John Eliot Gardiner - the pros and cons...

[Once Was 4]

As from now, teamsaint, you are one of TWO people on this thread who have worked with / for Sir J.E.G.
The other one is 'yours truly'.
I first played for him in about 1979/1980 in his 'Erato' recording of Handel's ''L'Allegro/(etc etc)" and subsequently from about 1984 to 1993 or so. I assure you that I am NOT a 'toady' or a 'creep' when I say that playing for him is always a 'rewarding challenge'. I never, ever felt 'bullied', so, please let's knock that one on the head. He doesn't bully but he strongly, VERY strongly 'persuades' you to his point of view, which is always ultra-musical. Even if you don't agree with him, you can always appreciate the logic of what he is requesting (not 'demanding', as another boarder has pointed out). In the end, his palpable vision of, and love of the music shines through and you find yourself simply wanting to play as well as possible for him.

May I put up my hand and say I am a third? And no, I was not bullied or intimidated - quite excited actually!

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

(as John Eliot jokingly pointed out to us, ‘none of the soloists would be good enough to be in the choir!)

[Maclintick]

He doesn't bully but he strongly, VERY strongly 'persuades' you to his point of view, which is always ultra-musical.

Leaving aside the alleged bullying tendencies, & comparisons to long-dead "old-school" conductors who may have behaved in similar manner, the "ultra-musical" bit puzzles me. Having spent an interesting couple of hours comparing JEG/LSO Live vs. JEG/VPO (DG) & Abbado/LSO (Decca) in the Mendelssohn "Italian", it strikes me that this "bully" has not managed to impose any authority on the resolutely un-Hipp VPO, whose playing in the "con moto moderato" is as Viennese & sweetly-rubato-ed as ever. On the other hand the recent LSO Live recording of this movement sounds horribly flat, charmless & vibrato-less in a semi-Norringtonian fashion, while the players scramble in the finale at JEG's "I'm faster than the competition" speed. I don't deny that his live concerts can be exhilarating, esp. in Berlioz & Rameau, but agree with those who find his Bach hard-driven.

[Once Was 4]

Regarding conductors as bullies, the following was related to me some years ago by a now deceased Principal horn player of the Minnesota Orchestra who had previously been a member of the Philadelphia. In the 50s an Eastern European conductor followed his idols Fritz Reiner and Artur Rodzinski to the USA. Unlike them though he could only find work conducting a series of community orchestras. One night he was rehearsing the 'New World' symphony; the 4th horn was a bank clerk who had been so busy at work that she had not been able to practice. Over and over again she failed to hit that first entry accurately; every time they tried it the maestro shouted and screamed in paroxysms of rage until at the 10th attempt he clutched his chest and fell lifeless to the floor. Genuine attempts to revive him were made but to no avail. He immediately descended into hell where he was latched on to by a fearful apparition; a malodorous and huge lady opera singer clad in a tatty and dirty dress who proceeded to shriek his favourite arias, hideously out of tune, into his ears. For weeks he traversed the circles of hell trying to shake off this demon. Then one day he met Fritz Reiner coming the other way with Marilyn Monroe on his arm; as they passed each other Reiner gave him a lecherous wink. That was it, our hero could not stand it any more and he demanded, and was granted, an interview with the devil himself. He complained bitterly of the unequal treatment he was getting compared with Reiner. In reply the devil fixed him in a baleful glare and hissed "Marilyn Monroe's PUNISHMENT is absolutely no business of yours!!!" Boom boom.

Actually Reiner appears to have conducted his bullying in a soft voice using sarcasm and the threat of the sack rather than shouting. One very famous Principal horn used to say that he often drove to work hoping that he would be involved in an accident to prevent him getting there. Reiner seems to have hated trombone players in particular and there is a long list of those he sacked. One survivor was the late, great, Edwin Kleinhammer who, however, was demoted to second trombone in the Chicago Symphony from the first position.

[jayne lee wilson]

Leaving aside the alleged bullying tendencies, & comparisons to long-dead "old-school" conductors who may have behaved in similar manner, the "ultra-musical" bit puzzles me. Having spent an interesting couple of hours comparing JEG/LSO Live vs. JEG/VPO (DG) & Abbado/LSO (Decca) in the Mendelssohn "Italian", it strikes me that this "bully" has not managed to impose any authority on the resolutely un-Hipp VPO, whose playing in the "con moto moderato" is as Viennese & sweetly-rubato-ed as ever. On the other hand the recent LSO Live recording of this movement sounds horribly flat, charmless & vibrato-less in a semi-Norringtonian fashion, while the players scramble in the finale at JEG's "I'm faster than the competition" speed. I don't deny that his live concerts can be exhilarating, esp. in Berlioz & Rameau, but agree with those who find his Bach hard-driven.

YMMC as ever, but vide #75 above &...

http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/LSO%2BLive/LSO0769

click "reviews"...

“Gardiner’s Mendelssohn is as genial as it gets.” Sunday Times, 21st August 2016

“Right from the off it's infectiously smile-inducing, with delicately chirping woodwind and rhythmically incisive contributions from the strings...Gardiner is a stickler for Mendelssohn's phrase markings...I’m sure it’s no coincidence that Gardiner’s experience with the music of JS Bach makes Mendelssohn’s own love of Bach more evident than usual.” Presto Classical, 9th September 2016

“the LSO [is] at its most immaculate with Sir John Eliot Gardiner, through his completely fresh view of the [First Symphony, pretty much re-inventing it…this is a glorious disc, along with a breathtakingly all’aperto performance of the Italian Symphony…the best you will hear” Herald Scotland, 9th September 2016

“Gardiner’s real competition is with himself, and the Vienna Philharmonic. But the strings of the LSO display unrivalled agility...Taken at a true presto, the finale [of the Italian] never quite spins out of control but sounds as though it might at any moment. Outstanding.” Gramophone Magazine, October 2016

“Gardiner keeps the LSO on its toes both in the C minor work and the Italian symphony, the winds producing crystal-clear articulation the hair-raisingly fast account of the latter’s concluding saltarello. He also effectively brings out the undercurrent of unease in the C minor work’s slow movement, and the final reprise of its theme is quite beautifully handled.” BBC Music Magazine, December 2016 ***

[Tony Halstead]

YMMC as ever, but vide #75 above &...

http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/LSO%2BLive/LSO0769

click "reviews"...

“Gardiner’s Mendelssohn is as genial as it gets.” Sunday Times, 21st August 2016

“Right from the off it's infectiously smile-inducing, with delicately chirping woodwind and rhythmically incisive contributions from the strings...Gardiner is a stickler for Mendelssohn's phrase markings...I’m sure it’s no coincidence that Gardiner’s experience with the music of JS Bach makes Mendelssohn’s own love of Bach more evident than usual.” Presto Classical, 9th September 2016

“the LSO [is] at its most immaculate with Sir John Eliot Gardiner, through his completely fresh view of the [First Symphony, pretty much re-inventing it…this is a glorious disc, along with a breathtakingly all’aperto performance of the Italian Symphony…the best you will hear” Herald Scotland, 9th September 2016

“Gardiner’s real competition is with himself, and the Vienna Philharmonic. But the strings of the LSO display unrivalled agility...Taken at a true presto, the finale [of the Italian] never quite spins out of control but sounds as though it might at any moment. Outstanding.” Gramophone Magazine, October 2016

“Gardiner keeps the LSO on its toes both in the C minor work and the Italian symphony, the winds producing crystal-clear articulation the hair-raisingly fast account of the latter’s concluding saltarello. He also effectively brings out the undercurrent of unease in the C minor work’s slow movement, and the final reprise of its theme is quite beautifully handled.” BBC Music Magazine, December 2016 ***

[Maclintick]

YMMC as ever, but vide #75 above &...

http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/LSO%2BLive/LSO0769

click "reviews"...

“Gardiner’s Mendelssohn is as genial as it gets.” Sunday Times, 21st August 2016

“Right from the off it's infectiously smile-inducing, with delicately chirping woodwind and rhythmically incisive contributions from the strings...Gardiner is a stickler for Mendelssohn's phrase markings...I’m sure it’s no coincidence that Gardiner’s experience with the music of JS Bach makes Mendelssohn’s own love of Bach more evident than usual.” Presto Classical, 9th September 2016

“the LSO [is] at its most immaculate with Sir John Eliot Gardiner, through his completely fresh view of the [First Symphony, pretty much re-inventing it…this is a glorious disc, along with a breathtakingly all’aperto performance of the Italian Symphony…the best you will hear” Herald Scotland, 9th September 2016

“Gardiner’s real competition is with himself, and the Vienna Philharmonic. But the strings of the LSO display unrivalled agility...Taken at a true presto, the finale [of the Italian] never quite spins out of control but sounds as though it might at any moment. Outstanding.” Gramophone Magazine, October 2016

“Gardiner keeps the LSO on its toes both in the C minor work and the Italian symphony, the winds producing crystal-clear articulation the hair-raisingly fast account of the latter’s concluding saltarello. He also effectively brings out the undercurrent of unease in the C minor work’s slow movement, and the final reprise of its theme is quite beautifully handled.” BBC Music Magazine, December 2016 ***

I'm a huge fan of Prestoclassical, but one would perhaps not expect a company whose business is selling product to post negative reviews ?? My main beef with the LSO Live/JEG Mendelssohn "Italian" is not with the excellent LSO, but with JEG's relentless & characteristically unfeeling approach to the "con moto moderato",which signals to this listener "OK, lets get this over with, & get on to the fast stuff".

FWIW, the majority of my conducting heroes don't conform to any tyrannical stereotype of the past-- Abbado, Haitink, Blomstedt, Chailly, & of the younger generation musicians of the calibre of Jacob Hrusa ( newly-apponted at Bamberg) Mirga Grazinte-Tyla (newly-appointed somewhere in the Midlands) or Santtu-Matthias Rouvali ( newly-appointed at Göteborg SO). Times change. Sometimes for the better.

[jayne lee wilson]

The point about posting the Presto reviews is that they are independent in themselves - and it is very hard, searching for oneself, to find negative reviews of any of JEG's Mendelssohn releases.

I made the comment above that atmosphere and evocation were underemphasised in the Italian - but as I've said above and elsewhere, JEG tends to use changes in tempi, dynamics, rhythmic energy and definition to make his expressive points - he rarely moulds a phrase affectionately or indulges much rubato.
But this doesn't preclude poignancy or sweetness of expression: the trio of that molto moderato has lovely, delicate flute/horn duetting; and just listen to the andante from Mendelssohn's 1st, where the sheer unaffected simplicity of utterance is very touching indeed. The 1st's scherzo movements are distinctly balletic and playful too. He doesn't always do things the same way.

Gardiner, (like Norrington, Krivine and others) wants to make it new: there are after all plenty of earlier, more Romantic or over-Romanticised recordings to choose from. Also the residual warmth, transparency and beauty of tone in the LSO strings does come over more explicitly at higher resolutions: the 24/192 download of 1 & 4 is exceptionally beautiful in this respect, and the same goes for the 24/96 Beethoven 2 & 8, despite the already-excellent qualities of the CD.

I was intrigued by Richard Osborne's comments about that Beethoven 8 - he felt it suffered in comparison to Beecham who recognised it, and played it, as the "comic masterpiece" that RO felt it, essentially, was.
But why then should JEG (or any later artist) do it that way? Giving us the music with as much energy, clarity, dynamism and rhythmic élan as the ORR can seems to me equally valid and at least as enjoyable. But then, I've long felt that this reviewing model is a little tired now, which sets new recordings against a favoured touchstone (usually marking them down...).

[aeolium]

Moving away from the discussion of particular individuals, I'd like to take issue with the idea, voiced by some on this thread, that there is some kind of justification in an authoritarian, even bullying approach by conductors, that the abasement, public humiliation and open abuse of orchestral players is excused in the service of making "great art". What does it say about us if we are prepared to justify that kind of conduct essentially for our own gratification? We know that it is unnecessary; there are plenty of very fine conductors who do not behave in this way, as Richard and others have indicated. So why excuse it?

I have seen plenty of examples of bullying when I was working. Invariably it was upsetting, debasing both of the bullies and their victims. It is particularly insidious as it is very difficult for a victim to resist. He may feel that he is in some way letting down the team if he challenges the bully. He may be afraid of losing his job if he is perceived to be a troublemaker. In cases where there are famous conductors working with orchestras on commercial projects the management will be very reluctant to upset the whole project for the sake of a lowly orchestral player. And as someone who has helped in the preparation of cases going to employment tribunal in the past, I know that cases of constructive dismissal - where someone's employment life is essentally made intolerable - are very difficult ones for the claimant to prove.

In the C21 there really is no possible justification for hectoring, bullying, authoritarian behaviour from conductors, and orchestras and their management should simply not tolerate it. As to means justifying ends, Kant said "Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means." If we are saying that it is OK for people to be psychologically damaged so that we can enjoy music then we are in our own practice contradicting that; we have to that extent become complicit with the bully.

[ahinton]

Moving away from the discussion of particular individuals, I'd like to take issue with the idea, voiced by some on this thread, that there is some kind of justification in an authoritarian, even bullying approach by conductors, that the abasement, public humiliation and open abuse of orchestral players is excused in the service of making "great art". What does it say about us if we are prepared to justify that kind of conduct essentially for our own gratification? We know that it is unnecessary; there are plenty of very fine conductors who do not behave in this way, as Richard and others have indicated. So why excuse it?

I have seen plenty of examples of bullying when I was working. Invariably it was upsetting, debasing both of the bullies and their victims. It is particularly insidious as it is very difficult for a victim to resist. He may feel that he is in some way letting down the team if he challenges the bully. He may be afraid of losing his job if he is perceived to be a troublemaker. In cases where there are famous conductors working with orchestras on commercial projects the management will be very reluctant to upset the whole project for the sake of a lowly orchestral player. And as someone who has helped in the preparation of cases going to employment tribunal in the past, I know that cases of constructive dismissal - where someone's employment life is essentally made intolerable - are very difficult ones for the claimant to prove.

In the C21 there really is no possible justification for hectoring, bullying, authoritarian behaviour from conductors, and orchestras and their management should simply not tolerate it. As to means justifying ends, Kant said "Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means." If we are saying that it is OK for people to be psychologically damaged so that we can enjoy music then we are in our own practice contradicting that; we have to that extent become complicit with the bully.

It's hard to disagree with any of this.

If most conductors behaved this way, at least a norm would be understood, however unacceptable it would be; one would then have to consider why something is so rotten in the state of orchestral life. However, most conductors do not conduct themselves in such ways, so one has to ask why the minority who do so do so. The question also arises as to whether those who do so achieve better results than all those who don't - a question which, I sumbit, largely answers itself.

Is there a similar situation with a minority of orchestral leaders bullying orchestras, or at least their own sections thereof?...

[doversoul1]

It's hard to disagree with any of this.

It is indeed (hard to disagree)

The question also arises as to whether those who do so achieve better results than all those who don't

I think this is the question that should become obsolete, because it leads to the way of thinking that if the answer is yes (better results etc.), the end justifies the means.

[Richard Barrett]

I think this is the question that should become obsolete

... mainly because the answer is so obviously no.

[aeolium]

... mainly because the answer is so obviously no.

My point is that the results are irrelevant. Even if it were true that the conductor bullies achieved better results (and there cannot be any objective judgement about that) the behaviour would not be justifiable.

[ahinton]

... mainly because the answer is so obviously no.

Exactly - which was the point that I sought to make; there's not a scrap of evidence that bullying by conductors produces superior results and thre may well be some that it produces inferior ditto.

[ahinton]

My point is that the results are irrelevant. Even if it were true that the conductor bullies achieved better results (and there cannot be any objective judgement about that) the behaviour would not be justifiable.

Indeed. What can such conduct on the part of a conductor do for the morale of the players other than damage it? - and how will players give of their best, individually or corporately, when their morale is compromised?