ERNEST FLEISCHMANN

The situation described in Martin Bernheimer’s “The Tyrant of the Philharmonic” (Oct. 8) would be funny if it weren’t so sad. However, the fact that Fleischmann engineered, or didn’t engineer, Andre Previn’s leaving and Esa-Pekka Salonen’s hiring is not important anymore. All that flap amounts to now is history and good gossip. But what about the orchestra? What about the good of the Los Angeles Philharmonic as an organization that must continue to work under this “tyrant”?

The real question here is what kind of a board of directors the Los Angeles Philharmonic has that allows the executive director to get more publicity than the music director or--more important--than the orchestra itself? This board has allowed Fleischmann to run amok.

If Previn made a serious mistake in wanting to run his orchestra, in wanting to make the important decisions, imagine how the rest of the directors in the organization feel. If Fleischmann wants to be the music director, too, he also wants to be the finance director, the publicity director, the marketing director, the art director--in short, it’s the Ernest Fleischmann Philharmonic. Fleischmann’s cure for “amateur boards” was to hire a good person and let him do his job. But has Fleischmann himself hired good people and allowed them to do their jobs? The length of service of his cronies in the administration can only be attributed to years of squirming and kowtowing to the whims of the dictator. Doesn’t the board see that any organization run by a megalomaniac is absolutely blocking good efficient work?

NAME WITHHELD BY REQUEST