I liked your blog until you ended it by virtually threatening said individual who should take the gig. this is clearly a heated and sensitive issue, I dont think it helps to add that anyone who should take the job has just blacklisted themselves from any future position.

You'd be a scab to work during the strike, and Karen is completely correct: since the music world is so small, you'd be blacklisted in the eyes of any future musician looking to hire you if you took the job.

Auditions are held behind a screen, sometimes even through the final round, to eliminate discrimination based on former employment, sex, disability, etc. It's also illegal in many states to require union membership as a condition of employment, so they do not have the right to ask about your union affiliation, or lack thereof.

Fabulous letter. I hope all musicians read this and take your words to heart. As a former LO violist during the years right after it became a full time job, I am just sickened by the actions of the LO board. The musicians have been gracious, smart, open minded, and patient. Solidarity amongst all musicians is key to our long term success in making our profession legitimate and valued by all. Do not be a SCAB!

A resounding YES. From a violinist in the Louisville Orchestra. By the way, I don't believe in their "offer" of $925/week. I'd call it "bait."

I would like to add one additional thought to the above logic offered by Ms. Blundell.
Please carefully consider this: if many of the presently locked out Louisville Orchestra musicians had not fought to take the Louisville Orchestra to full time status in 1981 and if, since that time, subsequent musician committees not researched, negotiatiated and spent years of work creating and defending decent working conditions, salary and benefits, the Louisville Orchestra would not even exist as a full time salaried orchestra and thus there would be no position for you to fill.

Our musicians voted time and time again to reduce their own salaries to keep every musician employed as part of our family. Likewise there would not be any full time orchestra in Louisville for the current administration to mismanage and disassemble. If someone spent 30+ years designing and building a house, would you think it correct, wise, compassionate or ethical to move in and take that house away from the person who built it, free of charge?

Dearest Edward: you're an idiot.

Advertising for musicians on craigslist does not make an orchestra "real". You obviously aren't a professional musician, are you? If a similar situation were taking place with the Austin (where I live) Symphony, I wouldn't take that audition - and I'm at a level where I *am* paid to play in smaller "real" orchestras here in Central Texas.

I'm lucky that music is a side gig for me, and I have a day job I enjoy and get paid well in.

$27k for 30 weeks a year? Yes, you are correct, that is not a full time gig. It's a part time job. Find other work, teach, other performances, write, arrange, copyist, orchestrate, etc. Musicians do this all over the country.

Because, Edward, by taking that same job working for the same management, you will likely soon find yourself unable to pay the bills and therefore end up working for Wal*Mart or Target anyway.

Also, the players didn't use to have those jobs; they STILL have those jobs.

Edward,
Your comment shows zero education about the subject matter, as well as a total lack of compassion or any common sense. I wonder how you would feel if your boss dumped you with no explanation or willingness to discuss terms, and replaced you with an unskilled, untrained, young laborer? How would your family feel? How would you make a living then...would you move your entire family to another city? Pull your kids out of school, away from their friends? Or, would you work hard to get your job back, one that you spent a lifetime training for and that you earned, only to have stolen from you? You might try educating yourself before wagging your finger at the musicians. I would also guess that you are NOT a musician, or at least not a professional anything.

How dare YOU lecture us about our knowledge or motives.

A "real orchestra," regardless of full time vs. per service or pay scale, is one that has ethical, professional hiring and firing practices. This is not a "real orchestra," it's a Potemkin village. It has far more potential to be a career-killer than a dream maker. And believe me, it won't be anyone's only chance. Taking this gig would be fatally short-sighted.

Can't tell if trolling or just stupid...

Troll detected

Edward,

If you or someone you know has a "dream" of playing in a "real" orchestra, then this is still not the situation for you/them. It would not be a good experience as is evidenced by the situation the orchestra has put themselves in. This orchestra will most likely not exist in the not too distant future and then the musicians who take this audition will be out of a job too. Not to mention being controlled by a board who clearly doesn't have the slightest idea of how to run an orchestra effectively. As a professional musician and college teacher myself, I would never advise any of my students or colleagues to audition for an orchestra in this situation.

Actually, you are probably right. If they get a job here, it most likely will be their "only" chance to fulfill the dream of a professional orchestra career. Nobody else will bother with them when reading their resume. So, let's hope the board of the LSO doesn't do an encore performance of their action.

Actually, you are probably right. If they get a job here, it most likely will be their "only" chance to fulfill the dream of a professional orchestra career. Nobody else will bother with them when reading their resume. So, let's hope the board of the LSO doesn't do an encore performance of their action.

In case this isn't just trolling. . .

Your short-sightedness is painfully evident. You want it now at the expense of whoever suffers in the future. Do you understand the concept of precedent? Do you understand that by taking a job sometimes you are hindering your own cause? There are many examples in history that are far more serious than this where the people in power took advantage of some opportunists within a population to help them defeat the rest of that population. An extreme example, possibly, but the extreme generally proves the case.

Further, your status as a debt-laden (grad?) student or recent gradate does not qualify you to make an objective decision here, or even a somewhat informed one. Once you get out of your early/mid-twenties and learn a thing or three, you might change your tune. If I'm wrong about this, it's because yours is an attitude of someone in that position.

I should qualify myself by saying that I make my living by doing everything you listed but am not an orchestral musician for the most part. I work at 4 colleges (including Juilliard) and perform on a very regular basis, including as a member of AFM 802 on Broadway. I have also published several scores as well as a book that, among a couple of other topics, discusses how music schools such as the ones you and I attended, don't adequately prepare their grads for the real world. You couch your responses in the harsh, lift yourself up by your own bootstraps, "join reality" philosophy. Do you really think these musicians don't do work beyond their orchestral endeavors? You assume you know better than other people because you are not capable of understanding anything other than your own, idealized perspective. You are also too easily dismissing the part where orchestra members elected to take a pay cut to keep the ensemble together. That sort of selflessness should be lauded, not ridiculed.

Real, working musicians are among some of the humblest, hardest working people around. At what point should we stand up for ourselves? After the next full time orchestra fires their contracted players? After Lincoln Center lets the Met perform with recorded music?

To everyone else that is trying to explain and educate dear Edward, don't waste too many more calories. Given his understanding of human nature and the industry, he is probably looking to invest in the Madoff fund soon as well. After all, it'd be really really hard to find another good opportunity and the people in charge there who betrayed people they originally claimed to work with and for deserve trust and a second chance.

To reply to Mr. Coast: the choice to become a "scab" (a term usually applied to a picket-line crosser, but I feel appropriate here) will damage to one's future career prospects (something Ms. Blundell outlined clearly). To claim that this may be an emerging-professional's "only chance to fulfill their dreams" is ludicrous - but will prove true when they are later blacklisted for working for Louisville. The choice is clear: immediate gratification of orchestral playing for a company that clearly devalues its artists, or continuing to scrape by until ANY OTHER ensemble or organization holds auditions.

Can I just ask for your credentials, or, at the least, sources for what you're saying?
Ps- go ahead and take the audition, I think you're exactly the type of person they're looking for

As an orchestra musician, I would not invite any musician who scabs with the Louisville pickup orchestra to an audition, nor would I seriously listen any audition presented by such a musician.

Edward,
It's impossible to argue with stupidity, so it's impossible to argue with you for that reason. I feel extremely sorry for you. That's really all I can say. Arguing against this letter obviously isn't convincing us to side with you. Just look at how many comments are against YOU. Give it up Edward.

It's a stepping stone. Young people will populate this orchestra and move on to orchestras and teaching positions elsewhere. Nothing will change. The days of the union's power have been over for years and this is yet another example of it. People will admire those who continued to work instead of sitting on the sidelines because of some last century concepts of employment.

You are correct - they will see it as a stepping stone. However, it will probably be the ONLY stone they will ever step on. Do you realize how many musicians audition for EVERY opening in any professional orchestra. They may get something in the LSO, but that will be their career, because there will be so much competition for every other position they may audition for, and when those who have a say in the hiring for any other full time orchestra of any value or ability will see their resume and probably not even bother to listen much - there will be any number just as, or more talented than any of those "young musicians" you are encouraging to take these spots. I have a nephew who currently plays professionally in an orchestra, and has been all over the world playing auditions, the closest finish being last cut. He has also played all over the world with several orchestras who have hired him when they were without a player on his instrument. You seem to think it is something like filling out an application at WalMart or McDonalds. Nothing of the sort. There doesn't have to be a "blacklist" to be blocked from getting a job in a career orchestra. It can be done just as well by reading the resume.

From another comment thread: "Why do we need the union?" Let's see: No unlimited rehearsals without breaks, not being fired on the spot for dubious reasons, collective bargaining for better pay, temperature clauses, negotiating in good faith, etc. etc. etc.

-Terry O.

If someone is willing to be a vulture, it is their prerogative, much as it might disgust those of us who already have employment in music. Here's what those vultures need to consider. What kind of outfit is it that you're going to be working for? This is the very same board that has locked out and showed little regard for its current workers, who've never had cushy jobs to begin with. Their attitude towards employees isn't going to change with a new group. You'll be the ones fighting a $10000 pay cut in 3 years. And when your new vulture job pays about $23000 after tax before they ask for cuts, where's that going to put you? I wouldn't audition for this group even at their former levels of pay.

Krista, 1981 called and wants your comment back. No one is going to be blacklisted that would have any meaning. In a few years, you will see more orchestras going this way and become non-union if they manage to stay in operation at all.

Sir, the International Musician's Union, of which nearly every professional orchestra is a part, has had the Louisville Orchestra on the "Unfair" Blacklist for months. If a person is hired by the LO/LSO/whatever it is to be called, they cannot ever audition for a single major North American orchestra.

I have a hard time believing that being a scab for Louisville would really hurt your long-term career prospects. Winning an audition even as a scab there will still be tough, and will look better on your resume than a stock-boy job at Wal-Mart. Honestly speaking, 95% of orchestral musicians have pretty dismal career prospects, so being in any orchestra is going to be a better deal than not being in one.

I understand solidarity and appreciate it, but it doesn't pay the bills if you're in a bad place financially. And if the union wants to remain the good guy, they should probably stop the intimidating threats of blacklisting scabs (for life? Who knows.)

But, you see, by accepting work for an organization that has already treated its musicians extraordinarily poorly, you are guaranteeing that you will be subject to the same treatment. If you end up somehow losing that employment, you are guaranteeing that you will essentially get no more music performance work EVER, until the day you die.

Well . . . you were close . . . I'm a full-time musician and teacher in my mid-thirties.

I gave up on orchestral music in college when I realized how incredibly long the odds are, how stupid the audition process is, and how ridiculously rare openings are (thanks to tenure.) Many of my friends from college made it into full-time orchestras eventually, often at enormous personal cost, but many (many) more did not and had to either switch careers, live half-way around the world, or find a sugar-daddy. These weren't students at a rinky-dink school, either, but one of the most respected music schools in the country.

I *love* classical music, and I love orchestras, and I want nothing more than for live orchestral music to be a bigger part of everyone's life. However, I'm saying that the snobbishness, the group-think, the threats of life-time blacklisting, etc., do *not* play well with the public, and *that* is why I think the people here bad-mouthing management in general and Louisville in specific (or capitalism! Good luck with getting that banished!) need to back off a bit and calm down.

Keith, I'm sorry but no, the conventional wisdom that any audition is better than no audition simply does not apply here. Believe me, as a freelancer, nothing is more paramount than one's reputation among colleagues. Keep good faith, and people will line up to help when you fall on hard luck; burn bridges, and watch your gig life evaporate.

Before I joined the union, I worked some non-union jobs. I did not have the benefits of a union-negotiated contract, so the working conditions were appalling. But, I suffered them gladly because it was a job, and I was desperate to play. Anywhere. With anyone. Just so long as it was a paying gig. I completely sympathize with the questions about the union's role, particularly for young players who have not yet established themselves.

But, during that same period of time when I was playing non-union gigs, a good friend of mine took an orchestra job with a management that had proven itself to be untrustworthy. He, too, was desperate for any job that paid. He moved thousands of miles away and turned down other, lower-paying, gigs in favor of the high-powered orchestra seat. Only a few months into his contract, the orchestra stopped sending out paychecks. He had to move back home with no financial resources whatsoever. It took him years to recover from the economic complications stemming from that orchestra job.

Regardless of your position on the union or the sustainability of the model, it is highly unwise to accept work from an employer that has proven itself unlikely to compensate you for your efforts.

Hooray - a voice of reason.

I am a tenured musician in an ICSOM orchestra. In my ten years with the orchestra, I've been on four audition committees, including three times voting on resumes. If I ever see a resume that includes time spent in the Lousiville Orchestra as a scab, I will vote "no," which is in my power. After I vote "no," my colleagues will vote "no," and the resume will be thrown in the trash. Tenured players decide who receives an invitation to audition, not the management.

Your comments reveal a complete lack of understanding of how orchestral collective bargaining agreements are structured. Fortunately, some people in arts management know how to support the artists. It's a shame Louisville doesn't.

Ok, since we're making this a social issue, let's replace the words musician and orchestra with murder and food. Would you kill for food in a society where food was in abundance? It's sort of the same thing here. The last I checked, there are a number of jobs in the music industry. Get off your spoiled hands and work for it. I you don't want to work for it, get off the pot and work at walmart! If you're in a bad place financially, your number one goal is finding a way out of the financial mess not an audition, not scabbing in Louisville. If your prospects are that low and you can't find a way to live within your means, do not look at a music career to hold you up, especially at the expense of others who have found a way through the madness and got crapper on anyway!

Very well said, Karen. I would add that if you audition for the orchestra and you *don't win*, you'll have double-screwed yourself: no job right now and a lifetime of unemployment.

Tom,

Greetings from another WVSO player! As the orchestra's principal tubist, I can assure you with 100% confidence that nobody in that orchestra feels as you do now. In fact, we all share solidarity with the musicians of the Louisville Orchestra, especially since some of them now work with us - I wish they would stay, but I'd much rather they'd be allowed to go back to work in Louisville!

As to your comment about blacklisting, the AFM has *not* taken that position nor will they. (Some players above have commented about how people that audition for the LO "might get blacklisted," but there have been no statements by the union itself which support this idea.) What WILL happen to players that audition for the LO is they will not be given work outside of the orchestra because what they are doing is viewed by every union musician (in other words, the vast majority of full-time orchestra musicians) as abhorrent: they are proactively taking food out of the mouths of the musicians who have the jobs RIGHT NOW. *That* is what guarantees that whoever auditions for the LO will not receive union work for as long as they continue to pursue a career as musical performers.

VERY good point, and well-stated. Thank you!

Who exactly would have "walked up your back to take your job?" Certainly not the person you describe above, who waited for you to leave it voluntarily before deciding to go for the resulting opening himself. One has to twist logic far past any recognition to see that as a lack of solidarity. Lack of class in interpersonal relations, maybe, but no more than that.

I can only add my voice to those who have told it like it is: taking this audition will be professional suicide on many levels. The chances of the new orchestra even being in business after the first year is slight to none as the community audience is largely very sympathetic to the original players and will likely stay away in droves. I personally know of at least 15 subscriptions which are not being renewed for this very reasons. The "scabs" will find virtually all freelance jobs in Louisville shut to them as the choral directors, churches, and other arts organizations are not going to consider hiring them. So when it folds, those who have played in it will have no local prospects whatsoever, and no national prospects in any union orchestra. End of career, except for non-union freelance, bar scene, street playing. I don't mean this to sound threatening, I would personally have empathy for people who would take this job out of need, but they need to know the reality of the consequences.

Ray, thank you for your well wishes.
To address your question, I say it depends on the player. There could just be those whose financial situations necessitate them staying with the LO, or auditioning to join. I'm sure they understand the risks of either blacklisting or continuing money problems. Either way, however, I personally would not be willing to vilify a player for his/her choice; only they know what best suits their needs. For that, they have my sympathy.

To be honest, the AF has it's ups and downs as well; I want to clarify that, lest I be accused of "recruiting" on this thread. It's not for everyone, but it underscores my previous point - there IS musical life outside the symphonic world; the military is only one example.

What is sad is that we live in a world where the Board of the Louisville Symphony may succeed in hiring a 'new' orchestra.

Why are musicians fighting amongst themselves about whether this is the right thing to do or not? It isn't right to take this audition.
Whether you are currently, or were formerly, or are NOT YET, WE ARE the union.
Young musicians (college-age and high-school age) need to take the long view: Would they want to find themselves in a future job being replaced by students?

As so eloquently written above, if they have any hope of having a livelihood as an orchestral musician, young musicians should stand with their older colleagues.
It simply is the right thing to do. It is not about black-listing or ending careers. However, it is very much about allowing our Boards, our donors or corporate sponsors, our audiences, our students, and Joe or Jane Public to continually de-value what a professional orchestral musician has to offer.
Take the long view, young musician. Do you want to have your talent and your skills valued in your future? Then don't take this audition; don't let the Board of the Louisville Symphony devalue their musicians.

I agree that young musicians, such as myself about to start my DMA, should stand next to the more experienced musicians. We learn from the ones who have succeeded. However, I find the rhetoric of this entire thread to be volatile to the advancement of one's career. Knowing people who are trying to get orchestra jobs in states with unions and without unions need the experience. I am not advocating taking the position at all. I would be advocating going to the audition for practice. Nothing is more important than getting more experience in the audition process. And, as it sounds, since the LO will probably take whatever they can get, the younger local musicians should take this cheaper audition experience as a blessing. But, I agree with all the currently working musicians, do not take the job. If you start giving more power to a less responsible board, it shows other boards they can get away with the same tactics. Forget the hard work the former LO musicians have accomplished in 30 years, it goes against the work of thousands of musicians for hundreds of years. I agree unions are dying, but it's only because the dismantling of unions is a cheaper alternative to negotiations.

If you're not #1 or 2 in the State, don't even consider a performing career.
And 2 is on the bubble a bit more than 1, which is still on the bubble. Cause there are 49 other #1's out there each year.......

Philip, while this is almost an entirely different issue it is still a relevant one. There used to be a public service ad that went on during NBA basketball games (I'm a hoops junkie violinist). Basically it was about the staggeringly small odds of "making it" professionally by playing basketball. I have often thought that the classical radio stations should run similar adds about the odds of "making it" as a classical musician. Of course at the elementary, middle, and high school level there is still immense value in educating oneself and improving one's skills that can later translate to the ability to do so in other fields as well as the personal joy and satisfaction of making music. At the college or conservatory level, though, I wonder exactly as you do. Perhaps it is time that those institutions consider paring their size or at least making it clear that a degree or resume only goes so far. And for private teachers, while always wishing to encourage the improvement and learning, it is also a responsibility to offer an accurate assessment of their students as far as likely professional prospects.

Philip: I think you actually are arguing the same point. A sustainable livelihood as a musician is difficult because what a professional musician does is devalued. How many orchestral musicians have heard from an audience member: "Oh, you are actually paid for playing?" There is a disconnect.
I would point out that there are many different means of being successful or defining success as a musician. One hears continually of how the Internet is making it easier to reach the public, and to create momentum for what you wish to create for the world.
Rather than be bitter at the state of affairs, we, collectively, must work to make the connections for our audiences, our students' parents, our symphony Boards, our donors and for each other.
An audience member just last night said: "What about a donor campaign that reaches out to all the people who once studied an instrument, or played in an orchestra (school, community, etc.)?"

I would also point out that difficulty finding a job in your field for which you attended college, is not a plight limited to musicians. One reads about this all the time and hears news reports on this very subject.
It is the world we live in. One where the median income has been stagnant for the last 40 years. Maybe that is the problem...

There is a time and place for the discussion of this valid question, but I do not think it is here and now, as it changes absolutely nothing about the underhandedness of the Louisville situation.

Philip,

You have taken things very much off-topic, but I nonetheless feel I must respond to what you have written about the viability of music as a course of study.

It is absolutely true that winning an orchestral position is exceptionally difficult - perhaps equal to the challenge of getting the lead role in a major film or getting drafted by the New England Patriots - and it would certainly be drastically irresponsible for a music teacher to promote orchestral playing as a career to a student who simply does not have what it takes to get one of the few jobs there are in that field.

But to say that music as a whole is an unrealistic course of study is utterly ridiculous. Thousands of people are gainfully employed in America's orchestras, and many, many more have used creativity to piece together a nice living from freelance work.

One will of course never get rich from being musician, but that is an extremely modest sacrifice I (for one) am willing to make in order to make a living in a profession I love, as opposed to a profession that is "safe." I deal with career frustrations just like anyone else. I would love to be playing with the Cleveland Orchestra or the Boston Symphony, but I would never give up my $12,000 a year job with the Spokane Symphony for a different profession. Naturally, I have to supplant this with as much outside work as I am able, but I would like to think I have put together a relatively nice living without being in one of America's top orchestras.

If the difficulties of living well in music are not to your taste, than you absolutely should choose a different line of work. That is completely understandable. But it is wrong for you to belittle music as a profession when there are so many of us who are happy to face these challenges in order to do what we love. There are many struggling actors and athletes who would tell you the same thing, and I don't think anyone has the right to tell them that they are wrong to make their own choices.

And yet every time I hear of situations like in Louisville, the musicians want me to band together to support their cause. Whose cause do most orchestra musicians champion other than their own? How do composers get their new works performed? Who gives lessons to poor kids that can not afford them? Who advances any player except the self? Who supports their local music educator? The music world is ill.

I second Ray on this one. My (per-service, union) orchestra just played a new commission last week. We offer reduced cost lessons in our economically depressed town. We provide resources and assistance to the educators of music (whether or not their primary class is band!) in the area.

No aspect of professional music is easy, whether one is on stage, in the executive office, or in the classroom. It is difficult to "make it" in the arts regardless of one's personal definition of the term. We are all constantly struggling for resources and exposure. But, every day I see professionals across the field, at multiple levels of success, collaborate to help realize the potential of each other's art.

I'm sorry Steve, do I know you or you me? Is it your impression I am a member of the Louisville orchestra?

Thanks, Oh I know, I just like to think that even trolls can do their homework so they can be the best trolls they can be.

Well, Steve, I don't exactly make a secret of being a union member, or a violinist, or knowing and supporting the LO musicians but I am in fact not without a job as I am not and never have been a member of the orchestra. I am actually a businessman as well as a musician. And I must ask what YOUR interest in the situation is if you constantly follow this topic but are clearly not a professional musician. And never, in all the comments have I ever suggested "woe is me" as in fact I am quite satisfied with my professional situation and business situation. But thank you for your entirely cowardly personal attack.

There are so many factors contributing to orchestral decline in this country.. I do think positive energy is critical for any art, whether in the board room or on stage. Respect and the benefit of the doubt is also important. Otherwise, we're all just like Keith Olbermann....

In English we use an apostrophe to indicate a possessive. We never use an apostrophe for plurals. Even some of "those Japanese and Koreans who dream of a greencard" might know that.

I was not going to comment here until I saw this comment about the "bloodsucking" New World Symphony. Even though I agree that there are too many many conservatories and music programs pumping out way too many musicians for not enough jobs. To bring NWS into that discussion is crazy. NWS is a great opportunity for those who get to experience it, to get some "experience" and not have to be temped by this lousy situation with the LO. I am sorry but this comment of the "musician" is clearly somebody bitter that they did not make it into NWS in the first place. NWS is not about money, it's about a great experience to work closely with great musicians. Maybe try re-auditioning and you will get to experience it yourself.

Actually - when you consider the stipend and housing, NWS fellows do better than the paltry sum the replacement LSO is offering.

I'm a 23 year old aspiring orchestral musician. This situation with LO is not the only type of situation like this in this economy. My advice to my young colleagues is to not be discouraged by the current economic situation, because it's only temporary. Also, a great bass trombonist once told me "there's always room on the top". Be the best, and persevere through this economic "rough patch".
Things will eventually work out. Maintain a high level of professionalism always with no exceptions (especially out of desperation)! We are lucky that it's even possible for music to be a career. Smile, and enjoy the music no matter where you are. That's the whole point, right?

Who will conduct this new orchestra or will they be like Orpheus and play without a conductor? I don't think any experienced music directors would be associated with such a controversial situation. Or maybe the board will advertise on Craig's List again... To me it is akin to demolishing a historic landmark to put up a boring new building built with cheap materials and unskilled labor. You get what you pay for. The building might be there, but have you really created anything meaningful to your community or is it just an eyesore?

I can't wait to hear the Bruckner!

Does anyone know where music director Jorge Mester stands in all of this? Will he be auditioning the Craigslist group or does he stand with the original orchestra?

#3, "We'll blacklist you", (even though likely true) doesn't seem like a very good argument for defining a distinction between "professional" musicians and "disingenuous" symphony boards.

==================================

just to clarify: Even though I still have NOT been able to find an IMPARTIAL and JOURNALISTIC report of all of the events of this conflict precisely as they've occurred (and don't expect to), I'm NEARLY CERTAIN that the way in which the musicians were dealt with displayed PROFOUNDLY POOR JUDGEMENT with MULTIPLE BAD CONSEQUENCES.

Companies in nearly all industries can fire just about anyone for just about any reason. The fact that people and their friends can anonymously slander former bosses on facebook (etc.) is one reason why I've severely downsized my own company to immediate family members.

Finally, I don't believe that copying and pasting pre-manufactured snide memes on social media paints the AFofM in a particularly good light (other than to ardent AFofM members).

These "money situations" in orchestras like this are never black and white. Does anyone really believe that the CEO of Louisville isn't making a huge salary? If you have been following all of the newspaper articles about the situation, the Management rejected the musician's offer of arbitration because the binding arbitration would have forced them to make changes on their end too.

I know that I didn't really understand this side of the music business until I had a few jobs myself. And all unions are not bad! The orchestra that i play in, the Local AFM is extremely helpful to us, and most definitely has our back. It's just too bad that the Louisville local didn't involve itself more in the beginning, when there was actually a chance of salvaging a better outcome.

I have many friends that play in LSO and I have subbed with them myself in the past. It really is a great group of musicians and it's a shame that this is happening now.

Being in the music business is so competitive and people have to fight tooth and nail to get any respect. If we don't stand in solidarity with our colleagues, then we are giving up our power. Our strength comes from our numbers. When I first got out of school, I too was very anti-union and didn't understand what they were doing for me. I have since reversed that opinion. The AFM does do good for musicians and the work that we accept if musicians choose to become well-informed about the issues, and get involved in the union.

Ms. Blundel hits the nail on the head with this letter! There is so much about being a professional musician out side of playing and taking auditions. The management of the LSO is hoping that young people just out of school will be ignorant about these issues and accept work with them. I hope that people considering responding for the audition call realize how disingenuous LSO management is. Please take the time to educate yourself about all sides of the situation!

Tom, I've spent my morning reading through the various comments here and I was wondering the very same thing. Would it be possible to turn this around a little by getting together and making good music no matter what? I don't know whether it's legal or desirable, but it seems like it would at least be productive. I'm interested to hear other people's thoughts on this.

Tessa, I can not disagree more. Is it not a fact that their previous contract was for 71 musicians? Did they not, over the course of a number of months negotiate down to 55 at one point only to have the attorney Smith inform them that their acceptance was null because it was several hours late? Did they not just propose 59 players? Did they not also agree to the shorter number of weeks, which means they lose the salaries for the 7 weeks (about $6475.00 per player or almost 20% of their salary?) Their proposal for arbitration is at at a least as reasonable as the board hand-picking the options before the players could decide.
So in effect, you are saying that giving up at least 12 and perhaps 17 positions (as in firing people), giving up 20% of their salary is not "moving an inch". I hope you are either a child, or God help us all perhaps a board member who is not in the loop (but needs to be).
If the LOI does in fact hire a replacement orchestra I would welcome the KLS competing directly with it - on the same night in fact. I think you'd be in for a brutal surprise as to the loyalty of much of the Louisville audience. I know the dozen or so subscribers I have talked too are all not renewing and I am in a position to influence dozens more. Whitney will be a cavern where the LOI board gets to bury itself in ignominy before filing the inevitable Chapter 7.

Tessa, I can not disagree more. Is it not a fact that their previous contract was for 71 musicians? Did they not, over the course of a number of months negotiate down to 55 at one point only to have the attorney Smith inform them that their acceptance was null because it was several hours late? Did they not just propose 59 players? Did they not also agree to the shorter number of weeks, which means they lose the salaries for the 7 weeks (about $6475.00 per player or almost 20% of their salary?) Their proposal for arbitration is at at a least as reasonable as the board hand-picking the options before the players could decide.
So in effect, you are saying that giving up at least 12 and perhaps 17 positions (as in firing people), giving up 20% of their salary is not "moving an inch". I hope you are either a child, or God help us all perhaps a board member who is not in the loop (but needs to be).
If the LOI does in fact hire a replacement orchestra I would welcome the KLS competing directly with it - on the same night in fact. I think you'd be in for a brutal surprise as to the loyalty of much of the Louisville audience. I know the dozen or so subscribers I have talked too are all not renewing and I am in a position to influence dozens more. Whitney will be a cavern where the LOI board gets to bury itself in ignominy before filing the inevitable Chapter 7.

I like Tom's idea better than the lack of an impartial journalistic timeline (supplanted by emotionally-based opinions) that I've seen to date.

Regarding no blacklisting: It is my understanding that any union musician playing with an orchestra on their national 'unfair labor practices' list can be fined, ejected from the union for life, or both. The potential fine was substantial, as well.

Jeri, I think your point is well taken and I agree that it can sometimes seem that the musicians do not appreciate the time and money which board members and donors provide at no great benefit to themselves. In theory, the respect should flow both ways and the musicians should not fall into the entitlement trap which does happen. I must say that when this dispute began to percolate well more than a year ago I saw the online videos management posted and listened to their arguments and frankly thought their position quite reasonable. While I would have preferred the ensemble remain at 71 players, and as supportive of the players as I have been, I then and now understand the desire of management for a smaller core and still find it reasonable. But the vindictive nature of the negotiations (a vindictiveness that seemed entirely one-sided until recently) and the fact that the players essentially surrendered about 95% of the way towards the management position found me rapidly off the fence. The final straw was the day on which the players voted to accept the management proposal of 55 players after meeting with Chuck Maisch, the CEO, and a scant two hours later a missive from the union busting attorney (that is his career reputation of thirty years, not a slur directed at him just because he represented the management) declared that the players voted "too late" and the deadline had passed and now the had to drop to 50 players. As you can imagine, the reaction was furious. All of this is from my best understanding of these events as told to me by many different people - if any of this is in error I am happy to hear a different version.
I fear that the relations here are so frayed it will take a long time to heal if it ever will.

I don't know where to begin. The real/true problem here is the orchestra world as a whole and how it's set up. Management works for the musicians--or tries--and the musicians constantly criticize the management when things aren't perfect. I really want musicians to stop and think about these people who go to work every day and work 40-80 hours a week dealing with all of the fund raising, marketing, personnel issues in the orchestra, artistic administration, etc. and many of them don't make nearly as much as the musicians playing--please remember this. It is a joint effort and for the musicians to consistantly BLAME management is really disheartening. It is not a good business model--the way it is set up. The union is good for some things (i.e. over time, cold temperatures, helping with limiting rehearsals, etc) but I think it is mostly a problem for the organizations. There is a division between the musicians and management that is too hard. And, Louisville is a prime example. I say that the graduating musicians need to take this audition. It is a pitty for those in the Louisville Orchestra who played there for so long and want to keep their jobs--but they need to remember that this economy is dismal and there are SO many people out there who have NO JOBS and also worked hard to get where they are. I don't fault the Louisville Musicians for being angry--they're not angry at the musicians for wanting to take the auditions--I believe they're angry at the system and feeling powerless to help keep their orchestras alive.....It really is a problem with the business as a whole. It's time for a change!

In most situations where it's management vs musicians, both sides can be idiotic. Management IME *usually* has some very smart people running the show, but that doesn't mean they won't make stupid decisions. In the case of the LO, management has made a *very* idiotic decision in locking out all tenured musicians and trying to replace them in the most shifty, underhanded way possible. Can't come to terms on a contract with your employees? Fine, shut down. But don't make the entire organization look bad in the eyes of the public and the industry by trying to replace your employees with scabs. This is VERY bad for the organization and for the industry as a whole.

Using the term "scab" in this day and age is ridiculous. It's not 1930 and only an old fossil would use it. Ultimately, we must all adapt to a new world. Blaming management and calling people scabs only takes away mental resources from working out real solutions.

To the commenter who criticized NWS: You couldn't be more off base about what NWS provides young musicians. It's no coincidence that when you look around America's orchestras and their broader constituency, some of its most engaged and intelligent and vocal leaders are NWS alumni - including the author of this post.

To those who assume musicians operate ignorantly off of negative board stereotypes: Most orchestras allow/require musician involvement in governance. Many of us have seen boards operate up close and personal - great ones and dysfunctional ones.

You know what's rare in our industry? A board that ever acknowledges its own failures first. So often, board members are lightning-fast to externalize the fault for their own failures so as to avoid diminishing their own reputations or standing within the community.

Here's what I hear from my colleagues around the country who are in leadership positions. We hear board members talk about the bad economy (no longer true by any statistical metric, outside of housing), donor fatigue (usually a result of boards and development staff failing to market aggressively and develop a broader fundraising base), labor costs (which in most orchestras has barely moved in the last 10 years), and declining attendance (often fueled by overly cautious, uninspired programming insisted upon by board members and management to avoid "alienating" old people).

It's no coincidence that the orchestras that are succeeding right now - whether it's Los Angeles or Nashville or Oregon or Kansas City or others - are producing inspired and creative programming, executing at a high level on stage, and have boards and management that are responsive, committed to marketing the hell out of their institutions, and raising the money necessary to grow.

It's no coincidence that while Louisville struggles, Colorado is revitalized and working to right its ship. Of course, Colorado also canned its CEO and replaced all the naysayers on its board, too.

Building and sustaining a thriving arts institution isn't rocket science. Do inspired work and market it aggressively. The best magnet for fundraising is success.

When board members start resigning themselves to "right-sizing" or whatever other absurd buzzword comes out of the League of American Orchestras these days as a way to conceal managerial failure, it's very difficult to break the death spiral without a complete change in leadership. Otherwise, here's what happens.

The board cuts the budget. Talent starts to leave. Audience members and donors take note and begin lessening their own financial commitments; after all, who wants to pay more money for a worse product? The board fails to meet its even lower revenue targets. The board blames everyone but itself. It cuts the budget again. This happens in perpetuity until the board is no longer able to pay its creditors, at which point it files for bankruptcy, and usually blames the community for its inadequate support. Even in death, it's *never* the board's fault.

Louisville *can* succeed. It wasn't so long ago that Louisville was thriving and just down the road, Nashville was in trouble. Now, a generation later, the roles are entirely reversed. Both communities are similar in size and demographic. Both have musicians committed to doing great things on stage. So what caused the change in fortune? What's the big variable that caused one institution to thrive and one to fail?

Make no mistake - whether it's the San Francisco Symphony or the Podunk Philharmonic, organizational success depends on clear, passionate, inspired leadership, both on the stage and off the stage. Here's hoping the musicians in Louisville can find a management team as committed to growing and producing great art as they are.

Wonderful post Ryan.

You nailed it.

I challenge everyone on here complaining about the possibility that an orchestra might hire an entire roster of non-union musicians, to admit if they've ever played a non-union gig. Fess Up. How deep has your solidarity really been?
You know, in many states, it's illegal to require union membership as a condition of employment. "Blacklisting", then, as it were, is patently illegal in those places. Not a damn thing you can do about that!

Lol.. Although I'm not taking a side, there is a bit of truth to this.. In the end, it's all about creating opportunities. We were all never trained in this, but it is ESSENTIAL for art! We must all individually make the case and bring passion and energy to what we do. At some level, we all wish to become complacent, both management and performers..

As much as I love going to the symphony and deeply respect the tremendous skill and experience of the performers in professional ensembles, I'm afraid to say not all cities are cut out to have one. It seems that a lot of self-identified professionals here (sorry, I can't, er, won't Google all of your names) are saying that this is a fixable problem, though the solution has not presented itself. I'm mostly an ignorant bystander. It could be poor management alone, for all I know. From my outsider perspective, it appears serious LO funding and budgeting problems have existed for decades, despite the willingness of its musicians to accept pay cuts year after year, or through unsuccessful changes in management (though I don't know how recently).

Maybe the performers should just move on like Birch Blundell tells the potential scabs to do (since "other jobs will come open"), and, let the Louisville Orchestra be as mediocre as it might be!? Its just lost pride if you aren't reemployed. I understand why the statement was made, and its clear that this is how the industry works.

If they so up in arms about this, maybe such concerned X and Y union members could collectively donate a portion of their pay to sustain the Louisville Orchestra? Or perhaps volunteer to work with them in finding a more permanent solution to their funding problem? Many responses here indicate there is such a thing as a successful, viable orchestra, regardless of circumstances.

Decorum aside, I think its beneath the honor and dignity of grown adults and master musicians to threaten the careers of starving artists and hundreds, if not thousands of professional-level performers who have been passed over or on the long waiting list for this type of employment. I'm not one of these aspiring future performers, just to set the record straight. However, I do find it sad that the national culture creates a necessity for this type of discrimination; but I'm told that's the way it is, for better or worse. That there are limited seats in professional ensembles seems like pretty unavoidable math to me, so lets not limit a critique of a Darwinist mentality to the business side alone. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean just the "best players," or those within the existing hierarchy, as much as that is bound to wound some egos.

Even if the economy really isn't as bad as some here are saying, there is some truth that general interest in this branch of the fine arts is declining and that funding for the arts faces real difficulties into the future. Unfortunately, a large portion of this society is either ignorant of fine art, indifferent, or has moved on to other forms of entertainment.

On a side note, I find it curious and quite disappointing that many symphony orchestras don't bother posting content in the greater public domain, like YouTube. Just a few selections would suffice and they are worth donating. Even running into a concert or selection by accident online could change a person's attitude toward this wonderful art and contribute to its exposure and future support.

Louisville old-timer musicians: welcome to life. Start your own orchestra, form your own board, raise your own funds. This is your opportunity.

No professional orchestra sounds bad because it has too many young players. The problem in the industry is that people who won jobs 30, 40 years ago are still playing. The field is exponentially more competitive now than it was when they got in, so there are literally thousands of people out there better suited for the job than they are. But the system is established on the premise of holding a lifelong job. Union rules make it extraordinarily difficult to weed out weak players. Often, the problem is not acute enough to seem to warrant action-- but these "lifers" do not play anywhere close to the standard that they uphold for young auditioners. They don't necessarily sound awful, they just sound bad--- while one small, momentary mistake can eliminate a much more qualified player from an audition. Lifers who have lost the qualifications for the jobs they hold often mitigate their own boredom and guilt by conjuring reasons to complain about their work conditions--- positioning of chairs, proximity to other players, placement of plexiglass shielding, lights in their eyes, etc etc etc. The system is totally out of balance. Too many talented young people are shut out of positions that they should be rightfully be holding, because they are the best players out there, and the people who have been sitting in the orchestra for 30 years are not.

The problem you describe is much less pervasive than in decades past. Typically, young players are who advance at auditions these days are quite seasoned, and have spent a lot of time playing in various orchestras. Many walk onto the job with much more intensive recent playing experience than the people sitting in the chairs around them.
Hopefully, in your case, the system worked effectively, and that person was prevented from keeping a job for which s/he was not qualified.

Ah, yes, right on schedule, here we have the fear-mongering argument... So, the only way to change from the status quo is to suddenly be like the NFL, is that what you're saying?
Well, I really don't see what is wrong with expecting people to keep up the quality of their work, if they're getting paid to do it. If you can't execute certain technical maneuvers on your instrument anymore, then you shouldn't be pretending that you can, for years on end, only to serve your own needs, when there are others who can do it better.
The question "who in their right mind would go into such a career?" already applies to orchestral music as it is. Apparently, people want to play.

If you had seen my post below (which unfortunately although directed to you was not in the right position) I was asking you if you had a proposal that was workable that would stake out some kind of middle position. It seems clear that you are both young and bitter that no one has voluntarily acknowledged your superior skills and resigned so that you could take their place. I don't blame you exactly, but I think your view is myopic. Plenty of older players do work to keep their technical chops and approach each concert as a challenge - I know I do. Maybe in some of the really busy ICSOM orchestras they do get blase. But the specific topic of this blog is the Louisville Orchestra (of which I am NOT a member) and I think it is full of mostly 20-40 years olds, with some older. It is not just a lineup of white hair and graybeards.
And if you have a thought about a proposal to change the status quo I'm truly interested.

And of course "no longer contributing artistically" can be very easily objectively judged, especially by someone who wants that person's job ...

Kids just coming out of college are used to being surrounded only by people their own age, with the exception of professors. I'm sorry, but these kids need to get used to the idea that they will be competing with other humans who are not exactly like them. Yes, that means older ones. Tough crap. It's not unfair that upon exiting college, they will suddenly confront people who are decades older than they are in more than a parental or mentoring context. Welcome to the human race. After college, you will never again be part of a direct social or professional circle that consists of people who are, at maximum, four years older than you. Deal.

You can argue it as much as you want, but the fact remains: if you want someone's job, you are living in la-la-land if you think you are the most objective judge of whether or not they are "contributing artistically" -- your own words, I remind you. First, it's "contributing artistically," and now you've shifted the goalposts to "can they or can they not play a trill as fast as I can?" Shifting sands, dude. Besides, how many 90 year old violinists are there in the world, really? I can think of ONE who is working in a big-name orchestra, and given that he experienced premiering Rachmaninoff's works when Rach was still around to write them, I'd say that that experience is more than enriching enough to merit his hanging around. (I'm sure you'll mention two more and manage somehow to rhetorically multiply that into another million unknown ones all cruelly making YOUR MONEY.)

Seriously, dude. You act like there are seventeen million 85-year old string players with dementia stacked up like cordwood in the path of ten or twenty teenaged wannabe Perlmans. That's just not reality. You are projecting your fears in a crappy economy on people who are simply not a threat even in the remotest sense.

I'm neither young nor old, and not a professional musician, but every profession in the world seems to have to deal with kids who think that anyone over the age of 50 should die and get out of their anointed way.

College kids have spent their lives in artificial environments where they are competing only with people their own age and everyone who is older is in a parental capacity. They get out into the world and find out that this is simply not the case and that, as all young people must do, they need to work very, very hard to establish themselves. They don't want to. They are impatient as all hell and think that they need to make that first million before they turn 25. They scream and rant about how experience shouldn't count so much, only because they haven't got any yet. And in your case, they multiply the very, very few 80+ orchestral musicians in the world into an army of Alzheimers-saddled drooling placeholders lying in their way.

You really need to learn who your real enemies are, and what's really standing in your way, instead of just whining that everyone older than you in the world isn't acting in a parental capacity toward you.

I think it very much depends on the orchestra - and some of our recent additions are in fact superb players in every respect. I'm just not sure at what point one draws the line - how would you propose a system where there was some middle ground between having new auditions for every position each year, or complete security until very "old" whatever that might be.

I don't want to speak for Mr. Model, but I definitely think there should be mandatory reviews for all members of an orchestra every 5-10 years or so. These reviews could consist of simple interviews with peers, artistic administration to flat out re-auditions. I mean the average life-span of a music director at any orchestra is between 7-10 years... how's that for job security?

George Szell once asked, "What is the purpose of a symphony orchestra for which so many people give without compensation their time - I am now talking about the board - and collect money... What is the purpose? Is it the purpose of a symphony orchestra to make it possible to have the best of music? Or is the purpose of such an orchestra to give their members the easiest and unchallengeably permanent job?" (Szell-Culnshaw 1968).

I can attest as a close observer of the orchestra for most of my life that it's quality has become truly abhorrent.

Mr. Weaver, I will cede to you the fact that my perceptions of quality orchestral playing have certainly changed through my years of study and professional work as a musician. Perhaps it's just that the LO has not gotten better, and this is what I perceive.

And I absolutely hold no grudge to the players or administration, nor to I hold any personal animosity in any way. Quite the contrary. I just want for things to be better, and that includes having the best orchestra that Louisville can possibly field, which I believe sadly has not been done for many years.

I strongly suspect that new models' proposed solution is one that assumes that an orchestra is a collection of individuals playing to the top of their individual ability with no gestalt qualities whatsoever. (Only someone who has zero experience working in a group setting could possibly imagine that individually measured performance should be the major determiner of fitness.)

Individual-level testing is an extremely untrustworthy way to ensure gestalt-level performance. The typical orchestra should not be regarded as a trading floor where the bottom 15% is fired every quarter. You're free to attempt an Ayn-Rand-style implementation of that philosophy and give it a try, though. Let me know how it goes. :-)

There's a common joke that to escape the bear, you don't have to outrun it, you just have to outrun your buddy.

In truth, you don't have to do either. All you have to do is TRIP your buddy. Implement periodic reviews like this, and I predict a bunch of shitty players who learn right quick how to sabotage their colleagues more than improve their own level of play. It's the same sort of behavior that tanked Enron managerially.

'Night, gal. Get your beauty sleep! Take your theories and stuff 'em, with all due respect.

I am the Artistic Administrator for a regional orchestra in the Midwest and I can say with confidence that we will not hire any musicians either as subs or as permanent members who have any affiliation with LO during this impasse. The same goes for conductors and soloists. There's our blacklist for you.

I didn't know that! I have already forwarded your suggestion to the local President. Thanks!

As a long time resident of Louisville I support the musicians in their efforts to maintain their positions in th Louisville Orchestra. I will NOT support an orchestra that does not include them. The management of the Louisville Orchestra, and its boardare the ones who need to be replaced!! A big thank you from a member of the community to the musicians for giving us so many years of beautiful music.
To Edward - We as a country have allowed this mess we are in. We as individuals have allowed the economic mess we are in. We accepted the lie from the Reagan years that said we should be lucky to have jobs. We accepted and demanded cheap goods from foreign countries. We bought our way out of good jobs by purchasing junk we didn't need with money we didn't have. An economy can not survive on low wage service sector jobs. Manufacturing built the economy our parents and grandparents enjoyed. A strong middle class kept this country strong. Now we pay the price for our compulsive consumerism.

Ok, I actually agree somewhat with the bad guy though I think his tone is unacceptably harsh but so is the author's.

Let me put all of you into a bit of reality. I have been working in the corporate and non profit world while pursuing composition and have gotten performances of my works. Some organization based in New York cannot pay their performers starting out - all they can offer is recordings, exposure, and bend over backwards to accommodate.

Secondly we live in a society where for 30 weeks a year an orchestra player can be paid $925 a month and charge anywhere from $35 - $80+ an hour to teach. The orchestra will play basically an ossified repertoire of music because classical orchestral music programming has taught listeners what "classical music" is supposed to be Mozart, Mendelssohn, a few Weber, Beethoven, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Berlioz, some Bruckner, Mahler and oh maybe some Bartok, much less often Webern and Schoenberg (well for Schoenberg some of his early stuff would get far more circulation), and Copland and every few years a possible premiere of a living composers work (usually the well established ones who just aren't as famous as say Glass) . This is not true of ALL orchestras - look to San Francisco Symphony for their American Mavericks programming, but I am stating the norm.

Now, let us take a home health aid who is paid anywhere from $6 - 9 an hour and unless she belongs to a union probably gets little or no health benefits or time off. To progress in their careers they need to go to resources which may be open similar hours to the home health aide. They may have a family and therefore have limited opportunities to make extra money. They are hired by agencies and they may have periods of unemployment because there is no one in need of their services for short periods. They may work long hours - 40 - 50 hour weeks. They may do overnight shifts and then switch to day shifts. They travel mostly in their surrounding area.

I have worked with such people so to hear someone who is at a workplace which is undergoing turmoil but has had a great history of premiering new music and the job does not involve the health and safety of your aged mother, father or temporarily disabled friend, I really do think you sound horribly entitled and unaware of what other people are going through. On the other hand I admire your musician's struggle and the need for far better treatment. So I wish you'd focus your post on that and quit scaring kids away from your orchestra. Rather let them know the facts and warn them it may be tough but if they are willing to fight for their rights and better management, they may be pioneers in revitalizing the orchestra. And what is with this - if you take this job you will be basically blacklisted? What are you, Joseph McCarthy?

For those musicians who do take your advice, and their money is running out, parents cannot afford your teaching rate of $50 bucks an hour for their kid, the rent is two months past due and you are waiting for your Food Stamps card, I guess you can go to many other orchestras: Scottsdale, New Jersey Symphony, oooh yeah try NY Phil ..or go to Europe. Oh wait, you're on food stamps and cannot pay the rent and mom and dad have paid for prior months rent. Gosh what will you do? God forbid you accept an offer from Louisville.

This is a bit of the track of the discussion but you do raise an interesting point and one that generally relates to the dynamic of fulltime orchestra players versus local freelance players and subs. I don't have an off the cuff answer but I'd be glad to hear from a different perspective.

I think it's awful to see ANY of you calling anyone who wants to take the audition a scab. I've always been disgusted with catty self-interest disguised as wisdom and patronage. You're all of you two-faced liars and it's no wonder your world is going to hell.

Any honest person would tell young musicians "look--go for it if you want. It's a shaky situation and it might suck, so don't imagine for a second that this is going to change your life or turn your luck around. But yeah if you're bagging groceries waiting for ANYTHING to come along then you should do the audition. You can't afford to worry about solidarity sometimes and we all know that."

Don't pretend it's even actually about solidarity, or about giving sound advice, when you know in your heart it's not.

Dear all,

I just came across this extended discussion. While I have a few minutes before my next client, I would like to respond on the topic of the extraordinary value of a musical education. Like many of those posting, I have two degrees from a very prestigious school, earned during the '70s. Although I had offers from engineering schools after high school, I followed my heart and went to the Eastman School of Music. At the time, I remember distinctly that I very much believed that the study of my instrument at a conservatory--with its process of immersion, study and training--was the most real education available to me.

As I write this now, more than forty years later and with the value of hindsight, in my experience this was absolutely true. Professionally, I was very fortunate, being hired as an assistant professor of music right out of graduate school, playing in the local symphony and other ensembles and later making the jump to a better orchestra as principal bassoon. Subsequently, after a few years, my life took a different turn and I left the orchestra to pursue opportunities in other fields of endeavor.

I offer this simple comment--I hope with all my heart that no person who takes the chance to follow their dreams in music ever looks back on that decision with regret. Regardless of whether I was playing in the orchestra, teaching, debugging computer code, editing advertising copy, or passing the California bar exam, the effort of those years at Eastman set a standard of excellence that has informed and influenced everything I have done since. It made me who I am today and I honestly believe that my investment in that education was among the best decisions I ever made.

The world has changed greatly over the years and along with it careers in music. I don't envy anyone trying to get started in any field in this economy. But what I do know is that the effort expended toward mastery of one's instrument is unique, transformative, brutally honest, and all-consuming. Any one who wholeheartedly, and without reserve, has subjected him or herself to that fire comes away with far more than the ability to play well or to potentially win an audition. Such an person is well situated to be successful at whatever they put their hand to, no matter what the field.

Sincerely,

Nancy Christie