I was involved in a discussion today that made me think about the unique nature of Portland and its problems of self-effacement and inferiority (much of which I’ve discussed elsewhere in this blog) – more specifically, does Portland need world-class institutions (maybe a better term of art might be “top-rate”?), and if it does, does Portland want them?
Slight digression ahead:
Does the “Keep Portland Weird” ethos mean that we should stay safe and moderately successful, but not swing for the fences, with all the risk and chutzpah that implies? And by the way, the recent local media coverage of the “Keep Portland Weird” (based upon the Keep Austin Weird campaign) movement has very much missed the mark as far as the original intent of the slogan. Rather than meaning embracing meth addicts and allowing homeless people to loiter at will (which the local news outlets would have you believe), the movement was originally intended to protest the commercialization of the community at the expense of those quirky local personalities, businesses and architecture that make Portland a unique and wonderful place to live. I would say that the Pearl District and Bridgeport Village are the exact sort of development that “Keep Portland Weird” types are railing against. In fact, look at this and tell me I’m wrong.
Ok, back to the topic at hand: does Portland want or need a top-rate orchestra? In a way it’s too late, because they’ve got one, whether they want it or not. Unfortunately, things/people that are successful rarely stick around if their community fails to step up to the plate and support the continued excellence.
Before I go any further with this, I’d like to make a small point about the artistic state of the orchestra as compared to when I arrived twelve seasons ago. And I’ll make the usual disclaimer (by now tired and shopworn) about how James DePreist brought the orchestra to full-time status and into its own (more or less) hall as well as bringing national if not international attention to the ensemble.
That being said, the orchestra I joined twelve seasons ago is not even remotely comparable to the one that I find myself in now. We’re ever so much better in myriad ways now. Does that mean we were horrible before? No, but I’d have given us a ‘C’ grade back then, and maybe an ‘A-‘ now. Intonation in the woodwinds was often all over the map. Brass playing was spotty and full of cacks. Rhythm in the strings was highly suspect. Performances were often lackluster and listless. Above all, there wasn’t much of a backbone of discipline in the ensemble. Now, we have much better intonation in all areas of the orchestra. Rhythm is much tighter, even in very difficult modern works. Performances are highly polished and played on the edge of our seats. We have a top-notch woodwind section, and brass sections that supply warm, burnished sounds at all volume levels (and can they supply the volume!). In short, the Oregon Symphony is now a top-notch ensemble, worthy of recognition for the strides we’ve made as well as the traditions we maintain.
So, if this is true (and I obviously believe it is), why are we failing to get the support we need? Why do the Portland Art Museum and the Oregon Ballet Theater and Whitebird and BodyVox all get raves for what is happening in their organizations and we do not? I think that the trap we’ve fallen into is common and fatal, but thankfully also reversible.
When orchestras find themselves in fiscal trouble, they often go into even more conservative forms of themselves. Spending is cut wherever possible – regardless of the fact that cutting in areas such as marketing and broadcasting just cuts your legs out from under you before you can even start to recover – with little regard for artistic or longer range fiscal viability. I think the solution is to think lean and mean: exercise the body and brain as efficiently as possible with sound nutrition – NOT a starvation diet.
We’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t in some quarters. First we play too much “new” music, then we don’t play enough. But maybe we don’t play enough of the right “new” music (I put the quotes because my view of new music is music written in the last decade, not pieces written only since 1930). We can be responsible while also being provocative – instead of commissioning Kevin Walczyk‘s Corps of Discovery Symphony for the anniversary of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, why not commission a piece from a native American composer, or at least seek a piece written from a sympathetic point of view to native Americans? Imagine the conversations that could be stimulated by such a commission! It’s just one example, but thinking big idea-wise rather than just small budget-wise can create “buzz” and excitement – that something is cooking over at the Oregon Symphony – rather than business as usual playing dead white European music in the same tired format.
So, to me, it’s not so much that Portland won’t support a top-notch institution, it’s that Portland will pony up for something that it sees as exciting and relevant and useful. I think that the idea brain trust at the symphony is heating up, and it will be a race to see if the zeitgeist can change before the bank account is dry. Stay tuned…