Keith Clark’s Leadership

As a longtime resident of Orange County, I would like to offer my support to conductor Keith Clark in the current controversy over his tenure as music director of the Pacific Symphony. I believe that both the Los Angeles Times and the symphony’s board of directors have been less than equitable in their treatment of the orchestra’s leader.

In a recent article by Randy Lewis (Calendar, Feb. 27), two specific instances were presented of negative reviews of concerts, one of them with violinist Henrik Szeryng. The concerts (were) enthusiastically received by (other) critics and audiences: The Szeryng concert got excellent reviews in the San Francisco Chronicle and the Newhouse newspapers, and the orchestral portion of that concert, recorded live, has become a major commercial success on the Pro-Arte label.

Speaking from my own experience as concert-goer, Clark’s rendition of Brahms’ Second Symphony was the most passionate and brilliantly executed that I have ever heard, in a program that included Claudio Arrau’s Emperor Concerto, in which conductor and soloist fused in perfect harmony.

It seems unjust that Keith Clark should be replaced at this time, after having spent many years building the Pacific Symphony into a viable musical organization, and having, at last, been provided with the splendid facilities of the Performing Arts Center.

It takes time for an orchestra and its conductor to become accustomed to the peculiarities of a new concert hall, and Maestro Clark should be allowed at least two years to prove his abilities in this new setting. I would like respectfully to urge the board to reconsider its action and also to suggest that The Times be more evenhanded in its evaluation of Clark’s career and concerts.

JULIAN PALLEY

Irvine