A Testing Moment for the Philharmonic

Tonight, the Los Angeles Philharmonic Assn. will open the 78th season at the Hollywood Bowl with all the usual fanfare. Glamorous society will picnic in style in the boxes. Celebrities will be on hand. Cold cash will presumably be raised for the excellent purpose of supporting the Philharmonic, not only one of the city’s most important cultural treasures but also an institution with an increasing reputation as one of music’s visionary world leaders.

And yet this will be a strange gala. These are, for the Philharmonic, unsettling times.

The evening, a nostalgic program of Beatles favorites played by the Hollywood Bowl Orchestra, kicks off a newly designed Bowl season. Programming distinctions between classics (on Tuesdays and Thursdays, with the Philharmonic) and weekend pops (with the Hollywood Bowl Orchestra) have been clarified, the jazz program has been fortified and a world music series has been initiated.

The architect of this sleek, modernized approach, signified by an elegant brochure with handsome black-and-white photographs, is Willem Wijnbergen, the Netherlands-born musician and M.B.A. who became managing director of the Philharmonic and its summer home, the Bowl, in March of last year. But Wijnbergen won’t be in the managing director’s box tonight sharing wine with dignitaries.

Last week, he stunned Los Angeles and the music world by resigning, according to the orchestra’s board of directors. Wijnbergen claims that he challenged the board to take action on “serious issues” lest he exercise a clause in his contract that allowed him to terminate it for “good reason.” Lawyers are now arguing over the legalities, but the result is not ambiguous. Wijnbergen is already out, and the Philharmonic is facing a major leadership void at a crucial moment in its history.

Wijnbergen was outspoken and controversial from the start. He instituted a major reorganization of the institution, adding new positions and overseeing the turnover of nearly half the staff. He separated Hollywood Bowl and Philharmonic operations and demonstrated a zeal for marketing, his specialty. He resolved to make the orchestra programming more audience-friendly and sell seats. But he was equally determined to make the audience pay for those seats, and one of his most shocking moves was to end the Philharmonic policy of supplying promotional tickets, no matter how empty that left the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion at some concerts.

Wijnbergen had evident support for all these innovations from the board, and now neither party will offer any explanation of the “serious issues” that created the current crisis. Instead, the Philharmonic has moved on, beginning a formal search to replace Wijnbergen and putting the organization in the hands of its chief financial officer in the meantime.

Still, by taking precipitous and unexplained action, the orchestra appears adrift.

Construction is about to begin on Disney Hall, which has the potential to be the world’s most imaginative new concert space and a sparkling symbol of Los Angeles as a 21st century cultural mecca. With an opening in the fall of 2002, now is the time for planning the inaugural season and determining the next stage in the evolution of the orchestra.

Esa-Pekka Salonen, the music director, will take a sabbatical from conducting in the calendar year 2000, leaving yet another significant leadership void at the Philharmonic.

Without Salonen, ticket sales, already in decline at both the Pavilion and the Bowl, will likely suffer even more.

And on top of all this, the players’ union contract expires in the fall.

Dealing with such challenges requires initiative and vision. But given the stubborn secrecy with which the board has handled Wijnbergen’s startling departure, it hardly inspires confidence. Rumors replace reasonable explanations, as the Philharmonic bumbles its crisis management. It seems as though it has much to hide and can never quite get its story straight. Even Salonen has thus far refused to address the issue, his short formal statement merely mouthing the obvious sentiment that he and the orchestra remain deeply committed to bringing to all of us their best.

Salonen Appears to Be Key Player

Salonen, however, is likely the key player in the situation. It is inconceivable that the board would act without his assent, and perhaps it is operating on his behalf. For instance, a glance at the programs next season scheduled by Wijnbergen during Salonen’s sabbatical reveals far more artistic timidity than has been characteristic of Salonen’s adventurous direction.

It is not uncharacteristic for Salonen to take quietly determined action when required. Early in his seven-year tenure with the orchestra, he found it necessary to replace a concertmaster who was not on his wavelength, and that caused a stir. Yet the outcome has been an unqualified success and made possible the extraordinary ensemble playing we now enjoy.

The Philharmonic has been led, in the past, by great conductors (Otto Klemperer, Eduard van Beinum, Carlo Maria Giulini) and glittering stars (Zubin Mehta, Andre Previn), but all were, in one way or another, caretakers of a tradition. Under Salonen, the orchestra has developed something new, a sense of a future, for itself and for classical music in general.

In recent months alone, we have witnessed Salonen’s astonishingly assured premiere of what may turn out to be the great orchestral statement of the century’s end, John Adams’ “Naive and Sentimental Music.” He delivered an unforgettable performance of the Sibelius First Symphony at season’s end, and just weeks ago, he brought a dazzling burst of creativity to the Ojai Festival as its music director.

Salonen, we must remember, doesn’t need us as much as we need him. At 41, he has become one of the world’s most appealing and coveted conductors. In this period of orchestral transition and insecurity (as of this week, orchestras in Boston, New York and Philadelphia are on the prowl for new music directors), the cemented relationship between Salonen and the Philharmonic is enviable. It is no secret that the Cleveland Orchestra, widely held to be America’s best, courted Salonen in its recent search for a new conductor.

Clearly, then, Salonen’s interests and needs should be the Philharmonic’s priority. And the best scenario is that those interests and needs are precisely what the current situation is all about. But unfortunately that is not what the Philharmonic is projecting, with its stonewalling, the posturing of clashing administrative egos, and its deference to lawyers, who serve their clients, not the good of art and society.

In these nervous-making times, we need to know that the orchestra can cope with its current leadership void and has some notion about how to move forward, that it will not squander the spectacular progress the orchestra has made under Salonen. We need to know that whatever it’s up to, the Philharmonic can rise above administrative squabbling and put art first, in the belief that all else will follow. Because it always does.