Don Rosenberg gets his

I was reading one of my favorite blogs, Opera Chic, the other night, when I came across this post quoting Tim Smith, the music critic of the Baltimore Sun, that Cleveland Plain Dealer music critic Donald Rosenberg has been removed from reviewing concerts by the Cleveland Orchestra. The first paragraph of Smith’s post sums it up:

Don Rosenberg, music critic at the Cleveland Plain Dealer for 16 years, was told yesterday by the paper’s editor that he will no longer be covering the famed Cleveland Orchestra. He has been given the option of reviewing other musical events in town, as well as dance. Another writer at the paper, Zack Lewis, was told he will now be orchestra’s reviewer. First, the full disclosure: I’ve known Don and Zach for years; both are members of the Music Critics Association of North America and its board of directors; Don is the immediate past president of that organization; I’m the current president. Now, the full, unbridled response to this news: It stinks.

(The whole post can be found here.)

I have long complained about Don Rosenberg’s seeming personal vendetta against Franz Welser-Möst; almost never has he had anything good to say about FWM’s performances, and when he does, it’s always couched in backhanded terms (“one of the best things he’s [FWM] done.”)  Far more common are the mean-spirited comments.  Rosenberg’s reviews have become a joke, especially when they are so out of sync with reviews that the orchestra receives when it performs elsewhere.  Are Rosenberg’s ears so finely tuned that he hears things others don’t?  (Sometimes I would read his review just to see how harsh it would be.)

I don’t happen to believe that Franz Welser-Möst is in the pantheon of great conductors.  (Mark the performance of the Berg “Chamber Concerto” a couple of seasons ago that totally broke down in performance.)  But when he’s “on”, the performances can be remarkable.  I do think that it is odd that the Plain Dealer has replaced Rosenberg, however, since it totally smacks of interference on the part of the orchestra in the newspaper’s journalistic integrity.  (There are close ties between the Orchestra’s board and the Plain Dealer management.)  There is precious little arts coverage in the PD anymore–I rarely read the paper in its printed form.  I’ll read some stories online, but mostly I ignore it altogether.  The paper’s website cleveland.com is a disorganized disaster as well.  (Why can’t newspapers have a look at some of their competitor’s sites to get a clue?)

One of operachic’s commentors (from Cleveland) got the salient bit:

Plenty of us in Cleveland have been tired of Rosenberg for a long time. His reviews are highly formulaic, and I’ve become increasingly convinced that he writes them at intermission.

I think nearly everyone would agree that FWM does not walk on water, but from what I hear the orchestra really is happy working with him. And personally I think he’s done some things really well. (He’s also conducted some of the most Wrong-headed Mahler I’ve ever heard, but that’s another story.)

Finally, I’d note that there’s a sad larger context around this. First, the Plain Dealer is not a venerable newspaper. It’s a thin, dying small-town rag that hasn’t done any significant journalism in decades. Its arts reporting exists only to build audiences for struggling institutions in a struggling town. The truth is that the Orchestra fills halls everywhere but on its home turf. They desperately need to build a new audience if they are to remain the “Cleveland” orchestra at all. The PD has simply knuckled under to that reality. (Of course, the orchestra could help by improving their marketing and diversifying their programming.) It’s not a pretty story, and it certainly doesn’t speak to journalistic integrity. On the other hand, Rosenberg’s “criticism” doesn’t either.

2 thoughts on “Don Rosenberg gets his

  1. In recent days, the music writers’ blogsphere has been rife with assumptions and even accusations that the management of The Cleveland Orchestra engineered personnel changes at Cleveland’s daily newspaper, The Plain Dealer. These accusations are false.

    I want to set the record straight: I was completely surprised by the news last week that Plain Dealer music critic Donald Rosenberg has been re-assigned and will no longer cover The Cleveland Orchestra for the newspaper.

    A half dozen critics have called or emailed me this week asking if I met with the newspaper’s editors to lodge complaints. The answer is I have never met with them to protest Donald Rosenberg’s opinions. In the normal course of business during my tenure with the Orchestra, I have spoken with every editor, past and present, about the newspaper’s coverage. In those meetings I have delivered compliments and concerns about their news and feature coverage as well as their editorial positions and decisions. But in every case I have also said, very explicitly, that the Orchestra’s management understands and respects the paper’s and the critic’s role in expressing opinion about our artistic activities. And whether or not we agree with the opinion we fully accept and support their right and responsibility to publish it.

    Donald Rosenberg has written about The Cleveland Orchestra for decades. I worked directly with him for many years, especially during my early tenure here as Director of Public Relations. In that role, I opened the Orchestra archives to him for research on his comprehensive history of the Orchestra “Second to None.” I very much enjoyed the productive and professional relationship we’ve shared. I appreciate and admire a great deal of his work on the subject of the Orchestra and I am grateful for his dedication to regular and comprehensive classical music coverage. Over the years we have agreed and we have disagreed. All the same I will miss working with him.

  2. I know the this is an old story now, but having recently heard several recordings by FWM while he was in London, a radio broadcast of Shostakovich’s 5th with the Cleveland Orchestra, and a concert with the CO and Carneigie Hall, I can see why Rosenberg might be critical of the maestro. I find very little revelatory or truly inspiring in his work. His Brahms’ first symphony at Carnegie made me long for Szell’s patrician way with this music. FWM’s frenzied and superficial account was forgettable. Rosenberg may have been more right than wrong.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s