I just happened upon this short article about the departure of the executive director of the Tacoma Symphony (which was my first professional gig when I was in undergrad at the University of Puget Sound) – here, you read it in its entirety, and tell me what jumps out at you:
Amy Wigstrom, executive director of the Tacoma Symphony Orchestra, has resigned the position she has held since 2003. Wigstrom leaves to become the executive director of the American Heart Association in Tacoma.
“I am very proud of what has been accomplished at Tacoma Symphony during my time there, and I look forward to watching the symphony continue to flourish as I remain a part of this community,†said Wigstrom, who lives in Tacoma with her family.
During her tenure, the orchestra eliminated a deficit.
The TSO is a professional 90-member orchestra with a seven-concert season and $1 million budget. The orchestra has initiated a national search for a new executive director.
Ok, she was proud, but of what? Eliminating a deficit? Did she improve audience attendance, improve working conditions for the musicians? Did the orchestra present music in new and exciting ways, with a dynamic music director and well-qualified, hard-working musicians? I bet they did – but all that was seen fit to talk about in this exit interview article (probably cribbed directly from the press release) was the fact that this orchestra eliminated a deficit. So the public leaves this article thinking only about the bottom line. What about the product – the music? Or those who come to see and hear the performances, or those who make the performances happen? It’s one more small bit of a giant negative slant on the arts in America.