with culture, responsibility

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking these past three days. Thinking of how the pointless, needless deaths of two colleagues might have prevented. It’s a difficult process, coming to grips with the inexplicable – it makes one realize the value of a strong religious faith, and the comfort which that can bring. I, however, see no plan, no way that the violent, random extinguishing of these two vibrant spirits can possibly result in the betterment of others. Perhaps, with time, there might be something positive to come out of this tragic event, but I cannot imagine it would be any recompense to Kjersten’s and Angela’s parents, spouses, children, friends, colleagues, or patrons.

As I have pondered more the nature of the freelance lifestyle – the endless driving, rehearsing, fast-food dining, weekends lost on the highway, evenings lost on the highway, and long days spent in a haze of tiredness doing the “day job” – I wonder about the nature of culture in America, and how it has created an entire class of migrant freelance musicians. Before the dawn of the 20th century, most of America’s population was rural, while most American culture or fine art was urban. As the Industrial Revolution took full sway, the population began to pour into the urban centers, further enriching the arts. After the World Wars, the power and wealth of America as the dominant superpower poured wealth into many of the smaller cities and towns.

These newly-enriched population centers sought to emulate their more well-established and wealthy cities, and arts lovers founded museums, theater companies and orchestras. As travel became more accessible through the automobile, musicians who were largely trained in the largest urban centers found these new sources of income were available to them, but at the cost of travel. As these smaller communities grew, they wished to have ensembles which could keep the best musicians in town, which in turn would ensure more artistic stability and a general enrichment of the local arts scene through resident musicians.

By the 1960’s, many smaller communities (including Portland) had resident orchestras which played fairly extensive seasons, though not necessarily enough to ensure a living wage. At this time even the major orchestras such as those in Boston, New York, Cleveland, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles (the “big 5”) were not playing full 52 week seasons and their members often played recording gigs or taught lessons to supplement their incomes. Somewhere along the line, however, the decline of the power of the music director and the rise of the power of the musicians’ union led to dramatic increases in pay for the largest orchestras in the wealthiest communities. Members of these orchestras were now able to play only the work required by their orchestra in order to make a living wage.

Meanwhile, the smaller orchestras and their supporters saw this development and wished that their circumstances could match those of their larger counterparts. Boards and donors worked to make this possible, as the musicians pushed ever harder for wages that would reflect their years of education and hard work as well as their ever-increasing level of artistic prowess. Somewhere along the line, however, both parts of the organism which is the symphony orchestra lost sight of what their communities could afford. Short-term gains were pursued at the cost of long-term sustainability. By the 1990’s, many orchestras in large metropolitan areas were going out of business (Vancouver, B.C., San Diego, San Antonio, Florida Philharmonic, etc.). These areas did not lack for local wealth – in fact they were rife with it. These organizations ceased to make effective cases for their own survival. They over-extended themselves because they did not plan for success, they simply demanded it to appear out of thin air with Enron-style accounting sleight of hand.

Meanwhile, the previous successes and ballooning budgets of these orchestras attracted more musicians to come to the growing regions of the country. The largest ensembles could not employ the vast majority of these new musicians, and so many of the resulting “edge cities” of these metro areas began their own orchestras. Why? Because they wanted their own pet cultural project to rival their big brother or sister cities. Musicians began commuting from the larger cities to the smaller ones, often distances of over 100 miles or more. Rather than funding the larger, well-established ensembles, these regional semi-professional gigs took resources and talent away from the cities.

Back in the cities, the available competing destinations for philanthropic entities grew considerably, diluting the amount of money any one ensemble could raise. Salaries leveled off, then dropped, as these ensembles were unable to meet their fund-raising goals. As a result, the ballet and opera companies were unable to support full-time ensembles. These musicians were forced to travel ever further out into the region to continue to make a living wage, commuting two hours each way on top of playing in several local ensembles and teaching as many as 40 students a week – all at the same time. The commuter-freelance musician had arrived.

What would make this cycle end? It’s hard to say, but better planning by boards and musicians about how to grow an organization would certainly help. Recognition by the public that the arts deserve robust support, not just from individuals but also through government subsidy, would also help. If the smaller ensembles were able to get enough support to pay close to a living wage, it could cut down on the amount of commuting that many freelance musicians must do in order to survive. In the end, if we want the perks of a cultured society, we must take on the responsibility to ensure that those who provide the culture are afforded a decent, living wage.