THE ONCE AND FUTURE HOLLYWOOD BOWL

Two critics weigh in on the debate over whether to move forward with a proposed new orchestra shell or to preserve the one that has become a Southland icon.

*

Some three decades ago, Professor Peter Schickele, the funniest man in music, made an extraordinary entrance at the Hollywood Bowl, where he was introducing his then-recent “discovery,” the justly forgotten music of PDQ Bach. The good professor always arrives late for his shows, usually breathlessly running down the aisle just as the stage manager is about to give up on him. On this occasion, though, he swung in, like Tarzan, on a rope, dropping into the reflecting pool and climbing on stage with a fish in his mouth.

Today if he were to try such an exploit, he would take out two or three wealthy patrons and break their wine bottles. The pool was long ago drained and filled with premium box seats.

The Hollywood Bowl is not what it used to be. And that is something that must be considered when judging preservationists’ desire to safeguard the Bowl’s trademark shell. Yes, that shell was once a remarkable structure, and it has meaning for many of us. But its beauty and function were part of an ambience, both acoustic and architectural, that no longer exists.

I remember a Hollywood Bowl from my childhood that was full of magic. The shell shone pure in its design, unadorned by spheres, poles of loudspeakers and grids of lights. The acoustic was natural and musical. There were no police helicopters or small planes buzzing over the Cahuenga Pass. There was no Hollywood Freeway with its background hum. And there were the treats of intermission, when the reflecting pool’s fountain became a spectacular colored light show of water and fire.

But my favorite moment came next. All the lights in the amphitheater were extinguished and an announcer asked us all to strike a match or fire up a cigarette lighter. For a fleeting moment, the Bowl assumed a glittering, even mystical, theatrical presence. The mood was set for the symphony to follow in a way that I have never since found equaled.

So, sure, let’s save the shell, but let’s do it right and restore the Bowl to all its former glory. I am, of course, counting on preservationist leaders in this fight to turn back the clock. There is much work to be done. We must lobby to remove the Hollywood Freeway through the Cahuenga Pass, restore the acoustical properties of the Bowl (which will involve constructing a new hill where there once was one), outlaw police helicopters and private aircraft, reverse no-smoking ordinances, evict the revenue-producing subscribers from their front boxes and replace the reflecting pool.

I’m afraid we’ll also need to bring in the psychologists to help us control human behavior--audiences were different, more attentive, back then, and they dressed. And we mustn’t forget to adjust the repertory. Not only were many of the standard late-19th century pieces much newer 50 or 75 years ago (the Grieg Piano Concerto then would have been chronologically equivalent to the Schoenberg Piano Concerto now), but the Bowl was much more actively current in its programming. It wasn’t uncommon in the ‘30s to hear someone like the modernist Mexican composer Carlos Chavez conduct his new works. The conductor and musicologist Nicholas Slonimsky was entrusted with giving the American premieres of important works by the likes of Ives and Varese, music that is now, more than 65 years later, considered too modern for today’s Hollywood Bowl.

Nostalgia Aside, It’s Time to Reinvent

However unreasonable, the sentimental save-the-shell crusade does proceed with a certain logic, given the attitudes of the Los Angeles Philharmonic and the Hollywood Bowl Orchestra. Both ensembles are, themselves, basically nostalgia brokers when it comes to their alfresco residencies. The new shell that the Philharmonic Assn. proposes will attempt to look like the old one (without some of the clutter) yet be more musician friendly. But all that means is that the orchestras will now be able to play the same old warhorse classics and potboiler film and Broadway scores in more reasonable comfort. The Bowl will still be the noisy, inadequately amplified, distracting, unmusical place it is today, and audiences will be no less bored.

I have a different suggestion. Forget about saving the old shell or building a fancy new one, and invest in technology. Seventy-five years ago, the Bowl represented a new kind of musical experience for its time; let that be the tradition we honor. Reinvent the Bowl as a 21st-century venue.

Put in a truly uncompromising sound system. Any nod toward natural acoustics makes no sense in the modern urban site; only the reflecting-pool denizens get anything close to it, and the sound isn’t very good even there. Consult the computer music folks at Stanford, UC San Diego and IRCAM in Paris; these are the people who have done the most advanced and imaginative work in electronically placing sound in space. Spend a bundle to create an amplified environment like none ever attempted. And plan to constantly spend more money updating the system, yearly if necessary, as technology changes. Bring in fabulous video, as well, not the hokey stuff the orchestra fooled around with last year. Make the Bowl truly egalitarian, let everyone see and hear.

Bring back the light shows. Maybe all we need is a very plain shell that works for the musicians. Then special effects wizards could shoot all manner of laser holograms on it, so that it could be whatever suited the moment. Make the Bowl so dazzling a place that people simply must go. Isn’t that the Hollywood way, after all? In all likelihood, the technology will pay for itself by filling the many empty seats on Tuesdays and Thursdays, but if not, enlist one of the giant electronic firms as a sponsor.

Rethink the music. Alongside the classics could be new work--if the Bowl is futuristic and the sight and sound are a delight, the excitement factor will be all the greater if the orchestral music is also suitably new and thrilling. Even the Hollywood Bowl Orchestra could do with some updating of its formulas. Instead of the same derivative Hollywood scores, what about the cutting-edge major classical composers writing for films these days, including Philip Glass, Michael Nyman, Tan Dun and Osvaldo Golijov. Look further afield, say, to something like Louis Andriessen’s Stravinskized disco soundtracks from the ‘70s. Think about that with light show and dazzling amplification!

Liven up the food. The new Patina service is too bland and exclusive. Los Angeles County owns the Bowl, and it might better serve its community by supporting smaller enterprises. Invite in taco carts and sushi chefs. Serve Korean barbecue, Thai and Vietnamese noodles, Chinese food, health food. Set up a small green market, and give audiences the pleasure of assembling a fresh picnic on the spot. Let the food celebrate the city.

The Philharmonic is building a new concert hall in downtown Los Angeles, but as sensational as Frank Gehry’s architecture is, the facility is ultimately based on the 19th-century model of concert giving. That is as it should be for the regular season. But the Hollywood Bowl could become a place to rethink the whole concert-going experience, its revolutionary antithesis, not its artistically poor relation.

Los Angeles is poised to become a multicultural and a multimedia world capital of the 21st century, a teeming, vibrant, glitzy, crazy, forward-looking, remarkable, diverse, fun and unpredictable city famed for its ability to continually reinvent itself. Let the Hollywood Bowl be part of it. Enough of nostalgia and shell games.