In an otherwise informative and exemplary post on Blogging Basics (written with classical music bloggers in mind), Lisa Hirsch (aka Iron Tongue of Midnight) includes a bullet item that raised my eyebrows:
- I promise that you will get email or comments from performers you discuss. Give some thought to what and how much you want to say to them. Of course, sometimes it’ll be a performer thanking you for complimenting his or her performance.
Really? That certainly hasn’t been my experience. I’ve never received a comment or email from Esa-Pekka Salonen, Gustavo Dudamel, Pierre Boulez, Carl St.Clair, Cecilia Bartoli, Deborah Voigt, Placido Domingo, Jeremy Denk, Anne-Sophie Mutter, John Adams, Steve Reich, Philip Glass, William Bolcom or pretty much anyone else that I’ve reviewed and/or interviewed in my career. (In more than 20 years of covering St.Clair — I’ve written more about him than anyone else in the world — I may have gotten one or two emails from him).
Nor do the less celebrated engage. The musicians of the Pacific Symphony do not comment here, or elsewhere, or email me. (Recently, I ran into a Pacific Symphony musician I know and she hadn’t heard that I had been writing a celebrity column, five days a week, for the last 9 months, and I’m the only music critic in Orange County.) A single member of the Los Angeles Philharmonic comments on this blog (and he’s a friend), despite my coverage of that group dating back to the early 1980s. No one from Los Angeles Opera, or Long Beach Opera, or … etc.
If professional musicians read and conversed regularly with their local critics, music criticism in this country wouldn’t be on life support, I’d still have my award-winning blog at the newspaper, and I’d still be a full-time music critic (also award-winning).
But professional musicians couldn’t care less about music critics and their blogging brethren.
I’d like to be proven wrong. Go ahead, musicians I’ve written about, make my day. Leave a comment.
Classical Life 
As usual, Mangan is right.
Actually he’s not quite right- I once received an email from Denk resulting in a rather interesting exchange which I never published, and I was also once taken to task by a member of the San Francisco Symphony who didn’t read the full context of what I wrote about a performance (and later apologized for failing to do so). Those are two times off the top off my head in 2 1/2 years, though it doesn’t happen often.
I once got a nasty letter from Jake Heggie … an exception that proves the rule.
Why is it the responsibility of musicians to shore up critics and/or criticism? The critics had the upper hand for years. Now the bottom has fallen out of the market and engagement is the rage. Salonen, Adams, et.al. are rich and have people that handle all that stuff for them. Review emerging artists or the terrific performers who never made the big time, you would assuredly get responses.
Regarding orchestral musicians – won’t most of the rank-and-file have some kind of media contact rule in their employment agreements? That’s the way it is in most large corporations.
Finally, blogging is not the same as the olden-day Usenet or listservs where discussion did take place until the flamewar inevitably happened. Blogging is a broadcast medium with discussion tools pessimized to make excerpting, threading, and focussed replies as difficult as possible.
I don’t believe I said it was musicians’ responsibility to save criticism … Critics NEVER had the upper hand; just compare salaries. … If Salonen, Adams et al. are rich and have people to handle “that stuff” for them, why don’t we hear from the handlers? … I’ve reviewed more emerging artists and terrific performers not in the big time in my career than the other kind and I still haven’t heard from them. … Orchestral musicians have no such contract. … Seems perfectly easy to comment here, if you ask me.
“tmangan
I don’t believe I said it was musicians’ responsibility to save criticism …”
Then I incorrectly interpreted ‘If professional musicians read and conversed regularly with their local critics, …[deletia] I’d still be a full-time music critic (also award-winning).’.
“Critics NEVER had the upper hand; just compare salaries. …”
Maybe I am mixing fields inappropriately. I’ve seen theatre artists in LA try to engage with critics and have the exchange be more than the review. The answer from the then-LAT and other outlets was “You don’t understand journalism, journalistic objectivity, or our responsiblity to our readers.” Then somewhere around 2005, things went south in arts criticism and engagement is now the in thing.
“If Salonen, Adams et al. are rich and have people to handle “that stuff” for them, why don’t we hear from the handlers? ”
My guess is that they respond where they think it will do some good or prevent some damage.
“Seems perfectly easy to comment here, if you ask me.”
I would have preferred to it if your comment and those of others in the thread would be highlighted, indented, and excerptable for appropriate reply rather than having to cut, paste, and quote by hand. Email programs offer that, I have not seen a blog that does.
OK. I exaggerated. I have gotten some responses over the decades, both negative and positive. But they were rare.
I also was once denounced from the stage of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion by Jan Peerce. The audience cheered. No problem.
And I do NOT think it is the responsibility of musicians to shore up critics and/or criticism. Artists do their job, and we, I hope, do ours.
As a professional musician I am somewhat careful about responding to bloggers, but I’ve been known to do so on occasion. I never comment on reviews at all, even when I think they are very very wrong and need or deserve some correction(s): we performers fear that it can come back and bite us where it hurts, you know? There’s nothing in my contracts that say I can’t communicate with a reviewer or write a letter to the editor, but there’s this little “Danger, Will Robinson!” message that I heard — well, okay, I hear my own name — telling me that writing would be a not-so-very-wise idea! I DO read all the reviews I can find of my performances. I think we all do (even if some lie and say they don’t). When they are good I smile. When they are bad I ache.
But … I actually thought reviews were aimed at general readership, not at the performers. Do you really feel that we are the market for reviews, then? (I would think that’s a sort of small market compared to general readership.)
As a blogger I sometimes write about performers. I hear from some performers, I don’t hear from others. But I honestly don’t write to hear from them, so I am fine either way. I certainly don’t hear from the big names. I understand that, since SO many would be writing about them!
But your comment, “But professional musicians couldn’t care less about music critics and their blogging brethren.” … that’ll go on my blog and we’ll see what my colleagues and other readers say! 🙂
I can tell you that “reprisals” by music critics towards musicians who have taken them on in public are very rare. At least in my experience. I recall giving Jake Heggie a very positive review after receiving his critical letter (which was published in the paper). Another thing — music critics are professionals and adults, just like musicians. We call them as we see them, and don’t (generally) have personal vendettas against anyone.
Reviews are indeed aimed at the general public, just like the performances given by opera companies, orchestras, string quartets, etc.
No, I don’t write to hear from performers, either. If I did I would have given up long ago.
“But professional musicians couldn’t care less about music critics and their blogging brethren.”
I’m not sure you are right about that. I bet a LOT of them read what you and other critics write, but would never acknowledge it by responding to you. What could they say that would not appear to be either pandering to or attacking the writer? Either way, they look bad.
Yeah, the pandering thing is a concern as well, Bert. Thanks for bringing that up!
Side note: What troubles me greatly are the people I run into who say they skipped a concert because of one review. Reviewers have a power, yes? I feel as if we are at your mercy! (Hey, want some of the chocolate brownies I just made? 😉
I’m glad, Mr. Mangan, that you would never retaliate if we did negatively comment on one of your reviews. I suspect we will all still remain quite cautious. In this biz many of us know to behave that way as much as possible … with conductors, with colleagues, and yes, with reviewers! 🙂
Mangan is right. Rare is the soloist, orchestral player or conductor who see a music critic as anything other than an antagonist to their ability to get paid or a proselytizer for their pet project. A few enlightened General Directors and even some Marketing Directors understand the role of criticism as a BEGINNING of a conversation about music in a larger community. A conversation that matters, by the way. Audience members intuitively understand it too; that’s why they have a healthier attitude toward critics than many professional musicians, which is surprising when you think about it.
Hi Tim, always enjoy your writing and appreciate your devotion to keeping classical music writing alive. As a publicist for a number of arts organizations (most not classical music), there is one thing I can contribute to this conversation, and that is that often artists are under strict direction from their public relations firms or press departments/orchestra management to avoid engaging in conversations with critics. I’m not someone who recommends that — in fact, I encourage the artists with whom I work to express their appreciation for an important positive review or feature (though NOT their criticism), but given your experience, I would venture to say that I and my colleagues who do likewise might be an exception to the rule. Interesting discussion, in any case. Hoping to see you soon.
I’ll have a more extensive posting at my blog some time soon (I have a Ring review to write), but I’ve gotten blog comments from Cary Bell (principal clarinet of SFS), Tod Brody (freelance flutist), Laura Claycomb (soprano) and maybe one or two others. I had an interesting email exchange with a performer who will remain nameless, as well.
Now, I was NOT reviewing Cary or Tod in those cases; Laura’s comment was following the last SFS Mahler 8 and was about James Morris, who was also in the performance – oh, and I got a comment or email from Anthony Dean Griffey for the same performance. The nameless performer was, yes, responding to a review on the blog.
I also got email long ago from Alan Held after I’d commented positively about him on opera-l.
(P. S. All of you in California, you should come hear our Ring here in SF.)
By coincidence, I sat next to Lisa Hirsch for Goetterdaemmerung just a couple of hours ago at the SFO and she was taking extensive notes at all the places that I might have taken notes, so I especially look forward to her review….just as I always look forward to yours, Tim. I get occasional comments, but at the Huff Post it seems that reader “Likes” are more favored as a shorthand way to give feedback – at least of the favorable variety – without having to think of something clever to say. When they come my way I feel like lifting a pen once again for the next review. Perhaps the installation of that device could be a good way for your readers to check in with you. Rod
The musicians of the Pacific Symphony do not comment here, or elsewhere, or email me. (Recently, I ran into a Pacific Symphony musician I know and she hadn’t heard that I had been writing a celebrity column…
But perhaps some people in the profession of classical music do comment here or elsewhere (or send emails or snail mail to you) anonymously? If not, then their lack of participation is very puzzling to me. Maybe it’s because they don’t want to inadvertently rock the boat (for themselves, their colleagues, the management they work for) and end up in an uncomfortable spotlight? Or what occurred to the music critic for the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
I’m not in the field of orchestral music, I’m not a musician, and I’m certainly not well versed in most of the finer aspects of classical music. Yet I find this blog interesting enough to visit it on a regular basis. Therefore, I can’t believe people who are professional musicians and who also presumably are quite in touch with the ins and outs of the world of orchestral music would not want to read blogs like this, if not also comment on them, at least on occasion.
A single member of the Los Angeles Philharmonic comments on this blog (and he’s a friend)
I mentioned that perhaps people in his (or her) field hesitate to become involved in online chatter because of the notorious nature of reader forums on the internet, with the phenomenon of flame wars and trolling. Or how easily controversy can be triggered.
I also was once denounced from the stage of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion by Jan Peerce.
I vaguely recall reading about some conflict that the former music critic of the LA Times got into with Mrs. Chandler regarding a review of his involving Zubin Mehta, or something like that. Speaking of which, or FWIW, I finally heard a recording of Dorothy Chandler being interviewed and her voice reminded me of someone like Mamie Eisenhower, meaning a person who sounds somewhat matronly and no-nonsense. In this age of instant communication and modern media, it’s unthinkable that a prominent member of a community can be rather veiled for an extended period of time.
Critics NEVER had the upper hand; just compare salaries. …
With that as a segue, I recently saw a list of the annual income of various executives of major orchestras throughout America. I am uncomfortable about the amount that the head of the LA Philharmonic makes compared with others. That’s even more the case in this time of high ticket prices, tight fundraising, and certainly in the context of those who are employed by non-profit organizations. I don’t want to get too political, so I’ll leave it at that. But when a person is perhaps overly well compensated, they had better at least earn their keep. No excuse for any less.
Okay, as an outsider to the music performance, writing, blogging, industry, etc….
I am in a position in my work where I am out to impress my customers. Although I love to receive praise and compliments for my work, I equally appreciate the negative feedback as well, and the opportunity to address any issues. Performances, like art, and many other things, are going to have many opinions of said performances.
Are you sure you want to open that can of worms? The one that contains comments from musicians, and conductors? Could you keep your pride and sanity if you got several negative responses? (Not that you would).
A bit of a cliche, but too often true….”No news is GOOD news”.
Patrick and Paul,
The issue for me isn’t so much the comments, or lack of them, by musicians. It’s what their absence indicates, which is a lack of engagement with music criticism. Yes, some professional musicians read me, I’m sure, but these days we can count readers online. And the numbers don’t suggest that the members of the LA Phil, Pacific Symphony, or any other orchestra or ensemble are reading me en masse. My one on one interactions with musicians in this community also indicate an apathy towards music criticism, and sometimes an open hostility.
OK, that’s fine, in a way. As patty points out, I write for the general reader. But my point has been made, I think. Professional musicians don’t care two hoots (ha) about music criticism. We have yet to receive a comment from one on this post other than our old friend MarK (patty doesn’t count — she’s a blogger), despite hundreds of readers and an open invitation to do so.
My two cents…
As the Register’s theater critic since 1993, I’ve enjoyed a fairly lively dialogue over the years with my small yet passionate community. But that conversation happens in more personal and protected forums: on the phone, via e-mail or even (less and less frequently these days) by good old snail mail. The oft-repeated complaint about public online discussusion forums which preserve anonymity — that they too often descend into ad hominen attacks and petty sniping — is especially pertinent to the performing arts, a world where negativity can affect a performer’s psyche in unpredictable ways. Facebook has proven to be a useful platform for some critics (I’ve had only limited success there though). Posted reviews generate comments, but the commenters must put their names to their thoughts, so almost everyone plays by Duchess of Queensbury rules.
That said, I don’t think that generating a public dialogue with my readers and the people I cover is a primary mission of my job. To put it bluntly, I’m a consumer reporter. The back and forth is interesting, and it makes me feel more connected to the community I cover, but I don’t spend much of my time pondering how to encourage it. I just try to cover my beat as comprehensively and intelligently as I can — a daunting enough task for me! — and let the comments happen (or not) without any cajoling, coaching or pleading from me.
A rather strange discussion. Once again, not surprisingly for me, Martin Bernheimer is the one who makes the most sense: “I do NOT think it is the responsibility of musicians to shore up critics and/or criticism. Artists do their job, and we, I hope, do ours.” Precisely! It is no more artists’ responsibility to help critics earn a comfortable living as it is critics’ to do the same for artists. In my opinion, both artists and critics have the same two real responsibilities – to the art form they serve (in this case, classical music) and to their respective audiences. Everything else is nonsense.
By the way, Tim, power is not always measured by dollars. You don’t know how many times in the past i heard people saying, “What happened last week? Why did the orchestra play so poorly?” to which i would reply, “What didn’t you like about it?” and they would say, “Oh, we were not at the concert but the review was pretty bad! So, why was the playing so lousy?” That is what i call real power.
There are several practical reasons why most musicians prefer not to respond to or comment on reviews and some of the most important ones were mentioned here by both Bert Bigelow and Patty.
MarK, but critics do have a responsibility to the artists and ensembles they cover. They should be fair and accurate for one thing. They shouldn’t just make things up, out of thin air.
Also, it is part of every critic’s duty to “nurture” the art form in his or her community. That can be done with both positive and negative reviews (as well as other sorts of writing).
For the record, I don’t think it’s the responsibility for musicians to shore up critics and/or criticism, either. They could if they wished though; I think they have the power and the numbers to do so.
As far as power and salaries: When California has only two music critics in the entire state on the staff of a newspaper — that is, two guys who make a living from music criticism — that is a sorry situation indeed.
Being fair and accurate is part of critics’ responsibility to music and audience – not to musicians. Otherwise it would be like saying that musicians must play well because they have that responsibility to critics… The same with nurturing – it is the right thing to do because it serves music and audience.
Two critics for the entire state is probably not enough. Still, i would prefer two great critics to ten mediocre ones.
I’d prefer three critics.
Yikes! I don’t count?! I think I’ll go back into my cave now. 😦
You count! Thank you for your comments, patty.
Well, truth be told, I don’t count all that much: I’m not playing with the Big Guys and I know you were talking about “names” in your original post. I have no “name”, in reality. (Not that I’m sad about it; I love my position, being in several groups and teaching keeps me very content. I’d never have handled the stress of a larger and more respected group, nor do I play at that level, I’m sure.) But I hope you know I was just teasing you. 🙂
I’ve posted several times now on my blog with a link to this entry of yours. I do hope some of my musician reader folk jump in. It’s Monday, though, and that day is very frequently or day off so they might all be resting and relaxing or whatnot! (I just rest & relax with a laptop, so of course I comment … and far too frequently, I know.)
You dare tease a music critic? Next time I review you patty — reprisal!
So, there are several issues being discussed.
– Do musician comment?
– Should they comment?
– Should they be engaged with criticism?
I was specifically discussing the likelihood of getting comments from a musician if you’re a blogger. If you’re a full-time pro reviewer, you’re seen as legitimate. Bloggers often are not. One person who emailed me – the nameless performer – asked what my credentials are. I trotted them out (and addressed some of the performer’s specific issues) and did not hear anything more.
Should performers engage with critics and bloggers? I am with MB here. I don’t see much value to it, honestly. I’m on record that performers should think twice before even reading reviews; see the blog posting here.
When I was a full-time pro reviewer, I was asked many times what my credentials were. So that doesn’t just happen to bloggers.
Listen, I don’t want to get in a back and forth with Carl St.Clair or anyone else I mentioned (though imagine what a comment by Esa-Pekka Salonen would do for readership!). But for me, music criticism is part of an essential community conversation about music, and it would be nice if they (musicians) were more interested in it.
I think the interaction between musician and music writer is quite important. It’s the community, as a whole, that works. Not the separate units. (Unless you are talking, as a musician, about just playing in the comfort of your own living room and not for the general public.) If classical musicians think they can survive without the media reviewing them, they are just as wrong as music writers thinking they can survive without the performers (not that writers are saying that… though there have been plenty of musicians who believe they can survive without the press). With the dearth of support for serious music writing and criticism in this country, musicians should be making a noise. And I don’t mean a noise of praise. They should be contacting media editors and asking “what happened to your classical music coverage?” They are not doing this. Across the country, classical music criticism has been eliminated from newspapers with very little noise coming from musicians. Can you image if sports coverage were treated thus?
So, in that sense, musicians should pay attention to what is written about them and be engaged in the whole community.
About a negative review stopping a few people from attending a concert: think of how many people won’t come, at all, because there is zero coverage. This is actually happening right now.
Perhaps musicians do not wish to reply on blogs, but they could write to editors just so the editors think twice about firing their music writers. (I don’t think Tim meant to say that he actually expects musicians to comment on his blog, specifically. Rather, he was exploring an idea of musicians being engaged in the written word about music.)
You could probably count, on both hands, the number of full-time classicial music critics left in this country. There has been a cleansing of them without much of a whimper from musicians. Yet, without those writers, the symphonies and operas and chamber performers have nothing but a PR based platform to exist upon.
Gee, maybe we’re all practicing? (Or in Patti’s case making reeds and practicing.)
“You dare tease a music critic? Next time I review you patty — reprisal!”
… can’t seem to hit “reply” to that, Tim … guess we’ve gone too deep in that comment thread …?
But really, I’m not teasing! I had aspirations when I was younger; I thought I could make it big with my natural ability when I was in high school & college. But one has to practice much more than I was ever willing, so here I am. I make a decent salary, piecing it all together. I LOVE my life. Somehow bouncing around from opera to symphony to (well, okay, this isn’t my fave) ballet, to (sadly now to lesser degree) musical theater, to chamber music, to teaching … it all works well for me. It’s a good life, and I still get to whine a bit. I excel at whining. Best of all possible worlds for me, I suppose.
But you missed the one and only performance I think you would have loved and I was happy with in my now 36 year career. So too late now, Tim. Or maybe I AM teasing about that. Who knows?
Cheers! I now promise to stop commenting. But just LOOK at the comments you’ve received on this entry. Too bad you don’t get income from comments, eh?
Tim, your explanation for me makes sense. I think your point being is………what state or impact does a very legitimate music critic have anymore, when the subjects don’t even interact with the critic?
That’s a valid question.
What do you mean “anymore”? When was it different? Musicians talking back to critics was always an exception, not a rule. And that is the way it should be.
Because of the Internet, people read more reviews now, not less. That leaves even less time for replying. Also, some of the bloggers are actually better critics than some of the “legitimate” ones writing in newspapers.
Care to name some bloggers who are better critics than the “legitimate” ones?
Also, as the only performer who I have written about to comment here, why is it that you feel comfortable doing so while your colleagues don’t?
While I’m a little late to the party, this conversation is too interesting not to comment on. As someone who writes a lot of opinions about the music I more often than not pay to hear, I would say I get regular, if not frequent, feedback from people I’ve written about. Most of it positive, but some of it not. (In fact, I got email feedback just this weekend from one of the vocalists performing in San Francisco’s Ring Cycle.) Now as you know, Tim, I don’t actually consider myself a music critic, which is a topic for another conversation. But, perhaps this is the very reason I get so much feedback. As the lines between professional critics and other impassioned parties begins to blur and the term “social media” becomes more and more vague in distinguishing it from anything else, perhaps the rules and people’s attitudes toward a previous set of standards about commentary are changing.
The first time I ever got feedback was from a vocalist who was very upset about something I’d written among a very glowing review of his performance. It so surprised me that any artist or musician would read anything I’d written in a review that I doubted the email’s authenticity for nearly two years until another writer (Lisa Hirsch in fact) provided me proof of the communication’s origin. I still am surprised that artists read what I write and honestly if the situation were reversed, I don’t think I’d be willing to do the same. I typically do not view artists or musicians as the target audience of what I write, but am more interested in influencing the opinions of others especially as the voices involved in these conversations have become increasingly fragmented.
Hi, Tim –
This has been an interesting discussion. I’m a colleague of Patty’s; we worked together for many years before my retirement.
Here’s slightly different perspective on this topic. First, I’ve eagerly read most reviews of most performances I’ve played over a 50 year period. For the most part, I’ve found reviewers to be even handed and fair, so no need to comment. A good review is always a treat. Oh, good – somebody noticed. On some occasions, I have thought, “I knew that, but I wish he hadn’t noticed.” Again, no need to reply. But orchestral playing, like professional sports, is a team effort, and, while a musician can have a bad night, a whole orchestra does not. Our standards are much higher than that. And we seldom have a really bad show.
But when the reviewer writes, “The ensemble was ragged, intonation sketchy, dynamics poorly defined…” he is really talking about a failure at the leadership level. And there is no defense against that negative review; I can’t say, “Yes, but it was all Seiji’s fault.” and sign my name to it. So I don’t respond to those, either.
I think the reviewer’s perspective is one of commenting on and perhaps refining, the listener’s experience in the audience. That is a very subjective thing.
As performers we are first and foremost concerned with the technical aspects of our own parts, the mechanical, physical Doing of the performance. Next, of course, is ensemble, but that’s a personal choice only in the immediate vicinity. After that the conductor has the broad control over orchestral ensemble, dynamics, tempo, style and so on.
When I think of a performance, it is in terms of those physical aspects, the memory of a cluster of sensations involved in the performance, the interwoven lines of the music, my turn alternately to be active in moving that line or to have a passive, supportive role. And all the while I’m listening to the result of that team effort, the music.
I’m not sure the audience would benefit from sharing my perspective. It’s a lot of Stuff, mostly about the oboe, different from the clarinet player’s or the violin player’s Stuff, and it clutters the clean line of the music if you don’t need to do it. This is a very specific thing.
So ultimately we are approaching the topic from different places. I’m not indifferent to what you have to say, nor am I hostile. We were both in the same room when the concert took place so we have experienced the same event, but you are writing about your experience, and I don’t have that experience to comment on. I have my own quite different experience, which I’ll happily explain, but which might bore you silly.
If I haven’t already…
Keep up the good work. As much as we complain about reviews, we need you. We are all part of the same ecological niche.
“Care to name some bloggers who are better critics than the “legitimate” ones?”
If you are not restricting it to blogs – the platforms that showed up a couple of years ago – check out the archives of Dave Lampson’s Moderated Classical Music Mailing List. Until it mysteriously stopped in May 2010, it had excellent discussions, reviews, and criticism.
http://community.lsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-LSOFTDONATIONS.EXE?A0=CLASSICAL
The reviews and reviewers are archived and still appear to be active at:
http://www.classical.net/music/recs/reviews/
This has been an interesting discussion. To turn it on its head a little bit . . .
As infrequent as it is to have musicians comment on a critic’s blog (at least in Tim’s case), it is almost certainly even more rare to have a critic comment on a musician’s blog or discussion forum. I think that this represents good taste.
One glaring exception: during last year’s Mathieu Dufour controversy, the Chicago critic [I refuse to acknowledge him by name] at the center of the brouhaha made his way onto a number of musician’s and newspaper sites and left comments and sent PM’s to some posters — I know because a friend of mine got one of the PM’s. As unprofessional as his original actions were, his willingness/desire to inject himself into other conversations about him seemed to be cheap and petty and represented particularly bad taste.
Given my general disrespect for this particular writer even before the incident, I find his actions to be the exception that proves the rule.
Answering Tim’s questions:
1. For example, in my opinion, Brian of OWA and OperaChic are both better reviewers than…
2. Can’t say why other people are less comfortable commenting than i am; you would have to ask them. But i think the main difference is that for some reason i simply enjoy it more than others, that’s all.
So, if I’m not mistaken, a lot of you seem to be asserting that professional musicians are assiduous and faithful readers of music criticism and their local critics, but do not comment for various reasons (some of them very good).
But, I don’t think there’s a lot of evidence to support that view. My own evidence, not limited to a lack of emails and comments, suggests otherwise. The little experiment of this post suggests otherwise. I tried to make it easy for musicians to comment here (the post wasn’t a review of anyone) and yet not a single local professional musician, other than MarK, has said a word, not even “Kilroy was here.”
I think my original assertion stands — professional musicians don’t care about music criticism — until proven false. I guess we’d have to do some sort of survey. I’d have to do a direct mailing though, apparently, or call everyone up.
So if they don’t respond to you they don’t care about music criticism, Tim? It seems to me that there could be holes in that statement. Dunno … just thinking …?!
I DO know that a number of my colleagues don’t go online, or go online very rarely. The majority of my colleagues don’t know I have a blog, and I’ve been doing that thing for years now. Some sort of despise the whole internet thing, and puzzle over my involvement. I’ve been told that what I do is a narcissistic endeavor (yep, probably so!), I’ve been told I “Post too damn much” on Facebook (absolutely true!), and many think I’m an idiot for being so open about my life in such a public place (I do believe I may have lost work due to my blog). So yeah, I guess it’s possible you’d have to send out a letter or call them. (Me? I’m phonaphobic, so I’m quite thankful for email.)
I can also tell you that most of my colleagues read all the reviews we can find about things in which we are involved. We can be flattered or flattened by them, to be sure. (Yeah, I read and hear about players who say they don’t care what reviewers say, but I’m not sure I believe those people!) Many of my colleagues also rely on me to find the reviews online, and I print them up and bring them to work with me so they can read them. I sometimes post links and portion of reviews on my blog, but when the review is hurtful I don’t bother.
Mostly it seems as if you might be very angry with musicians for the loss of your work? But again, I read things SO wrong so much of the time. It’s a talent, so I run with it. 😉
No. A response is only ONE kind of evidence that musicians might care about music criticism. There are others. Hits, for one. I mean here and elsewhere.
Yes, certainly, musicians (or some of them) must read music criticism in print.
I’m just saying that this post doesn’t seem to have proven my original assertion wrong. It may be wrong (though I doubt it), but this post was unsuccessful in trying (ever so modestly) to answer the question, either way.
Though the discussion has been a lot of fun, no?
Musicians ARE NOT responsible for me losing my job. I do not hold them responsible. They could have helped, certainly, but it was not their responsibility to do so.
Your “original assertion” was that “professional musicians couldn’t care less about music critics and their blogging brethren”. It is probably true as a general rule and i don’t see anything that is either wrong or surprising about it. Now you have changed your wording a little and are saying that “professional musicians don’t care about music criticism” which is actually a very different sort of statement. This one i think is quite wrong. Many musicians, maybe most, do read reviews often and do care a great deal about their content.
For a musician, the review is like a verdict – guilty or not. Sometimes, after reading a review, musician feels as if he or she pulled an OJ. Other times, one feels as if the defense should start all over and find some exculpatory DNA evidence. Talking directly to the jury in such situations is probably extremely risky.
I don’t get any sense of anger from Tim for musicians causing his loss of work. (Did he say that?) I thought this whole thread was out of intellectual curiosity and to assess the overall situation of music writing readership and interaction. I could be wrong, though.
Well, as I said, I have a tendency to read things incorrectly … and especially negatively, go figure!
Truth be told, after I wrote that last comment I thought, “Why the heck am I so defensive about this?! Why is it making me feel the need to defend my colleagues?”
I’ve yet to come with any sort of good answer to that. So yeah, I’m feeling a bit sheepish.
Well, I’ve been really enjoying all your posts. Tim’s posts and others, too. Very interesting subject with plenty to reflect upon!
Tim, what I think is that performers have publicists who tell them to be cautious about everything they say on the internet or to a reviewer. Some performers have blogs (Patty, Jeremy Denk, Brian Sacawa, Joyce DiDonato) and write about their performing life there. Others might not have the time or interest to read criticism or might believe that their performances can speak for themselves.
Tim wrote: “Though the discussion has been a lot of fun, no?”
… indeed! Fun, puzzling, and, for me, makes me question my own intentions in commenting in the first place, wouldn’t you know? What I mostly like, as I stated elsewhere, is that the conversation has remained so darn civilized. See … we CAN all get along! (And hey, I have sharp knives at the ready and I never once pulled them on anyone. 😉 )
When you talk about “hits” are you saying you don’t see hits from musicians or hits in general? I appear to come from somewhere other than where I live, I believe, but I’m not positive (I’m a bit of a computer idiot. Thank goodness for WordPress and a husband who can help me with things.). I check the hits on my own blog in my self-absorbed way, and I average only 243 per day according to site meter and 400 with Jetpack (I’m gonna go with Jetpack for some unknown reason). My husband’s photography blog is MILES ahead of that.
I do think I brought you only two comments other than my own. But again, I suspect that the majority of musicians I work with are not prone to spending that much time with computers and are pretty cautious about writing things publicly. It appears, though, that you are talking mostly about famous names and the musicians in your corner of the world. (I know very few people playing down there these days.)
Ramble ramble … over ‘n out … sorry … disjointed … please blame the reed. That’s what we always do!
I have the BEST readers here, and we pride ourselves on our civility.
AH-HAH!!! THAT’S why there are so few musicians commenting. 😉
Sorry, just had to ….
Yeah, who needs em? Heh.
I always felt it was inappropriate to write to a critic, especially one that has reviewed me. When I have received negative reviews (usually from smaller regional papers), I have felt the urge to contact the critic to offer him some “constructive criticism”, when I felt his review to show ignorance. And for a short time, I did have a small time critic “out to get me” in favor of another local pianist (and family friend) he was trying to promote. Once I played a Mozart Concerto, and this same critic brought along a female companion who was moved to tears. He thought such an emotional reaction was inappropriate for Mozart, and he criticized my performance because of it.
However, since I am writing now, I will say this: you wrote a review for me about 16 years ago which was very positive, and I am very grateful to you for that. Thank you.
I DO know that a number of my colleagues don’t go online, or go online very rarely. The majority of my colleagues don’t know I have a blog, and I’ve been doing that thing for years now. Some sort of despise the whole internet thing, and puzzle over my involvement
If most of your colleagues are part of the pre-Internet generation, that would explain some of their apathy, if not annoyance, towards online activity. Plus, if a lot of their hours at home are spent practicing their craft, that would make them different from other people—or those who, in effect, leave their work at the office.
In my case, I have to say that since I, unlike my children, didn’t grow up in the age of today’s instant technology, I find myself not taking to it like a fish to water. I was trying to figure out how to text something to a relative and my daughter, growing exasperated with me, sniffed, “oh, mom, you’re hopeless! Forget the keypad and just call her on the phone!”
“If most of your colleagues are part of the pre-Internet generation, that would explain some of their apathy, if not annoyance, towards online activity.”
Deborah, I’m going to guess I’m older than the majority of my colleagues! Go figure. My kids probably grow exasperated with ME because I’m online far too much! 🙂