It wasn’t. Still, they did not want us to fail,” Holt said.

The issue of fund raising--always a critical part of successful opera production--was another source of disagreement between the Dordick and the Kaufman-Holt camps. Dordick, Kaufman claimed, “was not a big money raiser. She had people on the board who could always bail her out.”

Dordick saw it differently, insisting “I was constantly out there raising money, but Ed (Kaufman) stopped me. The way he insisted on doing things himself, the company was going to collapse. And when I left, the funding sources dried up.”

Holt defended his fund-raising abilities by pointing out that, since Dordick’s resignation in April, “we’ve raised the largest amount (in that time period) in our history, $500,000.” A problem in securing additional money from untried sources was that “new people wanted to give us the last dollar, but not the first dollar. They all had an attitude of wait and see.”

The move to the Wiltern also was cited as a problem. Dordick noted that Kaufman “refused to allow me to be in on the Wiltern negotiations. I think the contract discussions could have been handled better. We wound up spending more than we should have. I really only wanted to do two fine productions there, but the board had wanted three.”

“It wasn’t the number of productions, but their spacing over the year that was important, “ Kaufman countered. “We made the least use of the (Wiltern) facility. We had the theater for three weeks, but we ran ‘Don Giovanni’ for only three nights. We should have done two productions in tandem during that period. And that’s what Henry wanted to do.”

Holt concurred. “(Presenting tandem productions) was the only way that house would work. It’s just too expensive, and you don’t make an impact with only one production at a time.”

Kaufman believes, in fact, that “we really did too few productions” to make ends meet.

The future? Holt felt confident about eliminating outstanding company debts. “There is some money left to be distributed,” he said. “We could declare bankruptcy, but we chose to make what is called a general assignment to creditors, so we can distribute the money more quickly.”

He did not expect a lawsuit from the Wiltern. “How much blood can you squeeze out of a turnip?”

Kaufman declined to speculate about his continuing role in opera production. “I’m merely an opera lover,” he said.

And Dordick? There was the possibility, she noted enigmatically, that she would land a position with an opera company later this year.